RE: Limiting Trademark Policy Discussion (was RE: [REPORT] PMC 2015-07 Private-List ...)

[Dennis E. Hamilton]

I'm wondering about the following.  
 
I think the "based on X" conversation is already happening at a general level 
and I believe participation at that level is better, since this will probably 
be simple and generic and VP Brand Management will likely take a position that 
applies to us also.  

I thought "powered by X" was also being discussed at a cross-project level.  I 
may have been mistaken.  The conversations went across different lists and I 
lost track.  I suspect VP Brand Management may set a policy there too.

I think in practice there will always have to be treatment on an 
individual-case basis.  Any cookie-cutter test would be simply a starting point 
for a negotiated agreement that could be rescinded if an user of the marks 
violates the agreed conditions.

I have no prediction how that would go.

Those were somewhat open discussions that arose out of what happens if someone 
distributes builds of unreleased code, and what about when someone other than 
the project distributes binaries of released code, with none to significant 
alternations.  How can the Apache Project marks be used under those conditions? 
 

It would be good to see what conclusions have been reached, if reached yet, and 
rely on that broader analysis if possible.

I didn't think there was any notion of required labelling so much as indicating 
how one of those distributions could indicate relationship in a way that did 
not violate trademarks.  I am not certain there was anything about required 
based/powered but rather conditions under which those would be allowed to be 
used, although others, including Dave may have raised the prospect.  We should 
look again there.  

What were your take-aways from those discussion, Dave?

 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2w...@comcast.net] 
Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2015 18:13
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: Limiting Trademark Policy Discussion (was RE: [REPORT] PMC 2015-07 
Private-List ...)

As me from my soapbox:

[ ... ]

I think that the project should have an open source code test for Powered By 
that applies to all. The rights to use are clear for all. The obligations 
spelled out. Benefits given equally.

[ ... ]

Once we have a proposal that the community likes we can go through any type of 
confirmation or clearance the Brand committee requires.

I expect that this discussion should proceed carefully and not rush into set 
form but instead collect ideas focusing on different parts. There must be an 
opportunity to heal rifts with respect for all.

Are you open to that discussion?

Are you open to any and all to that discussion?

This process is not against any group, but for all.

Regards,
Dave

[ ... ]


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org

Re: Limiting Trademark Policy Discussion (was RE: [REPORT] PMC 2015-07 Private-List ...)

[Louis Suárez-Potts]

Hi,

> On 29 Aug 15, at 21:13, Dave Fisher  wrote:
> 
> As me from my soapbox:
> 
> Any proposal for reworking trademark policies would naturally "grandfather" 
> prior arrangements. My hope is that any rework of policies would be more and 
> not less generous than current reality.
> 
> I think that the project should have an open source code test for Powered By 
> that applies to all. The rights to use are clear for all. The obligations 
> spelled out. Benefits given equally.

Easier said than done. I had written a longer reply on this issue but that can 
wait.

> 
> We should (re)acknowledge what (re)based on Apache OpenOffice requires 
> whatever that really is.

Yep.
> 
> Once we have a proposal that the community likes we can go through any type 
> of confirmation or clearance the Brand committee requires.

Indeed.
> 
> I expect that this discussion should proceed carefully and not rush into set 
> form but instead collect ideas focusing on different parts. There must be an 
> opportunity to heal rifts with respect for all.
> 
> Are you open to that discussion?
> 
> Are you open to any and all to that discussion?
> 
> This process is not against any group, but for all.

yes. I need to underscore one thing I think Dave is doing here. He’s humanising 
the process, opening it up. Undoubtedly this will lead to some confusion but it 
won’t be serious and it won’t fatally commit or tarnish Apache. It will 
actually be good, should it occur. And it will also lead, I believe, to 
interested and interesting discussion, which is hugely important and whose very 
existence implies trust.


> 
> Regards,
> Dave

best,
louis
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
>> On Aug 29, 2015, at 5:26 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton  wrote:
>> 
>> From the Chair,
>> 
>> I don't know, off-hand, what the proportion of discussion of Trademark 
>> Policy is in the PMC private discussion activity so far this year.
>> 
>> However, a discussion of trademark policy, as such, especially with "real 
>> and fictional examples," is inappropriate on this list if it is about 
>> trademark enforcement.  Trademark enforcement, when material to an issue 
>> before the PMC, is a private duty of the PMC.  There are ways to reduce the 
>> discussion to essentials there, however.
>> 
>> Let me illustrate what I mean by this.  Let's say the Apache OpenOffice PMC 
>> has offered arrangements, ratified VP Brand Management, by which a third 
>> party can employ AOO marks as part of a "Powered by Apache OpenOffice" 
>> labeling.  The PMC establishes the conditions under which that arrangement 
>> is available to individual parties and may propose custom arrangements based 
>> on the circumstances.  That might be useful to describe and clarify here.  
>> 
>> On the other hand, proposal of conditions under which third parties might be 
>> *required* to enter into such an arrangement is entirely different, even 
>> hypothetically.  As far as I know that is inconsistent with the ASF view of 
>> how its mission is accomplished and its being a good citizen in the world of 
>> open-source activities.  The ASF is by nature not litigious and resolves 
>> concerns about inappropriate use of its marks by other means. I can't 
>> imagine it attempting to compel use of any of its marks.
>> 
>> IMPORTANT. Trademark protection, infringement, and remedies are serious 
>> legal matters and they are not for inexpert discussion on public mailing 
>> lists.  Suspicions of infringement and any acting on those suspicions in 
>> public pronouncements are unwelcome.  Even disguised accounts of specific 
>> situations relevant to this project are inappropriate.  And if not relevant 
>> to this project, they don't belong here either.
>> 
>> To abbreviate the need for custom PMC discussions on cases of alleged 
>> trademark infringement, I have posted a policy applicable to how the AOO PMC 
>> shall deal with any allegations of infringement and prospective curing of 
>> such infringements at
>> .
>>   
>> 
>> Questions, comments, and suggestions about that text are welcome.
>> 
>> - Dennis
>> 
>> BACKGROUND INFORMATION
>> 
>> At the Apache Software Foundation, the Board delegates the determination and 
>> resolution of trademark matters to the Vice President, Brand Management.  
>> All external engagement with respect to trademarks is handled discretely 
>> within the PMC and then always reviewed by, and possibly acted upon, by VP 
>> Brand Management and only VP Brand Management.
>> 
>> Individual projects are expected to be vigilant about how marks are used and 
>> also allowed in the domain of the project.  The Apache OpenOffice PMC 
>> conducts such activities.  The web site page at 
>>  is sufficient information for 
>> those who have concerns for use of or infringing use of Apache OpenOffice 
>> marks.  
>> 
>> There are non-specific topical di

Re: Limiting Trademark Policy Discussion (was RE: [REPORT] PMC 2015-07 Private-List ...)

[Dave Fisher]

As me from my soapbox:

Any proposal for reworking trademark policies would naturally "grandfather" 
prior arrangements. My hope is that any rework of policies would be more and 
not less generous than current reality.

I think that the project should have an open source code test for Powered By 
that applies to all. The rights to use are clear for all. The obligations 
spelled out. Benefits given equally.

We should (re)acknowledge what (re)based on Apache OpenOffice requires whatever 
that really is.

Once we have a proposal that the community likes we can go through any type of 
confirmation or clearance the Brand committee requires.

I expect that this discussion should proceed carefully and not rush into set 
form but instead collect ideas focusing on different parts. There must be an 
opportunity to heal rifts with respect for all.

Are you open to that discussion?

Are you open to any and all to that discussion?

This process is not against any group, but for all.

Regards,
Dave

Sent from my iPhone

> On Aug 29, 2015, at 5:26 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton  wrote:
> 
> From the Chair,
> 
> I don't know, off-hand, what the proportion of discussion of Trademark Policy 
> is in the PMC private discussion activity so far this year.
> 
> However, a discussion of trademark policy, as such, especially with "real and 
> fictional examples," is inappropriate on this list if it is about trademark 
> enforcement.  Trademark enforcement, when material to an issue before the 
> PMC, is a private duty of the PMC.  There are ways to reduce the discussion 
> to essentials there, however.
> 
> Let me illustrate what I mean by this.  Let's say the Apache OpenOffice PMC 
> has offered arrangements, ratified VP Brand Management, by which a third 
> party can employ AOO marks as part of a "Powered by Apache OpenOffice" 
> labeling.  The PMC establishes the conditions under which that arrangement is 
> available to individual parties and may propose custom arrangements based on 
> the circumstances.  That might be useful to describe and clarify here.  
> 
> On the other hand, proposal of conditions under which third parties might be 
> *required* to enter into such an arrangement is entirely different, even 
> hypothetically.  As far as I know that is inconsistent with the ASF view of 
> how its mission is accomplished and its being a good citizen in the world of 
> open-source activities.  The ASF is by nature not litigious and resolves 
> concerns about inappropriate use of its marks by other means. I can't imagine 
> it attempting to compel use of any of its marks.
> 
> IMPORTANT. Trademark protection, infringement, and remedies are serious legal 
> matters and they are not for inexpert discussion on public mailing lists.  
> Suspicions of infringement and any acting on those suspicions in public 
> pronouncements are unwelcome.  Even disguised accounts of specific situations 
> relevant to this project are inappropriate.  And if not relevant to this 
> project, they don't belong here either.
> 
> To abbreviate the need for custom PMC discussions on cases of alleged 
> trademark infringement, I have posted a policy applicable to how the AOO PMC 
> shall deal with any allegations of infringement and prospective curing of 
> such infringements at
> .
>   
> 
> Questions, comments, and suggestions about that text are welcome.
> 
> - Dennis
> 
> BACKGROUND INFORMATION
> 
> At the Apache Software Foundation, the Board delegates the determination and 
> resolution of trademark matters to the Vice President, Brand Management.  All 
> external engagement with respect to trademarks is handled discretely within 
> the PMC and then always reviewed by, and possibly acted upon, by VP Brand 
> Management and only VP Brand Management.
> 
> Individual projects are expected to be vigilant about how marks are used and 
> also allowed in the domain of the project.  The Apache OpenOffice PMC 
> conducts such activities.  The web site page at 
>  is sufficient information for 
> those who have concerns for use of or infringing use of Apache OpenOffice 
> marks.  
> 
> There are non-specific topical discussions on the use of marks and the naming 
> of software distributions based on code from ASF projects, such as recent 
> discussions on gene...@incubator.apache.org and legal-disc...@apache.org.  
> There are some seemingly-borderline cases that the ASF may take a position 
> on, and it might become necessary for the AOO PMC to be watchful for such 
> cases.  In general, VP Brand Management will establish what such cases are.  
> The determination can easily be that some or all such cases are trifles in 
> the context of the mission of the ASF and will not be pursued.  The LEGAL 
> JIRA section might also have issues related to branding issues.  
> 
> 
> - Dennis
> 
> -Original Message-
> F

Limiting Trademark Policy Discussion (was RE: [REPORT] PMC 2015-07 Private-List ...)

[Dennis E. Hamilton]

>From the Chair,

I don't know, off-hand, what the proportion of discussion of Trademark Policy 
is in the PMC private discussion activity so far this year.

However, a discussion of trademark policy, as such, especially with "real and 
fictional examples," is inappropriate on this list if it is about trademark 
enforcement.  Trademark enforcement, when material to an issue before the PMC, 
is a private duty of the PMC.  There are ways to reduce the discussion to 
essentials there, however.

Let me illustrate what I mean by this.  Let's say the Apache OpenOffice PMC has 
offered arrangements, ratified VP Brand Management, by which a third party can 
employ AOO marks as part of a "Powered by Apache OpenOffice" labeling.  The PMC 
establishes the conditions under which that arrangement is available to 
individual parties and may propose custom arrangements based on the 
circumstances.  That might be useful to describe and clarify here.  

On the other hand, proposal of conditions under which third parties might be 
*required* to enter into such an arrangement is entirely different, even 
hypothetically.  As far as I know that is inconsistent with the ASF view of how 
its mission is accomplished and its being a good citizen in the world of 
open-source activities.  The ASF is by nature not litigious and resolves 
concerns about inappropriate use of its marks by other means. I can't imagine 
it attempting to compel use of any of its marks.
 
IMPORTANT. Trademark protection, infringement, and remedies are serious legal 
matters and they are not for inexpert discussion on public mailing lists.  
Suspicions of infringement and any acting on those suspicions in public 
pronouncements are unwelcome.  Even disguised accounts of specific situations 
relevant to this project are inappropriate.  And if not relevant to this 
project, they don't belong here either.

To abbreviate the need for custom PMC discussions on cases of alleged trademark 
infringement, I have posted a policy applicable to how the AOO PMC shall deal 
with any allegations of infringement and prospective curing of such 
infringements at
.
  

Questions, comments, and suggestions about that text are welcome.

 - Dennis

BACKGROUND INFORMATION

At the Apache Software Foundation, the Board delegates the determination and 
resolution of trademark matters to the Vice President, Brand Management.  All 
external engagement with respect to trademarks is handled discretely within the 
PMC and then always reviewed by, and possibly acted upon, by VP Brand 
Management and only VP Brand Management.

Individual projects are expected to be vigilant about how marks are used and 
also allowed in the domain of the project.  The Apache OpenOffice PMC conducts 
such activities.  The web site page at 
 is sufficient information for 
those who have concerns for use of or infringing use of Apache OpenOffice 
marks.  

There are non-specific topical discussions on the use of marks and the naming 
of software distributions based on code from ASF projects, such as recent 
discussions on gene...@incubator.apache.org and legal-disc...@apache.org.  
There are some seemingly-borderline cases that the ASF may take a position on, 
and it might become necessary for the AOO PMC to be watchful for such cases.  
In general, VP Brand Management will establish what such cases are.  The 
determination can easily be that some or all such cases are trifles in the 
context of the mission of the ASF and will not be pursued.  The LEGAL JIRA 
section might also have issues related to branding issues.  


 - Dennis

-Original Message-
From: Dave Fisher [mailto:dave2w...@comcast.net] 
Sent: Saturday, August 29, 2015 12:45
To: dev@openoffice.apache.org
Subject: Re: [REPORT] PMC 2015-07 Private-List Activity through July

We could reduce private traffic if we discussed the policy for trademarks in 
public. The community can help write a clear policy statement with real and 
fictional examples. This would serve the community by reducing private 
inquiries to unusual cases not previously considered or unclearly explained.

Regards,
Dave

Sent from my iPhone



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org