Hi,
Florian Effenberger wrote on 2011-08-24 11:57:
If I hear no objections, I will modify the site footers accordingly in
the next days.
modifications are done now. :) Thanks everyone for your feedback!
Florian
--
Florian Effenberger
Steering Committee and Founding Member of The Document Fo
Hi :)
I think so.
+1
from me even tho it doesn't count
Regards from
Tom :)
From: Florian Effenberger
To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org
Sent: Wed, 24 August, 2011 10:57:12
Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] Re: trademark use request
Hello,
thank
Hello,
thanks for all your feedback! So, the latest version of this would be
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of
their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks
in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also
subjec
Le 23/08/11 15:25, Simon Phipps a écrit :
Hi Simon,
>> better still :
>>
>> "Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy."
>
> I agree that's more precise English. I am a little concerned it's uncommon
> usage that those with English as a second language might consider difficult,
> and th
the law in this area.
Regards from
Tom :)
From: Simon Phipps
To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org
Sent: Tue, 23 August, 2011 14:25:24
Subject: Re: [steering-discuss] Re: trademark use request
On 23 Aug 2011, at 13:03, Alexander Thurgood wrote:
On 23 Aug 2011, at 13:03, Alexander Thurgood wrote:
> Le 23/08/11 10:18, Florian Effenberger a écrit :
>
> Second thoughts,
>
>> subject to international copyright laws. Uses are explained our
>> trademark policy.
>>
>
>
> better still :
>
> "Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy
Le 23/08/11 10:18, Florian Effenberger a écrit :
Second thoughts,
> subject to international copyright laws. Uses are explained our
> trademark policy.
>
better still :
"Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy."
Alex
--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@d
Le 23/08/11 10:18, Florian Effenberger a écrit :
Hi Florian,
>
> Alex, how does that sound from a legal point of view? Is it strong enough?
>
"Usage is explained in our trademark policy."
Alex
--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to steering-discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Problems? ht
Hi,
Simon Phipps wrote on 2011-08-22 21:29:
I'm not sure about "binding" as I think "explained" is actually an assertive
word, but sure, that's fine too. I was just trying to be concise!
I'm not a native speaker, so you have much more insight into the English
language than I do. ;-)
So, th
On 22 Aug 2011, at 20:18, Florian Effenberger wrote:
> Hi Simon,
>
> Simon Phipps wrote on 2011-08-21 22:32:
>> As a matter of general style I believe TDF should not use the controversial
>> expression "intellectual property" anywhere. I suggest the following phrase:
>>
>>> > "LibreOffice" an
Hi Simon,
Simon Phipps wrote on 2011-08-21 22:32:
As a matter of general style I believe TDF should not use the controversial expression
"intellectual property" anywhere. I suggest the following phrase:
> "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of
> their corre
On 20 Aug 2011, at 14:49, Alexander Thurgood wrote:
> Le 20/08/11 11:34, Florian Effenberger a écrit :
>
> Hi Florian,
>
>> "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of
>> their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks
>> in one or more coun
Le 20/08/11 11:34, Florian Effenberger a écrit :
Hi Florian,
> "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of
> their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks
> in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are subject
> to internat
Hi Alex,
Alexander Thurgood wrote on 2011-08-10 16:04:
The easiest way around such a situation in the present state of...flux,
would be to indicate that :
"LibreOffice is a registered trademark of its corresponding registered
owner or is in actual use as a trademark in one or more countries."
ering-discuss] Re: trademark use request
Le 31/07/11 16:53, Florian Effenberger a écrit :
Hi Florian,
> hmmm... do I get it right that not mentioning any trademark protection
> is better than mentioning that a mark is protected, but not naming the
> registrant?
The easiest way around such
On 10 Aug 2011, at 15:04, Alexander Thurgood wrote:
> Le 31/07/11 16:53, Florian Effenberger a écrit :
>
> Hi Florian,
>
>
>> hmmm... do I get it right that not mentioning any trademark protection
>> is better than mentioning that a mark is protected, but not naming the
>> registrant?
>
> The
Le 31/07/11 16:53, Florian Effenberger a écrit :
Hi Florian,
> hmmm... do I get it right that not mentioning any trademark protection
> is better than mentioning that a mark is protected, but not naming the
> registrant?
The easiest way around such a situation in the present state of...flux,
wo
Hi Alex,
Alexander Thurgood wrote on 2011-07-31 12:03:
Ideally then, reference should be made to the FOD Verein and not to TDF.
Not mentioning the name of the rights holder at all opens the person who
publicises such a mark on their product to allegations of fraud,
trademark infringement, and f
y with the idea of changing it.
Apols and regards from
Tom :)
From: Alexander Thurgood
To: steering-discuss@documentfoundation.org
Sent: Sun, 31 July, 2011 11:03:50
Subject: [steering-discuss] Re: trademark use request
Le 31/07/11 10:21, Florian Effenberger
Le 31/07/11 10:21, Florian Effenberger a écrit :
Hi Florian,
> legally, the German association "Freies Office Deutschland e.V." is the
> current trademark holder, as TDF doesn't exist as legal entity yet.
Ideally then, reference should be made to the FOD Verein and not to TDF.
Not mentioning th
Hi,
Alexander Thurgood wrote on 2011-07-30 20:14:
Assuming that the TM_is_ actually registered in the name of TDF, then
yes, this is OK.
legally, the German association "Freies Office Deutschland e.V." is the
current trademark holder, as TDF doesn't exist as legal entity yet.
Florian
--
F
Le 30/07/11 18:39, Florian Effenberger a écrit :
Hi Florian
>
> I received a trademark use request from an extension vendor. For
> confidentiality reasons (the product has not yet been launched), I'll
> remove the name, but the request is as follows:
>
> Back of the product box:
> LibreOffice
22 matches
Mail list logo
