Hello Michael,
> Hi Michael,
>
> Michael Wheatland wrote (21-01-11 23:33)
>
>> I thought a little info might be helpful.
>> I don't dare mention the product name... but another open source
>
>
>
>> product has the following clause in their trademark policy which
>> allows unwritten licencing of the trademark:
>>
>> -----
>> //Use that does not require a written license//
>> Non-commercial Products that exist solely to support Drupal and its
>> adoption, use and users may use the Drupal trademark in promotional
>> materials, such as posters, books, pins, and t-shirts.
>>
>> Use of the trademark that is merely descriptive of the Product is
>> acceptable without need of a license. If such description clearly
>> separates your trademark from the Drupal trademark (e.g. by
>> describing the Product as "YourProduct for Drupal"). In other
>> words, you would not need a license to promote the name
>> "TotalTraining for Drupal" but branding your product so it seems
>> like it comes from Drupal (e.g. "Drupal TotalTraining") would not
>> be permissible. -----
>>
>> This policy has allowed the community to build a huge 3rd party
>> community support network around their product while protecting
>> their trademark successfully.
I think it should be stated that one of the goals (perhaps this is
unspoken or unclear at this stage) is to do very much the same. One of
the main weaknesses of OpenOffice.org was its inability to generate
business for the others (and even revenue for itself).
My initial comment would be that the Trademark policy works very much
in the same direction (actually the Drupal TM were studied among others
before it was drafted) but is somewhat more restrictive on the name.
Read below for more details.
>
> Interesting, thanks for posting,
> But as far as I read the current version on the wiki, it allows the
> same use etc. Or did I miss something?
> (http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/TradeMark_Policy)
>
> Regards,
> CorAs far as I can see, one aspect that is not covered by the proposed
trademark policy is the use of our product trademark "LibreOffice"
directly in the name or URL of other service providers.
ie can a commercial support provide be called "LibreOffice Support"
located at libreofficesupport.com?
I understand the policy would not allow that sort of use.
Also there is no distinction between commercial activities and
community (not for profit) activities in the 'permitted use' section,
which would result in groups, including NL groups being subjected to
the same rules as commercial providers.Then again, I may have read it incorrectly.
I think there is a distinction, actually, to the extent that the guiding
principle (aside the business case limitation) is that you can use the
LibreOffice name factually. So I would say that if you come up with,
say, a forum community that has the "Support forum for LibreOffice" it
is perfectly legit. The reason being, you're a forum factually
providing support and help on LibreOffice.
One other interesting point to mention that was touched on yesterday
was the policy not for LibreOffice itself but for the Document
Foundation. We're working on a logo without the foundation mention on
it as we would like to have a more restrictive appproach on this one.
Best,
Charles.