(Please note the From: address) Christopher wrote on 8/1/16 6:36 PM: > On Mon, Aug 1, 2016 at 6:22 PM Craig Russell <craig.russ...@oracle.com> > wrote: > >> Hi Christopher, >> >>> On Aug 1, 2016, at 3:00 PM, Christopher <ctubb...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>> Why would this be a concern for http://fluo.io, but not sites like >>> http://www.stratahadoopworld.com/ or http://accumulosummit.com/ which >> are >>> related to the ASF project, but clearly not owned or controlled by ASF? >> Or >>> even http://search.maven.org/? The last one has a disclaimer about who >> owns >>> the "Maven" trademark. Would it still be a problem for "http://fluo.io"; >> if >>> it also had a similar disclaimer?
Ever project's branding questions are distinct and independent from any other project's branding questions. While I'm happy to have people ask - in separate threads - "Is Foo project OK with blah?", that in no way means that those examples are good ones to follow. In particular, using another third party's potential branding mis-use to justify your desired uses of an Apache brand is a danger sign, and one that likely will draw more scrutiny to your question. >>> >> >> The reason I’m pushing back on fluo being in compliance with Apache >> trademark policy is that we currently have a mess with several other >> projects. PMCs are having a difficult time defending Apache’s brands. >> >> > We don't want to add to that list. We want to find some way to be compliant > without hurting the project or its community which extends outside of the > ASF. We previously had a single entity (fluo.io), and we're trying to split > into two distinct entities (an ASF PMC at fluo.apache.org, and an > independent community of related tools at fluo.io) with non-overlapping, > but clearly complimentary, scopes. That will cause your project to fail to graduate. The trademark for the project can only be used by one organization - either the ASF, or by someone else. Not both. Your community needs to decide what you're doing with the "fluo" name - either keep it for yourself, and choose a new name for the podling, or grant it to the ASF (during the Incubation process), and choose a new, unrelated name for your outside projects. I do appreciate the questions, and understand the points about other semi-related software bits or different licenses. But Apache projects must be branded as Apache projects, and not share the actual name or governance - or perception of governance - with outside groups. > > >> “The other guys are not in compliance so we don’t have to be” is not a >> good response. We are trying to straighten out other misuses of Apache >> trademarks and don’t want any more issues while we figure out how to fix >> the others. >> >> > That wasn't what I was trying to say. I was trying to say that it seems > like there are circumstances similar to what we are trying to achieve which > are, in fact, acceptable uses of trademark. I wasn't pointing out that > these other sites aren't compliant. I was pointing out that we'd like to > move towards whatever it takes to fall within these acceptable > circumstances which apply to these others. Reading the event branding policy would be helpful to explain some of the other branding uses. Events are a different trademark category than software products, and we have an explicit approval process for event related brands. http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/events > > So, my goal here is to find what is reasonable and acceptable for our > situation. > -- - Shane Curcuru Vice President, Brand Management The Apache Software Foundation http://www.apache.org/foundation/marks --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
