> On Aug 3, 2016, at 12:25 PM, Christopher <ctubb...@apache.org> wrote: > > On Wed, Aug 3, 2016 at 9:14 AM Vice President, Brand Management < > vp-br...@apache.org> wrote: > >> >> 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. >> > Understood. But, as I previously explained, that wasn't my reasons for > using those examples. I was highlighting what I believed to be acceptable > use, and trying to find a path of acceptability for our situation, similar > to those. I certainly was not trying to highlight mis-use to justify > further mis-use.
Thanks for clarifying. I believe that you were and are acting in good faith. > >> 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. >> > We've followed the second route... renaming the fluo-io organization on > GitHub to astralway, and are in the process of removing use of the Fluo > name everywhere except when referencing Apache Fluo explicitly. Excellent choice. It looks like there are no conflicts with “astralway” so you should be fine there. > > I actually had expected to be asking explicit questions on trademarks@ > soon, but given the route we've taken, I actually don't think we have any > outstanding trademark questions/requests to follow up with. Our next RC > brought to the IPMC shouldn't have any remaining trademark concerns. Good luck and it’s been a pleasure working with you on this issue. Regards, Craig Craig L Russell c...@apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
