[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       koffice-devel
Subject:    Re: KOfficeSource and KOffice
From:       Alfredo Beaumont <alfredo.beaumont () gmail ! com>
Date:       2008-01-14 17:15:28
Message-ID: 200801141815.28296.alfredo.beaumont () gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

Al, 2008eko Urtren 14a(e)an, Aaron J. Seigo(e)k idatzi zuen:
> On Monday 14 January 2008, Bart Coppens wrote:
> > On Monday 14 January 2008 08:28, Inge Wallin wrote:
> > >  * Should the KDE e.V be allowed to sublicense the KOffice trademark to
> > > anybody to use? Under which general conditions?
> >
> > Regardless of the fact that I still do not believe KOffice should be
> > trademarkable at all,
>
> why?
>
> > of course it should be sublicensed. Just like I think
> > the KDE Logo/Trademarks should be usable by third parties. My opinion on
> > the KDE Logo has always been that any use of the logo that is not
> > commercial should be allowed, while commercial usage should at least be
> > allowed for people/companies doing Free Software. I am of the same
> > opinion for any and all KOffice marks.
>
> ah, you mean it should have a liberal licensing program? well, the problem
> right now is we have no outwardly visible licensing program. we do need to
> fix that.
>
> i've added your thoughts above the growing pool of feedback ... thanks.
>
> > >  * Should KOfficeSource GmbH in particular be allowed to use the
> > > wordmark "KOffice" in their (our) name?  Under which particular
> > > conditions (ownership, board, actions, etc)?
> >
> > I have no objections as long as you handle in the spirit of Free Software
> > ;-) Unfortunately for you, that might not be the case if you're going to
> > write closed-source stuff. If that'd become the case, it's somewhat
> > unfortunately chosen that it's called KOfficeSource, while 3rd party
> > people can't get your sources.
> > I guess we could allow this, with the condition that the owner of the
> > trademark (for example the e.V.) requires a periodical evaluation (say,
> > once a year), to decide whether you have not damaged the reputation of
> > KOffice or so, and retract your license if you would have damaged it
> > significantly or so.
>
> who would do the evaluation?
> what would constitute "significant damage"?

I think this is a key point if such kind of condition is going to be 
established. But I guess some kind of condition should be established, if KDE 
e.V. want to effectively protect KDE and/or KOffice trademark. Therefore, if 
such a condition should be established, this must be very clear and 
objectively measurable, because failing the evaluation would suppose a hard 
damage to the company aswell. On the other hand, not setting any condition / 
requirement can potentially damage KDE / KOffice brand aswell. So I guess we 
would need some kind of measurable "Don't be evil".

Cheers
-- 
Alfredo Beaumont Sainz
http://www.alfredobeaumont.org/blog.cgi
_______________________________________________
koffice-devel mailing list
koffice-devel@kde.org
https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/koffice-devel
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]