[OpenIndiana-discuss] oracle gives openoffuce to apache

[Gabriel de la Cruz]

Shareholders should be pissed for getting the comunity go, in order to keep
the current value of the trademark up the project must stay alive, at this
very moment the only way they have to keep the project alive is investing
money into it... or maybe selling out the whole thing... otherwise, once the
project is dead (once the fork took all the atention from it) the value wont
be so big anymore.
They are donating the project, trading something in order to get their image
back (remember that they messed it up badly).
What they are doing is natural taking in mind the load of negative marketing
they generated.

Maybe Apaches will be less pissed after the court issue (another beautifull
move), but this is not so nice towards the document foundation... this is
about balancing things...

Anyway; investing cost money, and giving away relieves from negative
marketing. The second is best, even if it involves handling out a trademark.

Cheers




2011/6/2 Ignacio Marambio Catán <darkjoker at gmail.com>

> On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 12:59 PM, Gabriel de la Cruz
> <gabriel.delacruz at gmail.com> wrote:
> > The name is the only thing Oracle owns at this moment...
> > The rest is out there alrready.
> >
> > What they should do is to donate the trademark to the document foundation
> > and stop messing around with the thing.
> >
> > :-O
>
> Oracle owns much more than the name, just because it's GPL or whatever
> does not mean you can do whatever you want with it. you can certainly
> fork it as has been done but the license has to be respected.
> Trademarks have value, how could oracle's management justify letting
> that go to their shareholders and avoid being sued in the process?
>
> nacho
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 6:25 PM, Hillel Lubman <shtetldik at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 5:52 AM, Ken Gunderson <kgunders at teamcool.net>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Thu, 2011-06-02 at 10:42 +0100, Jonathan Adams wrote:I'm of the
> >> opinion
> >> > that LibreOffice would be taking a
> >> > step backwards if it took on the Openoffice name.  Folks know that
> >> > LibreOffice is the path for future.  The LibreOffice name is also,
> imo,
> >> > more enticing to me as end user - especially in this day and age of
> >> > "fake bake" corporate "open source" projects.
> >> >
> >>
> >> It's the matter of taste of course, but for me OpenOffice sounds better.
> >> Plus that name is established already, while most users never even heard
> of
> >> LibreOffice before. So if LibreOffice / OpenOffice can join back under
> >> OpenOffice name now, it'll only benefit the project in general  IMO.
> >>
> >> Hillel.
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list
> >> OpenIndiana-discuss at openindiana.org
> >> http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list
> > OpenIndiana-discuss at openindiana.org
> > http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list
> OpenIndiana-discuss at openindiana.org
> http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
>