Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2011 Archives by date, by thread · List index

Hello Michael,

Le Sat, 22 Jan 2011 13:22:03 +0930,
Michael Wheatland <> a écrit :

On Sat, Jan 22, 2011 at 9:07 AM, Cor Nouws <> wrote:
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 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?


As 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

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.



Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
List archive:
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.