incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Vice President, Brand Management" <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Fluo Parent POM 1-incubating (rc2)
Date Wed, 03 Aug 2016 13:13:55 GMT
(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 <>
> wrote:
>> Hi Christopher,
>>> On Aug 1, 2016, at 3:00 PM, Christopher <> wrote:
>>> Why would this be a concern for, but not sites like
>>> or which
>> are
>>> related to the ASF project, but clearly not owned or controlled by ASF?
>> Or
>>> even The last one has a disclaimer about who
>> owns
>>> the "Maven" trademark. Would it still be a problem for ""
>> 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 (, and we're trying to split
> into two distinct entities (an ASF PMC at, and an
> independent community of related tools at 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.

> 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

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message