The Apache Software Foundation will present its branded version of OpenOffice open source office suite to developers in the first quarter of 2012. Apache asserts trademark protection of the open source organization. In a statement, the OpenOffice project’s Don Harbison expressed that Apache has already completed its code clearance stage.
The OpenOffice.org suite version 3.4 was developed for debugging and testing. This is not a feature release but aims to comply with the IP clearance policies of Apache. Accordingly, an end-user release will follow. In terms of enhancements, metadata and digital signatures are among the target. The suite will adopt OASIS ODF 1.2 specification’s technology. “ODF is leveraged by OpenOffice.org.”
Apache License 2.0 enables a more diverse user and contributor base as well as lessens restrictions on Apache code usage. Apache mentioned that its open development model and license is acknowledged as a top-class means of ensuring open standards. As example is the ODF.
There are six personal productivity applications under the OpenOffice.org. It has database, equation editor, spreadsheet, drawing, presentation graphics and word processor featuring a Web-authoring component. The suite can be used in operating systems of Windows, Linux, Solaris and Macintosh.
Apache allows its participants to freely set boundaries in collaboration however Apache stresses that these organizations “are not free to use” the company’s trademarks in confusing ways. In order to prevent confusion of use OpenOffice.org and other related marks, Apache controls their associated use with other’s software and related services.
Harbison mentioned that Apache wants to ensure that the brand is respected and they therefore clearly set the trademark policy. He added that any entity who would like to use the Apache brand will undergo a review from the company’s trademark persons.
RedMonk Analyst Stephen O’Grady mentioned that Apache’s statement wants to remind the public that the code may be permissively licensed but “the associated trademarks are not.” He added that Apache is “asserting its trademark ownership.”
O’Grady also mentioned that there are difficulties in terms of dealing with forked codebases. He said that there is most likely a friction over usage, contributions and other concerns once two codebases will come from the same origin and still compete for the same users. So far, efforts in bridging the two are unsuccessful.
