Re: [libreoffice-marketing] Commence of the TDF store

Le Mon, 5 Sep 2011 10:39:54 -0300,
Paulo de Souza Lima <paulo.s.lima@varekai.org> a écrit :

> 2011/9/5 Charles-H. Schulz <charles.schulz@documentfoundation.org>
>
> > Hello Paulo,
> Hi =)
>
>
> > Le Sun, 4 Sep 2011 15:28:50 -0300,
> > Paulo de Souza Lima <paulo.s.lima@varekai.org> a écrit :
> >
> > > 2011/9/4 Charles-H. Schulz <charles.schulz@documentfoundation.org>
> > >
> > > > Le 04/09/2011 16:38, Danishka Navin a écrit :
> > > > > > > > I am not talking about the TDF community but external
> > > > > > > > people.
> > > > > > > All right. But *who* are external people? And how can we
> > > > > > > identify them? For
> > > > > > > me the only fact someone is using LibreOffice is enough to
> > > > > > > put him/her
> > > > in.
> > > > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I think that anyway anyone can use the LibreOffice logo
> > > > (without the subline) according to our TM policy. But I'm a bit
> > > > skeptical as to how Paulo defines the people who contribute to
> > > > LibreOffice and that we apparently are not aware of. We have
> > > > defined pretty much (and with some range) who are contributors
> > > > to our community and our project. The notion that somehow these
> > > > people should not be trusted is weird and not really
> > > > friendly-sounding. What do you mean, Paulo, that whatever
> > > > contributors do should be taken with mistrust?
> > >
> > > Excuse me. where exactly have I said that?
> >
> > In your last email, and actually below once again :-) At least
> > that's how I understand it.
>
> What exactly are you understanding? I didn't get your point.

I'm understanding that you claim there's a trust issue between "people"
and TDF. Isn't that what you were writing?

> > > My point is exactly the
> > > opposite. Please, read my other message on this issue. By the
> > > way, I don't think we can point exactly who are LibreOffice
> > > contributors and who aren't. We have no tools to do it.
> >
> > I think we do. We have a Membership Committee for that.
>
> No, we don't. There's a lot of people contributing to LibreOffice
> than those who have submited their profiles to MC. Assuming
> contributors are only TDF members is not the best way to treat this
> issue. 

I think it's a starting point, at the very least. If our goal was
separate one part of the contributors with the others, why would we
have a membership committee?
Essentially, what we do (and ask the Debian project, they have much
more strict criteria than we have) is make sure meritocracy works. In
Debian the bar is much higher, and they don't seem to take care the
people who could claim they're contributors but who don't match their
criteria for admission. 

> Only in Brazilian community, I can tell you that there's at
> least about 3 times more people contributing than the
> submited/accepted TDF members. You would be excluding, for example,
> Tom Davies from the community as well, and all we know he is
> contributing a lot to LibreOffice.

Being on a mailing list does not equate to contribute. But as for Tom
(and anyone) he/she's free to submit his membership request at anytime.
So the other people you mention must leave a track or a sign somewhere
they're contributing. 

> > > > So yes, we're talking about stores, not about anyone selling a
> > > > T-shirt.
> > >
> > > Hummm. I thought we were talking about *our* stores, not *any*
> > > store.
> >
> > The decision about whether we set up our own store (meaning our own
> > e-commerce infrastructure) or we'd work with established merchant
> > sites is something we need to discuss and that is of course not
> > made at this point.
>
> Indeed.
>
>
> > > > In fact, anyone can sell a t-shirt with the LibreOffice logo
> > > > without the TDF subline: I don't think it helps TDF, and I
> > > > think it does anything but covering the cost of T-shirt
> > > > production and whatever profit you want to make out of it.
> > >
> > >
> > > I'm not sure what exactly this means. So, correct me if I'm wrong:
> > > Anyone is able buy some blank t-shirts, print LibreOffice logo on
> > > (without the TDF subline) and sell them.
> >
> > Yes, welcome to Free Software :-)
>
> I'm in this world much more time than you could imagine. =)
>
>
> > >  But those people can't have
> > > any profit, neither to cover costs promoting LibreOffice, like
> > > travels, hotels, folders, subscriptions to events, etc.
> >
> >
> > Wait. This is a completely different topic. When people work
> > together to attend an event, be part of the team of the LibreOffice
> > project there should be a NGO, locally or regionally that should be
> > able to reimburse them. The way it reimburse them is because it
> > collects money and some of that money may come from selling
> > t-shirts. This is a very old, traditional way to work in FOSS
> > communities and I don't see why that would change.
>
> No, it isn't. You have a centralized thinking, where everything
> should be controlled by an NGO. 

No. I am trying to clarify what must be pooled and what should not be.
It seems you don't really feel LibreOffice should even have a legal
entity, however.  

> Other people have different thinking
> where the community should have more freedom to act.

So please explain what sort of "more freedom" you're talking about. 
Here we're talking about software freedom, the freedom to code, to
hack, to get one's work properly recognized. Are you implying that it's
not the case inside this project? 

>  There are, at
> least, two different views, and none are the "right one", in my view.
>
>
> > > Despite of
> > > that, some TDF SC members can ask for reimbursement for the same
> > > thing, when in a TDF mission, that comes directly from the money
> > > that those people, you're saying they can't use LibreOffice
> > > community brand for profit, gave to TDF.
> >
> > And the very same thing happens and is happening all over the
> > world, as we speak, in various regional NGOs working to support
> > LibreOffice. I don't see any problem with that.
>
> I do see a lot of problems with that. We have no regional NGO and no
> intentions to create one, since we were told that TDF would be the
> right place for such decisions, some months ago.

Who told you that you didn't need a NGO?

>  Now you are telling
> us we should go back to our previous condition. Many people have
> concerns about local NGOs because the problems we had here in the
> past. 

But everybody works through NGOs, all over the world. 


> But that's another topic. I don't think I should be reimbursed
> for any activity I do to promote LibreOffice.

But what if you want to go to Paris and give a conference?  :-)

> I do it for love and
> fun. But it would be great if I could help to pay my costs producing
> and selling LibreOffice stuff in my lectures. I don't see any problem
> with that.


Sorry but that's somewhat obscure. You want to sell stuff to cover your
expenses but you don't want an NGO to reimburse your expenses? I think
the latter is usually what's being done, the former - at least in
Europe- would be seen as awkward socially speaking. 

> > > Don't get me wrong, but I think there's something strange in that
> > > line of thinking. One thing is profit for itself. Another one is
> > > profit for using it in Libreoffice promotion efforts.
> >
> > Yes, you're right.
> >
> > > And that's the
> > > point I mean with *trust*: TDF should trust people will use the
> > > money for promoting LibreOffice.
> >
> > Trust is one thing (in fact my lines above should send you a clear
> > message about the fact that we trust people) but coordination,
> > representation, and a minimum of resources pooling is necessary. A
> > community is not only about selling T-shirts, it's also about
> > development. If you have no developers, or logo designers, I don't
> > know what you'll put on your T-shirts in the end...
>
>
> Nobody here is thinking about selling t-shirts.

I do :-) 


> T-shirts selling is
> just an example. I'm thinking in creating ways for people to sustain
> their activities supporting LibreOffice. You say a formal
> organization should controll those activities. I say people, who
> already contributes to Libreoffice, are adults enough to use the
> community trademark with care, so they don't need a NGO controlling
> what they do.

It's not about control, it's about coordination and practicality. Do
you actually want to turn people into little merchants "hi, I'll talk
to you about LibreOffice, please buy my T-shirt"... 

More seriously, while there may be several reasons why you would be
wary of a NGO, you should perhaps not stick to your previous
experience. Creating a new NGO, starting from a clean slate could
be a good idea. And you would be in one country, where LibreOffice
is really important, without a NGO? You would run into a whole kind
of problems. In this sense, one could say there are unfortunately
thousands of people who die in car accidents but a car can also be very
practical. 

> I'm sure that any abuse will be issued to the SC or the
> local mailing lists as soon it is detected. Please let's go back to
> the central topic. I'm talking about freedom people should have to
> act in order to promote LibreOffice. The point is: there are two
> LibreOffice trademarks.
>
> The TDF sublined trademark that is for TDF use only. No question
> about the TDF trademark. This issue seems to be very clear to me.
>
> The community trademark that is supposed to be used by the community,
> without hard restrictions. And some discussion about "profit" arose
> on this point. I think TDF should not be discussing if someone will
> have profit or not making and selling some stuff with that trademark.
> We have no ways to controll if people are doing what they declare to
> do, but the information that comes from the community. The majority
> of people I know who would be interested in make some use of this
> trademark are somehow involved with LibreOffice. They ARE community
> members already, despite the fact they don't have their names on the
> TDF members web page.

They're free to act within our TM policy, but to be frank here we want
to work as a project and this project lives by contributions, done by
contributors. It may be that you find our criteria are too high, but
unless people here find they're to strict people will have to prove
their contributions. I don't think it should be very hard, by the way. 

> I don't know a single person who would abuse
> LibreOffice trademark for personal advantages. All of them are
> working to promote LibreOffice. So, I don't see any problem in
> allowing them to have some profit with that, since it will not be
> used in large scales, nor for private companies, at least at this
> point, when we are trying to enforce this trademark to the market.
> Any kind of abuse, like the use of the mark by a private company
> without permission, or the use for large scale commerce, will be
> quickly detected and reported, because people who buys those stuff
> are involved with FLOSS, and news runs fast in this environment.
>
>
> > > > But I would also see disadvantages as clearly saying
> > > > that we support anyone using our logo: otherwise why would we
> > > > have any TM policy (and why would we have a foundation anyway?)?
> > >
> > > Question is not if TDF supports those people, but if those people
> > > support TDF and LibreOffice.
> >
> > and that is the line, right there, where I feel there's mistrust.
> > TDF *makes* LibreOffice.
>
>
> No, the community makes LibreOffice

* the community of contributors*

> and TDF should *represent* the
> community (Next Decade Manifesto). You are mixing TDF and the
> community. No one in the community are TDF "employees", as long as I
> know. I'm a contributor to LibreOffice community and I accept TDF as
> representative, *for now*. If TDF deviates from the stated in the
> manifesto, I'll rethink my position.

Or perhaps you'll elect another board of directors. TDF is a structure,
the structure of its contributors. It's not about a community and a TDF
being accepted. TDF is not an idle body, they're people inside it. 


> > So if people have no confidence in LibreOffice or
> > TDF they will stop using the software.
>
>
> I don't think they would stop using software once there are very few
> alternatives. But they would stop contributing to LibreOffice
> community certainly, because forking the project is not an option.

Why?

> That's why many people see Apache OpenOffice in good looking. People
> don't like to put their eggs in one basket, only. =)

So you are saying you like to have it on both ends, and perhaps you'd
like to sell LibreOffice T-shirts, and, depending on your audience,
Openoffice T-shirts. I think I understand now where you're coming
from :-) 

> > But implying there's a
> > confidence issue between users at large and the project itself is
> > -again- something I don't understand (clearly, I don't see any trust
> > problem, why should people not trust TDF is something I don't see).
>
>
> Despite of that, there's a lot of people who have concerns about TDF,
> some inside the community, some outside the community. That's what
> those people you're saying are not part of the community are doing:
> easing those concerns among people and promoting LibreOffice, even if
> they are not TDF members.


Paulo: why should they have concerns? 

> > > The simple fact of using a t-shirt is
> > > marketing, so it is a marketing effort and supports TDF.
> > > Personally, I only use t-shirts from people I identify myself
> > > with them. I never would use a t-shirt from Microsoft, would you?
> >
> > I wouldn't and I don't. But I also wear T-shirts of Debian, and it
> > so happens that I am not a Debian user (was, years ago). I'm not
> > calling myself a member of the Debian community because I have a
> > Debian T-shirt.
>
>
> But actually you are helping to promote Debian. =) 

In a sense, yes :-)

> I don't use
> Debian. I use Ubuntu. But I do participate of a local Debian
> discussion list and I have many friends who use Debian. I do feel
> somehow part of Debian community as well.

But you have no say in it. Do you feel the same concern with the Debian
project and SPI as you do with TDF?


> Nobody told me I'm not, at
> least for now. =) Being part of a community is not a question of
> being "subscribed" to a website. It's a question of identifying
> yourself with the values of that community. Meritocracy will define
> how much a community member you are. That's simple =)


Yes, indeed, I guess that's what I've been writing since the beginning,
haven't I?

> > > LibreOffice brand is
> > > not widely known, except in IT or FOSS environment. Those people
> > > already know/use Libreoffice. They are not our main marketing
> > > target, in my view. The "outsiders" are.
> >
> > You are right again, and I see -others do, I think- value in
> > spreading the word about LibreOffice. But Danishka's question is
> > different. He asks about an official TDF/Libo online store.
>
> No. He was asking about how to garantee that people using Libreoffice
> trademark will give part of their profits to TDF. My answer was about
> the use of the community mark. I think this issue about the TDF
> sublined mark is already well defined: only allowing the use through
> some sort of legal agreement between TDF and the interested part.
> This will require TDF become a legalized organization.

Absolutely.

Best,
Charles.


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to marketing+help@global.libreoffice.org
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted