Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [ee4j-community] Fwd: Jakarta EE logo selection process - next steps

Thanks as always for your insight. This kind of "real life" examples are extremely useful to understand some complicated business decisions for us unexperienced with these processes.

Keep on the great work.

El jue., 29 mar. 2018 5:17, David Blevins <dblevins@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> escribió:
I love this thread and think even if we talk this into the ground it's still a good thing for all of us.  Above all we as a community need to be brave enough to use our voice.  That's really the most important thing, far bigger than logos.

I'll give my honest perspective on where I see risk.

Our ability to convince Eclipse isn't a factor, where things will get difficult is Eclipse's ability to convince the handful of governments that do not allow trademarking "Jakarta EE" for geographical reasons.  They won't want to give us the trademark and we're hoping the graphic increases our chances of persuading them.  We'll be foreigners in that conversation asking for trademark in a place we don't live, talking to an government employee that might be very overworked.  This may not be the case, but I think we'd be smart to conservatively assume this a potential.

There's risk in tackling it up front and highlighting our awareness of their policy that Jakarta can;t be trademarked, but with the lion image it's ok.  The risk is that talking about it up front inherently increases their sensitivity of the subject and our potential for rejection.  If only 1 out of 3 people in the office that reviews the application were aware of the rule, we'll definitely have 3 out of 3 aware of the rule.  People tend not to approve risk in front of their co-workers.  There's a good chance "cover your butt" mentality kicks in.

There's risk in tackling it only after a potential rejection.  In this situation, we've already been rejected and now we're a foreign entity explaining to them where lions live.  There's risk the person feels their intelligence has just been insulted.  There's an additional risk in saying it in a culturally appropriate way.  Either way explaining to people they are wrong often makes them them save face and dig their heels in.

Were I the one who had to make the call knowing there's already risk in the bare word "Jakarta", I'd probably chose to avoid it and conservatively pick something I hope increases our chances with no potential for additional risk.

All that aside, I really like the lion.

On Mar 28, 2018, at 2:23 PM, Richard Monson-Haefel <rmonson@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:


I would like the EF to kindly provide a reason why the lion logo (see attached) was rejected. The ruling says “Decline, as it runs the risk of being associated with the city of Jakarta.”  That is not a valid reason to reject it. There are no lions native to Java, Jakarta, or Indonesia.  Please provide a solid reason why it was rejected or put it back into the candidates list.

Thank you!



ee4j-community mailing list
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
ee4j-community mailing list
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit

Back to the top