So IBM wants to take the code and use it for commercial offerings. If you don't believe that, look at IBM's Lotus Symphony, which is a (crappily) re-branded Ope

So IBM wants to take the code and use it for commercial offerings. If you don't believe that, look at IBM's Lotus Symphony, which is a (crappily) re-branded OpenOffice with a few user interface tweaks and bugs fixed. Being a massive backer of Apache OO, IBM does not want to lose the ability to leech back improvements into Symphony (which I should add is a commerical product they support). As a result, IBM is willing to keep Apache OO alive. LibreOffice has already massively pulled ahead in features and bugs fixed / shit code re-factored. It is just the name that keeps OO alive in my not so humble opinion. Either way, Michael Meeks and the (former go-oo) team that now work on LibreOffice will continue kicking it. In OSS, forking isn't always necessarily a bad thing. Choices keep both sides honest!