crests

[DanShaver]

This has all been very interesting and helpful to me in knowing how Greek members feel about the subject of trademarks and licensing. I regret if anyone felt threatened - it was absolutely not my intention.

The original note was simply to educate regarding the ownership rights of our various fraternity and sorority clients. As a Greek member myself (Sigma Chi), I have been working hard to protect Greek trademark rights for the last 10 years. We continue to see pornography companies using Greek marks on their websites and in their films. Also, we have encountered products that have no place carrying Greek marks as they truly don't reflect the lofty values that the insignia represents. Our systems of trademark control allow us to stop these uses when we become aware of the - protecting the image of Greek organizations which helps us all! We are hired by more than 40 national Greek orgnizations to help them protect the marks so we all can rest assured that our Greek organizations will be around - and known for the values that define us - for many, many years to come.

As to what constitutes fair use and what does not. Any commercial use of the marks is not considered fair use. Commissioning someone to make a t-shirt or banner, for example, would require licensing approval. I know it may seem unrealistic to require this level of approval, but as an earlier poster remarked, all trademark owners must control the use of their marks to keep exclusive ownership of the marks. Allowing unmonitored use over time can constitute "abandonment" - and I am sure we all want to prevent this from occuring to our respective Greek organization.

Thank you for letting me clarify a bit. Again, I apologize if anyone felt that the original message was a threat. We are simply trying to do help protect our clients marks - and we try to educate as much as we can, wherever we can.

If you have any questions - feel free to send them to me in a pm.

Interfraternally,

Dan Shaver

[Calixta]

Gee, never mind. I got everything I needed. Piece done. Never to bother you guys again. I didn't need ANY of these responders crests anyway. Thanks to those of you who did, though. They weren't needed for anything derogatory or to cast a bad light on anyone, just for examples. Thanks for all the legal info.anyway.

[Janerz222]

(I think I must be feeling masochistic today. Why else would I beat this dead horse?)

Calixta and others, I don't think it was anyone's inference or assumption that you were you up to nefarious deeds with the crests--it certainly was not mine.

I do think most of those who raised questions did so in order to inform you and others that there _are_ issues with our symbols and names, as much to protect you as to protect the GLOs. (I imagine it would be a real bummer if you got a cease-and-desist letter from an inter/national HQ.)

Unfortunately, the "volume" and language used by just one or two posters can ratchet a thread up to fever pitch, when it's really not there. In my humble opinion, that's what happened here.

There are lots of interesting questions/issues brought up in this thread. Everybody take them for what they are worth.

cheers!

[33girl]

I agree. Calixta, the majority of posters on here would be happy to help you without all the legalese - we were just too lazy to find a decent jpg. Not a "bother" - come back to GC anytime.

[SmartBlondeGPhB]

Originally posted by DanShaver
As to what constitutes fair use and what does not. Any commercial use of the marks is not considered fair use. Commissioning someone to make a t-shirt or banner, for example, would require licensing approval.

According to what we were told by our headquarters, during our convention at the end of June, this is not the case for us. Our collegiate chapters can ask any company they want to make t-shirts for them (this was a VERY contested issue) and they don't have to be licensed through the Affinity program. Our IH would just prefer them to use a licensed company.

[AlphaPhiBubbles]

Originally posted by PhiPsiRuss
But its intellectual property that is NOT public domain.

The bigger issue is that if a GLO does not aggressively protect its intellectual property, that property can become public domain.

How would you like it if the name of "Alpha Phi" was no longer the property of Alpha Phi?

Ok that wasn't my point at all. Now I dont know much about the laws surrounding these things, but I do believe in the ignorance and stupidity of the American public, and in ease of access to the internet, so I think that if ANY person publishing a website really doesn't want their images copied (with a simple right click) they should either not put the graphic there or write some coding that disables right clicking on images as some have already done. I even believe my own dear Alpha Phi should look into this if they are concerned.

[nauadpi]

Originally posted by AlphaPhiBubbles
Ok that wasn't my point at all. Now I dont know much about the laws surrounding these things, but I do believe in the ignorance and stupidity of the American public, and in ease of access to the internet, so I think that if ANY person publishing a website really doesn't want their images copied (with a simple right click) they should either not put the graphic there or write some coding that disables right clicking on images as some have already done. I even believe my own dear Alpha Phi should look into this if they are concerned.

I hate to play devil's advocate, but you can always take a screen shot... and generally the only reason you cannot right click is because it is part of a flash file, not that it has been protected in some way... Again though, you can always take a screen shot of it...

[Taualumna]

Originally posted by PhiPsiRuss
But its intellectual property that is NOT public domain.

The bigger issue is that if a GLO does not aggressively protect its intellectual property, that property can become public domain.

How would you like it if the name of "Alpha Phi" was no longer the property of Alpha Phi?

I think it's more difficult when it comes to something like letters. If "Alpha Phi" belongs to the org and the org only, then individual chapter names of other GLOs wouldn't have the right to use it to apply to their specific chapter.My GLO had, at one point, an Alpha Phi chapter, as I'm sure many other GLOs do. However, Alpha Phi International Fraternity belongs to Alpha Phi the GLO. It's late, so I hope everyone gets what I mean

[DeltAlum]

Originally posted by PhiPsiRuss
I move to second this motion.

Actually, you only have to second. It's already been moved.

Picky, picky.

ETA, I believe Brother Greek Shaver has explained his reasoning with his second post and perhaps it's time to let this thread ride slowly into the sunset.

[Tom Earp]

Thank You Delt Alum.

I think it has been seconded, passed with a voice vote.

I think DanShaver has found that many can be attempted to be force and and The Ire has Been Raised amongst GCers.

While He has a Job To Do as we all agree, His Presentation was a lot off kilter.

He has explained his point which is good as I am sure many of us as I did talk to our Hdq about the post.

He as a Individual is not the Final Authority, each of our Greek Organizations are the ones who make the final decision.

He has His Job, but not the final authority according to My Hdq. Well, when push comes to shove.

From our Legislative Session at Gen Assemb. We all have to become more protective with our symbols, Funny, T-Shirts were not included. Taste was left up to the individual Chapters. If they were found to be distastefull, then there could be problems.!

[PhiPsiRuss]

Originally posted by AlphaPhiBubbles
Ok that wasn't my point at all. Now I dont know much about the laws surrounding these things, but I do believe in the ignorance and stupidity of the American public, and in ease of access to the internet, so I think that if ANY person publishing a website really doesn't want their images copied (with a simple right click) they should either not put the graphic there or write some coding that disables right clicking on images as some have already done. I even believe my own dear Alpha Phi should look into this if they are concerned.

So, its the victim's fault because committing the crime is so easy?

GLOs have the right to post their intellectual property (as do Fortune 500 companies) and expect that it not be stolen. People can steal IBM's logo very easily off the Internet, yet IBM continues to use it for whatever reasons they choose. If its used improperly, and IBM catches wind, their legal department will kick into action. The same goes for GLOs. We have the right to use our crests for brand identity, and any other reasons we want. We also have the right to expect that our intellectual property will not be stolen. I know that if someone is using our intellectual property with out permission, Phi Psi will start legal procedings, and that's the way it should be.

[HotDamnImAPhiMu]

Originally posted by Rudey
Let's not add extra words to these statements when you are not billing out for this, you know?

-Rudey

I'm going to write that on a card and just show it to people.

[Tom Earp]