When charities go head to head in court, its always a misfortune --doubly so when the dispute relates to trade marks since these disputes are likely to attract attention among donors and can easily damage the goodwill of one or both parties. In a current American dispute, the disputants are literally warring parties: the Wounded Warrier Project and Keystone Wounded Warriers, whose respective marks appear below. I think that the trustees of charities should either be required or at least strongly encouraged to submit to cost-effective and low-publicity forms of dispute resolution when at odds with one other, leaving the courts for actions against real infringers without charitable status. What do readers think? Thanks do to Chris Torrero for drawing this to our attention.
Posted on: Mon, 06 Oct 2014 08:13:53 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015