Who owns the word 'Adventist,' or 'Catholic'?
Who owns the word 'Adventist,' or 'Catholic'?
By Julia Duin
By Julia Duin
Do religious groups have the right to sue you if you use their name, logo or so-called branding color?
Maybe so. On Monday, this blog ran a report that mentioned an Adventists for Life Facebook page for Seventh-day Adventists who oppose abortion.
The SDA headquarters, based in Silver Spring, Md., reacted quickly, asking Facebook to remove the offending page. I contacted Facebook on Wednesday to ask why no one checked with the folks behind the page before killing it. I received a copy of their policy that says once someone lodges a plausible claim of trademark infringement, Facebook removes or disables access, no questions asked.
Mark Price, a Canadian SDA'er who was in charge of the page, alerted the 600 members of the group that he'd been silenced. "The Adventists For Life group is not an organization but an informal gathering of Seventh Day Adventists who are pro-life," he wrote me. "I am very concerned, as you are, about this kind of power that the Adventist leadership have to shut people up."
I called SDA spokesman Garrett Caldwell to see what was up. He told me his organization had complained about trademark infringement; that is, the unauthorized use of the SDA brand.
"We are working hard to try to protect the name and organization associated with the name," he said. "Both 'Adventist' and 'SDA' are trademarked and registered names. We want to make sure the use of the name is connected with our organization."
If the originator of the page called SDA headquarters and asked permission to use the SDA name, "We'd say absolutely [yes]," he added.
Hmmmmm. I was sent a copy of a terse cease-and-desist letter written by Andrea Saunders, associate general counsel for the SDA, and there was no mention whatsoever of asking permission. The letter not only wanted the Facebook page renamed, it also wanted its originators to deregister the domain name for www.adventistsforlife.org, which the originators owned but were not using.
Now the page has existed on Facebook for some time. Only now did the SDA go after it. This whole situation brings up an interesting conundrum. What if other religious groups did the same thing? In this age of marketing, brand names and search engine optimization, are words such as "Jewish" or "Mormon" or "Catholic" now trademarks?
If so, someone had better call the US Conference of Catholic Bishops. They've been after the group Catholics for a Free Choice for more than a decade, informing anyone who will listen that CFFC "is an arm of the abortion lobby" and "is not a Catholic organization, does not speak for the Catholic Church, and in fact promotes positions contrary to the teaching of the Church as articulated by the Holy See."
Or how about many Jewish groups, which have resented the group Jews for Jesus ever since its 1973 founding partly because of its name?
Or the word "Mormon"? Surely the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints hasn't appreciated all the ways that word has been used.
Trademarking an ultra-common name, adjective or phrase may sound ridiculous, but look how the Susan G. Komen Foundation has threatened to sue more than numerous charities over the words "for a cure." That is, if you're a group of figure skaters that sponsors an event called "Skate for a Cure" to help fight cancer, you'll hear from the Komen lawyers. They'll also warn you against using the color pink, Komen's trademark hue.
The Lance Armstrong Foundation has taken a similar position with the color yellow, the Wall Street Journal reports.
It's only a matter of time before the world's religions pick up on this trend. The possibilities are endless. An enterprising Islamic group can claim it has exclusive rights to the world 'Muslim' and the color green. Hindus can certainly lay claim to the color saffron.
So the Adventists may be ahead of the times, not behind. They have been defending their name for some time, most notably in 1987, when they sued SDA Kinship, a group of gay Adventists, also charging trademark infringement. US District Judge Mariana Pfaeizer ruled against the church in 1991, saying the group's title did not infringe on the denomination's use of the name.
The SDA did not appeal that ruling, but it's been fighting the unauthorized use of its name ever since.
The SDA did not appeal that ruling, but it's been fighting the unauthorized use of its name ever since.
Should religious denominations be able to sue groups that use their name or logo without permission?
By Julia Duin January 30, 2011; 12:28 PM ET
.
Mark of the Beast: DEI = 501 Internal Revenue Code Exemption Requirements - Section 501(c)(3) Organizations
Mark of the Beast: VICARIUS 112 + DEI 501 + FILII 53 = 666
Revelation 13 (King James Version)
9If any man have an ear, let him hear.
10He that leadeth into captivity shall go into captivity: he that killeth with the sword must be killed with the sword. Here is the patience and the faith of the saints.
11And I beheld another beast coming up out of the earth; and he had two horns like a lamb, and he spake as a dragon.
12And he exerciseth all the power of the first beast before him, and causeth the earth and them which dwell therein to worship the first beast, whose deadly wound was healed.
13And he doeth great wonders, so that he maketh fire come down from heaven on the earth in the sight of men,
14And deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live.
15And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed.
16And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:
17And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
18Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.
Exemption Requirements - Section 501(c)(3) Organizations
To be tax-exempt under section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, an organization must be organized and operated exclusively for exempt purposes set forth in section 501(c)(3), and none of its earnings may inure to any private shareholder or individual. In addition, it may not be an action organization, i.e., it may not attempt to influence legislation as a substantial part of its activities and it may not participate in any campaign activity for or against political candidates.
Organizations described in section 501(c)(3) are commonly referred to as charitable organizations. Organizations described in section 501(c)(3), other than testing for public safety organizations, are eligible to receive tax-deductible contributions in accordance with Code section 170.
The organization must not be organized or operated for the benefit of private interests, and no part of a section 501(c)(3) organization's net earnings may inure to the benefit of any private shareholder or individual. If the organization engages in an excess benefit transaction with a person having substantial influence over the organization, an excise tax may be imposed on the person and any organization managers agreeing to the transaction.
Section 501(c)(3) organizations are restricted in how much political and legislative (lobbying) activities they may conduct. For a detailed discussion, see Political and Lobbying Activities. For more information about lobbying activities by charities, see the article Lobbying Issues; for more information about political activities of charities, see the FY-2002 CPE topic Election Year Issues.
Additional Information
Application Process Step by Step: Questions and answers that will help an organization determine if it is eligible to apply for recognition of exemption from federal income taxation under IRC section 501(a) and, if so, how to proceed.
Page Last Reviewed or Updated: November 15, 2010
Source: http://inquisitionnews.amplify.com/2011/02/01/mark-of-the-beast-dei-501-internal-revenue-code-exemption-requirements-section-501c3-organizations/
Source: http://inquisitionnews.amplify.com/2011/01/06/re-email-from-andrea-d-saunders-attorney-in-the-office-of-general-counsel-for-the-general-conference-of-seventh/
Needless to say, My Wordpress Blog was closed down because of this!!!
Blaine Bosserman
INQUISITION NEWS
See this Amp at http://amplify.com/u/ao75d
No comments:
Post a Comment