Komen states it is trying to prevent potential confusion and that when people see “for the cure” they know their money is going to Komen.
What a joke. Based upon the article, it appears Komen is bullying mom & pop groups not just “for the Cure” but any variation thereof and claiming rights to the word “Cure” and the color pink. Victims of Komen’s steamroller appear to include groups such as the following:
Kites for a Cure
Par for The Cure
Surfing for a Cure
Cupcakes for a Cure
Mush for the Cure
Many honorable people around the country and around the world are fighting for a cure or for the cure for SOMETHING, whether it be breast cancer, liver disease, neuromuscular diseases, whatever. The phrase “for the cure” or “for a cure” (without the word ‘Komen’ attached) are GENERIC or DESCRIPTIVE of what people are doing … finding a cure for their own particular cause. How can Komen claim a trademark on a generic descriptor?
Also, does Komen seriously think it’s donor money is well spent in its efforts to prevent alleged “confusion” in this area? Does Komen seriously think that when donors contribute to “Mush” for the Cure or “Surfing” for a Cure they are going to be confused that their donations are not going to Komen?
Not only is Komen wasting its own donor money on this garbage, but Komen is robbing valuable time, effort, and resources of other nonprofits who are fighting for the public good. These other nonprofits invest in their own materials and branding and then are forced by Komen into dropping all reference to “the cure.” Now what is the mom & pop supposed to do? All those “for a cure” t-shirts end up in the trash?
Komen is quoted in the article as trying to “be reasonable.” To me, being reasonable means not being over zealous. It also means weighing the cost of Komen’s efforts to prevent alleged “confusion” against the cost of all the bad press Komen is going to get as a result of its bullying.
Apparently Komen has raised too much money if they can afford to pay law firms to harass tiny charities working for other “cures.” (can I still that word without risking legal problems?)
Bad form Komen.
They’re all over the place. In fact, I’m starting one with my wife this month in an effort to help [del]find a cure for[/del] permanently resolve Spinal Muscular Atrophy.
Apropos of nothing, my friend runs a breast cancer charity which pays for mammograms and ultrasounds for low income women in the Central Florida area, and the Komen people have been on her back, too.
It reminds me a bit when Jimmy Buffet sued the “Cheeseburger in Paradise” restaurant owners, who’d operated very succesful restaurants in Hawaii for years, over naming rights when they tried to expand to the mainland. He suceeded them in stopping them from using that name on the mainland (they were able to keep the name for Hawaii restaurants), then turned around and partnered with someone else to open up another chain of “Cheeseburger in Paradise” restaurants. Which suck. Very confusing. Personally, I thought getting all sue-happy was contrary to the laid-back let’s-work-it-all-out-over-some-tequila image Buffet had crafted for himself over the years.
By using the name, the owners implied that he was involved with the restaurant when in fact he was not. He does have the right to use the title from his own song in his own restaurant.
The restaurants in Hawaii were started after the song came out, not before.
All I know is that if I’m Elvis Mitchell, I’m just prayin’ that all these upstarts try to fix it for themselves by changing their name to “The Treatment.” Oh yeah, I’m waitin’ on them…
