In May of last year, we did a story on Freecycle, the spontaneously organized, voluntary, web-based network devoted to enabling people to give stuff away rather than throw it away.
Then in May of this year, we wrote another story, about Freecycle and its growing pains. On the one hand there was a fight to obtain the trademark to the Freecycle name. On the other hand there was controversy about a $130,000 sponsorship from Waste Management, Inc., the largest garbage company in the U.S.
Well, it appears the former fight has been won and the latter money is being
put to good use.
Today we received a letter from "media relations" at Freecycle:
We are ... making a concerted effort to reach out to all media that have run a story on Freecycle™ in order to educate them as to the appropriate usage of the trademark-protected term "Freecycle." As you can imagine, protecting such name as a small nonprofit is no mean feat.
Don't we know it. Our media relations department is working 20 hour days!
In order to maintain the concept of one which stands solely for the integrity of a nonprofit public commons we must keep the mark from becoming merely descriptive or generic.
Again, here at Grist™, we understand. We too maintain the concept of one which stands solely for the integrity of that which the public commons. Sometimes twice.
Common misuses include adapting the mark as a noun such as the phrase "freecycler." The appropriate usage would be to say "Freecycle member" (note also the use of capitalization of the mark). The first use of the phrase should be followed by a superscript TM. If you use the total organizational name, it is appropriate to add the superscript TM after the entire name: "The Freecycle Network™."
As a grister Grist™ Employee, this speaks to the very
heart of what I hold dear about The Grist™ Family of Media Publications™:
our dedication to the purity and exclusivity of our brand.
Another common mistake is to use the mark as a verb as in "freecycling" or "to freecycle" as opposed to the correct usage: "posting and item to the local Freecycle group."
"Posting and item"? Well, what the heck -- we Grist™
Employees are not going to go around telling you freecyclers Freecycle™
members how to write. What do we know?
Thank you again for your wonderful coverage. You may be interested to know that we will be launching an entirely new Web site in the coming six months which shall be free from Yahoo groups and provide a new and wonderful home to the now 1.5 million Freecycle members in over 50 countries! Stay tuned!
We shall be tuned! Grist can't wait to provide you more free™ coverage as you expand your establishment while staying close -- so close -- to the grassroots™.
Comments
View as Threaded
Lisa Hymas Posted 10:29 am
08 Aug 2005
The Freecycle Network(TM) is now paying a "media relations" officer to badger news outlets about the inappropriateness of using "freecycle" as a verb or other unauthorized part of speech? This is how they're spending the WMI grant? And this is benefiting the environment or Freecycle(TM) Members or anyone how? What a pathetic waste of time and money.
Oh, I'll keep freecycling via the Seattle listserv, because I love the concept and because the Seattle listserv monitors and participants are swell people -- not like the paranoid, grammatically challenged bureaucrats apparently now employed at Corporate HQ.
Permalink
Andy Brett Posted 10:44 am
08 Aug 2005
Permalink
dreadsword Posted 2:29 pm
08 Aug 2005
What a strange email to recieve. I mean, as a marketing person, I have to wonder what sort of organization (profit oriented or not!) would resist their name entering the cultural lexicon in a positive way.
http://www.sustainabilityzone.com
Permalink
Kristin Posted 12:27 am
09 Aug 2005
When I first read about the idea in a local newspaper, I thought it was great that local chapters were popping up across the country. It makes no sense, however, to micromanage these chapters, nor to irritate those trying to do good, so that they leave, and perhaps worse, stop their charitable acts.
Kristin from sw Indiana
Permalink
CM Hersh Posted 8:44 am
10 Aug 2005
I use craigslist. Less structure, works great.
Permalink
Mary980 Posted 2:48 pm
23 Aug 2005
Mary
Permalink
pmagistro Posted 8:57 am
03 Oct 2005
And the media relations? Now they've pushed the bounds of ridiculous. Why do you think google is the number one search engine these days? simple interface, sure (you don't have to join a local google group to search for webpages, that's for sure) but no! "Google" has become slang - ever hear of anyone "yahooing" or "lycosing" or "altavistaing" anything? Of course not! But we google everything, and we google all the time. In my not so humble opinion, the makers of Freecycle could hope for nothing less from their concept...if everyone in the country thought, "hmm, why don't I freecycle that old bike rather than trashing it," we would be a bunch of serious freecyclers. All I have left to say about that is "freecycle on, my friends!"
So in light of all that, for now, I think I'll stick to craigslist (obviously geographic limits make sense for apartments - "and how would you like that 1BR 1BA for $450/mo to be shipped? UPS?") and eBay.
Permalink
Lisa Hymas Posted 9:24 am
03 Oct 2005
Permalink
timoey Posted 5:33 pm
23 Jan 2006
For more information please see:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fcnext/
and
http://greenribbon.us/
Thanks!
Permalink
scarbo Posted 10:02 pm
31 Jan 2006
Permalink
Ron Steenblik Posted 7:58 pm
25 Dec 2006
My parents rediscovered the Goodwill store in their town several years ago, and started buying many of their clothes from it -- not because they could not afford to buy their clothes new, but out of thrift. They took me to it the next time I visited them, and I was impressed by how well the items on sale were organized, and of course by the bargain-basement prices. I bought several pairs of shorts at $3 a piece, and a fine pair of khaki trousers for $4. Many items of clothing looked brand new, as if they had been given as gifts to the original owners and were the wrong size.
Goodwill's image problem is that many people would feel embarrassed to be seen shopping in one of their stores, or for others to know that what they are wearing had been purchased from them. That is an attitude that needs to change.
Goodwill does a great job facilitating the recycling of clothes, toys, books and furniture, in the process providing employment for thousands of people. And one thing I doubt you will ever see, is Goodwill harassing people for making a verb out of their name.
Permalink
Nancy Castleman Posted 6:34 am
30 Jul 2007
Below are some excerpts, and the actual legal documents are in the Files secrion on http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fcnext/ , for your reading pleasure.
"Courts look to three kinds of evidence to determine if an alleged trademark has been abandoned through naked licensing: whether the
trademark owner (1) retained contractual rights to control quality, (2) actually controlled quality, or (3) reasonably relied on the icensee to maintain quality. ... Here, the facts show, not only a complete absence of quality control, but also an absence of quality standards."
"As an alleged trademark owner with alleged licensees, TFN has an obligation to set quality standards so that greecyclers know that the
freecycling services offered by TFN's approved groups are consistent and predictable. TFN failed to set quality standards for its alleged
licensees. For this reason alone, TFN abandoned its alleged trademarks through naked licensing, and FreecycleSunnyvale is entitled to summary adjudication."
"Once a trademark has been abandoned through naked licensing, that trademark cannot be revived through belated efforts to inspect or supervise the quality of licensee operations."
"FreecycleSunnyvale asks this Court to enter summary adjudication upon the grounds that, because there is no material issue of the fact that The Freecycle Network, Inc., engaged in naked licensing, The Freecycle Network, Inc., abandoned any trademark rights it might have had in the word 'freecycle,' the phrase 'The Freecycle Network,' or a logo containing a stylized version of 'freecycle' and the elements of a guitar and bicycle."
"When permitting others to use its alleged trademarks, TFN (1) did not establish quality standards for its alleged licensees, (2) did not retain any contractual rights to inspect or supervise its alleged licensees, (3) did not engage in quality control of its alleged licensees' operations, and (4) permitted complete strangers to use its alleged trademarks without having any basis to rely on the quality control efforts of these strangers. FreecycleSunnyvale is therefore entitled to summary judgment on its claim for a declaration of non-infringement as well as on TFN's counterclaims, all of which are trademark based."
"Of importance is what did not happen when FreecycleSunnyvale affiliated its online group with TFN and began using TFN's logo. There
were no contracts. There were no discussions of any requirements, restrictions, or conditions on the use of the word 'freecycle' or the phrase 'The Freecycle Network.' At this time, freecycling was a grassroots movement, and neither TFN not Mr. Beal made any effort to control local groups by asserting trademark rights."
There are lots of legal references in the motion and other legal papers, but here are some quotes from a quick Web search:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trademark "... if a trademark owner does not maintain quality control and adequate supervision in relation to the manufacture and provision of products or services supplied by a licensee, such 'naked licensing' will eventually adversely impact on the owner's rights in the trademark."
http://www.ladas.com/BULLETINS/1995/1195Bulletin/US_Naked ...
"United States Court of Appeals Holds 'Naked' Licensing Results in Abandonment of Trademark Rights. In Stanfield v. Osborne Industries Inc., the Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit held that the plaintiff's licensing of its trademarks to the defendant, without any provision for, or actual exercise of, quality control, constituted an abandonment of the plaintiff's rights in its marks."
Nancy
Permalink
Colliewood Posted 4:54 am
14 Feb 2008
Hi, I hate to start with a negative post, but what we have been through with this group has been nothing short of a nightmare.
The moderator bounces you on or off at her will.
If someone wants to know more, I will gladly answer all questions, but just a sample of why I was on a Hit List.....
Dogs and cats do need homes. Often people cannot keep them for whatever reason. But sadly, good hearted people are giving their dogs or cats away on Freecycle. After being in animal rescue for many years, more than I care to say, I wrote the moderator and cautioned her on this practice. The problem is that many bad people like to make an equally bad buck. They come posing as a nice home for the pet (they make a second income scanning sites such as Freecycle.....) adopt it, and head for the nearest lab. They get about 75 dollars per dog, and somewhat less for cats. These people are pros at what they do. They come posing as happy families (I have no idea how the kids cope) and do this bogus "adoption". The family giving the pet away never knows what really happened.
Also, there are unscrupulous posters who want to dump an aggressive pet on the site as well. I work in a pet boutique, and a child came in with 17 stitches from a dog posted on Freecycle! It had to be put to sleep and now the child is traumatized for life.
Well, this is my first post, and don't want to press it unless anyone wants to hear more horror stories, and thank you.
My name is Kathy Baca and it's a pleasure to meet you.
Permalink