BBC: "Shaolin warrior monks launch battle for trademark status"

[cnholmes]

Some news....

"The warrior monks of China's Shaolin temple have applied to trademark their name in more than 80 countries, Chinese state media says. "

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/asia-pacific/3851031.stm

[Mike B]

Well potten cnh.

I think Shaolin Wahnam need to look at this carefully.

Trademarking is pretty dangerous stuff - once someone has one (even if it wasn't reasonably granted) - its at a minimum a lot of legal fees to not have them all over one and at the other end ones brand can be punted into touch.

I assume that SW has a good case of long term usage and lineage descent - but being right is never 100% of the issue when it comes to lawyers.

Fingers crossed.

Mike

[cnholmes]

Perhaps we should trademark "Zen"?

[Darryl]

"Accused of violations"

From the article

"We cannot perform Shaolin Kungfu ..."
Shi Yongxin

While this may be interpreted as me stating a flame war, it's not. In regards to some aspects of the process (e.g. protecting the name in regards to cigarettes, tyres, beer being 'Shaolin brands'), I personally find it amusing. Amusement aside, the implications could indeed be very serious.

As demonstrated by my quote, anything written down can be completely misinterpreted or blatantly misused. Instead of attempting to protect a national treasure, this to me is more indicitive of protecting a brand name. Once corporate profit steps in, corporate morality tends to be one of the first casualties. As a personal opinion, I am less concerned with the 'Shaolin brand' on non-related topics or products e.g. Shaolin Cigars, even if they have the tagline of "As smoked by the Shaolin Monks for centuries past". One of the senior European students has an excellent phrase for this - "Don't be stupid". If you treat people as intelligent adults and respect their right to use their own brains, then there is no real problem. The flip side of this is that the major marketing companies have realised how foolish people can be. From this perspective, the 'related products' angle is far more threatening and serious.

Regardless of any outcome, I find the whole matter extremely saddenning. It seems to me to be an extremely external perspective for an internal art. While the consequences could indeed be extremely serious, good food is good food.

[cnholmes]

I'm sorry, Darryl, I didn't understand your point at all

To clarify my comment on Zen; we had something very similar to this in the IT industry, with companies trying to patent such basic, fundamental ideas that it got a bit silly. One journalist famously remarked he was going to patent water, hence my comment here. The nasty side of this was that certain basic ways of using computers were legally cornered for the exclusive use of particular companies. If this hadn't stopped, you wouldn't be allowed to use URL links on this message board or any of your sites, it came that close.

My point is that perhaps "Shaolin Warrior Monk" is such a fundamental idea that its wrong to claim ownership and exclusive right.

Regards,
Chris.

[Darryl]

Edited post

Hi all,

I have edited my original post as when the forum transfered, it made my post look less like a quote and quotee and more like a titled personal message to the Abbot, Shi Yongxin. Since my intention was to show how casually words could be used and not to cause confusion, I have removed the confusion.