You better write or lose the right to be Shaolin, gentlemen

[carly]

I found this on another board - it's interesting - the copyright has implications for the US as well:
"Recently a Canadian corporation has claimed that they "own all instances of SHAOLIN WUSHU" and intend to register it as a trademark in Canada. If you represent a Chinese cultural association or a Chinese martial arts organization in Canada or the USA, we urge to consider filling in the following petition. We take the principled position that "SHAOLIN WUSHU" is a commonly held part of Chinese culture and that it should not be permitted for a single corporate entity to misappropriate these descriptive words for themselves.
(See petition below)
http://www.diverscity.net/shaolin
"

[David Jamieson]

uh, that would be akin to attempting to own the rights to "beethoven" or "boxing"

as a combined set "shaolin wushu", well, they could get it as a business name. so what.

They can't trademark the name "shaolin" and they can't trademark "wushu" either. Their attempt will be thrown out in canadian courts.

cheers

[Royal Dragon]

They can't trademark the name "shaolin" and they can't trademark "wushu" either. Their attempt will be thrown out in canadian courts.

Reply]
Not if the courts don't know what it is. Remember, Wu Shu is just a made up silly word to them. WE have to educate them. If we don't, Shaolin Wushu will be owned by a corperation, and nolonger eminant public domain.

The only organasation that I might feel comfortable with a copyright like that would be the Shaolin Temple itself. Even then, I think it's too late as so many branc styles use that term to describe thier real heritage and connection to Shaolin itself.

[Crimson Phoenix]

You simply cannot trademark something that can be easily proven to have existed at least 500 years before your country...
Don't worry, we risk nothing...

[David Jamieson]

well, royal, I'm sure the judiciary of Canada is familiar with the name Shaolin amongst it's members.

Yeesh. You know, it's not like we're all "tucked away" up here :D

In order for anyone in Canada to have a corporation, a business name or own the rights to a name, the onus is on them to provide proof that they do indeed have full and exclusive rights to that name.

The name Shaolin is ancient and well known world wide. I think the temple is in the process of getting their name "owned by them" as well.

anyway, it's a pipe dream and I would personally enjoy seeing the people who want to "own" the name defend their right to own it in a court of law in any country. hahahahaha, d-a-m-n that would be funny! :D

cheers

[Laughing Cow]

Kinda reminds me of the time when Harley Davidson tried to patent the "sound" of their Bikes, so that Japanese Choppers would have to sound differently

Was quickly thrown out of court. :D

Shaolin Wushu and the Kwoon name combined maybe, but not Shaolin Wushu as such..

What is Shaolin Wushu?? Nothing tangible that you can put into a Box and sell over the counter.

So, no worries is my opinion.

[trout]

actually, I was reading an article in a boston newspaper not too long ago and the temple is in fact try to gain a world-wide trademark on the name "Shaolin". The current abbott thinks he owns it or some such nonsense.

It was in a paper called The Record printed in Greenfield, Mass on 9/26/2002 NO.231. The writer worked for the Associated Press and was Ted Anthony.

Inititially I think they wanted the trademark to fight such items as shaolin cola, but I also know that they are going after, (legally) schools in Europe using the name Shaolin.

[YungChun]

That's like trying to trademark the term "Swiss Chocolate" or "Canadian Bacon."

[Crimson Phoenix]

LOL I like your sig, Yung!

[trout]

Well, I tend to agree with you on that, but the temple in China has already stopped individuals in China from using Shaolin to market goods.

Here, I found that article I mentioned:

http://www.washtimes.com/business/20020928-92775240.htm

[anishthayil]

Came across this authority notice that we can't teach Shaolin martial arts anymore without the authorization from the temple :-)

http://www.shaolinindia.com/article/sti-authority-notice

Shifu Kanishka Sharma has received direct orders from the Abbot of the Shaolin Temple, China, that No One, who is not Authorized by the Shaolin Temple, China is allowed to do or claim any of the below, either Online on Websites, Blogs, Social Media, etc Or Offline via Advertisements, Boards, Banners etc. that is

#1 To use any name containing the words "Shaolin Temple", "Shaolin Temple India", etc

#2 To claim to be an Authorized Branch of Shaolin Temple, China

#3 To claim to be an Authentic Shaolin Kung Fu Master

#4 To claim to be imparting "Real", "Authentic" "Shaolin Kung Fu", "Shaolin Qi Gong" etc.

Any one found violating any of the above will face Legal action to the Highest extent possible by law.

Please report any fraudulent activity by anyone in any place in India at our official email id: info @ shaolinindia.com

Notice:
Its is the personal responsibility of those interested in Shaolin Temple, Its Culture and its Three Treasures (especially Shaolin Kung Fu) to check the authenticity of the Centre and the Person claiming to be a Real Shaolin Kung Fu Teacher by checking our List of Shaolin Kung Fu Training Centers Locations with name of the Instructors who have been authorized to teach in it.

[curenado]

Oh yeah blah blah blah
I doubt anyone cares and I'm sure it will be tested more than once in court.
This new abbot is very american, capitalist and uses simliar tactics......talk about some shaolin fraud.
Anyway it's not worth arguing over. Let the ho's bring it. Nobody's changing their name for the abbots new clothes.....

[GeneChing]

I've merged it with a similar thread from a dozen years ago...

[David Jamieson]

That looks like they are just trying to protect their brand in India or something.
It's not relevant anywhere else unless there is some huge multimillion dollar branding operation on a global level in order to make Shaolin a corporation....

Yeah, like that's gonna happen. We're not talking Apple or IBM here and we most certainly aren't talking about patented processes etc.

This is truly making a mountain out of a molehill.