I just sent the following e-mail to GS/Ovis, at sheepslam@yahoo.com:

+ + + + + + +
Dear Sir,

A while ago I learned about a lawsuit the GS/Ovis has launched against FNAWS. Apparently the issue at hand is the used of the phrase "Grand Slam"? I was really shocked when I heard about this. Are you not a conservation organization at heart? Don't you write on your website your members comprise "a large percentage of the people interested in wild sheep hunting and CONSERVATION"? I'm sure very few, if any of these members will see the conservation aspect of this lawsuit, that will benefit first and foremost the lawyers involved.

I'm passionate about sheep and sheep hunting. I urge you to focus your effort and means on the conservation of sheep habitat, herds, and hunting opportunities, instead of this useless lawsuit that will do neither sheep nor the sheep hunting community any good.

+ + + + + + +

What good it will do, I don't know. Maybe if we all sent an e-mail....

I'll keep you posted about replies, if any.

Frans

I'd be interested in seeing any replies.

I don't know much about the issue, but I support both organizations. IMHO it always takes two to tango. I think one could express the same concern to FNAWS....why is this an issue that they aren't willing to concede or resolve amicably, in the interest of preserving funds for on-the-ground projects?

Cheers,
Canuck

Sure, if FNAWS will no longer use the terms, money can be saved. But this is a term that is widely used in all sorts of sports and other situations. Nobody is sueing YOU for use of the term Canuck, I reckon?

I propose that from now on we refer to it as Major Whammy! One sheep could be a Whammy, two sheeps a Minor Whammy, three sheeps a Medior Whammy. There, problem solved. All we need is a celebrity writer to use this a few times in an article, and we're on our way.

Frans

quote:

Nobody is sueing YOU for use of the term Canuck, I reckon?

Does anyone have a registered trademark on the name Canuck?

"Grand Slam" is the entire identity of the Grand Slam Club. They built their organization around the concept, with the full endorsment of the man that coined the term.

I have to believe there is a happy medium here.

Will be interesting to see how it works out.

Cheers,
Canuck

I have to believe there are business interests involved. Why else would two organizations that tried to set up some cooperation not long ago suddenly find each other destined for opposite sides of a court room? Maybe the exclusive use of the term Grand Slam will focus more attention on the outfitters and agents involved with GSC/Ovis?

Frans

Grand Slam breakfasts are served at Denny's by the millions and if memory serves me, it began with BASEBALL and not sheep hunting. Now who's lawyer is bigger?

FNAWS is growing much faster in members and therefore donations etc. and its pissing them off. Ovis/GSC are a wealthier crowd and they resent being messed with so they have to file a claim(any claim) to show their members they are not standing for it. They think the exclusive right to use Grand Slam terminology is going to garnish more members...but there are a lot less super wealthy and a lot more average joes so the FNAWS will always grow more members. Many new members of average means is much better than a handfull of wealthy new members and Ovis/GSC is seeing it in the cash coffers. JMHO.

What you said George, superb!

I have now read the complete complaint filed by GSC/Ovis and feel informed enough to have an opinion. I come down solidly on the side of GSC/Ovis on this one, and I will not support FNAWs in the future as a result.

FNAWs has no business horning in on GSC/Ovis's territory on this (especially the documenting and listing of GRAND SLAM awards). Their acts are a bunch of childish BS, IMHO. They should back off as they promised (and signed a contract) to do last year, and focus on other aspects of wild sheep conservation. Other than keeping the documentation and listing of Grand Slam, Ovis World Slams and Capra Slams within the sole domain of GSC/Ovis, the only thing they are asking for is that FNAWs seek their permission to solicit donations based on achievement (or partial achievement) of that specific status. I don't think that is much for GSC/Ovis to ask...and FNAWs wouldn't have signed a contract to that effect last year if they hadn't agreed. I think they are purposely screwing with GSC/Ovis at this point, which is a rediculous waste of donated money.

JMHO,
Canuck

ps: George...GSC/Ovis's registered copyright of the use of the term Grand Slam does not extend to the food service industry or baseball. It is very specific to the hunting of sheep.

I am familiar with GS/Ovis as well as being a member of FNAWS.

Are we in high school? Is Ovis going to sue NWTF when someone takes a "grand slam" of turkey species?

As far as I'm concerned, Ovis is nothing more than a bunch of rich pricks only interested in their big dick contest and who can kill more/bigger sheep the fastest. FNAWS has put a lot of $$$$$ on the ground here in WY for actual bighorn sheep conservation.

MG

quote:

FNAWS has put a lot of $$$$$ on the ground here in WY for actual bighorn sheep conservation.

Like 'em or hate 'em, GSC puts a lot of cash on the ground too.

FNAWs clearly wants to get into the "big dick contest" too as they are capitalizing on that to generate the kind of cash from their raffles that GSC does....and trying to take over the awards and documentation of the "big dick" contestants achievements.

Have you guys seen a membership list for GSC? There are a lot more members than the rich elite you are referring to. And lots of those rich old guys are members of both organizations anyway.

Your comment about the turkey slam is rediculous and juvenile. See my comment one post up.

I found out all I need to know about FNAWs when they started screwing with the RMEF over the Alberta and BC premier's permits for sheep. Those guys waste a lot of good money and energy and quite clearly don't live up to thier own promises. I didn't allow it to keep me from supporting them then, but this latest BS has now changed that.

I think I'll stick with the WSSOBC and GSC.

Cheers,
Canuck

Looks to me like a great way to spend money intended for conservation.

mg

GSC is at fault for defending itself? or is FNAWs at fault for this waste of money by not living up to the deal they already signed with GSC?

Either way, I agree with you...it is a momentous waste of energy and $$.

For now, I place the bulk of the blame on FNAWS...they haven't lived up to their own promise and they are clearly trying to damage GSC with their actions (based entirely on the fact they already agreed NOT to do what they are doing).

JMHO...each of us are entitled to their own...

Canuck

It's interesting to me that GSC has been contributing to FNAWS through co-operative/endowment contributions since 1991 and has given money to the FNAWS endowment fund since the lawsuit.....I also find it interesting that the term "Grand Slam", as applied to hunting sheep was coined and credited to a well known hunter/writer Grancel Fitz in 1948....Holshouser(sp?) owned the copyright in the mid 1950s when he founded the GSC??????? Maybe not. Maybe a gentleman's agreement, maybe a call or a handshake with Fitz? Do you think Grancel Fitz would sue anyone if he knew the use of his term would protect the high mountain hunting he loved?
FNAWS even entered into agreements with GSC on the terms use but ignored the agreement when they wanted to.....money talks....

Both sides have caused a line to be drawn in the sand.....both flexing their money muscle...both are guilty in perpetrating this "legal" hoax on prospective, sincere contributors looking to further the hunting they love....the legal action is certainly not doing the sheep any good any way you shake it.

Only the attorneys win in this one....so what's new, eh?

Just another black eye for hunters.

Joe

Like 7 year olds fighting over a toy.

quote:

the legal action is certainly not doing the sheep any good any way you shake it.

Only the attorneys win in this one....so what's new, eh?

Just another black eye for hunters.

Joe

Agreed.

FWIW, "GSCO is the owner of US Trademark Registration No. 3,136,758 for the trademark GRAND SLAM in class 16 for publications, namely, magazines, newsletters, books, commemorative journals and brochures in the field of wild sheep hunting."

I have no idea when this registration took place, but they have been using it since the 50's when Bob Householder founded GSC.

The are also "the owner of US trademark application serial no.78/462,180 for the trademark GRAND SLAM in class 41 for arranging and conducting conferences; providing recognition and incentives by way of awards..." etc, etc. The believe the longstanding recognition of GSC as the body recording, documenting and awarding this status has accrued common law trademark rights in this regard as well.

Anyway, I don't have an issue with them being the sole organization dealing with the registering of Grand Slams, and I don't understand why another conservation organization would feel the need to meddle with that. Really makes you shake your head.

Canuck

I know, I know, there's a contract, and a breech, and then you sue, right? Over the use of name. So this is once again about money, and not about conservation.

Frans

quote:

Over the use of name.

To be fair Frans, that is way over-trivializing the issue.

According to GSCO, they have been trying to negotiate for months and FNAWs won't even talk to them. Sometimes it takes a lawyer to get people's attention.

It even appears to me that FNAWs may actually be trying to run GSCO out of business (why else would they want to get into documenting and awarding Grand Slams...the one thing GSCO has always been about????). That is definitely about $$ and not conservation!!

As a long time contributor to both organizations, as I said above, I am very interested to see how this plays out. If both are more interested in conservation, it will become evident soon enough. If they are both money grubbing, it will potentially take a long time to sort out.

Hopefully it won't take a judge to decide where the line in the sand-box should be, so that both organizations can focus on what they do best and stay out of the other's business.

Cheers,
Canuck

Canuck,

Lets hope that the interest in conservation will prevail over business interests, and that this thing gets settled out of court. If they go to court over the right to attached the name Grand Slam, Super Slam or whatever kind of Slam to a package of killed animals, over the right to give out awards under that name, or the right to register people's sheep/goat kills they will loose me as a supporter.

Frans

feed the sheep not the bottom feeding attorneys.

sue the united states tennis assoc' grand slam next....

This is really disappointing and I'm irritated with both organizations because of it. I still think they are both good organizations that do good work and they need our support. I'm holding off any further monetary contributions until this is settled though. Can't see sending in money which I intend to "put sheep on the mountain" just to go into this lawsuit.

FNAWS should get coal in their Christmas stocking for violating their agreement with OVIS. And OVIS for taking the directing money away from conservation to this lawsuit.

While I understand why it has come to this, I still believe both are violating their organizations fundamental principle of being a conservation and hunting enhancement organization through these actions.

The Hunting Report has a message that GSC/Ovis has offered FNAWS to settle this out of court. FNAWS wasn't willing/able to comment to Causey when asked, but they promised a response shortly. Keep your eye on the Hunting Report I guess.

Frans

quote:

Originally posted by Fjold:
Like 7 year olds fighting over a toy.

Couldn't have said it any better myself if I had of tried.