CynicalScouter

I'm not a lawyer. What I am telling you is that 1) GSUSA says whether accidental or not, BSA councils, units, and National were infringing their copyrights left, right, and center and must a) stop it and b) pay. 2) BSA National's response has been to say oops this was accidental.

That's not what the lawsuit is claiming exactly. What GSUSA is claiming, and what BSA has admitted happened in at least 15 councils, is that parents were told or given the impression that GSUSA was disbanded and/or merged into BSA through the use of GSUSA's names, trademarks, logos, etc. In other words they were told that BSA now had "Girl Scouts". You may have consistently used "Scouts BSA Troop for Girls" but I assure you not all did. BSA is basically arguing in this lawsuit that yes, mistakes happened, councils and in particular certain staff and units didn't get the message clearly or transmit it clearly, but it was no big deal.

I'm noting the section of the GSUSA complaint that discusses your claim that it "precludes a valid claim" and that the magazine was already subject to litigation in which it was determined that https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Scouts.pdf

This seems backwards; so he's already decided the project he wants to do and is just looking for an organization to do it for? How about the other way around: he contacts local organizations to see if there are needs that they have? That said, the answers are found in Guide to Advancement 9.0.2.0 The Eagle Scout Service Project The relevant portions to start are 9.0.2.1 What an Eagle Scout Candidate Should Expect 9.0.2.2 “While a Life Scout …” 9.0.2.3 “Plan, Develop …” 9.0.2.4 “Give Leadership to Others …” 9.0.2.5 “Helpful to Any Religious Institution, Any School, or Your Community” 9.0.2.6 “Benefit an Organization Other Than the Boy Scouts of America” 9.0.2.7 “Proposal Must Be Approved … Before You Start” 9.0.2.8 “Use the Eagle Scout Service Project Workbook“ https://www.scouting.org/programs/scouts-bsa/advancement-and-awards/eagle-scout-workbook/ 9.0.2.9 Eagle Scout Service Project Coach 9.0.2.10 Fundraising Issues

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Defunct_Scout_and_Scout-like_organizations_in_the_United_States#Girl_Scouts_of_America

1) The point is NOT that you need a new organization. No one is asking for that, certainly not GSUSA. What they want is BSA to stop using words like "Girl Scouts, BSA" or "Girl Scouts" (which in fact was being done by some councils and volunteers when this came out in 2017) and they want financial compensation for the infringement. 2) GSUSA is NOT seeking a court to order Scouts, BSA or Cub Scouts from recruiting girls. What they want is it to be clear that they are two separate organizations. I suspect they'll win on this and at the bottom of most BSA publications there will be some "not affiliated with GSUSA". 3) Congress isn't covered by the 14th Amendment's equal protection clause. That portion of the 14th Amendment applies only to states.

And that's sorta what the Patent and Trademark Office ruled in 1982. They said BSA could continue to use the word "scout" as long as when they did so they did NOT indicate or imply it was Girl Scouts or girl scouts or Girl Scouting of girl scouting. And BSA even admitted and acknowledged as much in 2004. https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Scouts.pdf

Yes, and I am sure if/when it concludes it will be in the news.

I would also note that, frankly, Boy Scouts of America has been cooking since inception. Food, water, and shelter, and cooking covers 2 out of 3. In other words, "rolling out" cooking was taking existing BSA work for a century and figuring out what was and was not needed plus some modern understandings of diet (mention of the USDA food pyramid, healthy eating). In other words, and again I wasn't there, I do not get the impression that Cooking was something that had to be invented. It was always part of part of outdoor exploration. Plus, and I could be wrong, there's not a lot of moral, ethical, and religious ramifications to Cooking outside of the need to acknowledge religious diet restrictions. This is something entirely different being slammed together in 6 months that has major moral, ethical, and religious connotations (maybe) and we are just outside 100 hours to it being released.

Girl Scouts rebuke Boy Scouts in escalating recruitment war https://apnews.com/article/us-news-new-york-trademark-infringement-trademarks-manhattan-00ed4641c60828eefca1c14d57faada3

https://thehill.com/homenews/news/531712-girl-scouts-accuse-boy-scouts-of-damaging-recruitment-tactics

No, let me be clear. It was going to be bad because there's a good amount of people who are offended by this thing existing at all. But that was a content issue. This is both: that the roll out will be objected to AND the content. The last Eagle (Cooking) was rolled out OK (predates me but I was told by long timers it was OK since it was an existing merit badge that was "promoted" to Eagle) and the content was OK. This is a double whammy.

No. The lawsuit continues. November 24, BSA filed for Summary Judgment in their favor. And GSA opposed. MOST of the last year has been a big giant pause (since the bankruptcy). What activity has happened has focused on a series of documents BSA developed in the process of going to allowing girls into Cub Scouts and what became Scouts, BSA. In short, GSA is claiming this is smoking gun stuff and that Boy Scouts of America knew darn well it was causing confusion in terms of what it was doing and thereby infringing GSA's rights. GSA wants those documents to be public. BSA is asserting certain right, but in short a) the documents should not be released to GSA and b) if they are, because they contain proprietary business info they should be filed under seal and NOT open to the public. https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/8140964/girl-scouts-of-the-united-states-of-america-v-boy-scouts-of-america/

Not exactly. This is GSA's (basic) claim: that BSA was fine to use "Scouting" so long as it maintained the distinction it was BOY Scouting. When it became simply "Scouting" or "Scouts, BSA" that infringed GSA's rights. Moreover, as late as 2004, BSA admitted in court that yes, in the context of GIRLS "Scout" and "Scouting" belonged to GSA. When they allowed girls in, that broke the deal. And the Patent and Trademark Office had already warned BSA not to do it as far back as 1982.

Part of the reason they were NOT allowed to even use the phrase "Scout Life" was due to the lawsuit that GSA filed. Creating a separate publication for girls the used the word "Scout" is asking for additional litigation. https://www.courthousenews.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Scouts.pdf

We are now less than 5 days to launch of the new Eagle-required merit badge and no official word yet on the requirements. Meanwhile, National has pressured FB groups, Reddit, and other scouting affiliated social media to pull the requirements I found/that were leaked off their platforms. This is going to be a mess.

There is no "impeachment" of a committee chair. What exactly and precisely is going on? And what is "fake news"? The committee chair is selected by the Chartered Organization through its Chartered Organization Representative. If you disagree with the actions of a committee chair (generally) the point of contact is the Chartered Organization Representative. The committee does not "impeach" the committee chair and has nothing to do with the selection or removal of the committee chair. That said, note I said "generally". If there is a threat to the health, safety, or welfare of scout (e.g. the committee chair is beating a scout) then law enforcement and contacting your local scout executive under the youth protection guidelines. But if this is just "I don't like the committee chair" or "I disagree with the committee chair" or internal political/personal squabbles, then go to the Chartered Organization Representative. If they side with the committee chair, that is the end of the conversation.

Did your council approve this? Wearing uniforms while fundraising? Also tip jars = no no. Bryan on Scouting even did a piece on a troop that did this and he was forced to retract it within a day. https://blog.scoutingmagazine.org/2014/01/30/upon-further-review-troops-grocery-bagging-fundraiser-isnt-permitted/

Both my pack and troop treasurers are opposed because they don't want to have to learn Paypal or Square.

Prior to 2019 there was an "expectation" and "encouragement" for $200 to pay or fundraise. This came from a parent who did swim team that had this as mandatory. The first year we "paid it forward"; a scout who between September-November 2019 did the $200 fundraising or direct pay was good to go for 2020 recharter and had only to pay the national dues + council dues (we got hit with an insurance fee) + our pack dues of $25 in December 2019. Parents who didn't make the $200 were told how short they were (some scouts did 1 hour in front of the Home Depot and got $45 credit I believe). This year (2020) we are offering the option in December to decide NOW if they will pay direct or fundraise in fall 2020. I haven't reached out to the committee chair or treasurer yet to see what the outcome was, but I suspect we will have lots of parents who will say they will fundraise in fall 2020 and then if they fail to meet target we'll have to follow-up after.

One other thing that my pack started to do last year: a fundraising goal. Scouts must either fundraise $200 of fall product sales (usually 2-4 hours in front of the local Home Depot) OR come up with $200 to the pack. Fall 2019 worked well and of course Fall 2020 was a bust.

This is fantastic! I only have three questions: 1) Per semester- how often (as a percentage of scouts or families) do you have to chase people down? My troop and pack does dues-due-at-recharter (so, once a year) stemming from a concern in the past that the treasurer or committee chair would spend half their time chasing down parents who haven't paid. 2) How do you distribute the annual budget? My troop posts to out website and directs people to the page. My pack emails the excel sheet around. 3) "Only the Scoutmaster and COR know who receives scholarship support." We have a scholarship system as well (100% coverage for certain scouts) but the way we read the BSA financial requirements the treasurer must know (and it is our committee chair, not our COR, who is the third person). Is your treasurer in the loop?

Because if you asked 100 people what "fair and equitable" taxation means, you'd get at least 50 different answers. The only thing all 100 people have in common is that all 100 would say "fair and equitable taxation includes a provision I PAY LESS." "Sin taxes" like lotteries are therefore much easier to pass/enact. Only "those people" play the lottery and/or I can "opt out" of paying taxes by simply not playing.

For future reference https://etac.ihubapp.org/posts/54906/important-message-from-the-national-director-of-exploring