AOPA and RAAus in Dispute over Slogan

[Jim McDowall]

With Part 149, it probably could get across the line if it cut back its sights to RA only but ot also has the Company stigma to overcome to get paying members and there’s a much different appetite than there was 18 monhs

it is my understanding that ELAAA is a fee for service proposition - no membership required. KP maybe you can clarify?

 

 

[turboplanner]

it is my understanding that ELAAA is a fee for service proposition - no membership required. KP maybe you can clarify?

That’s my belief too, but RA is individual, exciting, includes non- standard aircraft, contains designers and builders. It’s an animal that hasn’t stood still, currently bogged down by imitation GA aircraft, but there’s nothing to stop it going off into exciting new directions. For that you need the members, the people involved to drive it. BMX is a good example of a thriving, cutting edge technology sport driven by members.

 

 

[Jim McDowall]

That’s my belief too, but RA is individual, exciting, includes non- standard aircraft, contains designers and builders. It’s an animal that hasn’t stood still, currently bogged down by imitation GA aircraft, but there’s nothing to stop it going off into exciting new directions. For that you need the members, the people involved to drive it. BMX is a good example of a thriving, cutting edge technology sport driven by members.

You only have to look at what has happened in sailing with the advent of foilers to see how innovation unrestrained by regulation has created a totally new approach. If I was a teenager again I would definitely have swapped my 420 and LW Sharpie for one of these excitement machines.

 

 

[nomadpete]

Get over it fellas.

 

RAA never asked for royalties. And they made that clear from the start.

 

And they have (after all this mudslinging) withdrawn the application so if someone else really want to own the phrase, they can apply for it.

 

 

[terryc]

Get over it fellas.RAA never asked for royalties. And they made that clear from the start.

And they have (after all this mudslinging) withdrawn the application so if someone else really want to own the phrase, they can apply for it.

That's ok but who's going to replace the funds back into raa's account. this was nothing but stupidity. Where do these people come from. They are the people who lecture us on the type of people they want on the so called board.

 

 

[bull]

Get over it fellas.RAA never asked for royalties. And they made that clear from the start.

And they have (after all this mudslinging) withdrawn the application so if someone else really want to own the phrase, they can apply for it.

But the BIG question still remains,,,,,,,WHY did they do it in the first place ,and WHO did it???

 

 

[440032]

The trademark has now been cancelled - it's easy to find in the public domain.

 

 

[Head in the clouds]

That's ok but who's going to replace the funds back into raa's account. this was nothing but stupidity. Where do these people come from. They are the people who lecture us on the type of people they want on the so called board.

Well, I couldn't find any means on the ipaustralia site to cancel an already approved Trademark, however I'm humbled indeed, there must be ...

 

Here is a link to the cancelled trademark.

 

And here is a screenshot of it -

 

 

I think we'd probably all agree that we all make mistakes at work sometimes and most of us don't have to repay the direct cost of those mishaps. Those of us who are self employed need Professional Indemnity insurance just in case. In the scheme of it $500 is a mere bagatelle, probably the waste of admin time is more of a concern considering that regos and processing times from the RAA online store are still an embarrassment, let alone the time it sometimes takes to process specific operational or tech enquiries.

 

Anyway, I'm sure it'll be a lesson learned.

 

And - as for those who still refer to themselves as shareholders of this 'organisation' - anyone got a share certificate to prove it? We're no longer anything more than clients methinks. Perhaps that's necessary though, I really don't know either way, but I'd hate to be trying to run an organisation like this with more than 10,000 interested parties all hell-bent on criticising every move. If they answer every question on every issue whenever they frequently pop up (employment of a Tech Manager is a current case in point), then there'd be no time to get anything meaningful done.

 

 

[bull]

Well, I couldn't find any means on the ipaustralia site to cancel an already approved Trademark, however I'm humbled indeed, there must be ...Here is a link to the cancelled trademark.

 

And here is a screenshot of it -

 

[ATTACH]61751[/ATTACH]

 

I think we'd probably all agree that we all make mistakes at work sometimes and most of us don't have to repay the direct cost of those mishaps. Those of us who are self employed need Professional Indemnity insurance just in case. In the scheme of it $500 is a mere bagatelle, probably the waste of admin time is more of a concern considering that regos and processing times from the RAA online store are still an embarrassment, let alone the time it sometimes takes to process specific operational or tech enquiries.

 

Anyway, I'm sure it'll be a lesson learned.

 

And - as for those who still refer to themselves as shareholders of this 'organisation' - anyone got a share certificate to prove it? We're no longer anything more than clients methinks. Perhaps that's necessary though, I really don't know either way, but I'd hate to be trying to run an organisation like this with more than 10,000 interested parties all hell-bent on criticising every move. If they answer every question on every issue whenever they frequently pop up (employment of a Tech Manager is a current case in point), then there'd be no time to get anything meaningful done.

But this issue go,s beyond a simple ""mistake'' this was planned thought out and executed and got thrown back in the face of the exec,s by a member backlash and those responsible have now back pedalled and tried to cover their tracks with bullshit statements like,, for the betterment of all aviation ,,,what a crock , someone needs to be sacked......

 

 

[nomadpete]

So, all you folk who keep complaining about RAA not listening to members.

 

Here is an example of RAA listening to members, and retracting something that members disapproved of.

 

I can't see any evidence of the alleged 'covering tracks'.

 

By the way, as far as I know, RAA already have a number of registered trademarks. This was just one more. Probably not particularly essential to us, so in the face of criticism, they let go of it.

 

 

[Head in the clouds]

So, all you folk who keep complaining about RAA not listening to members.Here is an example of RAA listening to members, and retracting something that members disapproved of.

 

I can't see any evidence of the alleged 'covering tracks'.

 

By the way, as far as I know, RAA already have a number of registered trademarks. This was just one more. Probably not particularly essential to us, so in the face of criticism, they let go of it.

Yes, it looks like 7 registered, 3 pending, 1 cancelled and 2 never registered. The last application was just in the last month - so it seems our RAAus IP advisers consider this exercise to be a worthwhile plan for the future.

 

Bull, I guess you're one of the fortunate few who never makes mistakes, or who corrects them before anyone ever notices. I, for one, give credit to RAAus for responding to criticism quickly and appropriately, hopefully they are also in damage control behind the scenes.

 

So - whilst my first reaction certainly was 'heads must roll' - on further reflection I wondered what it might cost in money and lost time if they sack the one who made this mistake and have to train someone new into the position. Not to mention the compensation for unfair dismissal, because a single mistake is not sufficient cause for dismissal ...

 

 

[bull]

Yes, it looks like 7 registered, 3 pending, 1 cancelled and 2 never registered. The last application was just in the last month - so it seems our RAAus IP advisers consider this exercise to be a worthwhile plan for the future.Bull, I guess you're one of the fortunate few who never makes mistakes, or who corrects them before anyone ever notices. I, for one, give credit to RAAus for responding to criticism quickly and appropriately, hopefully they are also in damage control behind the scenes.

 

So - whilst my first reaction certainly was 'heads must roll' - on further reflection I wondered what it might cost in money and lost time if they sack the one who made this mistake and have to train someone new into the position. Not to mention the compensation for unfair dismissal, because a single mistake is not sufficient cause for dismissal ...

But the point is this was NOT a 'mistake',,,it was planned thought through and executed ,,,so all this talk of a 'mistake is covering someones arse...…………...

 

 

[terryc]

Raa responded not to "members" but to other very angry organisations. I'd like to be at the next get together of these organisations. Some of you guys are very generous to these clowns, very commendable.

 

 

[kgwilson]

The other very angry organisations sat on their hands for 40 years and did nothing. RAA has been proactive on many fronts but nothing satisfies a few who are hell bent on complaining and criticising at every opportunity. I think they are doing a better job than most of the other organisations and in my opinion have lifted the profile of recreational aviation well above that of SAAA, AOPA, GFA HGFA etc. RAA has become far more professional than the others and seems to have developed a fair rapport with CASA. No organisation is perfect though and mistakes will be made. How effectively these are dealt with is more important.

 

If you don't like what is happening, leave, register with another organisation, start your own or forget about aviation. Alternatively throw your hat in the ring and stand for the board. If the anger amongst members is as high as what you lead us on this forum to believe, getting elected will be a shoe in.

 

 

[Keith Page]

So, all you folk who keep complaining about RAA not listening to members.Here is an example of RAA listening to members, and retracting something that members disapproved of.

 

I can't see any evidence of the alleged 'covering tracks'.

 

By the way, as far as I know, RAA already have a number of registered trademarks. This was just one more. Probably not particularly essential to us, so in the face of criticism, they let go of it.

Think they had to surrender the trade mark as there were looming legal implications.

So the line of listening to members would not be that relevant.

 

KP

 

 

[fly_tornado]

what does listening to members even mean in the context of the RAA? The last big change was about reducing the number of people needed to make decisions.

 

 

[turboplanner]

This is an amazing thread! Two sides arguing, but have any facts been confirmed yet?

 

 

[fly_tornado]

According to AOPA CEO Ben Morgan, RAAus sent AOPA a letter last week stating that AOPA would need to pay a licence fee if they continued to use the slogan.

that was the only reason I started this thread.

 

 

[kgwilson]

The only fact I can see is the letter to Ben Morgan from Michael Linke reprinted in posts #6 & #66.

 

 

[bull]

The other very angry organisations sat on their hands for 40 years and did nothing. RAA has been proactive on many fronts but nothing satisfies a few who are hell bent on complaining and criticising at every opportunity. I think they are doing a better job than most of the other organisations and in my opinion have lifted the profile of recreational aviation well above that of SAAA, AOPA, GFA HGFA etc. RAA has become far more professional than the others and seems to have developed a fair rapport with CASA. No organisation is perfect though and mistakes will be made. How effectively these are dealt with is more important.If you don't like what is happening, leave, register with another organisation, start your own or forget about aviation. Alternatively throw your hat in the ring and stand for the board. If the anger amongst members is as high as what you lead us on this forum to believe, getting elected will be a shoe in.

But a MISTAKE WAS NOT MADE this was planned.

 

 

[bull]

The other very angry organisations sat on their hands for 40 years and did nothing. RAA has been proactive on many fronts but nothing satisfies a few who are hell bent on complaining and criticising at every opportunity. I think they are doing a better job than most of the other organisations and in my opinion have lifted the profile of recreational aviation well above that of SAAA, AOPA, GFA HGFA etc. RAA has become far more professional than the others and seems to have developed a fair rapport with CASA. No organisation is perfect though and mistakes will be made. How effectively these are dealt with is more important.If you don't like what is happening, leave, register with another organisation, start your own or forget about aviation. Alternatively throw your hat in the ring and stand for the board. If the anger amongst members is as high as what you lead us on this forum to believe, getting elected will be a shoe in.

deleted...Understand the angst but play the topic not the person...mod

 

 

[bull]

deleted...mod

 

 

[bull]

Think they had to surrender the trade mark as there were looming legal implications.So the line of listening to members would not be that relevant.

KP

Your dead right KP , more polly speak, and self preservation tactics then listening to members.

 

 

[bull]

This is an amazing thread! Two sides arguing, but have any facts been confirmed yet?

If free speech offends you dont scroll...……sorry about the spellingmistakes, as i,m just one of those country bumpkins that do,s not have the intelligence to see a con when we see one ,,,,,,lol

(edited..mod)

 

 

[octave]

(deleted..mod)