tim-mooney.com

It doesn’t come up often in the nonprofit world, but every once in a while there will be a trademark dispute… Check out this story regarding a “Big Sister” issue in Boston.

Be mindful that trademark and copyright laws apply to nonprofits just as much as a for-profit corporation!

A charity’s nonpartisan advertisement is drawing the attention of some in the reform community. The ONE Campaign’s ad is
described by the NY Sun:

At issue is a brief sequence in ONE’s television ad showing simulated campaign buttons for 14 presidential hopefuls from both major parties. “Ask each presidential candidate if they’re on the record fighting global poverty and disease,” the ad’s narrator intones. “One voice, plus yours and millions of others. They will hear.”

Attorneys for the Campaign Legal Center suggest this ad falls under the disclosure provisions of BCRA, while Jim Joseph, the attorney who represents the ONE Campaign says it’s purely an issue advertisement that doesn’t support or oppose any candidate, and is therefore outside of the requirement’s scope. When all is said and done, is this really the type of advertisement that the law was supposed to target? Is this a “sham issue ad”? It appears on its face to be precisely the type of ad that should not be regulated (and I put disclosure of donors in the “regulated” column). If the law does demand disclosure, I would suggest it’s another indication of the problems with BCRA.

UPDATE… Jim Joseph on the election law listserv gave an update:

I am counsel to The ONE Campaign and certainly had my comments taken out of context in the NY Sun article. The reporter seemed to be questioning ONE about why it had not registered as a political committee, which led to my response explaining how The ONE Campaign is not a political committee and how its ads do not support or oppose any candidates. When I finally realized that what he really was talking about was filing the Form 9, I explained that ONE was filing the form within 24-hours of the FEC regulations becoming final on Dec. 26. ONE never raised funds for electioneering communications, but used general treasury funds for these ads. The regulations provide very clearly that donor names do not need to be included on Form 9 under these facts. The reporter’s claim of ONE “boasting” of its ad buy was a simple press release stating that it was releasing an ad and buying $1.8 million in air time. The ads were set to end before December 26 and were paid for well before then, so there is probably an argument that the regulations that became effective on Dec. 26 did not apply, but I explained to the reporter that we wanted to file the form even if there might be argument that ONE was not required to file. We even filed before the FEC released a revised Form 9; the current form does not match up to the new regulations, that is for sure. Obviously, none of this comes out in the article. Given the “faux” issue ads that are out there, you would think the press would not be focusing on such non-issues as this.

Totally agreed on the last point!

The FEC is in the midst of a serious political squabble that will essentially shut down new business starting January 1st. Thankfully, before the lights went out the Commission released the Explanation and Justification document (PDF) on their new electioneering communications rules (PDF). AFJ has the summary here. Recommended reading if you’re a nonprofit that uses broadcast ads at all during election season!

A preview of sorts for the upcoming New Media screencast that I’ll have available… here is a screencast on Creative Commons licensing. The interesting aspect of this screencast is that it is an example of a remix of a creative commons licensed work. The original was a static comic with a script here. How is this important to nonprofits? It’s useful to know what kinds of artwork, music and other works are available for you to use without paying premium license fees. It’s also helpful to support the (usually) independent artists that use these licenses as a way of getting their work out to the world.

Enjoy the screencast and feel free to pass it along… after all, it’s a Creative Commons licensed video!

The podcast got a nice mention by Texas Nonprofits in an article on their site… check it out here.

This is all just in time for the latest Nonprofit Law Podcast… in number 25 we take a look at end of the year recordkeeping tips for nonprofits.

One-click subscribe in iTunes
Subscribe in other podcatchers

That’s a shudder you hear from every person who would be responsible for handling an audit of a nonprofit. Reuters has the scoop here.

Steven Miller, IRS Director of Tax Exempt and Government Entities, gave a speech recently on nonprofits. As the Nonprofit Law Prof blog reports, the most provocative part of the speech:

Please understand that I am not saying that no valid differences exist between the non-profit and for-profit sectors. I am asking something more nuanced: to what degree has the non-profit sector drifted toward the commercial sector, and to what extent should it be taxed like the for-profit sector? And even where the exempt sector acknowledges unrelated commercial activity, why are so many organizations declaring losses on these endeavors? It seems as if the IRS needs to police this Drift Line.

Newcomers to the nonprofit world are often surprised to the extent nonprofits (particularly 501(c)(3)s) are able to engage in commercial-like activities. Will the IRS start taking a harder line?

… of articles on shady nonprofits. Check out MSNBC. It’s also the season of calls for more nonprofit regulation… the question is whether or not the few bad apples should put more burdens on the good nonprofits? Balance is key.

The Washington Post reports on the importance of nonprofits in the 2008 election cycle. be sure to check out the response to the article by AFJ and Chronicle of Philanthropy as well.

NPR’s Justice Talking covers the tricky speech vs. election regulation topic this week:

The presidential election is less than a year away and a Supreme Court ruling could change the kinds of advertisements we see and hear in the days running up to an election. Also, some are questioning whether reporters need a law to protect them from being forced to reveal their sources. On this edition of Justice Talking: how the First Amendment affects political campaigns, blogs, corporations and journalists. Parts of this program were taped in front of an audience at the annual convention of the National Communication Association.

Check out the audio here (mp3).