Breaking news concerning the lawsuit lodged by Jennifer Wright of Green Shift Inc against the Liberal Party for usurped the name of her company for Stephane Dion's carbon tax plan:
A news release from the Liberals at about 5 p.m.: “ The Liberal Party of Canada and Green Shift Inc. have resolved their dispute over the “Green Shift” trademark. The Liberal Party of Canada will continue to use “Green Shift” under license from Green Shift Inc. Green Shift Inc. is not affiliated with the Liberal Party of Canada and the
grant of the license does not constitute an endorsement by Green Shift Inc. of the Liberal Party of Canada.” And with that, the trowels are buried!
Some observations to hold us over until more details are forthcoming:
- By paying a license fee, the Liberal Party has conceded the point to Jennifer Wright that the Liberals had no right to use "Green Shift" without her permission.
- The Liberals have paid thousands of dollars in legal fees just to concede.
- Stephane Dion called the lawsuit "deplorable". And he caved. I guess it wasn't deplorable enough.
- Jennifer Wright has paid thousands of dollars in legal fees that will now be paid off by the Liberals for as long as they insist on calling Stephane Dion's carbon tax plan "The Green Shift".
- Money being collected from donors, so precious to the financially strapped Liberal Party, is now being spread between fighting an election, paying for day-to-day operating expenses, retiring leadership debts, paying down legal bills, and now, thanks to some knucklehead's prediction that Jennifer Wright would love to share the name of her company with the Liberal Party, a license fee.
- I've gathered several opinions, and the consensus is that this license fee is a writ expense, and has to be counted against campaign spending limits.
All in all, it seems like "Green Shift" has turned out to be a really bad idea on every count.
Oh, and the link to Jennifer Wright's website has disappeared from the Liberal Party's carbon tax website, along with the cheesy "not affiliated" disclaimer that utterly failed to prevent the Liberals from reaching this embarrassing conclusion. It's been replaced with text that explains the licensing agreement.
It was an expensive mistake, and the Liberals haven't even stopped paying.
Unless they just drop the name "Green Shift" altogether.
Never too much of a good thing: The same text that explains the licensing agreement appears on the main Liberal Party website. Does this text have to appear everywhere the Liberals use "Green Shift"? Adding it to every website won't be too hard, but what about printed material and other stuff.
No secrets here: If the people I've spoken to are correct, then as an election expense, the Liberals will have to divulge the cost of the license agreement:
Wright said she also couldn’t disclose whether the agreement includes payment by the Liberal party for use of her company name.
“I think it will all be a confidential agreement,” she said.
The payments are being used to promote the Liberal Party:
(1) An election expense includes any cost incurred, or non-monetary contribution received, by a registered party or a candidate, to the extent that the property or service for
which the cost was incurred, or the nonmonetary contribution received, is used to directly promote or oppose a registered party, its leader or a candidate during an election period.(3) An election expense referred to in subsection (1) includes a cost incurred for, or a non-monetary contribution in relation to,
(a) the production of advertising or promotional material and its distribution, broadcast or publication in any media or by any other means;
That makes it public information, either now or when the returns are filed.
