BKWSO appoints new trademark attorney

BK-judge.jpg (17.84 KiB) Viewed 8111 times

Following the same controversial course of action as Scientology™, TM™ and the Hot Birkram Yoga ®, the BKWSO in Austin Texas have appointed attorney Louis T. Pirkey of Pirkey Barber, LLP to handle its latest US trademark application number 77313590. One of four applications to date, including; 3417285, 3417284 and 3401098, intended to protect the so-called "Spiritual University's" right to provide ...

advertising space by electronic means and global information networks; editing and publication of advertising matter for others via the internet, specifically websites [and] operate an online shopping site in the field of spirituality and meditation.

Freedom of speech and freedom of religion activists within the movement voice concerns that these trademarks could be intended to further exclude the followers of the religious movement from accessing the increasing secreted channelled messages from God on which it is based. Further centralizing power within the hands of an unaccountable and undemocratic leadership, whose positions are secured by their money power or family connections, rather than spirituality, it is thought these applications were made in order to support personally motivated legal action. The trademark applications, of which one claims a "pseudo mark" pretending that "BKWSU" is short for "BKWS You", cover;

Books and printed publications in the nature of magazines, newsletters, booklets, pamphlets and brochures, all relating to spiritual and meditation issues; stationery; printed instructional and teaching material featuring spiritual and meditation issues" including ...

the "provision of spiritual sacred text, specifically termed Murlis or Murli classes, for meditation students.

Initially refused under Sections 1 and 2(e)(1) of the Trademark Act because the applicant, BK Hansa Raval, was not the owner of the mark and because the mark was merely "descriptive", lacking in any limitations of the identification of services. It has been suggested that trademarking "Brahma Kumaris" is like trademarking "Christian" or "Buddhist". The application is current on 3 months hold after protests were made and concerned individuals are encouraged to contact the US Patent and Trademark Office ... or local BK center-in-charge.

Whereas the BKWSO legally has "no members" with rights, only donors they call "students", this move legalizes the right of an unelected minority to recognize who are official 'children of Brahma' in the same manner as China seeks the rights over Tibetan to appoint "official Lamas" ... the God of the BKs is not a Democrat.

The US Patent Office stated that such a mark would suggested that the applicant’s meditation and services follow or abide by the principles of Brahma Kumaris. If granted, it could be used to prevent other BK centers for calling themselves BKs and in the possibility of costly and aggressive infringement suits, such as the BrahmaKumaris.Info domain dispute. Much criticised by the Yoga movement, a recent US court case in the district court for the Northern District of California found that ancient Yoga positions could be the subject of a valid copyright, despite their previous existence for 1,000 of years. *

In a moment of outstanding enlightenment and rectitude, the Patent office stated that anyone ...

... who operates a center where the principles of Brahma Kumaris are taught has the right to use the wording “Brahma Kumaris” to describe their services.

And quite right by the BK Knowledge they are too.

However, attorney Pirkey for Colonel Raval of Texas respectfully submitted that these rejections are based on "a misunderstanding of applicant and its services, and should be withdrawn". Global Media Chief Karuna Shetty retrospectively provided a letter of authorization for the applications but no note is on record from the governing body of the chimeric BKWSU, 'The World Spiritual Renewal Trust' leading critics to ask whether the Brahma Kumaris' accountants have their eyes on the increasingly affluent but increasingly corporate New Age and self-improvement movement to market its diffusion range products to with rumors suggesting that the higher echelons of the Brahma Kumari movement were were divided over the matter.

... Before me, there was no money, no business with Yoga", Bikram said.

With its increasing profit margins on "service products", Godly artifacts and even images of its "Our-Gurus-are-not-Gurus" Sindhi Gurus ... certain sorts of Brahma Kumaris appear to be investing thousands of dollars in applications and attorneys to follow en suite ... all on the back of the reputation of a charity established over decades by the "two paise (donations) of old widows" in India.

The attachment bk-trademark.jpg is no longer available

* Open Source Yoga Unity v. Bikram Choudhury, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10440, 74 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 1434, Copy. L. Rep. (CCH) P28,982 (N.D. Cal. 2005)

Yoga History

"Through regular publication of the work of the Institute, these Indian contributions will reach the whole world.

They will become public property. No patents will ever be taken. The spirit of our national culture demands that we should forever be free from the desecration of utilizing knowledge only for personal gain.

It is my further wish that the facilities of this Institute be available, so far as possible, to workers from all countries. In this I am attempting to carry on the traditions of my country. As far back as twenty-five centuries, India welcomed to its ancient universities ... scholars from all parts of the world."

-Autobiography of a Yogi, published 1946, page 81, from a speech given by J.C. Bose at the dedication of an Indian physiology/philosophy Institute

Ha! You can always trust a good Bhagat to just get it right ... cant you! Its a shame the Brahma Kumaris never attended any.

IMO, and from what I read into this, many ex-BKs on this site could also now apply to the same office as state that as "I have been practicing/teaching this knowledge" I too am therefore authorised to use the same "trademarked" name of the Brahma Kumaris. It would then be up to the BKWSU/O to then issue a statement declaring as to why this is not so, from their view point.

Could be an interesting response.

I think they should.

I think it is ridiculous that one or two self-appointed gurus should exercise the legal right to decide who is an "official Brahma Kumari" or not. Especially when their own history or ethics are under question.

Of course, underneath all this is 'money' ... just as usual. The Brahma Kumaris are sliding deeper an deeper into the money aspect of their business and there is a large market to tap. They want to own it and monopolize it. and what these trademarks do is make it impossible for any other BK to provide BK-related products and services to the BK and New Age market.

That is the front end. At the back is the other usual question; who is 'in' the money and power ... who is 'out' of the money and power ... and how is it decided?

There was that story about how Big Mohini flew in to some local center to hoover up a big fat donation to be used instead ... we presume ... for service at the New York end. Service, I dare say, including her food, accommodation and flights. There is the question of why the BKWSO allows individuals like Raval to accept donations and free labor "in the name of God" for property, a "Brahma Kumari center", in her own personal name.

And now why, of all things, "Brahma Kumaris" or even "BKWSU" is trademark for being a shop within which the Murlis are a protected product ... this and ever 5,000 years.

Personally though, I think it is all bogus and was a "preparation" all about us over here.

the BKWSO in Austin Texas have appointed attorney Louis T. Pirkey of Pirkey Barber, LLP to handle its latest US trademark application number 77313590.

Can we read the entire text of the actual application of BKWSO?

Go to the US Patent and Trademark Site, here, and type in Brahma Kumaris (this direct link might work).

Also, take the number and insert them into the Trademark Document Retrieval database, you can see and download all the documents.

The trademark office publishes the applications in a gazette. Of course, no ordinary person is going to be able to watch for published trademarks. This is all for big companies' benefit. You then have one month to put in an objection. In this case, someone has requested additional time, 3 months, to explore the issue before putting in an objection.

What I want to know is ... what did the attorney say in the direct telephone calls to the Trademark office to "clarify" matters? Why is not it in writing?

Once upon a time, in the old days, like Lekhraj Kirpalani take private donations from outsiders, all this stuff would have been done under the covers and no one know about it. Now it is all coming to light and being evidenced. We can see the reality.

I am wondering what would happen if someone (perhaps me, for example ...) were to put together a big spiritual/meditation event and used the BKWSU name & logos, gave them credit and due acknowledgement for the work ... what the impact and response would be from them?