(From Lognet 92/2)
There is presently no report from the Academy. However, since JCB's return to San Diego in May the Academy has met frequently by e-mail on a great variety of proposals, and an extended report on them is being prepared for LN 92/3.
—Hue RAM/JCB
I received [in May] the decision of the Federal Circuit affirming the ruling of the Trademark Board that the mark “LOGLAN” is generic. The Institute will move for a rehearing of the decision, but that is not likely. The decision is a disappointment, but the consequences of the ruling are actually quite limited. Anyone can now use the word “Loglan” in trade to designate da's product. Likewise, the Institute can advertise the fact that such a product is derivative, inferior, unoriginal...you can supply your own adjectives. This is a “win” for LeChevalier only in the very restricted sense that the Institute is now precluded from using the legal system to eliminate his use of the word “Loglan” on his product. The Institute still possesses full rights to use the word “Loglan” itself and to educate consumers about LeChevalier’s [dubious] activities.
—Hue Wes Parsons
As Wes expected, our motion for a rehearing was denied. —JCB