Joined: June 2006
|Quote (sparc @ Mar. 06 2012,01:21)|
|KBertsche investigates Cornell's role: |
|I see both sides of this issue, but I would put as much or more blame on Cornell than on groups that rent Statler Hall from them. Cornell, as a private university, has no obligation to rent their space to anyone. They try to attract rentals as a source of income. And the Cornell name is a selling point for their rentals. Cornell can't have it both ways; if they want to attract rental groups with the Cornell name, they must expect that these same groups will use the Cornell name to publicize their events.|
According to the information sheet about renting Statler Hall, "The Hotel School reserves the right to refuse requests for use of space in Statler Hall that it believes is not in keeping with the mission and goals of the school." If Cornell is embarrassed by this situation, they should change their rental policy or make their approval process tighter.
Cornell's event planning information sheet shows concern about using their name or logo on "merchandise" "(i.e. shirts, hats, pens, etc.)" but specifically says, "Note that this policy does not apply to information printed on paper (i.e. posters, program booklets, etc.)."
I don't think the group did anything wrong in scheduling or publicizing their symposium. On the other hand, in attempting to use Cornell's name in the publication of their proceedings, the may well have violated Cornell's policy statement on Use of Cornell's Name, Logos, Trademarks, and Insignias. These sections of the statement are pertinent:
Responsibility for use of Cornell’s name and marks in the ordinary course of university business rests with the unit head. Questions regarding such use should be directed to the unit head. Examples of such use:
1. Official unit names. For example, “Cornell Institute for Public Affairs.”
2. Official event names. For example, “Cornell Conference on Law,” or “Cornell Nutrition Conference,” when approved by the appropriate dean or unit head and operated as a university event.
Except as specifically authorized in writing, use of Cornell’s name and marks in advertising and other promotional vehicles is prohibited when such use is likely to be perceived as an endorsement, even if such an endorsement is not the intention of the person or organization seeking to use Cornell’s name or marks.
Except those uses included in the “Ordinary Course of University Business” segment of this policy, the use of the name “Cornell University” or “Cornell,” in non-student organization names implying or tending to imply some official connection with the university, is prohibited except with the written permission of the university and under such restrictions as it may impose.
This person seems confused. On the one hand, he says "I don't think the group did anything wrong in scheduling or publicizing their symposium," then he quotes Cornell as saying "Except as specifically authorized in writing, use of Cornell’s name and marks in advertising and other promotional vehicles is prohibited when such use is likely to be perceived as an endorsement, even if such an endorsement is not the intention of the person or organization seeking to use Cornell’s name or marks."
It's pretty clear that the intent was to create the impression that Cornell was somehow officially complicit.
Evolution is not about laws but about randomness on happanchance.--Robert Byers, at PT