Ummm go to www.mindcamp.com.  Have you filed for a trademark? What about FooCamp and BarCamp and CodeCamp? You’re all doing sort of the same thing. And I imagine that O’Reilly views it as growing community and not everyone lifting his idea.

It doesn’t seem like you’ve really got a legal claim to the name.

If your goal is to grow a brand name then get the legal paperwork done and quietly enforce the issue.  Now it just looks like you’re throwing a tantrum.

Calling Fraud on these guys is a little much.

Reply to this: comment | thread

And remind me when you trademarked mind camp, and how you developed the idea of people getting together to hack? sounds like the fraud is you.

Reply to this: comment | thread

To the 2 guys above, you may want to read this post again. This London guy just doesn’t have courtesy, that seems to be the issue here. He is essentially “taking” the notion of the Mind Camp event for himself without any prior attempt for getting the blessing of anyone involved with the original. That is just bad business in my book. I’m sure if the guy was doing something called “London GnomeDex Camp” you would be singing a different tune.

Reply to this: comment | thread

Andru, I’m happy to help with your London event and I hope it’s a success.

As a resident of the UK, please let me know what UK rights you have to the name or the concept and I’ll gladly comply. I hope you don’t take your notion of ‘rights’ to other countries; it’ll be a long, long road.

This event may or may not be similar to the Seattle event, as it too is self-organising. It is being sponsored by London South Bank University, where I am a lecturer.

We just want to get like-minded people together, and learn from each other.

Thank you Rev Fry and chrish01. Eric B, the London wiki fully acknowledged the Seattle Mind Camp event, until we were asked to change it.

Andru, I’m really happy to keep talking to you about this, and to include you in our event.

Greg Tallent

Reply to this: comment | thread

Whoa - hold on Greg. Your attitude in your post is exactly what I think people are getting up in arms about. You basically stated that you have taken the name that someone else worked hard to make into value in this space, because it is too hard for them to “protect” over international boundaries.

What a piece of work you are. I for one find that appalling. According to your wiki, you are a senior lecturer in e-Business. That fact, combined with the way you handled yourself in the setup if your event, is saddening.

Reply to this: comment | thread

Hold on.. you’ve had one event and suddenly it’s a value space? I tend to think you might be confusing the natural reaction of a lot of geeks in close proximity with some sort of business genius.

Reply to this: comment | thread

It’s only a name, but hey, let the people decide. I’ve put a link to this blog entry and the Seattle Mind Camp on the er.. .. London Mind Camp wiki. http://www.bearstorm.com/wiki/index.php?title=Main_Page

Perhaps it should be Mein Kampf.

I tend to agree with the Rev, though.

Greg

Reply to this: comment | thread

Greg - I took a look at the London wiki, and I think you are misunderstanding my position. My whole issue is with market confusion, and the fact that you decided to use the name without at least asking those that came up with it and used it originally. It is an issue regarding common courtesy.

Reply to this: comment | thread

You know, reading all of this seems to highlight one major point. No matter what ANY of you think, the fact is simple:

A bunch of people got together and made a very successful event that they dubbed “Seattle Mind Camp.” Not only was it all over the Seattle media, it also hit newspapers in Texas, Tennessee, Canada, and others. So yes, there is definitely value in it. So much so that at least three people flew in Internationally to be a part of it, and sponsors seemed to jump on board very willingly from the appearance that their paraphernalia gave off at the event.

Now whether the name if protected, trademarked, or whatever else you want to do to DRM it up, it was still USED. That being said, anyone else that wants to use it SHOULD (although it isn’t a REQUIREMENT) contact the originator and make the intention known.

It really is as simple as that. While it isn’t required, it certainly is the “right” thing to do to at least ask.

Reply to this: comment | thread

Andru - If it is just common courtesy, I should have perhaps let you *know* in the first place. Please accept my appologies.

Your first email to me said: ‘Gear Live Media has filed for the “Mind Camp” DBA name, and it is currently in the process of being accepted.’ - among other things. I’m not even aware of what ‘DBA’ is.

This smacks of business rights - and so my response was a business response.

Thanks for the reminder, Liz.

Greg

Reply to this: comment | thread

Greg,

No problem - however, it seems you are partially missing the point. Want to be a good businessman? Change the name of your event. If Andru and crew are doing an event in London using the same moniker that they have already established themselves with, combined with the fact that you didn’t check with anyone on that crew originally, why not think about doing the “right thing?” So what if you have to change the name of your event? It will still be “what it is,” and you still have over 4 months until your date.

Reply to this: comment | thread

Liz, I do want to be a good businessman, in the sense of doing what’s most benefit to the most people. It seems to me that London Mind Camp is a good name to have for the sort of event we want to hold. We already have excellent people involved in this, we are based in London, have the resources, and no one from the UK has contributed to the argument against using this name.

If there are bodies in the UK who hold sway over this name (not sure how else to put it) then I haven’t heard from them.

There is a world called business. We cannot ignore it, ‘cause it is what most people are in.

I think we’re in the best position to make this work. Correct me if I’m wrong.

We ‘sit on the shoulders of giants’.

Greg

Reply to this: comment | thread

What the…you need to re-read what you just wrote, Greg. You just said you want to be a good businessman in the sense of doing whats most beneficial to the most people.

Are you that shortsighted? How in the world do you think it is most beneficial for there to be two London Mind Camps run by two different groups? Dont you think that might CONFUSE people? Why not be original and come up with your own name?

You are doing what is best for no one it seems, because this really doesn’t even seem that it would benefit you! THere will be confusion in the market.

My two cents anyway. Oh, and FWIW, I have been running my own business for a number of years. Whether it was “legal” for me to do so or not, if I were in your position, I would have changed the name of my event as soon as I got the request. Why? Aside from it being curteous and all that, people would see that as me working with the community rather than against it.

Reply to this: comment | thread

g r e g.. just from reading your tacky and pathetic sounding attempts at sounding smart i find myself literally shedding Iq points. I agree with Andru and Liz have some common courtesy.. you are one of the people that disgraces the human race. And if mind camp didn’t grab international attention.. or at the least limited international attention then why the heck do you know about the name? Why do you want to make a program called MindCamp? Because it has been given a good reputation by OTHERS.. not yourself.

Reply to this: comment | thread

well, Despite the fact that there has been just event, i still think that they do have the full right to call it their own and any other copycat, a fraud for it was there concept and idea. They should thus be rewarded for it.No offense to anyone, just my 2 cents. Thanks.

Reply to this: comment | thread