When did the EAA become money grubbing bullies?

HomeBuiltAirplanes.com

Help Support HomeBuiltAirplanes.com:

Topaz

Super Moderator
Staff member
Log Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2005
Messages
13,997
Location
Orange County, California
Again, the legal test is whether the "average person," meaning usually the judge or the members of a jury, depending on the type of case, would determine that the potentially infringing design is "clearly a derivative" of the original.

There are no objective criteria, including whether or not there are certain elements included or not. It's a completely subjective decision. One of those "I know it when I see it," things. And yes, given the subjectivity of branding and even commercial art, it's the best possible way.
 

pictsidhe

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2014
Messages
7,372
Location
North Carolina
Again, the legal test is whether the "average person," meaning usually the judge or the members of a jury, depending on the type of case, would determine that the potentially infringing design is "clearly a derivative" of the original.

There are no objective criteria, including whether or not there are certain elements included or not. It's a completely subjective decision. One of those "I know it when I see it," things. And yes, given the subjectivity of branding and even commercial art, it's the best possible way.
A parody does allow derivatives. Law is one huge and horribly complex grey area. If this comes before a jury, they will be asked to decide which of at least two legal interpretations it best fits. Some will favour the defence, some the prosecution...
 

Topaz

Super Moderator
Staff member
Log Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2005
Messages
13,997
Location
Orange County, California
All true, but this isn't a parody usage. Or, at least, SOS claiming it was will be a heck of a stretch to prove in court.
 

Dana

Super Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Apr 3, 2007
Messages
8,958
Location
CT, USA
If SOS just uses the beerventure logo at the tent at the convention, I could see it being interpreted as parody, it's all in fun, after all. If they used the logo on beer in cans sold outside the convention, that's a different matter.

Some friends and I used to put on the "Connecticut Yankee PPG Boogie", a two day event for paramotors. More than once I heard the Saturday night festivities referred to as the "beer boogie".
 

crusty old aviator

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2014
Messages
114
Location
Grantham, NH
I never liked Tom P’s EAA logo. Back in the 90’s, I showed it to a friend who creates logos for a living, he said it was a terrible logo, as it inferred that EAA was an aerospace defense contractor, not a bunch of homebuilders. Then I showed him the original logo, and he immediately recognized it from car windows and said the “cute” little homebuilt at the bottom told the whole story and the spelled out Experimental Aircraft Assn put a name to it. He was puzzled as to why anyone with any marketing sense would allow it to be changed...and, I suppose that’s the reason: egos overruled intelligence, just part of the human condition. Tom wanted to distance himself from Dad and make EAA his own, so he did just that and rebranded the organization.
In the late 80’s, there was some minor disagreement around Chapter insurance in Canadian Chapters. If they were paying the same dues as US Chapters, they should get insurance, too. It was then that EAA first viewed EAAC as a liability, and went after EAA of Canada, threatening to sue them for (c) infringement: after three decades of amiability, so the alienated Canucks decided to hell with the greedy Yanks in Oshkosh and EAAC became RAAC (Recreational Aircraft Assn of Canada). Decades later, there is again an EAAC, so hopefully history won’t repeat itself.
 

BJC

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Oct 7, 2013
Messages
10,467
Location
97FL, Florida, USA
When they put the B-17 (“by your ride here!”) on my membership card, I called and asked for a replacement card with either the original logo or a homebuilt. They were (big surprise here) unable to do so.

The membership person that I talked to did offer that they were getting lots of calls just like mine.


BJC
 

Topaz

Super Moderator
Staff member
Log Member
Joined
Jul 29, 2005
Messages
13,997
Location
Orange County, California
If SOS just uses the beerventure logo at the tent at the convention, I could see it being interpreted as parody, it's all in fun, after all. If they used the logo on beer in cans sold outside the convention, that's a different matter.

Some friends and I used to put on the "Connecticut Yankee PPG Boogie", a two day event for paramotors. More than once I heard the Saturday night festivities referred to as the "beer boogie".
The difference is two-fold. For one, EAA seemingly isn't willing to "look the other way" anymore. Whatever bad blood has developed between the two organizations, it's poisoned any notion of "Ah, just let it go. They're not really hurting anything."

Secondly, it's really hard to claim parody usage when the use is intimately connected - functionally connected - with commercial sales. A parody is a rhetorical use. Commercial use kind of excludes the notion of "parody" from the equation from the get-go, the way trademark law is usually interpreted.
 

pfarber

Well-Known Member
HBA Supporter
Joined
Feb 21, 2019
Messages
465
Location
Pennsylvania
I never liked Tom P’s EAA logo. Back in the 90’s, I showed it to a friend who creates logos for a living, he said it was a terrible logo, as it inferred that EAA was an aerospace defense contractor, not a bunch of homebuilders. Then I showed him the original logo, and he immediately recognized it from car windows and said the “cute” little homebuilt at the bottom told the whole story and the spelled out Experimental Aircraft Assn put a name to it. He was puzzled as to why anyone with any marketing sense would allow it to be changed...and, I suppose that’s the reason: egos overruled intelligence, just part of the human condition. Tom wanted to distance himself from Dad and make EAA his own, so he did just that and rebranded the organization.
In the late 80’s, there was some minor disagreement around Chapter insurance in Canadian Chapters. If they were paying the same dues as US Chapters, they should get insurance, too. It was then that EAA first viewed EAAC as a liability, and went after EAA of Canada, threatening to sue them for (c) infringement: after three decades of amiability, so the alienated Canucks decided to hell with the greedy Yanks in Oshkosh and EAAC became RAAC (Recreational Aircraft Assn of Canada). Decades later, there is again an EAAC, so hopefully history won’t repeat itself.
I absolutely HATE the direction the EAA has gone since the late 90's. I grew op in the 70s/80s and subscribed to Kitplanes when the actually had most of the rag dedicated to BUILDING AIRPLANES!!!!! The 'Stress without tears' series of articles was re-read dozens of times as my dumb a** tried to figure out the math.

Now the EAA is nothing more the Young Eagles and what company's kits are being match drilled and riveted by some white middle aged man in a rented hanger. Oh, there's 4 pages of actual tips in the back of the magazine.

I support the EAA because there is no one else to support the E/AB movement, but if there was enough money in it, I'm sure the EAA would switch to nothing more than a pilots club.

My conversations with any kit builder always is short and boring. They copy the plans and follow whatever trend is in the forum that month.
 

Tom H

Member
Joined
May 7, 2014
Messages
10
Location
Shelbyville, Ky
EAA seemingly isn't willing to "look the other way" anymore
I don't think EAA ever willingly "looked the other way" regarding beer sales and possibly other private enterprise near the convention grounds.

I've been attending Oshkosh since 1980, and remember several privately owned houses on the east side of Knapp St., slightly north of Waukau Ave. One of these houses often flew a blimp shaped, yellow balloon, with the word BEER on it. There was also a house on the corner of Knapp and Waukau that provided affordable food (and a big shade tree). Back then, Knapp was the N/S dividing line of the convention grounds, and, it seems, a publicly accessible street (no road blocks, etc.). A person would need either an entry tag or membership card to get into the area north of Knapp, but could access the beer house area. (to complete the picture, a flight-line pass would be required to pass through the flight line fence to access the area with the airplanes). Anyway, the Scholler campground was west of Knapp. A rule in the campers guide, probably seldom enforced, was "no alcohol in the campground", which may have reflected Paul P.'s views. I suspect many campers made the short walk to the beer house, which probably was a thorn in EAA's side. Somewhere along the line the "no alcohol" rule was dropped, and EAA's camp stores started selling beer. Maybe during Tom P's reign?

I did not follow it in detail, but remember seeing in the local newspapers (which many campers purchased from teen vendors making the rounds each day) the issue of the airport/EAA taking these private properties by legal force.

I don't know if the beer house was affiliated with the SOS brothers, but, it seems that EAA still does not want any close, convenient competition to its merchandisers.
 

crusty old aviator

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2014
Messages
114
Location
Grantham, NH
I have never liked the new logo, the old one was much more meaningful.
You would make a great marketing guru, Matthew!
In the archives of the early Experimenter newsletters, there is an article showing various EAA logos under consideration and explaining why they chose the one that we now recognize with great nostalgia. When the new logo came out, there was no article explaining the rationale behind the change, like when Coca Cola came out with “new Coke.” It sure alienated a lot of the old boys.
EAA has a history of trying new things that ended up disappointing its membership: remember when, in the late 80’s, Sport Aviation switched to using an ink that dissolved from your finger oils and smeared? To their credit, they did inform Ray Schoeller that he shouldn’t order any more of that ink and when it was used up, they did switch to something that was more pricey, but didn’t smear under our thumbs.
As for Paul P. and alcohol: like a horse and carriage. When EAA finally obtained a license from the County, they were able to sell beer and wine in their stores. Paul was big on family values (that’s why he had two of them), so they banned alcohol from the grounds, early on, because the membership didn’t want their children exposed to drunks. But Paul liked his “smoke oil,” a potent concoction that he kept in one tube of a set of large field glasses. You had to know which eye piece to remove to have a swig.
Those were heady times! We were all seriously flawed people, except for Gene Chase, but we managed to accomplish whatever needed doing.
 

Wayne

Well-Known Member
Log Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2013
Messages
423
Location
Chicago, IL
“Sounds like there's a wide-open space for a 'replacement' organization that sticks to its roots”
It’s been tried, by Paul P himself. Seems that he agreed with most of what is being said here about what EAA has turned into. It was the Sport Aviation Association (SAA)
They held several fly ins at Frasca Field (C16 - Urbana Illinois). It was so grass roots that Paul was working the food line - yep he served me a hot dog!

This idea has occurred to me of late, maybe we are due for a group that has it's roots in 2020.....
 

Vigilant1

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Supporter
Joined
Jan 24, 2011
Messages
4,538
Location
US
How many active members on HBA? Maybe we could just act like home-builder cowbirds and descend on one type group's yearly fly-in on a rotating basis!??
Or, make such a fuss at every EAA function that they pay us to secede. I think we should hold out for transfer of ownership of all the Sport Aviation archives and exclusive rights to all images and likenesses of Steve Whittman and Paul Poberezny.
 
2
Group Builder
Top