Home | Community | Message Board

Sporeworks
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Bridgetown Botanicals Bridgetown Botanicals   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds   Left Coast Kratom Buy Kratom Extract   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   Mushroom-Hut Mono Tub Substrate   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1
OfflineIamMatt
Stranger
 User Gallery

Registered: 06/20/10
Posts: 1,071
Last seen: 1 year, 6 months
Company Gets Trademark For The Word ‘Psilocybin,’ Frustrating Decriminalization Advocates
    #26447301 - 01/22/20 10:28 PM (4 years, 6 days ago)

https://www.marijuanamoment.net/company-gets-trademark-for-the-word-psilocybin-frustrating-decriminalization-advocates/

As psychedelics reform efforts pick up across the U.S., there’s an increasing weariness among advocates about the potential corporatization that may follow.

That’s why many found it alarming when a California-based company announced on Thursday that it had successfully trademarked the word “psilocybin,” the main psychoactive constituent of so-called magic mushrooms.

Psilocybin™ is a brand of chocolates that do not contain the psychedelic itself but are meant to “begin educating, enlightening and supporting the community in upgrading their inner vibrations in order to get everything they want of their time here on earth,” according to a mission statement.

As psychedelics reform efforts pick up across the U.S., there’s an increasing weariness among advocates about the potential corporatization that may follow.

That’s why many found it alarming when a California-based company announced on Thursday that it had successfully trademarked the word “psilocybin,” the main psychoactive constituent of so-called magic mushrooms.

Psilocybin™ is a brand of chocolates that do not contain the psychedelic itself but are meant to “begin educating, enlightening and supporting the community in upgrading their inner vibrations in order to get everything they want of their time here on earth,” according to a mission statement.

Soon after founder Scarlet Ravin shared news of the trademark on LinkedIn, advocates raised questions and concerns: What does that mean on a practical level for other psilocybin organizations? Why should one brand get exclusive rights (to a certain legal extent) to the scientific name of a natural substance?

The reality of this particular trademark is more nuanced than it might appear at first glance. While it’s true that the company was granted the distinction by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, it’s specifically for educational materials and it’s listed on the supplemental register, rather than the principal register, which means it would be incumbent upon the brand to prove that it has earned distinctiveness of the mark if the issue went to court.

“It’s certainly good for her business to have that mark, but I think at the end of the day, it’s going to be somewhat weak,” Larry Sandell, an intellectual property attorney at Mei & Mark LLP, told Marijuana Moment. He added that this example is “indicative that people are trying to stake early claims to IP.”

“Even if they might be somewhat overreaching, people see a potential new market here and they want to stake out their ground,” he said. “It’s a big next space that people are anticipating a legal market. Maybe it’s where cannabis was five to 10 years ago.”

Despite those legal limitations, reform advocates view the trademark as emblematic of a bigger issue—that someone would presume to take ownership of a substance that’s at the center of a national debate on whether or not to criminalize individuals for using it.

Kevin Matthews, who led the successful campaign to decriminalize psilocybin mushrooms in Denver last year and is the founder of the national psychedelics advocacy group SPORE, told Marijuana Moment that he didn’t doubt Ravin had the right intentions—to promote education into the substance—but he said the decision to trademark is nonetheless questionable.

“This being an open-source movement, trademarking the word psilocybin, in some ways it feels like—although I don’t think this is her intention—it’s lacking perspective,” he said. “Does that mean we can’t use psilocybin as SPORE because we’re an educational non-profit and she’s a for-profit branded company? It doesn’t make a lot of sense to me. She needs to let go of the trademark.”

Ravin said that her goal in trademarking psilocybin was to prevent the substance from being becoming the next cannabis, which she said has been corrupted from its “true spiritual, medicinal benefit” and turned into a corporate commodity.

As psychedelics reform efforts pick up across the U.S., there’s an increasing weariness among advocates about the potential corporatization that may follow.

That’s why many found it alarming when a California-based company announced on Thursday that it had successfully trademarked the word “psilocybin,” the main psychoactive constituent of so-called magic mushrooms.

Psilocybin™ is a brand of chocolates that do not contain the psychedelic itself but are meant to “begin educating, enlightening and supporting the community in upgrading their inner vibrations in order to get everything they want of their time here on earth,” according to a mission statement.

Soon after founder Scarlet Ravin shared news of the trademark on LinkedIn, advocates raised questions and concerns: What does that mean on a practical level for other psilocybin organizations? Why should one brand get exclusive rights (to a certain legal extent) to the scientific name of a natural substance?

The reality of this particular trademark is more nuanced than it might appear at first glance. While it’s true that the company was granted the distinction by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, it’s specifically for educational materials and it’s listed on the supplemental register, rather than the principal register, which means it would be incumbent upon the brand to prove that it has earned distinctiveness of the mark if the issue went to court.

“It’s certainly good for her business to have that mark, but I think at the end of the day, it’s going to be somewhat weak,” Larry Sandell, an intellectual property attorney at Mei & Mark LLP, told Marijuana Moment. He added that this example is “indicative that people are trying to stake early claims to IP.”

“Even if they might be somewhat overreaching, people see a potential new market here and they want to stake out their ground,” he said. “It’s a big next space that people are anticipating a legal market. Maybe it’s where cannabis was five to 10 years ago.”

Despite those legal limitations, reform advocates view the trademark as emblematic of a bigger issue—that someone would presume to take ownership of a substance that’s at the center of a national debate on whether or not to criminalize individuals for using it.

Kevin Matthews, who led the successful campaign to decriminalize psilocybin mushrooms in Denver last year and is the founder of the national psychedelics advocacy group SPORE, told Marijuana Moment that he didn’t doubt Ravin had the right intentions—to promote education into the substance—but he said the decision to trademark is nonetheless questionable.

“This being an open-source movement, trademarking the word psilocybin, in some ways it feels like—although I don’t think this is her intention—it’s lacking perspective,” he said. “Does that mean we can’t use psilocybin as SPORE because we’re an educational non-profit and she’s a for-profit branded company? It doesn’t make a lot of sense to me. She needs to let go of the trademark.”

Ravin said that her goal in trademarking psilocybin was to prevent the substance from being becoming the next cannabis, which she said has been corrupted from its “true spiritual, medicinal benefit” and turned into a corporate commodity.

“Knowing that psilocybin is going to be next [to be legalized] I feel strongly guided by the deepest part of my heart to really offer a sense of education of what could be when you take such a strong, beautiful medicine and to give people an education platform here and now to let them know what’s coming, how to receive it, how to get the most benefit from,” she told Marijuana Moment in a phone interview.

“We paved the way for this being a medicinal offering and not a consumer, recreational shitshow. That was our intention,” Ravin said. “The only way that we are going to have access to mainstream consumers is by having some sort of trademark on the word so that we can use it for something that’s not what it actually is.”

“With this being something that we can now put into market with a box of chocolates that has no psilocybin in it, but as you can already see, it creates a platform for discussion of what the beauty of this plant can do,” she said. “Me and my movement and my team, we don’t own the word. We’re not going to ever sue anyone who also uses the word—we’re opening a doorway for ourselves and anyone that wants to see this educated upon so that we can hit people who are unfamiliar with it now with downloads to actually have this be a safe, successful psychedelic transition.”

Asked to react to criticism about the trademark from advocates, Ravin said “we’re all here to follow spirit guidance to show love and light, and the visions I had of doing what we’re doing now was based upon breaking boundaries and breaking perceptions and allowing people to have an opportunity to sink into being one unit.”

“Yeah, it might be coming out, we might be using the platform of psilocybin. We can use any platform to do this,” she said. “We can use any platform to come together as a whole, and the longer that people sit in duality and say, ‘oh now she’s going to have a stronger voice than me is just looking at something not through their heart,’ it’s looking at it through ego and judgement.”

“The more that we describe what we’re doing, the more people I think will start to feel our unity and we’ll be able to move together as a stronger force than pointing fingers and trying to separate one another,” she said. “Those days are done.”

Ravin said that once the Psilocybin™ chocolates are ready for market, she plans to contribute 10 percent of profits to the Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies (MAPS), which is involved in researching therapeutic benefits of psychedelic substances.


Edited by IamMatt (01/22/20 10:29 PM)


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineanarchyfan
Stranger
 User Gallery

Registered: 04/04/13
Posts: 150
Last seen: 3 years, 9 months
Re: Company Gets Trademark For The Word ‘Psilocybin,’ Frustrating Decriminalization Advocates [Re: IamMatt]
    #26447856 - 01/23/20 09:29 AM (4 years, 6 days ago)

Gr8 b8 m8


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineFractal420
Psycellium
Male User Gallery


Registered: 06/21/13
Posts: 5,913
Last seen: 8 months, 14 days
Re: Company Gets Trademark For The Word ‘Psilocybin,’ Frustrating Decriminalization Advocates [Re: anarchyfan] * 1
    #26450692 - 01/24/20 07:50 PM (4 years, 4 days ago)

“what the beauty of this plant can do“

This doesn’t strike me as good, tbh. I hope they leave the “SPORE” trade alone


--------------------
Dreaming of That face again.
It's bright and blue and shimmering.
Grinning wide
And comforting me with it's three warm and wild eyes.

Prying open MY third eye



Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineShiVersblood
VAmPiRES HELLA ❤
I'm a teapot User Gallery


Registered: 08/18/07
Posts: 115,620
Loc: United States of America Flag
Last seen: 17 hours, 58 minutes
Re: Company Gets Trademark For The Word ‘Psilocybin,’ Frustrating Decriminalization Advocates [Re: Fractal420]
    #26455649 - 01/27/20 05:40 PM (4 years, 2 days ago)

It should be against the law to trademark the word psilocybin. That would be like if McDonald’s wanted to trademark the word Hamburger. It would simply be unfair. And it really does not make sense on a fairness level.


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineChakraYogi
Stranger
I'm a teapot

Registered: 12/21/19
Posts: 6
Last seen: 3 years, 11 months
Re: Company Gets Trademark For The Word ‘Psilocybin,’ Frustrating Decriminalization Advocates [Re: ShiVersblood]
    #26460292 - 01/30/20 01:46 PM (3 years, 11 months ago)

(...) which means it would be incumbent upon the brand to prove that it has earned distinctiveness of the mark if the issue went to court.

In practice, say, the chocolate company would first send a C & D. If the "Oregon Psilocybin Society" ignored the C & D and continued with their pamphlets because, you know, psilocybin is a molecule in this context and not a chocolate company then nothing; The OPS continues its endeavors and so does PsilocybinTM the chocolate company.

...and then OPS destroys them by publicizing the C & D.

However...and I'm thinking of the several year McDonald's threatening action against a man by the legal name of Ronald McDonald who owned McDonald's Family Restaurant (Est 1956). Long story short, he came out victorious and McDonald'sTM left town. But I can imagine the stress this may've caused him and his family.

I can't imagine the chocolate company wanting to destroy themselves by being frivolous and, based on historical context of genericized trademarks, I see this one falling into that category due to psilocybin  being a molecular compound gaining therapeutic traction.


--------------------
“If the words 'life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness' don't
include the right to experiment with your own consciousness,
then the Declaration of Independence isn't worth the hemp
it was written on.” - Terence McKenna


Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1

Shop: Bridgetown Botanicals Bridgetown Botanicals   Original Sensible Seeds Autoflowering Cannabis Seeds   Left Coast Kratom Buy Kratom Extract   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom   Mushroom-Hut Mono Tub Substrate   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Alaskans vote to decriminalize marijuana veggieM 2,180 1 10/26/04 02:43 PM
by Civ
* 'Smokeless' medicinal pot has its advocates veggieM 1,295 0 06/20/05 11:07 AM
by veggie
* Jamaica to Consider Decriminalization Bill veggieM 1,108 1 07/28/05 09:03 AM
by OneMoreRobot3021
* Cocaine drink emulates illegal namesake
( 1 2 all )
motamanM 7,906 22 11/06/06 08:28 AM
by junglejuice
* Medical marijuana advocates rally in Madison [WI] veggieM 1,481 0 10/01/05 09:13 PM
by veggie
* Advocates for legalizing marijuana tout the benefits at Hempfest Da_Vine 1,082 1 08/21/06 08:08 PM
by saffr0n
* Biggest seizure of psilocybin in the task force's 23-year history [MA] veggieM 5,270 11 12/31/06 09:34 PM
by p0ng
* U.S. states, not Canada, led way in decriminalization motamanM 3,029 2 06/18/03 12:32 AM
by DailyPot

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: motaman, veggie, Alan Rockefeller, Mostly_Harmless
1,312 topic views. 1 members, 5 guests and 6 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.023 seconds spending 0.007 seconds on 14 queries.