Greed and Control Can Ruin an Industry and Movement

Categories After Scrum, Agile, Culture, Origins, Scrum 123 Comments Tags , , ,

It has come to my attention that Scrum Alliance is trying to register a trademark on, “SCRUM USER GROUP,” at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.  Word on the street is that that the Trademark Office has indicated that it will publish this trademark shortly for opposition.  If no one opposes, I understand that the trademark will be registered in early September 2015.  Even more astounding is that I understand that Scrum Alliance has actually made arguments to the Trademark Office that the terms, “SCRUM,” and “GROUP” are not generic terms, and so therefore are eligible for trademark.  Unbelievable.

Jeff Sutherland and I developed Scrum in the early 1990s. We provided it to the software development community with pleasure, and with no copyright enforcement. To promote discussion about Scrum and all things Scrum, we made sure that there also were no trademarks. We wanted people to use the word Scrum in every form possible, to promote discussion, papers, books, conferences. We wanted Scrum to emerge, and not to follow a predictive path like waterfall and PMI.

As a great result, a Google search for the word “scrum” results in “about 26,100,000” hits. Scrum has spread just as Jeff and I hoped.

I founded Scrum Alliance in 2004. In 2009, its Managing Director, Jim Cundiff, send a notice to the Orlando Scrum User Group that the words “Scrum User Group” were a trademark of Scrum Alliance. He informed them that they needed to sign a licensing agreement with Scrum Alliance to continue using “its mark.”

I told Jim to knock it off, that the phrase was generic and we in no way wanted to restrict or control its use.

Fast forward six years. Scrum Alliance has continued with its ownership of Scrum User Group, pursuing a trademark as described above. Right now it looks like, if nothing is done, they will gain ownership of this mark in early September.

Interesting, what Jeff and I provided for free, others are claim as their own so as to make money and to control the community.

So what will happen?

  1. I can protest and file and appeal. This apparently will cost about $250,000. We will win but I hope I win the lottery.
  2. You can enter some comments here about whether you think I should file this appeal, and whether you believe the word Scrum or Scrum User Group are public domain, or can be owned by an organization like Scrum Alliance.
  3. You can create a lot of noise in the industry to let Scrum Alliance know that pursuing private ownership of public material is wrong. Maybe they will desist.
  4. If we don’t do enough and Scrum Alliance gains control of our wording and vocabulary, we will have to drop the use of Scrum in our everyday life.

Scrum Alliance claims to be “a membership organization that encourages and supports the widespread adoption and effective practice of Scrum.” However, its use of the trademark process actually negates their claimed goal.

Please refer to my next blog, Turning A New Leaf.

123 thoughts on “Greed and Control Can Ruin an Industry and Movement”

  1. I agree with you Ken, freeing up the term, will free up the hands of those of us who want to see the ideas flourish across multiple industries. Press on sir.

  2. I wish to see the other party’s comments here. It’s a widely known fact that most of “licensing” goes against the freedom of spreading and collaboration around the license subject. If Alliance has some other motivation to register it except greed – it will be nice to hear their voice.
    Keeping in mind all the pain of legal wars and fighting it would be huge advantage for all the community to see both organizations working together and not against each other affecting the performance and efficiency of the movement’s growth.

    • I am not the ScrumAlliance. My opinion follows…

      There is no profit (or even revenue) generated by user groups. They are community organised and funded.

      Some naughty-from-outside-of-Scrum people have used the terms as effectively a Trojan horse to advertise/sell/con people. That is probably why the Alliance is trying to protect the term. For quality control and integrity. Not selling or money.

      Of which they make nothing.

      In fact most Scrum User Groups are Agile groups with content and discussion far beyond Scrum.

      So, I cannot see a control argument. I think we can all agree there is zero greed component.

      Finally, Ken… Didn’t you try and trademark the original scrum terms such as ScrumMaster and Product Owner?

      • Jim Cundiff, the initial trademarked of Scrum User Group, tried to tm Scrum Master and Product Owner. That didn’t succeed, so his next attempt was certified scrum master and certified product owner. I do not know if that succeeded.

      • I would (possibly naively) agree with this assessment. By trademarking the terms used by Scrum, it becomes a brand name and could potentially put an end to the “Scrum-but” that is so pervasive in the industry.

      • Ken – instead of writing a blog post why not reach out to the new CEO of the ScrumAlliance and initiating a conversation? You might be positively surprised at the results.

        Cheers
        Mark Levison – human

  4. Now Scrum has spread as you wish maybe it is time for you and Jeff to tight things up. If Scrum Alliance does not do it, others will.

  5. As an author of the Agile Manifesto, a long-time Agile and Scrum aficionado, and an all-around good guy, I do not support the notion of trademarking “Scrum”, or “Scrum User Group”. I do understand the desire and, perhaps, appropriateness of trademarking “Certified ScrumMaster”, with or without the space before the M, because that’s actually a “product offering” of the Scrum Alliance.

    (I also think certifying is mostly BS the way it is done in our industry and wish that people would stop. That’s not gonna happen.)

      • Building on Ron and Vernon’s feedback — I do feel it’s important to recognize that the Scrum Alliance is (technically) a non-profit organization, although perhaps the Scrum Gatherings are run as for-profit entities (?).

        The organization’s 2013 IRS Form 990 is available here:

        http://bit.ly/1Llzycd

        Let’s dare to dream that these valuable organizations (Scrum Alliance, Scrum.org, Scrum Inc.) can eventually connect and align to a larger, transcendent & **shared** Purpose that will ethically & responsibly serve the many organizations that still need our help.

  7. You might want to think about crowd funding the action against the trademark application.

    I would think also that international rugby would have a few comments if they had to Pay Scrum Alliance every time the teams faced up for a Scrum.

    Happy to work on some noise in the industry all it seems to take in the agile software profession is for greed to change a word or two hey lets have burn left charts and the next thing you know its new methodology being hawked around gullible enterprise organisations.

  9. Hi Ken, yes please object and appeal. Working with and communicating about Scrum shouldn’t has to be be something you have to think twice about license wise. Same goes for a Scrum User Group. Otherwise helping out other groups and people will cost you money!

    I do not think that asking scrum alliance friendly or unfriendly will help. Their business model is about making lots of money and -sad to say- they are already successful with this. ScrumMaster have to pay a re-certification fee each year.

    If you and/or scrum.org have too limited financial means, it would be a good idea to ask for donations.

  11. IMO it isn’t worth $250,000 to appeal this. Let those who understand the values carry them forward using different words. Then the Scrum Alliance can happily own words that people no longer use or need.

  12. Lets not turn it into a lawyers picnic. Political Pressure should be enough. Dissent from CST’s would be appreciated.

  13. Maybe just trying to emulate SAFe? Seems there’s a bit of coin rolling that way….! That being said I’m on board with the crowd funding opposition approach…perhaps revenue from the shirts mentioned above could be donated!

  14. I agree…its shameful what they are doing at the Scrum Alliance. I am more and more disappointed with them as the days pass. I have stopped recommending their entry-level certification programs to people because the value simply isn’t there. And more people are beginning to recognize the fact that there are better communities out there (yours, for example).

  17. If the Scrum Alliance is attempting to trademark to prevent other nefarious companies doing the same and preventing common usage, then I understand the intent. However, another approach would be to not trademark anything then if a real threat to the community occurs, band together with Scrum.org and the community to raise funds to prevent it. So if this is the only argument in favor of trademarking, remove the reason to do so.
    Gabrielle Benefield (CST and friend of Ken:)

  18. The current licensing terms at scrumguides.org indicate that you and Jeff have placed the Scrum Guide in the Creative Commons. Is that actually correct?

    If so, I’d infer from this that the term “Scrum”…when used in the context of the Guide and the “Scrum Framework” it describes…is protected under the relevant Commons license CC BY-SA 4.0. I therefore wonder to what extent any third party restrictions on the term “Scrum” and the associated art would be enforceable, even where related trademarks are held.

    Defending rights that are protected under the Commons shouldn’t cost anyone even $0.25 of their money, to say nothing of $250,000. Surely it is those who attempt to take away such rights who must incur the expense, in terms of both resources and reputation.

  20. This is a very interesting post.

    I agree with Ron. I do not agree with trademarking ‘SCRUM’ or ‘Scrum User Group’ except to protect against nefarious use. Nigel’s comments clearly points to a problem that exists in our community, where con artists are taking advantage of people. We want to prevent this at all cost.

    There is monetary value in the word ‘Scrum.’ Simply look at a Google adwords campaign using the word and compare to the word ‘waterfall.’ There is a huge financial difference.

    Here’s the deal. There is not a person on the post that does not understand the value of a trademark. Here are few examples of trademarks that have been filed.

    Ken Schwaber filed to trademark ‘SCRUM’ on May 14, 2010. It was abandoned on August 19, 2010.

    Scrum Alliance filed to trademark ‘CERTIFIED SCRUMMASTER’. This trademark was filed on January 31, 2007 and is still active.

    Mountain Goat Software filed to trademark ‘PLANNING POKER’ on April 20, 2007. This trademark is still active and freely used by everyone. Thanks Mike.

    We need to take a look at all parties involved in this debate and understand their true motives before we launch a blind unguided attack against them. Maybe we need an unbiased Scrum Board. LOL

    I really don’t care whether the trademark is approved or not. Have fun!!!

    Disclosure: I am a member of Scrum Alliance and a CST. I am a PSM I through Scrum.org. I facilitate a Scrum User Group called ‘Texas Agile.’ I do not speak on behalf of the Scrum Alliance or anyone else.

    • Devon (and Nigel) “…where con artists are taking advantage of people. We want to prevent this at all cost.” Why do we want to prevent this? What are we, the police? Let people con other people. Honestly, if suckers want to buy flakey nonsense let them do so. They’ll quickly regret it and search for something more meaningful. You know, let people fail—and learn. Now where did I hear that? 😉

      • Hi Tobias. The issue is that when the ‘suckers’ buy flakey scrum courses and are taught by someone who does not understand this stuff properly (and how it is applied in the real world) then they go out into the real world, and fail at implementing Scrum. And that failure is reported when the next ‘State of Agile’ report comes out (or whatever). And we all look like we don’t know what we are doing – and that Scrum doesn’t work.

        I can think of one global training organisation, for example, who have created their own so-called ‘certification’ and are now selling Certified ScrumMaster courses (that aren’t)). Their miss-selling does mean that occasionally I receive a call from a desperately unhappy individual who has signed up for their course – only to realise that they have not bought what they think they had (and they can’t get out of their contract and switch to a ‘proper’ CSM or CSPO course). I don’t like to see the con artists at work. Under-qualified agilistas let loose without a clue how to operate will not help our cause at all. Yes, let people fail – and learn – but what about those who are oblivious to poor training and then wonder why their Scrum projects are failing?

        Oh, and that large training organisation I mentioned were brought to the attention of the UK’s Trading Standards Authority (more than once). Let’s not have training suppliers without the appropriate agile/scrum skills and experience jumping on the bandwagon…

    • teambeardedeagle,

      Planning poker is not free! You need to pay Mike Cohn by displaying his company name on all your cards!

  21. The best way of protection would have been trademarking, since once trademarked it would be possible to set the term free whilst still being able to avoid commercial abuse. The original thought was naive in my opinion.

    • The very best I ever did was not protecting Scrum with copyrights or trademarks. People would then have had to worry about “proper” use; we would have started splintering immediately. Instead, people were free to experiment and discuss.

  23. I’m a little confused about the September 15th date mentioned. The Scrum Alliance’s page (https://www.scrumalliance.org/community/user-groups/scrum-user-group-logo-posting-guidelines) says:
    The SCRUM USER GROUP® is a registered trademark, U.S. Registration No. 3,687,796; Registered September 22, 2009.
    So the cat may already be out of the bag.

    @teambeardedeagle and @gbenefield1: Considering that in order to call your group a SCRUM USER GROUP, you have to have a Scrum Alliance CSM, CSPO, or CSP on board, and you have to get permission from the Scrum Alliance, this does not sound like a defensive trademark.

  24. Appeal, even if it means forking out for a lawyer. What is wrong with these people? I wonder if rugby commentators might have to rejigg their rugby terms : “And thanks to our sponsors the Scrum Alliance, there will now be a scrum on the 25m line”. Oh good grief.

  25. They are obviously paranoid about something, just go to their web site and you can’t read the text as there are so many ® splattered everywhere!

  26. Have you considered starting a crowd funding campaign against this? I believe that most people that work with scrum would want to act against this move and would gladly donate towards any action that might prevent this from happening.

    • Reading back I obviously missed a couple of suggestions in the comments but I would gladly contribute towards the cause. In the mean time I will be making lots of noise.

  27. The freely given information by the Scrum Alliance is part of what drew me to Scrum when I first started looking for lightweight project management frameworks. Unfortunately, if SA succeeds with this, I’m afraid many certification holders, myself included, will end up looking for ways to get certified in other ways. Along these lines, if this trademark does go through, I foresee a noticeable uptick in Scrum.org certifications.

    Is it me, or does Scrum Alliance seem to be more about revenue generation than about educating people about the benefits of Scrum and how it benefits not only software development, but so many other industries and works streams?

    • It’s not just you 🙂
      “The SA appears to exist to certify new trainers who will teach more CSM classes so the membership grows, and the demand for more CSM classes grows, so more trainers can be certified, and so on ad infinitum.” —https://agileanarchy.wordpress.com/2010/10/12/the-scrum-compliance/

      • If only they would see that this ultimately will push away long time members and SA supporters, that might help. And, if they at least stated somewhere that they were in it more for revenue generation than public education, at least people would know what they are getting into/being a part of. I fear that at some point in the future, SA and PMI will merge based on how similar they have become, and how much they model similar business models.

    • As I have been reading all the comments, this exact thing came to mind – ‘Scrum Alliance User Group’. This provides legitimacy to any group that chooses to align themselves with the Scrum Alliance. Others can continue to freely propagate the practices of Scrum through other means.

      I don’t believe a trademark will change anything for me.

  31. Ken (, Tobias and other friends) – instead of speculating endlessly about what is happening why not reach out to someone who works at the ScrumAlliance and ask them what is happening. There is a lot of reaction here to words that were written on a page. If we were ScrumMasters read something like this and didn’t do any more digging before reacting we would be reprimanded at best and fired at worst. Why assume the worst of the ScrumAlliance? Ken – after all these years I don’t assume the worst of either you or Scrum.Org. Why do you have to assume the worst of the ScrumAlliance.

    Cheers
    Mark Levison

    • Mark,
      Good suggestion. Earlier this morning I sent such a summary and request to Manny Gonzalez, the new CEO of Scrum Alliance. I think this is a great opportunity for him to turn the direction from exclusive to inclusive.
      Let’s see.
      Ken

    • Mark, whether the registration was done in 2009 or 2015 it’s still bullshit practice. The SA is using the ® already, so this is NOT speculation. My tweet on this did not attack individuals, it attacked a way of being that the SA has created for itself—which is to act like all the big corporations they claim to want to change. It’s hypocrisy to the highest degree.

  32. Ken,
    I am in agreement that a trademark is potentially dangerous.
    Would you please provide
    the USPTO trademark request number
    and
    address to mail a letter to
    so that we can all print out and flood the USPTO with your post and our agreement notice to them.
    I believe this approach supports the ‘fight’ you are referencing without a US$250k price tag since the USPTO is required to consider all objections.
    If we all flood the office at least we have a chance to delay any award.

  33. Ken – here are the relevant details: The SCRUM USER GROUP® is a registered trademark, U.S. Registration No. 3,687,796; Registered September 22, 2009. SCRUM ALLIANCE® is a registered trademark, U.S. Registration No. 3,548,753; Registered October 7, 2008.

    It would appear this trademark was applied for and granted while you were still part of the ScrumAlliance and on the board. Perhaps you would like to amend your post to clarify your mistake and apologize to the staff of ScrumAlliance none of whom were around when this trademark was granted.

    Since such time and effort has been put into promoting this perhaps you would put equal time and effort into apology.

    Saddened in Ottawa
    Mark

    • When I found out about the trademark and how it was being applied, I instructed the staff to drop it. Unfortunately, they did not and persisted to apply it. I apologize for not managing the Scrum Alliance staff adequately, but not for my intentions.
      Ken

      • Mark,
        The first application was in 2009. We were informed that the TM is in its final 30 days before it goes from pending and and in the supplemental register to, in early September, being a done deal in the principal register for TM. This is the last time we have to do anything about it.

    • Mark, do you have any proof or evidence that “SCRUM USER GROUP” trademark has actually been registered and owned by Scrum Alliance, possibly a paperwork? Or are you just copy-pasting such claim from Scrum Alliance website without any proof?

  34. Ken – I will contact you over twitter or linkedin. I have some insight on how to handle this that may really help.

  35. Many people on this thread are sharing their sentiments that seem to be based on very personal experiences that have little to do with the issue discussed. There are 180 CSTs and 77 or so CSCs, some of whom may have individually contributed to how some posters (maybe little value in training received, maybe little value in coaching received) on this thread perceive Scrum Alliance as a whole. But to equate this to strategic decisions by SA is not fair.
    Ken
    With all due respect for the monumental work that you have done to this space, I would agree with the comment by Mark Levison: why not talk to Manny and truly understand merits behind doing this? Collaboration is over…something…something…(I read it somewhere…) 🙂
    What if this is just to protect some very specific terms from misuse and dilution? Given that there is so much terminology hijacking out there, I would not be surprised that this IS the reason.
    gene

  36. To Mark Levinsons comments:
    Ken – here are the relevant details: The SCRUM USER GROUP® is a registered trademark, U.S. Registration No. 3,687,796; Registered September 22, 2009. SCRUM ALLIANCE® is a registered trademark, U.S. Registration No. 3,548,753; Registered October 7, 2008.

    It would appear this trademark was applied for and granted while you were still part of the ScrumAlliance and on the board. Perhaps you would like to amend your post to clarify your mistake and apologize to the staff of ScrumAlliance none of whom were around when this trademark was granted.

    Since such time and effort has been put into promoting this perhaps you would put equal time and effort into apology.

    Saddened in Ottawa

    Mark … I was Chairman of the Board of ScrumAlliance and Manager of ScrumHub in late August 2009 when I suffered a near fatal car/bike accident (I was on the bike). I was in intensive care at Brigham and Women’s Hospital for a month,and then rehab. The moment my accident occurred, Jim Cundiff cancelled the assessment and developer program and Tom Mellor took over as “temporary” Chairman of the Board.

    Given the timing and my lack of consciousness during the time, I’m not sure what I should apologize for.

    Ken

  37. Mark Levison—
    “Tobias – you were Managing/Creative Director for a year why didn’t you relinquish the trademark?”
    I was never Managing Director of the Scrum Alliance. I had the nominal title of Creative Director. I was engaged in a part-time consulting role, not as an employee. There were many things I tried to change, many bad practices I recommended we drop. But I had no personal power to change anything—believe me, I tried. I tried very hard to the point of making the board of directors very uncomfortable. Ultimately though, I failed. This ® nonsense was not even on my radar at the time. There were way bigger dysfunctions to focus on.

    • Tobias fair enough, my picture was incomplete.

      Thanks for helping to clarify. Will you be at Agile 2015?

      Cheers
      Mark

  38. Hi all,

    I want to contribute quickly as a CST (scrum alliance variety) and as the founder of 3 user groups and currently ‘lead’ on one (Agile Carolinas). I took Ken’s course originally, and trained a lot of Jeff Sutherland.

    I know nothing about trademarks and care less. I have a couple of friends who are lawyers, and despite that, my basic feeling is ’12 lawyers at the bottom of the ocean is a good start’.

    I think user groups, or virtually all user groups will remain free and open no matter who does what with this TM baloney.

    So, aside from the principle (lawyers should not try to ‘steal’ things), I am very unclear what the real issue is. I mean…it means nothing. at least re user groups. IMO.

    BUT…I do think ‘scrum’ has some real enemies. I think the real enemies are NOT scrum.org vs scrum alliance (although based on years of watching non-profit and other orgs, I am sure both are to some degree (still…nod to Tobias) dysfunctional).

    In my opinion, the problem is with ScrumStudy and people like that, who give no recognition that Sutherland and Schwaber invented Scrum. And define Scrum with notable differences. I AM concerned about them. OTOH, we have to allow freedom of speech, and even some of ‘good guys’ want to define scrum notably differently than each other.

    Finally, I am hopeful that we (scrum alliance people and scrum.org people) talk more, recognize our commonalities and work together more. When some person says something ‘disagreeable’, I hope we can take some time to find out what it is all about, before trying to name ‘the other’ as an enemy.

    My 2 cents. Thanks, Joe

  39. With all the speculation going on, why don’t the appliers for the trademark simply and clearly state:
    1) the reason they are planning to trademark;
    2) whether they are planning to in any way profit from the trademark now or in the future; or
    3) intend to prohibit any use of the term or subset of terms being trademarked.
    Seems to me we keep asking for communication.
    The discussion is here.
    Maybe we can resolve this with a written statement that addresses the now and the future concerns here as well.

  40. Ken, when I raised this with the Scrum Alliance, I got the following reply:
    ———————————————————
    Liz Crider, Jul 20, 09:10:
    Hi Trevor –

    Thanks for your note. There are some discrepancies in that post and what has actually happened with the TM Scrum User Group.

    The TM was acquired in 2009 after being filed in 2008 in an effort to protect users and build value for our global community. The SCRUM USER GROUP® is a registered trademark, U.S. Registration No. 3,687,796; Registered September 22, 2009.

    Since that time, Scrum Alliance has invested more than a million dollars around the globe in user groups and provided tools and support to help them form, grow, and succeed. We believe that Scrum User Groups are created by the community and for the community to encourage discussions that will lead to transforming the world of work. Today, we continue to work hard to support our membership and we’re excited that our community has grown to over 400 user groups across the globe.

    As the Agile Scrum community grows, we are working on launching a new platform that will increase engagement and ease of use, and provide a place for scrum practitioners to network, learn, and connect.

    We have no plans to change, close, commercialize, or alter user groups in any way. We will maintain our support of user groups and hope that the community benefits from our support.

    Regards,
    Liz Crider

    Global Membership and Community Manager

  41. Definitely appeal that and any other “common words/public domain” trademarks that they might also have pending. Better with not your money. There’re enough businesses who do scrum and might feel that they can help. Creating enough buzz can bring these companies’ attention. And if you backed up by businesses, Scrum Alliance will have less willingness to trademark anything else.

  42. Dear Scrum User Group Community:

    Scrum Alliance is excited that our community has grown to more than 400 user groups worldwide, and we continue to work hard to support our membership. Our organization has invested more than a million dollars around the globe in user groups and has provided tools and support to help them form, grow, and succeed.

    We believe that Scrum User Groups are created by the community and for the community. We have no plans to change, close, or alter user groups in any way. They help you stay current on best practices, share experiences, and solve problems. As the Agile Scrum community grows, we are working on launching a new platform that will increase engagement and ease of use and provide a place for Scrum practitioners to network, learn, and connect.

    In 2014 our Board of Directors led the development of an exciting strategic business plan that will launch the organization to new levels. Under this new direction, we feel there is no need to continue our filing for the Scrum User Group trademark. Therefore, we have asked our legal counsel to withdraw the filing. Stay tuned as we continue to create an organization where our community can thrive by transforming the world of work.

    Thank you

    Manny Gonzalez

    • Thank you for resolving this after taking all comments into consideration. In the future I hope everyone remembers to write, reread, proof, correct grammar, and most importantly, remove snipes. Tone is a huge problem in today’s world of “type and send” communication. I use the process of always imagining I am speaking to my grandmother which assures accuracy, brevity, and respectful tone.

    • Manny took this action within a week after I brought this problem to him and the Scrum Alliance. The Scrum Alliance has great potential, potential that can be used to create a better world of work when its capabilities are so led. Let us all join in wishing them success. Let us do what we can to help them achieve their mission. There certainly is room is this world for both the Scrum Alliance and Scrum.org. Our impact will be much greater when we are joined.
      With hope and relief,
      Ken

      • Well said Ken. And well resolved. An hour of my evening spent reading the comments – and I hope that others reach this far and can see Manny’s response – and your reply too! Far better that there is collaboration among the real experts (I don’t claim to be one by the way – but reckon I am closely related to one!) about how to ensure that folk are enabled to use Scrum effectively and successfully than time and energy spent worrying about trademarks. Worry about other, newer training organisations jumping on the Scrum bandwagon – and not about the Scrum Alliance or Scrum.org.

  44. Pingback: Long live @AgileFlorida (RIP Orlando Scrum) | A servant leader's lessons

  47. Hello Ken,

    Interestingly, I found this page while looking for another case of appropriation of Scrum inside a trade mark : “Professional Scrum Master”.

    In a very big company I work for, people from Avanade ans Scrum.org are trying to impose something from far wider than what is Scrum, advocating for tools (essentially from Microsoft) and specific process. I think that among those concepts and tools, and with respect to the “Professional” trade mark, the client is abused and misleaded. People are evaluated whether they get the “Professional” certification or not. Process are imposed and auto-organization is forgotten. An Editor, well known for the quality of its software, sells licences in the name of Scrum.

    What do you think of such a behavior ? Isn’t it what you are fighting against ?

    Thanks a lot for your answer,

    Christophe

  49. Pingback: Codicia, control de marcas en software y los intentos de registro de la marca “Scrum” - Javier Garzás | Javier Garzás

  50. TESS (PTO Trademark search system) shows that this trademark is “DEAD” (Abandoned July 27, 2015).

    Word Mark SCRUM USER GROUP
    Goods and Services (ABANDONED) IC 035. US 100 101 102. G & S: association services, namely, promoting the interests of product developers and manufacturers who employ collaborative product development and project management processes. FIRST USE: 20080327. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 20080327
    Standard Characters Claimed
    Mark Drawing Code (4) STANDARD CHARACTER MARK
    Serial Number 86076745
    Filing Date September 27, 2013
    Current Basis 1A
    Original Filing Basis 1A
    Published for Opposition August 4, 2015
    Owner (APPLICANT) Scrum Alliance, Inc. CORPORATION COLORADO P.O. Box 40097 Indianapolis INDIANA 462400097
    Attorney of Record David M. Perry
    Prior Registrations 3687796
    Type of Mark SERVICE MARK
    Register PRINCIPAL-2(F)
    Live/Dead Indicator DEAD
    Abandonment Date July 27, 2015

    http://tmsearch.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4809:4135i1.3.6

  51. Maybe you should edit the blog post and add the fact that Scrum Alliance abandoned their trademark application in response. That way people do not have to read every response here.

  52. A good example of why I am moving away from doctine. I like the scrum Framework, but I like other Agile Concepts also. Many things are requiredone to accomplish my goals for an organization. Frankly, bypassing terms like Scrum, Kanban, Lean, XP, or anything else that might get trademarked is quite easy. It will just result in less marketing and attention for the Scrum Alliance. Oh! Did I forget to mention, less respect!

  56. Extremely good short article. I simply have to tell you that I love your posts blog. Guess I will just book mark this posts. Your points are well made. I simply must tell you that your blogs are great.

  57. Pingback: 4 cosas, generales y de contexto, que deberías saber sobre Scrum (y 2) - Javier Garzás

  60. Picking the location that you simply desire to operate
    in will proceed quite a distance in helping you identify the type of
    constraints which have been applied.

  62. Pingback: Con licencia para Scrum – Gustavo Veliz

  63. So what’s the final verdict? Any update? I would say that we can use SCRUM freely and that Scrum Alliance has taken the route of trademarking “Certified ScrumMaster® and Certified Scrum Product Owner® courses ” (taken from their websites).

    • Fiercely depending “their marks.” Use them freely. If Scrum Alliance notifies you, offer to meet with them to resolve the issue. Take a newspaper reporter or a recording device with you. Publish the interaction.
      Ken

  64. Thanks for your publication. One other thing is individual American states have their unique laws that will affect property owners, which makes it very hard for the Congress to come up with a whole new set of rules concerning property foreclosure on people. The problem is that every state provides own legal guidelines which may work in an undesirable manner when it comes to foreclosure procedures.

  65. Pingback: Long live @AgileFlorida (RIP Orlando Scrum)

Leave a comment