Major violation of the 'Decommodification' principle?

Bob · Post by **Bob** » Fri Sep 04, 2009 8:11 pm

Vaguely recall a plane skywriting for some product eight or ten years ago. I suppose skywriting is more of an art than towing a recycled banner, but who's to judge?

spectabillis · Post by **spectabillis** » Fri Sep 04, 2009 8:51 pm

not me. but after hearing about the hot topic sign over the thunderdome... methinks a better reproach would be to hang a brawndo banner wherever this drink provider is.

karine · Post by **karine** » Fri Sep 04, 2009 10:39 pm

Yes, but it is a (small) Seattle newspaper...

geospyder · Post by **geospyder** » Mon Sep 07, 2009 6:53 pm

Muffin wrote:Giant Aerial Marijuana Bud Banner to be flown over Man
http://bit.ly/2KmFB

SEATTLE, Sept. 4 /PRNewswire/ -- On the day that the Man burns at the
legendary Nevada Burning Man event this year in the Black Rock Desert,
partiers will see a giant marijuana bud banner flying overhead.

The huge banner, which has already flown over Seattle Hempfest and San
Francisco, features a glistening marijuana flower, along with lettering that
asks the question "Want Big, Sugary Buds?"

The controversial banner is the brainchild of Michael "Big Mike" Straumietis,
co-founder of international hydroponics nutrients manufacturer Advanced
Nutrients.

The little whirybird (not in picture) that was pulling it was really struggling.

fciron · Post by **fciron** » Mon Sep 07, 2009 7:00 pm

As I said earlier. It's not underground anymore,

it just feels that way because of the dust.

rodiponer · Post by **rodiponer** » Wed Sep 09, 2009 10:48 am

I also saw the banner being towed by the helicopter, with everyone around me saying "If only I could read it, then I would know what to NEVER buy."

Kinetik V · Post by **Kinetik V** » Wed Sep 09, 2009 11:24 am

That banner made me wish for a Stinger missile or two....as long as the pilot didn't get hurt seeing that banner go up in flames would have been wonderful. But alas, a precedent has been set. I wonder who will be the next to fly their banner over the event?

(You still gotta give them credit for having the balls to do it.)

Apollonaris Zeus · Post by **Apollonaris Zeus** » Thu Sep 10, 2009 9:36 am

We will send Paul Addis after them!

Minxy · Post by **Minxy** » Fri Sep 11, 2009 3:16 pm

Not to take the direction off of the topic of big sugary buds, but did anyone else get handed some playa schwag with the Black Bear Diner logo on it? :P My boyfriend got a beer cozy that said Burning Man 2009 with the man on one side...and the Black Bear Diner logo on the other. :P

UGH.

We plan on emailing them and telling them we will never patronize their establishment again. Bleh.

Post by **actiongrl** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 9:45 am

Minxy, please do. People being active in telling these companies what's wrong with these ideas means SO much more than me or our attorney or any of our IP volunteers contacting them trying to pleasantly explain our position.

While my own emails or calls of this nature (we have this conversation several times a month, with various vendors and agents seeking to advertise to or financially exploit this culture from the outside) are very much from the heart, I would like to think that think the sincerity of multiple voices from participants is a more effective tool to protect ourselves than any threat of legal response via IP law.

As for the energy/electrolyte drink issue, it has indeed been offered in the Cafe without any branding for the past 9 years. The press release was pushed forward by an employee at the company against advice from our cafe crew, while our usual contact was out dealing with the death of a family member. I feel for them, and am sorry for her loss, but this press release would never, ever have been approved, and is baldly a violation of nine years of purposefully unbranded positive relationship.

Healthy hydration is important; I drink stuff like this out there. But what do you guys think is the appropriate response to what appeared on Business Wire, given these circumstances? (Leave the argument for or against selling beverages in the Cafe out of it for a moment, please - I really would like opinions on how folks think they'd pursue this accidental, but highly visible violation of a very important ethic regarding Burning Man.)

Thoughts?

Simon of the Playa · Post by **Simon of the Playa** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 10:49 am

take the money....then bite the hand.

let corporations and private individuals donate to the BRAF

than let the BRAF make a plaque, or a sign, or press release thanking these companies and people for their support,

then burn the sign.

patronage is not always a bad thing, just ask leonardo and the medicis.

but the decommidification principle and ALL of the 10 principles are there for a reason.

they are at the fundamental core of Burning Man.

it is not a religion, although it could easily be one. it is not a way of life, although it should be.

its a camping trip in the desert. How we set-up, organize, pay for and execute this lovely holiday in the dust is the main issue for almost all of the "issues" that the "mainstream" will present and challenge us with.

i say we stick to our guns....(ygmir, don't say it) and keep our ideals lofty.

Life, as well as Burning Man is a state of mind.

MikeVDS · Post by **MikeVDS** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 11:06 am

I think you are perfectly in your rights to mention a trademarked name in your ad, as long as it's true. I could put out an ad that says I hate the taste of McDonalds, I could say that my phone was tested at McDonalds while I ate, or I could say I donated 300 tons of tang to McDonalds, as long as it's true. What you can't do is sell, "Burningman Goggles", but you could sell "goggles that you wore at Burningman" or "Goggles the same as the ones you use at Burningman". I could be wrong but I think that's the fine line these people are walking.

MikeVDS · Post by **MikeVDS** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 11:07 am

What burningman could do is release a press release saying they will no longer use that product, the product violates some of their principals and Larry hates the taste of their product.

pandasex · Post by **pandasex** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 11:56 am

i just hope this isnt what evolution meant for Burning Man.

MikeVDS · Post by **MikeVDS** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 12:33 pm

If you really don't like it, what you can do is go to google, search "<product> and forums". Then when people mention it, respond with negative information about the product. If you really care about this type of advertising, instead of complaining, give them negative press and encourage others to do so as well. If the community joined in this people might fear trying that.

pandasex · Post by **pandasex** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 12:38 pm

dude!!!!!!!! thats a great idea !!! I will do that and maybe we can post some links to get other ppl to do the same.....

btw the thread about kids biting ppl was more cheeky than serious but point taken

MikeVDS · Post by **MikeVDS** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 12:45 pm

I figured. Unless you're a great writer (which I am not) it's difficult to convey tone and sometimes just as hard to interpret it, so I never assume. Even though I may seem serious about it, I'm not, for one I know kids aren't going to be banned so it's not a "real" issue and even if they did, I think it's fine, it's not my event, and we'd just go do something else we're welcome at. I just like BSing on here and arguing about anything.

So you're going to the 420 pages and saying that stuff killed your pot and the stuff that lived tasted like shit? Ohlala energy drink, or whatever that was, gives you the runs and your Lexus is nothing compared to your BMW?

pandasex · Post by **pandasex** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 12:53 pm

i would totally lie to keep advertisers out of BM......yeah and i will.

They need to stay away

is that bad? that i feel that way?

Token · Post by **Token** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 1:22 pm

So just because something hits the Newswire it becomes an issue?

Let's just wipe out the 8 years of service and go for it.

I'm more conserned with BM becoming a resort destination than the few news flashes, as misplaced as the may be.

Whole villages selling camping spaces and ameneties for hundreds of $ per person, several theme camps offering meal plans, RVs and trailers delivered to the Playa so the patrons can fly in on Advantage Air Solutions flights. The list goes on and on...

Center Camp has sold out a decade ago and is old news. Having 5 or 10 % of the BRC population on resort meal plans is what bothers me the most.

It seems we have grown well beyond the control of the Org.

pandasex · Post by **pandasex** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 1:26 pm

Token wrote:So just because something hits the Newswire it becomes an issue?

Let's just wipe out the 8 years of service and go for it.

I'm more conserned with BM becoming a resort destination than the few news flashes, as misplaced as the may be.

Whole villages selling camping spaces and ameneties for hundreds of $ per person, several theme camps offering meal plans, RVs and trailers delivered to the Playa so the patrons can fly in on Advantage Air Solutions flights. The list goes on and on...

Center Camp has sold out a decade ago and is old news. Having 5 or 10 % of the BRC population on resort meal plans is what bothers me the most.

It seems we have grown well beyond the control of the Org.

your right.....from what i have heard this has been long in the making (im only 2 years BM) so how do we save it? can we save it?

Isotopia · Post by **Isotopia** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 2:24 pm

I'm kinda curious how this whole thing played out once folks at the BM office found out about it and were able to smith together a reply.

Not looking for specifics but am wondering if the perps were set on with a good verbal lashing.

Token · Post by **Token** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 2:47 pm

I don't think there is anything to save. I personally have no vested interest in the protection of the Burning Man brand as was advertised in Money magazine or some such a couple years ago.

BM has been a spectator event for the 9 years I have attended. In my wild assed guesstimology, about 10% of the population builds 90% of the show.

Much as average cost per capita for the event has hovered at ~$220 for the years that have afterburn reports posted, there are indicators in the data that show the event has peaked and is at best slowly stagnating or Hades forbid, declining.

The BM Org. have lately been obsessed over protecting their brand and trademarks way more than they are concerned with any of the principles they coined. The emergence and overwhelming presence of apartment villages is a testament to the trend this lack of leadership allows. Sure, its and experiment, but even experiments allow you to tune the environment of the Petri dish.

I have no illusions on the ineffectiveness of the "community" in affecting any form of change. The Org holds all the cards in this deck. It is up to them to listen and act. All we can do is summon the Waaaaaambulance to no effect.

But that's just my opinion, and I'm ever the pessimist.

T

Post by **actiongrl** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 2:59 pm

Iso, the response was to ask the Cafe for some background, which we did, and learned what I posted above. Have not determined my department's response yet, though the Cafe have already given them a good tongue lashing.

Simon of the Playa · Post by **Simon of the Playa** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 3:21 pm

though the Cafe have already given them a good tongue lashing.

ME NEXT ME NEXT!

oh wait...wrong forum.....i am SO embarrassed.

i thought this was the, oh, nevermind.

ygmir · Post by **ygmir** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 6:20 pm

Simon of the Playa wrote:take the money....then bite the hand.

let corporations and private individuals donate to the BRAF

than let the BRAF make a plaque, or a sign, or press release thanking these companies and people for their support,

then burn the sign.

patronage is not always a bad thing, just ask leonardo and the medicis.

but the decommidification principle and ALL of the 10 principles are there for a reason.

they are at the fundamental core of Burning Man.

it is not a religion, although it could easily be one. it is not a way of life, although it should be.

its a camping trip in the desert. How we set-up, organize, pay for and execute this lovely holiday in the dust is the main issue for almost all of the "issues" that the "mainstream" will present and challenge us with.

i say we stick to our guns....(ygmir, don't say it) and keep our ideals lofty.

Life, as well as Burning Man is a state of mind.

dang......

ygmir · Post by **ygmir** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 6:25 pm

although, if we did hold our sticky guns aloft.......well...........

theCryptofishist · Post by **theCryptofishist** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 7:38 pm

Now that you've settled that will you please go after apple for that ipod ad with the man with his arms raised and that white cord trailing around him.

Post by **mdmf007** » Fri Sep 18, 2009 9:16 pm

Commercialism isnt evil - we all know that.

I am a firm believer that the right products at BM wouldnt hurt a thing, and could probably enhance the burn by making it cheaper for the masses.

Thats just my opinion though. I hear BMORG aggressively defending their trademark, and thats their right. over a million a year is spent by the US Forest Service to defend Smoky the Bears image.

fciron · Post by **fciron** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 9:42 am

Actiongrl, Thanks for the background info.

As I mentioned earlier, I think this sort of thing is going to occur more often as more eyes are turned towards the event. The energy drink kerfluffle is something that BMorg has some input on since you all deal with them directly, but I can see the emergence of all sorts of companies making claims about their products having been used at BM. (I believe this was the case with the cel phone thing.) The event is not being used to advertise to burners, but to non-burners who have heard about the rigors of the Black Rock Desert. As the larger public became aware of BM then it can be used as a product-proving-ground.

If a product is brought to BM and used, unbranded, on the playa and that experience is used in off-playa promotions does the BMOrg have any recourse?

It would appear to be permissible as long as the advertiser made only true claims. Of course, I am not a lawyer.

Isotopia · Post by **Isotopia** » Sat Sep 19, 2009 10:14 am

I am a firm believer that the right products at BM wouldnt hurt a thing, and could probably enhance the burn by making it cheaper for the masses.