|Re: CoHousing TM||<– Date –> <– Thread –>|
|From: Judy (BAXTER%EPIVAXvx.cis.umn.edu)|
|Date: Mon, 22 Mar 93 17:14 CST|
in reply to: findley [at] math.berkeley.edu [The CoHousing company is here in Berkeley; I have a flyer from them that indicates they have a trademark on the word "CoHousing." Does anyone know anything about this? What are the implications of the trademark?] I went to a workshop they gave in Massachusetts, in sept of 1990 (gasp!). It was very good, and rather overwhelming. That question was asked - basically, they said that the reason for the trademark is to give the term some legal meaning, so that a developer can't advertise a cohousing development without really doing the process. So , one could sue someone , I guess. It's not that they are protecting the term to make money on it. Here in Minneapolis, Cohousing is now written into the zoning code (don't ask me the details, I can't remember them offhand) to make it clear that it fits into, I think, residential category. I don't know about the rest of this quiet net, but I am stressed out - I just moved into Monterey CoHousing Community - am living with a construction site in half of my unit, (we are turning a former retirement home into 8 apt-type units) half my stuff is still at my house which i'm selling, and we just selected an architect for the 10-15 townhouses we plan to build on the surrounding land. Cohousing is wonderful, AND it is really true what "THE BOOK" says about needing at least 15 households. We have 6 active in the building at the moment, and we are stretched ve-e-e-ery. thin. We're actively recruiting, Twin Cities-ers, so if you know someone... We're 5 blocks outside the Minneapolis boundary, and have a great start. Judy Baxter
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.