-
Matt Fridell posted an update in the group The Sustainable Sites Initiative 11 years ago
Since the petition from ASLA and press release from UT are contradictory, please help me understand what’s going on with the following questions:
- UT States: “UT has never had a formal partnership or any legal agreement with ASLA, despite our efforts over the past two years to develop one.” ASLA states : ” The SITES trademarks were developed through a partnership between ASLA, the U.S. Botanic Garden and UT.” Does this mean that there was never even a formal memo of understanding between these agencies the entire time they developed and worked on SITES?
- What is the legal designation of SITES, or SSI? Is it its own nonprofit or what?
- If it is its own entity why would UT act instead of SSI?
- If it is not its own entity, WTF ASLA? Why would you have participated in this without getting the foundation set up properly?
- Why did development on SSI continue past page one if they didn’t have the partnership resolved? Don’t they know that these things always unravel at the end?
- If SITES is an independent organization, what the heck is UT doing? They are way out of line obtaining TMs on their behalf!
- Litigation is good if it teaches ASLA to get their act together before jumping into something, even something as cool as SITES!
SITES is a great program, don’t get me wrong. But this isn’t nonsense – this is basic business organization! Help me understand?