Girl Scouts Sue Boy Scouts over 'Uniquely Damaging' Multigender Programming
The federal lawsuit by the century-old organization claims the Boy Scouts have appropriated the trademarks and goodwill generated by the Girl Scouts over decades.
November 06, 2018 at 04:28 PM
5 minute read
Girls rule, boys … well, infringe on trademarks and damage the goodwill of brands.
That's the heart of the federal lawsuit filed by the Girl Scouts of the United States of America against its sibling Boy Scouts of America Tuesday. The two congressionally chartered organizations have long been known for providing gender-based service and empowerment programming.
Yet the comity between the groups has broken down over the Boy Scouts' decision to begin offering enrollment to children of both genders.
According to the complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, the Girl Scouts alleged that their counterpart's decision to simply go by the name “the Scouts,” while trading on the history of the Girl Scouts, not only violates their trademark, but will be “uniquely damaging” to the group's efforts going forward.
“Such misconduct will not only cause confusion among the public, damage the goodwill of GSUSA's GIRL SCOUTS trademarks, and erode its core brand identity, but it will also marginalize the GIRL SCOUTS Movement by causing the public to believe that GSUSA's extraordinarily successful services are not true or official 'Scouting' programs, but niche services with limited utility and appeal,” the complaint contends.
In October 2017, the Boy Scouts announced plans to allow girls to join their ranks for the first time.
“We believe it is critical to evolve how our programs meet the needs of families interested in positive and lifelong experiences for their children,” Michael Surbaugh, BSA's chief scout executive, said in a statement at the time. “We strive to bring what our organization does best—developing character and leadership for young people—to as many families and youth as possible as we help shape the next generation of leaders.”
Since then, according to the complaint, the Girl Scouts' fears about this decision to its trademarks and mission “have been realized.” Families, schools, and communities have been told the two groups have merged, the Girl Scouts claim, or worse, that the Girl Scouts no longer exist. Parents have been mistakenly signing up for new girl programs being offered by the Boy Scouts. Boy Scout groups have used the other program's trademarks in materials, and have even used quotations from the Girl Scouts' founder to promote new Boy Scouts services.
Beyond the material issues for the organization and its 2 million girl members, the complaint argues the move has the potential to harm the very population at the core of the dispute.
“Many millions of girls have participated in and benefited from GSUSA's services, which are founded on research showing that girls learn best in environments led by girls, through programs tailored specifically for girls,” the Girl Scouts contend.
The suit alleges trademark infringement, unfair competition, and dilution on behalf of the Boy Scouts under both federal and New York state law. On top of demanding an injunction to halt any use of confusing or similar language, the complaint calls for the withdrawal of trademark applications for new slogans sought by the Boy Scouts, such as “Scouts BSA.”
New York-based Dorsey & Whitney partner Bruce Ewing represents the Girl Scouts. He did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
In a statement sent by a spokesman, the Girl Scouts said it does not comment on pending litigation, before adding that the “filing and the claims therein speak for themselves.”
The organization continued: “The action Girl Scouts took today are in keeping with standard practice in any field, and we did what any brand, company, corporation, or organization would do to protect its intellectual property, the value of its brand in the marketplace, and to defend its good name.”
A spokeswoman with the Boy Scouts sent a statement on behalf of the organization, which said it is reviewing the filing. On their programs, the organization defended its decision to start accepting girls into the program, saying the call was made “after years of requests from families who wanted the option of the BSA's character-and leadership-development programs for their children—boys and girls.”
“We believe that we owe it to our current and future members to offer families the options they want,” the organization stated. “We applaud every organization that builds character and leadership in children, including the Girl Scouts of the USA, and believe that there is an opportunity for both organizations to serve girls and boys in our communities.”
Related:
State Prohibits Hiring Bias, AG's Office Reminds Scouts
Dilution Under the Trademark Laws
MoFo Helps MoMA Score Trademark Injunction
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllAn ‘Indiana Jones Moment’: Mayer Brown’s John Nadolenco and Kelly Kramer on the 10-Year Legal Saga of the Bahia Emerald
Travis Lenkner Returns to Burford Capital With an Eye on Future Growth Opportunities
Legal Speak's 'Sidebar With Saul' Part V: Strange Days of Trump Trial Culminate in Historic Verdict
1 minute readTrending Stories
- 1'A Death Sentence for TikTok'?: Litigators and Experts Weigh Impact of Potential Ban on Creators and Data Privacy
- 2Bribery Case Against Former Lt. Gov. Brian Benjamin Is Dropped
- 3‘Extremely Disturbing’: AI Firms Face Class Action by ‘Taskers’ Exposed to Traumatic Content
- 4State Appeals Court Revives BraunHagey Lawsuit Alleging $4.2M Unlawful Wire to China
- 5Invoking Trump, AG Bonta Reminds Lawyers of Duties to Noncitizens in Plea Dealing
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250