Logo in legal limbo

‘Alaska Grown' battle divides farm community

February 26, 2006

JOEL DAVIDSON/Frontiersman reporter

MAT-SU - Alaska's small farming community is locked in a heated lawsuit regarding legal control of the popular Alaska Grown logo.

For the past 20 years, the Alaska Farm Bureau's Mat-Su chapter, along with several other agricultural nonprofits, have sold T-shirts, ball caps, sweaters and other paraphernalia emblazoned with &#8220Alaska Grown.” The money they raise goes toward promoting Alaska's agricultural products.

The state, however, claims to be the rightful owner of the logo. Several negotiation sessions between the two parties have failed to resolve the dispute, so last week, the Division of Agriculture filed a lawsuit against the Alaska Farm Bureau's Mat-Su chapter to decide the logo's legal ownership in court, once and for all.

Established in 1985, the logo's creation was a cooperative effort between the state Division of Agriculture and members of the agricultural industry. At that time, hundreds of farmers gathered in Fairbanks to choose between six logo options the state helped design to market agricultural products. The farmers settled on the now-famous Alaska Grown mark.

The Division of Agriculture officially registered the mark with the state in January 1986.

The goal of the Alaska Grown program was to distinguish Alaska vegetables and other agricultural products from out-of-state competitors. As a side benefit, agricultural nonprofits also raised money to support their industry, by selling logo-printed items.

For its part, the Division of Agriculture agreed to certify that all farmers met certain quality-control guidelines before they could use the Alaska Grown logo to promote their products. In addition, the Division also assured that only nonprofit entities affiliated with Alaska's agricultural industry could use the logo to sell promotional items such as clothing.

The arrangement worked fine for nearly two decades as nonprofits, led primarily by the Alaska Farm Bureau's Mat-Su chapter, promoted the trademark through selling thousands of &#8220Alaska Grown” clothing items. The logo is now recognized statewide as a distinguishing mark for Alaska farm products.

Recently, however, the Mat-Su chapter complained the state was failing to uphold its agreement to protect the use of the logo from nonagricultural entities such as T-shirt shops and gift stores, which used bootlegged versions of the mark to turn a profit.

Members of the Mat-Su chapter claim the state has responded slowly to bootleggers, resulting in a poor job of prohibiting nonagricultural entities from siphoning off Alaska Grown clothing sales from rightful beneficiaries.

In January 2005, amid growing frustration, the Mat-Su chapter finally filed for federal trademark ownership of the Alaska Grown logo as it appears on apparel. Eight months later, it also applied for the federal rights to the logo as it appears on all agricultural products.

Division of Agriculture Director Larry DeVilbiss sent a letter to the agricultural community on Friday, explaining his position.

&#8220This was a difficult decision for me because up until recently, the Division had enjoyed a good working relationship with the Mat-Su Chapter in connection with its sale of Alaska Grown promotional clothing,” he stated in the letter.

In a phone interview Friday, DeVilbiss admitted that the Division could have done a better job at policing the logo's use, but ultimately, that did not take away from the fact that the state owns legal rights to the mark.

Mat-Su Chapter Executive Director Karen Olson disagrees.

&#8220Our position is that the logo is the property of the agricultural industry,” she said. &#8220The Division is just a third-party certifier, not the owner of any trademark.”

Olson said the Mat-Su chapter's interest in owning the logo is not born of self interest, but of a desire to protect the logo's usage for Alaska's farmers and ranchers.

&#8220We just want to keep the logo within the agricultural community,” she said. &#8220If you have a trademark, you're supposed to be the ones selling the product. Well, the Division doesn't sell; it's the farmers that are selling. They've totally missed the point.”

DeVilbiss, however, argued that it was unfair for the Mat-Su chapter to be sole owners of the trademark.

&#8220Quite simply, allowing the Mat-Su Chapter to be the exclusive distributor for Alaska Grown promotional clothing would not be fair to other agricultural non-profits and would not be in the best interest of the state-wide program,” he stated in the letter.

Olson said the Mat-Su chapter already presented the idea of establishing a statewide committee of agricultural representatives, who could then regulate the trademark collectively.

&#8220We offered to do that,” she said. &#8220The Division flatly refused.”

Olson said the Mat-Su chapter mailed out postcard sign-ups for the idea and gathered 65 people who wanted to join a statewide nonprofit.

&#8220The Division was infuriated that we had formed a corporation,” she said, &#8220and they would not negotiate with us on that issue.”

On Friday, however, DeVilbiss said he was open to the idea of a nonprofit regulatory body.

&#8220That is something that could be talked about down the road,” he said, while adding that it was still important to first determine who legally owns the logo to begin with.

Olson said the whole ordeal has left her ashamed.

&#8220Something as unimportant as T-shirts is driving this animosity,” she said. &#8220If we have been reduced to caring more about T-shirts than the product, then Alaska agriculture is done for.”

Contact Joel Davidson at

352-2266 or joel.davidson@

frontiersman.com.