Canadian Lawyer

REGIONAL WRAP-UP WeatHering a soCial media s*** storm Continued from page 9 against public participation) provisions of the Quebec Code of Civil Procedure, argued for by Kudzman's lawyer, that enable a judge to order damages be paid for abuse of procedure and prejudice suf- fered by improper action. The Court of Appeal overturned the $125,000 award to Kudzman, ruling that there was no procedural impropriety by Lassonde, which did not challenge Zerbisias' dis- missal of its trademark infringement claim, nor was there any proof of abuse given that the juice company had acted in good faith in conformity with prevail- ing practices in defending and enforcing trademarks. Despite this, "ultimately Lassonde's success in the courtroom was irrelevant and it was public opinion as expressed in the social media that mattered, Larry Munn, a trademark and licens- ing litigator with Vancouver-based Clark Wilson LLP on the firm's Canadian Trademark Blog. "Success in the court- room may in some instances have a nega- tive impact on goodwill. Trademark own- ers should be taking social media into account when assessing their litigation options. launched a Twitter account and a new blog by its president to further encourage social media interaction with consumers and reinforce the message it is paying atten- tion. It also states that since April 2004 it has reached amiable agreements with nine out of 10 unnamed companies that were using the word oasis for their business and that the only company it was unable to reach an agreement with — despite several attempts — was Olivia' Meanwhile, " Lassonde has since to seek "due process" before the Quebec Court of Appeal. In the interest of "equity, and given the social media reaction to Kudzman' dent Jean Gattuso, in addition to offering to fully pay her legal costs he personally offered "any guidance she would require to fully grow her business." — KATHRYN LEGER s story, reports Lassonde presi- kathryn.leger@videotron.ca 10 JUNE 2012 www. CANADIAN Lawyermag.com s Oasis, obliging it " " observes DESPITE HOOPLA, LSUC MAINTAINS NAME embers of the Law Society of Upper Canada have voted to keep the regulator's 215-year-old name following what one proponent of changing it says was a triumph of tradition over merits. "I didn't expect the motion to go forward," says Omar Ha-Redeye, who supported fed- M eral government lawyer Thomas Vincent's proposal to change the name to the Ontario Law Society. "But I do think it was important to have that discussion. From my impression of the debate, the vote wasn't actually based on merits but rather on tradition, which is disappointing given lawyers are trained to debate issues on their merits." In a lively debate mixed with passionate comments and bursts of laughter, a packed house of people gathered at Osgoode Hall in early May to debate Vincent's motion. The LSUC stated it would cost about $1.5 million to rejig the name. "I was glad to see people took the time to consider the law society's traditions and felt the need to support them," says LSUC spokesman Roy Thomas. "Look- ing at the debate that took place, I think there was a consensus among most members that there wasn't any compelling reason to change the law society's name, that the cost would be too great, and that there were more important priorities. So it was nice to see that support." Vincent had argued the law society's current name created confusion among the public and should change to reflect Canada's current geography. His quest to change the law society's moniker became known a few weeks before the meeting and stirred up some pretty strong feelings among the profession. An unusually large number of online comments — both pro and con — accompanied the story when it was reported by Law Times. "Hallelujah!!!! Finally finally sanity may prevail, in, "Is this guy crazy? The name is part of our tradition and our culture. It is totally unique. New and modern names don't make it more relevant or better, it just makes it bland and insignificant. " wrote one commentator named Joyce. James Anderson chimed up by BP Stelmach: "Change it for no other reason than to stop referring to it as el suck." In the end, most lawyers likely agreed with Neal Kearney's comment, "There is no compelling or urgent reason to incur the cost of this name change. Alan Heisey, a lawyer who opposed the motion, told Law Times such debate " And other popular sentiment brought " was a good thing. "I thought the debate was very healthy and it was encouraging to see so many people who knew about the law society's history. I learned quite a bit and I think those who were dissatisfied with the name perhaps didn't know the law society had such a history. While there was no formal vote at the meeting, a vote by hand indicated only three people, including Vincent, Ha-Redeye, and former Ontario Bar Associa- tion president Lee Akazaki, supported the motion. — GAIL J. COHEN & KENDYL SEBESTA gail.cohen@thomsonreuters.com kendyl.sebesta@thomsonreuters.com

• Cover