It appears from TM Committee report that what should be applied for is a Collective Service Mark, not just a Service Mark. What is not clear is whether or not there was any discussion or information obtained as to whether and why the application should be The USGenWeb Project, USGenWeb Project or USGenWeb. Certainly any facts obtained in such a discussion have not been presented in the report. Nor is there any indication in either the report or Motion 00-32 prescisely how the NC should apply for the mark. Although I doubt that was the intent, directing "the NC to apply for the Service Mark" could be construed as a direction for Tim Stowell to personally own the mark. For the above reasons, and as much as I would like to see this resolved and a mark applied for, my negative vote on Motion 00-32 follows this posting. Holly Timm