July 19, 2012

Anti-Obama Group Caught Using US Military Logos Without Authorization

“Special Operations for America” must stop politicizing military insignia, US officials tell MoJo, or face possible legal action.

Risky business: The military wants its trademarked symbols off this anti-Obama group's logo.Screenshot: <a href="http://soforamerica.org/">soforamerica.org/</a>

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


When you set up a Swift Boat-style front group to accuse President Obama of stealing credit for the military’s valor, maybe it’s not the best idea to steal the military’s official logos in the process. “Special Operations for America,” a new super-PAC* endorsing Mitt Romney for president and ridiculing Obama over the Osama bin Laden raid, appears to have done precisely that. By using part or all of the insignia of the Marines, Air Force, Navy, Army, and the US Special Operations Command on its website, Facebook, and Twitter pages, the super-PAC has run afoul of military regulations, according to representatives of the US Marine Corps and Air Force who spoke to Mother Jones.

According to the Department of Defense, each service branch’s symbols are trademarked, and their commercial and political use is tracked closely by military officials to prevent any appearance of the military’s endorsing a partisan or for-profit cause. The officials said they will be contacting the group and asking them to stop using the insignia or face potential legal action.SOFA's logo using official US military insignia. Screenshot: soforamerica.org/SOFA’s logo using official US military insignia. Screenshot: soforamerica.org/

“They don’t have permission to use the Marine Corps eagle, globe, and anchor in promotion of their service,” said Jessica O’Haver, director of the Marine Corps’ trademark licensing program, after inspecting the super-PAC’s website and checking her database. “We can’t appear to endorse them…We don’t currently license nonprofits and charities, especially if they’re promoting a political cause.” O’Haver added that since the super-PAC’s website includes marks from the other services, she’ll be contacting the DOD’s Trademark Office so that it can notify the PAC about its unauthorized use of the material.

“We’ll be doing the same thing,” Staff Sgt. Jarrod Chavana, a representative of the Air Force’s Trademark and Licensing Program, said regarding the group. “It’s against military regulations for people to use [the Air Force logo] for political purposes.”

Officially launched this week, the anti-Obama super-PAC is led by Ryan Zinke, a retired Navy SEAL and conservative state senator from Montana. “It is time to take back America,” the group’s site exhorts would-be donors. “Your support of Special Operations for America (“SOFA”) is vital to the success of our mission: Advocating for the election of Mitt Romney and like-minded candidates…who believe in permanent and enduring American Exceptionalism.”

Part of that mission is firing away at President Obama for allegedly spiking the bin Laden football. “Navy SEAL’s, Special Operations Personnel and Veteran’s across America have been outraged since Barack Obama conveniently took credit for killing Osama Bin Laden for political gain,” writes Zinke. The headline on the press release announcing the group on Wednesday trumpeted Zinke as “Former Commander at SEAL TEAM SIX.” That seems a bit misleading: The unit, now known as DEVGRU, hasn’t officially been called SEAL Team Six since 1987, and Zinke once led subordinate units, not the entire SEAL Team.

The group’s tactics are nothing new: They’ve partnered with the soft-money group Veterans for a Strong America and its leader, South Dakota political operative Joel Arends, who deployed a web ad back in May that blasted Obama for taking “so much credit for killing Bin Laden.” But “Special Operations for America” has now gone a step farther by wrapping itself in the US military’s official symbols.

Mother Jones emailed SOFA for comment, but the group didn’t respond by publication time. What will happen once they are notified that they can’t use the military logos? Such organizations tend to respond in one of two ways, according to O’Haver. Most take the trademarked material down and offer apologies. “Sometimes, though, we get a cheeky letter back,” she says. “I forward them to our legal department.”

Correction: The story originally identified the group as a PAC rather than a super-PAC.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate