I’ve posted twice about how state and federal governments and donors are corporatizing nonprofits by treating them like for-profit companies: The Corporatization of U.S. Nonprofits and Corporatization Redux. The Wall Street Journal reports nonprofits are behaving like corporations and treating each other the same, not collegially as in the past.

It’s all about marks: trademarks, copyrights and other intellectual property. I’m amused that The Journal’s coverage is by Clifford Marks.

What’s especially interesting to me is that friendly attempts at compromise, which in years past probably would have been accepted as a figurative handshake and let’s-be-friends deal, are rebuffed. Those enforcing their marks believe money is at stake. Does it financially hurt the Lance Armstrong Foundation if other charities use “Strong” in their branding?

I’m interested in other examples of nonprofits tussling with each other, so if you’ve got one, please post it. Thanks.