(BBC)  As a result of The Giving Pledge, a charitable effort propelled by Warren Buffett and Bill and Melinda Gates, 38 American billionaires have pledged the majority of their wealth for charity.  403 billionaires currently reside in America, according to Forbes.  Mr. Buffett is pleased with the result of the call the pledge, saying in a statement, “We’ve really just started but already we’ve had a terrific response.”

(The Wall Street Journal)  For the Susan G. Komen For the Cure, imitation is hardly the sincerest form of flattery.  Beginning in 1982, Komen is the global leader in the breast cancer movement and has invested almost $1.5 billion. As such, the clause “for the cure” has been cropping up in other names of unaffiliated nonprofits, which is no surprise given Komen’s success.  However, Komen isn’t pleased to start a trend.  Fundraisers such as Kites for the Cure, Bark for a Cure, and Juggling for a Cure are facing legal battles from Komen due to imitation.

For instance, Kites for the Cure, a lung-cancer fundraising event, was told it must change “for the cure” to “for a cause” or some other name.  Moreover, Kites was told to stay away from pink, Komen’s choice color.  Mary Ann Tighe, who ran the lung-cancer fundraiser and subsequently became caught up in the dispute, thinks Komen went over the line.  “It is startling to us that Komen thinks they own pink.  We cannot allow ourselves to be bullied to no purpose.”  A central argument behind large charities’ reactions to other nonprofits’ similar names is that donors will make out checks to the ‘wrong’ charity; where a check might be intended for Komen, it will instead go to Kites for the Cure.  Andrew Price, a trademark attorney at Venable LLP in Washington, commented that nonprofits simply aren’t playing nice anymore:  “The days are probably over when nonprofits just said, ‘We’ll just get along with anybody who’s a nonprofit because we’re all trying to do good here.'”