Again, given how unscientific the survey was, I think we can take little more from it than a likelihood that a solid plurality favor a name change, and that there are still a few that don’t. As my practice is primarily Lanham Act, I favor a name change, but some of the open responses to the survey we received made me more certain than ever that we need one. Three of those that opposed did so based on a belief that we should favor patent law over other forms of intellectual property, and that our name reflects patent law’s primacy. And there it is—the misunderstanding about our organization’s inclusive approach that is created, permitted, and even fostered by the disconnect between our moniker and our mission. I believe it is time we put an end to that disconnect, and after much deliberation by the Open Naming Committee and the Board, proudly support doing so by changing our great organization’s name to the Boston Intellectual Property Law Association. I hope you’ll join me.