The Big Canoe Property Owners Association (BCPOA) is once again under fire—this time for filing a controversial federal trademark application for “BIG CANOE BROKERAGE,” a mark long used by a private real estate firm wholly unaffiliated with the Association. The move, part of what now appears to be part of the secret agreement between the POA and broker Mike Rhodes, is prompting alarm over potential misuse of member funds, misrepresentation to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), and the growing risk of renewed litigation.
A Trademark the POA Doesn’t Own—And Doesn’t Use
BCPOA’s trademark application (Serial No. 99196165), filed on May 21, 2025, claims that the Association has used the name “BIG CANOE BROKERAGE” in real estate services since 2017. However, public records show that the name has always been used by Big Canoe Brokerage, LLC, a private company owned by Rhodes and operating under bigcanoe.com. BCPOA is not, and has never been, a licensed real estate brokerage.
Yet in its filing, BCPOA declared under penalty of perjury that it—not Rhodes—is the rightful owner of the mark. As evidence, it submitted screenshots from Rhodes’ website. Legal observers warn that this could constitute a material misrepresentation to the USPTO and threaten the validity of the application.
Hidden Deals, Ballooning Costs
At the July 31, 2025 Board Meeting, the community learned for the first time that the original “BIG CANOE” trademark deal—finalized in 2025—has already cost property owners $148,000 in legal fees beyond the previously reported $400,000 purchase price. Now, an additional $30,000 and counting is being spent on the “BIG CANOE BROKERAGE” filing.
The deal itself was never made public. However, Board statements suggest that BCPOA agreed, as part of the original trademark purchase, to file for the brokerage mark on Rhodes’ behalf—and potentially assign it to him.
“We’re working closely with the attorney on filing all the trademarks… including all the real estate marks that we’re required to file under the terms of the sale agreement and the license agreement,” the Board stated during the meeting.
To date, neither agreement has been released to property owners, nor has there been a community vote authorizing such actions.
Risk to the Community—and the Original Deal
If the “BIG CANOE BROKERAGE” trademark is invalidated due to false ownership claims or lack of use by BCPOA, the consequences could be severe. Because the mark appears tied to the original trademark settlement with Rhodes, a failed filing could jeopardize the entire deal, potentially reopening legal threats or triggering new demands.
“We may be on the brink of a litigatory trainwreck,” said one concerned property owner. “We’re pouring legal fees into trademarks we don’t even use—and may not legally own.”
Formal notices of concern have now been issued to both the BCPOA Board and their trademark attorneys regarding the legality, transparency, and propriety of the application:
- Notice to BCPOA Board: [Link To PDF Copy]
- Notice to BCPOA Trademark Attorneys: [Link To PDF Copy]
Nonprofit Boundaries—Potentially Crossed
Under IRS regulations and Georgia nonprofit law, BCPOA is required to act in the best interest of its members and to operate within its nonprofit purpose—namely, managing community property and services. Spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on commercial trademarks unrelated to its core functions—especially ones that may ultimately benefit a private business—risks violating those obligations.
If determined to be a private benefit transaction or a misuse of nonprofit funds, these actions could put the POA’s tax-exempt status at risk and expose the Board to legal or regulatory challenge.
A Crisis of Competence?
Perhaps the most troubling aspect is the growing perception of strategic mismanagement. Despite spending over half a million dollars and entering into a complex, potentially high-stakes trademark agreement, the POA has offered no clear explanation, no operational justification, and no community consultation.
With no real estate license, no commercial brokerage activity, and no visible plan, the “BIG CANOE BROKERAGE” trademark pursuit appears to many as unnecessary, unjustified, and legally reckless.
As details emerge and financial exposure grows, property owners are beginning to demand accountability—and wondering how much more of their money will be spent on a trademark saga that should never have begun.
DISCLAIMER: Nothing contained in this article, nor in any associated documents linked to this article, should be considered legal advice.
Peace,
– david / publisher / property owner
Focus on Big Canoe, GA
themtnsvoice@aol.com
* publications of The Mountains Voice
Be the first to comment