Court Said It Would Have "Changed The Status Quo" Prior To Trial

On November 23, 2009, a Motion for Preliminary Injunction (PI) filed against the National Association of Flight Instructors (NAFI) by the Hills and Rich Stowell was heard in Los Angeles.  The injunction was not granted.

Following is a statement sent to ANN by the Hills:

"As the Court stated in its order, "[a] preliminary injunction is not a preliminary adjudication on the merits: it is an equitable device for preserving the status quo...."  In the opinion of the court, since our program has been offered through NAFI for twelve years, the issuance of a PI would have changed the status quo prior trial, rather than preserved it.  However, denial of the PI does not suggest that NAFI owns or otherwise has rights to the intellectual property associated with our Master Instructor Program (the Program).  Nor does the ruling have any bearing whatsoever on the outcome of the lawsuit for copyright infringement we filed against NAFI in September.  Rather, a jury will decide the outcome of the case when it goes to trial. 

We understood from the outset that a preliminary injunction is an extraordinary remedy that is difficult to obtain.  While obtaining a preliminary injunction presented a daunting challenge, we felt the benefits warranted the attendant risks of proceeding.  The goal of the injunction was to quickly stop NAFI's illicit use of intellectual property associated with our Program rather than waiting for the conclusion of potentially (if not likely) protracted litigation.

Although we are disappointed with the outcome of the motion, the yearlong process of defending our Program and the hard-earned designations of hundreds of supportive Master Instructors have advanced our cause.  For example:

• The NAFI board has been forced to respond to our legitimate concerns.
• NAFI has been forced to focus on the way it treats work product created by its members.  Members contributing work product to NAFI deserve clarity about the way their intellectual property will be treated.  NAFI must realize that written agreements should be obtained so that everyone is clear about the use and ownership of copyrights.
• NAFI's website no longer inflates the number of Master Instructors or misrepresents other credentials of its members.
• The US Copyright Office granted copyright registration for our Program.

Applicants have reacted to the stark differences in customer service between NAFI and Master Instructors LLC over the last few months as well:

• NAFI's own data shows that 62 percent of Master applications submitted to NAFI were subsequently withdrawn and/or resubmitted to Master Instructors LLC for accreditation.  In contrast, no application sent to Master Instructors LLC during the same period was withdrawn from us or resubmitted to NAFI.
• In documented cases, NAFI has taken months to process otherwise routine applications, whereas Master Instructors LLC continues to complete routine reviews in about two weeks.
• In other documented cases, NAFI has ignored repeated legitimate requests from applicants to withdraw their portfolios and have their application fees refunded.  And in at least one case, NAFI inexplicably denied a designation to a superbly qualified and highly skilled applicant.
• Master Instructors LLC now offers five distinct Master designations, whereas NAFI not only has reduced its available designations, but it has also greatly narrowed their scope.

Moreover, NAFI did not initiate the copyright infringement lawsuit -- we sued NAFI.  It is telling that NAFI fails to preemptively protect "its program" and the interests of its members.  In addition, as evidenced by its eleventh-hour filing of an application to delay the PI hearing, many on the NAFI board appear to recognize the tenuousness of their legal status.  No matter how NAFI spins it, it is clear that NAFI dodged a bullet.  Yet the board remains defiant; so much so that NAFI has rejected all efforts by us to engage NAFI in mediation.  EAA President Tom Poberezny characterized similar behavior by this board as "dysfunctional" when he attempted to mediate the situation earlier this year.

In any event, we have made our point.  We've been heard loud and clear, and we've brought public awareness to the behavior of the NAFI board.  We continue to focus our efforts on our decade-and-a-half long commitment to providing aviation educators with the professional recognition they deserve.  National recognition made available through our Master Instructor Continuing Education Program - aviation education's premier accreditation program."

FMI: www.MasterInstructors.org