Uncle Sam blunders again
Forum rules
Welcome to the Leverguns.Com General Discussions Forum. This is a high-class place so act respectable. We discuss most anything here other than politics... politely.
Please post political post in the new Politics forum.
Welcome to the Leverguns.Com General Discussions Forum. This is a high-class place so act respectable. We discuss most anything here other than politics... politely.
Please post political post in the new Politics forum.
Uncle Sam blunders again
Feds failed to legally protect Yosemite Park's name; corporation now owns the name and suing US for $M's.
Park service remiss; another gov't agency gave it away to a business.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/mor ... src=nl_mix
Park service remiss; another gov't agency gave it away to a business.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/mor ... src=nl_mix
- Griff
- Posting leader...
- Posts: 20850
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2007 4:56 pm
- Location: OH MY GAWD they installed a STOP light!!!
Re: Uncle Sam blunders again
What that company is doing is despicable.2571 wrote:Feds failed to legally protect Yosemite Park's name; corporation now owns the name and suing US for $M's.
Park service remiss; another gov't agency gave it away to a business.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/mor ... src=nl_mix
Griff,
SASS/CMSA #93
NRA Patron
GUSA #93
There is a fine line between hobby & obsession!
AND... I'm over it!!
No I ain't ready, but let's do it anyway!
SASS/CMSA #93
NRA Patron
GUSA #93
There is a fine line between hobby & obsession!
AND... I'm over it!!
No I ain't ready, but let's do it anyway!
Re: Uncle Sam blunders again
Why did gov't approve their trademark? Seems pretty foreseeable this was gonna happen.Griff wrote:What that company is doing is despicable.2571 wrote:Feds failed to legally protect Yosemite Park's name; corporation now owns the name and suing US for $M's.
Park service remiss; another gov't agency gave it away to a business.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/mor ... src=nl_mix
-
- Advanced Levergunner
- Posts: 6972
- Joined: Tue Apr 03, 2007 8:52 pm
- Location: Ridgefield WA. USA
Re: Uncle Sam blunders again
It seems to me that that suit will be thrown out in court. It depends on the date each were first used.
There is,no boubt lots of old evidence that the park was using the name before that company filed for a trademark.
Maybe I should trademark the name "gun" then nobody could produce any guns without paying me a royalty, yes/no?
What kind of lawyer would even take the case?
There is,no boubt lots of old evidence that the park was using the name before that company filed for a trademark.
Maybe I should trademark the name "gun" then nobody could produce any guns without paying me a royalty, yes/no?
What kind of lawyer would even take the case?
Re: Uncle Sam blunders again
Typical low life greedy kind.Chuck 100 yd wrote:It seems to me that that suit will be thrown out in court. It depends on the date each were first used.
There is,no boubt lots of old evidence that the park was using the name before that company filed for a trademark.
Maybe I should trademark the name "gun" then nobody could produce any guns without paying me a royalty, yes/no?
What kind of lawyer would even take the case?
Jeepnik AKA "Old Eyes"
"Go low, go slow and preferably in the dark" The old Sarge (he was maybe 24.
"Freedom is never more that a generation from extinction" Ronald Reagan
"Every man should have at least one good rifle and know how to use it" Dad
"Go low, go slow and preferably in the dark" The old Sarge (he was maybe 24.
"Freedom is never more that a generation from extinction" Ronald Reagan
"Every man should have at least one good rifle and know how to use it" Dad
Re: Uncle Sam blunders again
Probably a Democrat.
Re: Uncle Sam blunders again
Feds failed to legally protect Yosemite Park's name; corporation now owns the name and suing US for $M's."
What can you expect from a country that gave away the Panama Canal?
What can you expect from a country that gave away the Panama Canal?
Re: Uncle Sam blunders again
"What kind of lawyer would even take the case?"
How can they lose? Government itself granted / issued the trademark. What else would the corporation have to prove?
How can they lose? Government itself granted / issued the trademark. What else would the corporation have to prove?
Re: Uncle Sam blunders again
I'll tell you what to expect - give back Guantanamo to that old fanny burp Raul Castro.Hawkeye2 wrote:Feds failed to legally protect Yosemite Park's name; corporation now owns the name and suing US for $M's."
What can you expect from a country that gave away the Panama Canal?
Re: Uncle Sam blunders again
The company exists to make money; their contract gave them rights to intangibles. What did the Park Service expect?
This is not a case of a rapacious company. It's a case of clueless bureaucrats asleep at the wheel. It wasn't a theft, but a giveaway. If you're gonna be mad, be mad at them.
This is not a case of a rapacious company. It's a case of clueless bureaucrats asleep at the wheel. It wasn't a theft, but a giveaway. If you're gonna be mad, be mad at them.
Re: Uncle Sam blunders again
It was probably a company owned by George Soros! He owns most of the firearms industry, which is why stuff is so expensive and hard to come by these days.
- Griff
- Posting leader...
- Posts: 20850
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2007 4:56 pm
- Location: OH MY GAWD they installed a STOP light!!!
Re: Uncle Sam blunders again
Pisgah wrote:The company exists to make money; their contract gave them rights to intangibles. What did the Park Service expect?
This is not a case of a rapacious company. It's a case of clueless bureaucrats asleep at the wheel. It wasn't a theft, but a giveaway. If you're gonna be mad, be mad at them.
Names that have been in common usage for decades before Delaware North came into the contracts cannot be trademarked.On one side, there’s the U.S government, which claims that Delaware North surreptitiously accumulated those iconic trademarks during the two decades it managed Yosemite’s concessions and is now demanding that the park pay to get them all back. On the other side, Delaware North says that it is only asking that the new concessionaire pay full value for the intellectual property it’s getting along with the park’s horse stables and hotels, just as Delaware North once had to do.
Yes, they were given by either clueless, (as you say), or corrupt bureaucrats, I believe any honest Judge will find that "Common Usage" terms are not available for trademarks. Unlike "Coke" or "Pepsi" which were name by their founders, any such use in advertising by someone else demands a royalty paid to their owner.
Intellectual property my butt! Delaware North's claim to the name "Yosemite National Park" is a complete farce. Actually, IMO, it flies in the face of such a term, intellectual property. The fact that they, themselves had to pay for such when they acquired said concessions is immaterial. And just as corrupt... if not legally, then certainly morally. The names of those places belong to "US", the citizens of of this country. If a State park, then to the citizens of that state.
But, I ain't a lawyer... I don't like to swim that deep...
Griff,
SASS/CMSA #93
NRA Patron
GUSA #93
There is a fine line between hobby & obsession!
AND... I'm over it!!
No I ain't ready, but let's do it anyway!
SASS/CMSA #93
NRA Patron
GUSA #93
There is a fine line between hobby & obsession!
AND... I'm over it!!
No I ain't ready, but let's do it anyway!
Re: Uncle Sam blunders again
IIRC, the name "Yosemite National Park" still applies to the park itself, but the concessions have a corporate name that includes Yosemite, and that's what is being argued???
The Rotten Fruit Always Hits The Ground First
Proud Life Member Of:
NRA
Second Amendment Foundation
Citizens Committee For The Right To Keep And Bear Arms
DAV
Proud Life Member Of:
NRA
Second Amendment Foundation
Citizens Committee For The Right To Keep And Bear Arms
DAV
-
- Advanced Levergunner
- Posts: 4559
- Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 1:52 pm
Re: Uncle Sam blunders again
Perzactly. SHAME on the company - they deserve a total blacklisting from everyone who has any interest at all in this nation's various landmarks and historic sites.Griff wrote:What that company is doing is despicable.2571 wrote:Feds failed to legally protect Yosemite Park's name; corporation now owns the name and suing US for $M's.
Park service remiss; another gov't agency gave it away to a business.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/mor ... src=nl_mix
Come on, folks, we already know that the Government is failing miserably in almost every area that they administer or touch, but we might have some power to put the unpatriotic and greedy company out of business.
I will be sending this link back to them, with extreme prejudice.
-
- Advanced Levergunner
- Posts: 4559
- Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 1:52 pm
Re: Uncle Sam blunders again
Sent a post directly to the company at their website. I could not give them an exact link to this topic because their website security engine or firewall blocked the message with the url inside of it. So I sent them this:
Their website - http://www.delawarenorth.com/
At the "Contact" link, I sent my name, address, and so on with this message:
* * * *
Yosemite National Park - Your stance on ownership of the name of Yosemite National Park will likely result in a serious blacklisting of your company's products.
There is a website discussion at www levergunscommunity dot com with the topic: Re: Uncle Sam blunders again.
I am "JohndeFresno" and live near the National Park in question.
* * * *
I hope that they read this thread. I will indeed talk about this to family, friends, and associates. Even my Liberal acquaintances will likely be upset about this.
Their website - http://www.delawarenorth.com/
At the "Contact" link, I sent my name, address, and so on with this message:
* * * *
Yosemite National Park - Your stance on ownership of the name of Yosemite National Park will likely result in a serious blacklisting of your company's products.
There is a website discussion at www levergunscommunity dot com with the topic: Re: Uncle Sam blunders again.
I am "JohndeFresno" and live near the National Park in question.
* * * *
I hope that they read this thread. I will indeed talk about this to family, friends, and associates. Even my Liberal acquaintances will likely be upset about this.
- Griff
- Posting leader...
- Posts: 20850
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2007 4:56 pm
- Location: OH MY GAWD they installed a STOP light!!!
Re: Uncle Sam blunders again
Actually, it's things like "Half Dome" and other landmarks so they alone can market tourist items with those names on them. IOW, some other t-shirt company can't sell t-shirts with the picture and name of the landmark on them. Frankly, I think any such royalties should go to the Park, off-setting the cost to run the place.BlaineG wrote:IIRC, the name "Yosemite National Park" still applies to the park itself, but the concessions have a corporate name that includes Yosemite, and that's what is being argued???
They might actually become the most incensed over the issue.JohndeFresno wrote:...Even my Liberal acquaintances will likely be upset about this.
Griff,
SASS/CMSA #93
NRA Patron
GUSA #93
There is a fine line between hobby & obsession!
AND... I'm over it!!
No I ain't ready, but let's do it anyway!
SASS/CMSA #93
NRA Patron
GUSA #93
There is a fine line between hobby & obsession!
AND... I'm over it!!
No I ain't ready, but let's do it anyway!
Re: Uncle Sam blunders again
"Vote for Pedro"
Are you refering to Pedro the burro from "Boy's Life" magazine? If so, he has my vote
Are you refering to Pedro the burro from "Boy's Life" magazine? If so, he has my vote
Re: Uncle Sam blunders again
I know, right? They always burn incense when upset...Griff wrote:Actually, it's things like "Half Dome" and other landmarks so they alone can market tourist items with those names on them. IOW, some other t-shirt company can't sell t-shirts with the picture and name of the landmark on them. Frankly, I think any such royalties should go to the Park, off-setting the cost to run the place.BlaineG wrote:IIRC, the name "Yosemite National Park" still applies to the park itself, but the concessions have a corporate name that includes Yosemite, and that's what is being argued???They might actually become the most incensed over the issue.JohndeFresno wrote:...Even my Liberal acquaintances will likely be upset about this.
The Rotten Fruit Always Hits The Ground First
Proud Life Member Of:
NRA
Second Amendment Foundation
Citizens Committee For The Right To Keep And Bear Arms
DAV
Proud Life Member Of:
NRA
Second Amendment Foundation
Citizens Committee For The Right To Keep And Bear Arms
DAV
Re: Uncle Sam blunders again
I know who will be the most incensed.....
"Say yer prayers, varmint!!!!!"
"Say yer prayers, varmint!!!!!"
- Griff
- Posting leader...
- Posts: 20850
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2007 4:56 pm
- Location: OH MY GAWD they installed a STOP light!!!
Re: Uncle Sam blunders again
Adj. 1. incensed - angered at something unjust or wrongincensed - angered at something unjust or wrong; "an indignant denial"; "incensed at the judges' unfairness"; "a look of outraged disbelief"; "umbrageous at the loss of their territory"BlaineG wrote:Not exactly...Griff wrote:Actually, it's things like "Half Dome" and other landmarks so they alone can market tourist items with those names on them. IOW, some other t-shirt company can't sell t-shirts with the picture and name of the landmark on them. Frankly, I think any such royalties should go to the Park, off-setting the cost to run the place.BlaineG wrote:IIRC, the name "Yosemite National Park" still applies to the park itself, but the concessions have a corporate name that includes Yosemite, and that's what is being argued???They might actually become the most incensed over the issue.JohndeFresno wrote:...Even my Liberal acquaintances will likely be upset about this.
I know, right? They always burn incense when upset...
≡indignant, outraged, umbrageous
↔angry - feeling or showing anger; "angry at the weather"; "angry customers"; "an angry silence"; "sending angry letters to the papers"
Griff,
SASS/CMSA #93
NRA Patron
GUSA #93
There is a fine line between hobby & obsession!
AND... I'm over it!!
No I ain't ready, but let's do it anyway!
SASS/CMSA #93
NRA Patron
GUSA #93
There is a fine line between hobby & obsession!
AND... I'm over it!!
No I ain't ready, but let's do it anyway!
-
- Advanced Levergunner
- Posts: 4559
- Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 1:52 pm
Re: Uncle Sam blunders again
THIS guy's buddy Pedro.Hawkeye2 wrote:"Vote for Pedro"
Are you refering to Pedro the burro from "Boy's Life" magazine? If so, he has my vote
You NEED to see flick, "Napoleon Dynamite" !
We need someone in office with skills.
-
- Senior Levergunner
- Posts: 1459
- Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 6:31 pm
- Location: Arizona Territory
Re: Uncle Sam blunders again
IIRC; Delaware North is a front for the Buffalo NY Mob. A Mafia out fit.
Y'all be careful here, this is a very powerful Group. My bet is the Feds loose and the Mob wins.
They were founded in 1915 in Buffalo, NY. What's that tell you ? One of the largest privately held Corporations in the US.
Y'all be careful here, this is a very powerful Group. My bet is the Feds loose and the Mob wins.
They were founded in 1915 in Buffalo, NY. What's that tell you ? One of the largest privately held Corporations in the US.
SASS# 51223
Arizona Cowboy Shooter's Assoc.
Cowtown Cowboy Shooter's Assoc.
Uberti 73/44-40 carbine, Rossi 92/44-40,
Marlin 94CB/44 24" Limited, Winchester 94/30-30
Arizona Cowboy Shooter's Assoc.
Cowtown Cowboy Shooter's Assoc.
Uberti 73/44-40 carbine, Rossi 92/44-40,
Marlin 94CB/44 24" Limited, Winchester 94/30-30
-
- Advanced Levergunner
- Posts: 4559
- Joined: Fri Sep 07, 2007 1:52 pm
Re: Uncle Sam blunders again
If so, not any more corrupt, powerful or dangerous than "certain" political families. At least the Mafia wants to keep this nation from being taken over by foreign governments. I'll stop there to keep this in the "General Discussion" subforum.Lefty Dude wrote:IIRC; Delaware North is a front for the Buffalo NY Mob. A Mafia out fit.
Y'all be careful here...
- 7.62 Precision
- Senior Levergunner
- Posts: 1836
- Joined: Sat Mar 31, 2012 12:34 am
- Location: Alaska
- Contact:
Re: Uncle Sam blunders again
You have to understand that this is normal, to protect IP rights. The company, which is running the concessions, has to protect their merchandise. If they do not, another company would register trademarks and they bring a lawsuit against them and they would be unable to sell t-shirts and mugs and fridge magnets, etc. So the problem is not that they registered these trademarks, it is to be expected.
The problem is that they are using this first to prevent anyone else from getting the contract, and secondly, to punish the park service after they lost the contract, and to trying to make a pretty huge profit on it.
The government should have registered the trademarks themselves and then granted license to whatever company currently had the contract.
Any time you are dealing with trademarks, copyrights, or patents or other IP issues, you need to make sure with everyone involved who will own the rights. There are a lot of traps that you can fall into, from hiring a designer to build a logo, only to find out years later that he owns the rights to the logo, to publishing a book only to find you gave the rights to the book to the publisher or printer, or even gave the publisher first right of refusal on all future work, to hiring a lawyer to handle trademark or patent registration, only to find that the lawyer ends up owning the rights.
The problem is that they are using this first to prevent anyone else from getting the contract, and secondly, to punish the park service after they lost the contract, and to trying to make a pretty huge profit on it.
The government should have registered the trademarks themselves and then granted license to whatever company currently had the contract.
Any time you are dealing with trademarks, copyrights, or patents or other IP issues, you need to make sure with everyone involved who will own the rights. There are a lot of traps that you can fall into, from hiring a designer to build a logo, only to find out years later that he owns the rights to the logo, to publishing a book only to find you gave the rights to the book to the publisher or printer, or even gave the publisher first right of refusal on all future work, to hiring a lawyer to handle trademark or patent registration, only to find that the lawyer ends up owning the rights.
http://www.SHWAT.com
Front Line Holsters • http://www.7-62precision.com • Custom Finishes • http://www.762precision.wordpress.com
Front Line Holsters • http://www.7-62precision.com • Custom Finishes • http://www.762precision.wordpress.com
- Streetstar
- Advanced Levergunner
- Posts: 3889
- Joined: Sun Jan 11, 2009 5:58 am
- Location: from what used to be Moore OK
Re: Uncle Sam blunders again
JohndeFresno wrote:If so, not any more corrupt, powerful or dangerous than "certain" political families. At least the Mafia wants to keep this nation from being taken over by foreign governments. I'll stop there to keep this in the "General Discussion" subforum.Lefty Dude wrote:IIRC; Delaware North is a front for the Buffalo NY Mob. A Mafia out fit.
Y'all be careful here...
Italian immigrants are more proud of this country than some of the so -called native sons (or people who dont remember their ancestry or even care )
----- Doug
Re: Uncle Sam blunders again
...cannot sue the government for duties only the government can execute.
Very long-standing USSC decision.
Very long-standing USSC decision.
I'm positive God created the universe... I'm just not convinced He had any choice in the matter.
-A. Einstein
-A. Einstein