RE: [Leica] Photography permits Lone Cypress

[Tim Atherton <tim@KairosPhoto.com>]

>
> >The "Lone Cypress" in Carmel is another
> > instance that comes to mind. If I recall there is a gentle caveat not to
> > take pictures for commercial use...that the tree indeed is
> copyrighted...
>
>
> Jim Brick put a stop to that some time ago. The powers that be tried to
> prevent him from using photos of the tree for profit. Jim took
> the matter to
> court and won. A tree cannot be copyrighted, patented or claimed as
> exclusive intellectual property.
>

But they will still apparently threaten photographers and artists with legal
action to scare them.

Feeling is after the Gentile/Rock and Roll hall of Fame case they would
probably lose in court, but that doesn't seem to have dampened their vigour
in trying to "protect" this tree in the past.

here is an article from the web, followed by Jim Bricks post from the
archives:

http://web.archive.org/web/20030226154244/www.midreal.com/Pages/Articlecoast
weekly.html

or   http://tinyurl.com/vxa6

(had to dig it out of the Internet Archive...)

> I live and photograph out here in Lone Cypress land. I photographed the
> Lone Cypress in 1989 for use in our regional books. I use it as the cover
> of one of our books.
>
> We were threatened legal action by Pebble Beach who used some big name law
> firm in Washington DC to send me "we're going to clean you out because you
> are infringing our trademark."
>
> I immediately learned everything I could about trademark and did a
> trademark search on the Lone Cypress and all derivations. Nada! And in
> there ad's, they use "Lone Cypress ® " which, of course, is illegal. You
> cannot claim a "registered" trademark when you actually don't have one.
> None were applied for, and their original application was "abandoned."
>
> I gave the threats over to the ASMP legal council who did all of my
> answering for me. Basically the ASMP told Pebble Beach to "go pound sand."
> Whether or not PB was actually going to take it to court was based on the
> R&R HOF case. Had Chuck Gentile lost, PB would probably have pursued it.>
But Chuck won and PB went away (rock and roll hall of fame case) . And PB
has since been purchased back from
> the Japanese by Clint Eastwood and friends. It is now a more friendly
place.
>
> During the time when all artists were hassled, the local folks (Monterey
> Peninsula) hated PB and did not patronize them. This is bad publicity. Bad
> publicity spreads fast. I think Clint and friends know this.
>
> The reason they won't let you take "professional" photographs of the Lone
> Cypress is because that is the only way they have of protecting it. It is
> private property and they can control all uses of the property. But they
> cannot keep artists from using photographs, drawings, etc of the rock and
> tree, in saleable artwork.
>
> A lot of the PB restrictions I feel are left over from the previous
owners.
>

- --
To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html