Yosemite trademark dispute takes new turns
By Michael Doyle, McClatchy Washington Bureau
Yosemite National Park’s concessionaire executives met with National Park Service officials on Dec. 8, 2014. On that, at least, they agree.
What happened next, though, remains in dispute, like so much else involving renewal of the park’s lucrative concessions contract. Company executives say the park service “pressured” them to give up valuable intellectual property. Park service officials, in their latest court filing, deny it.
The conflicting recollections are becoming commonplace. From the courtroom to the California state Legislature, this multimillion-dollar conflict over Yosemite’s intellectual property is heating up like an ugly divorce to a long marriage.
Incited by the Yosemite names controversy, state Assemblyman Kenneth Cooley, D-Rancho Cordova, and Assemblyman Adam Gray, D-Merced, on Thursday introduced legislation restricting the trademarking of names associated with state parks, which Cooley said was “intended to send a message” about national parks as well.