You are here

Yosemite Trademark Discussion: FAQs

Share

Editor's note: The following FAQs were provided by DNC Parks & Resorts at Yosemite in connection with their intellectual property rights claim at Yosemite National Park.

Since 1993, DNC Parks & Resorts at Yosemite, Inc. (DNC Yosemite) has provided hospitality services in Yosemite National Park.  Yosemite National Park is a treasure, and we are proud of the hospitality and stewardship we have provided for more than twenty years. 


Recently, questions about Yosemite trademarks and their value have come to the forefront in the media.  Our contract with the National Park Service (NPS) required us to purchase all assets and assume all liabilities from the previous concessioner, Yosemite Park & Curry Co., including intangible assets such as trademarks, copyrights, mailing lists and customer history, at a price set by NPS and agreed to in advance by the previous concessioner. Our contract with NPS does not permit us to take the names with us, but requires a successor to buy the trademarks and other intangible property, just as we bought this property from the company before us.

In short, DNC Yosemite was contractually obligated to buy the trademarks and is contractually obligated to sell them to any successor. The question is not about allowing or denying the use of names such as The Ahwahnee. These names rightfully belong in Yosemite.  The question is solely about receiving the fair value for these assets as required by our contract.  We simply are seeking a fair and transparent bidding process for the new Yosemite concession contract, which is why we believe it is important to have a mutually agreed-upon value for concessioner assets, both tangible and intangible, established in advance of the bid submission due date.

Please see the FAQ below with additional information regarding this subject. 

Q1: How are trademarks involved with national park concession contracts?
A1:
 Some trademarks held by DNC Yosemite date back for decades and were in existence prior to the time DNC Yosemite became the concessioner. For example, the name "The Ahwahnee" was registered by the Yosemite Park & Curry Co. in 1988 and purchased by DNC as required by the 1993 concession contract with NPS. Trademarks are held by concessioners in other national parks and are a matter of public record and can be viewed by anyone.   

Q2: How can DNC Yosemite claim to own Yosemite names?
A2: 
As explained above, DNC Yosemite was required to buy the assets of the former concessioner, including the trademarks that protect certain names used for commercial purposes in the Park. DNC Yosemite has invested in and developed additional protected names in the intervening years.  The United States Patent and Trademark Office recognizes each of the registered service and trademarks in accordance with federal rules and laws. None of the protected names is a "place name" such as Yosemite Falls, Half Dome or El Capitan, but some of the protected names represent the locations where commercial services are provided (e.g., The Ahwahnee and Curry Village).  For instance, food and wine events such as Chefs' Holidays and Vintners' Holidays have protected names and have nothing to do with a place. Use of the slogan, "Go Climb a Rock", is similarly protected, as is the logo for the Yosemite Mountaineering School. 

Q3:  Has DNC Yosemite trademarked place names?
A3: 
 No.  DNC Yosemite has not trademarked or protected place names in Yosemite and it would not be possible to do so.  The names and logos that are protected relate to providing commercial services and the nature of the registration limits use of the name to the specific commercial purpose.  As an example, our company's logo is recognizable as a stylized shape of Half Dome and it is registered, but we have no rights to the actual name Half Dome and have no rights in relation to taking or using photos or other representations of Half Dome. 

Q4:  Is there a possibility that the names won't be used in Yosemite?
A4:
  This is not a question of allowing or denying use of names such as The Ahwahnee. Our contract with the NPS does not permit us to take the names with us, but requires a successor to buy the trademarks, just as we bought the then-existing trademarks from the company before us.  These names rightfully belong in Yosemite.  

Q5:  Is this a tactic to scare off or lessen competition in the award of the concession contract?
A5:
  No.  Competition for the contract can best be achieved with a transparent bidding process that includes a clear understanding of the assets and their appropriate value before bids are received.  Concession policy, law and contracts provide legal and contractual obligations for both NPS and concessioners during the bidding, award and operation of concession services. The applicable rules and regulations require appropriate consideration for all of the assets we are required to sell.  

Q6: How did DNC Yosemite arrive at the valuation of $51 million for intangible assets?
A6:
 DNC Yosemite had an independent third party appraise the intangible assets. In addition to the trademarked names that are the subject of such great interest, the $51 million valuation included intangible assets such as logos, service marks, mailing lists, websites, guest database etc. The NPS was advised of the $51 million appraisal of these intangible assets in June prior to the release of the Yosemite concession prospectus. There is no agreed upon figure for asset value at this time.  The NPS notes that the values presented in the prospectus are estimates only. 

Q7:  How much did DNC Yosemite pay for the stock of Yosemite Park & Curry Co. in 1993 in order to take ownership of all its assets and liabilities?
A7: 
As part of the 1993 bid, the NPS required the successful bidder to pay $62 million to purchase Yosemite Park & Curry Co., including the purchase of all assets and the assumption of all liabilities. This included taking on unlimited liability for known and unknown environmental remediation. DNC Yosemite was the only bidder willing to accept these conditions. The payment amount was set in advance by the NPS with the agreement of the Yosemite Park & Curry Company. The current situation is somewhat different. For instance, DNC Yosemite was required to acquire both the assets and liabilities of Yosemite Park & Curry Company, while the current contract calls for the purchase of assets only, without any requirement to also assume liabilities. Additionally, in 1993, the asset values were fixed and agreed to in advance. In the current prospectus, the NPS notes that the values presented are estimates only. 

Q8:  Did DNC Yosemite advise the NPS of its ownership of intellectual property?
A8:
  Many of the trademarked and protected names were purchased by DNC Yosemite in 1993 when the NPS required it to purchase the common stock of Yosemite Park and Curry Co. Ownership is evidenced by appropriate registration marks on the individually protected names in marketing brochures and on DNC Yosemite's website. All of DNC Yosemite's marketing materials are approved by the NPS.  Issues relating to intangible asset ownership and valuation were raised with the NPS in June prior to the issuance of the prospectus for the new Yosemite contract.  Ownership of intellectual property is a common business practice.

Q9:  Is DNC Yosemite bidding for the Yosemite contract again?
A9:
 We are proud of the hospitality and stewardship we have provided in Yosemite National Park for more than twenty years and hope to continue in our role as Yosemite's primary concessioner. 

Q10:  What is the historic background to this controversy?
A10: 
 In order to become the concessioner in Yosemite National Park in 1993, DNC Parks & Resorts at Yosemite, Inc. (DNC Yosemite) was required by the NPS to buy the stock of the previous concessioner, Yosemite Park & Curry Co. (the Curry Company) at a price that was established in advance by the NPS.  With this stock purchase, DNC Yosemite became the owner of all the assets of the Curry Company, both tangible and intangible, and responsible for all of the liabilities the Curry Company had accumulated since its inception in 1899.     

The assets DNC Yosemite purchased included many significant structures, such as The Ahwahnee hotel, Yosemite Lodge and Curry Village, all of which had been built by the Curry Company with its own capital; operating assets such as the furniture, fixtures, buses, business systems and other equipment used in the concession operation, all of which were purchased by the Curry Company with its own capital; and intangible assets such as the various registered place names operated under the concession contract, mailing lists, employee data and policies and procedures, which were also accumulated over the years by the Curry Company.  The liabilities that DNC Yosemite became responsible for included all of the operational liabilities associated with the concession operation and unlimited responsibility for the environmental cleanup required for contaminated sites, both numerous known sites that existed at the time and any unknown sites that might be discovered during the contract term.   

As part of the concession contract for Yosemite that DNC Yosemite was awarded in connection with its acquisition of the Curry Company (1993 contract), DNC Yosemite waived many rights that existed for concessioners at the time relating to possessory interest (ownership of real property assets, such as The Ahwahnee) and a preferential right of contract renewal.  For example, as part of the 1993 contract, DNC Yosemite relinquished title to real property assets owned by the Curry Company, which transferred to DNC Yosemite in the acquisition (The Ahwahnee hotel, Yosemite Lodge and Curry Village, etc.) and gave them to the American people over the life of the contract by returning ownership to the NPS.  The elimination of these concession rights has now become a part of public law for national park contracts. 

The 1993 contract did not provide for similar treatment for non-real property assets such as fixtures, equipment and intellectual property and the 1993 contract calls for the current concessioner to be compensated for those assets at values identified in the contract. It is important to note that compensation is to be paid by a successor concessioner, not the American people. What DNC Yosemite is working through with the NPS now is a process to determine the appropriate valuation for those assets under the terms of the 1993 contract.   

The NPS has long given recognition to the existence of intellectual property rights in concession contracts, independent of the physical assets associated with a concession operation.  Examples include the names “The Ansel Adams Gallery” in Yosemite,“Verkamp’s”, a shop featuring Native American products previously operated in the Grand Canyon, and the logo for the Red Bus Tours in Glacier National Park, which the previous concessioner refused to sell to the successor.  This resulted in the development of a new logo by the successor.  The difference between the 1993 contract and contracts at Grand Canyon and Glacier National Park is that DNC Yosemite does not have a choice in the matter.  At the expiration of the 1993 contract, if a new concessioner is chosen, DNC Yosemite is required to leave all the assets used in the business behind (furniture, fixtures, equipment and intellectual property) and the successor concessioner, not the NPS or the American people, is required to buy them from DNC Yosemite at various values, as defined in the 1993 contract.  That successor concessioner would then have the rights to use those assets in the next contract, with ownership rights in accordance with the terms of the new contract and other laws.

DNC Yosemite is proud of the service and stewardship it has provided in Yosemite National Park through its responsible management over the past 20 plus years, which has contributed to the value of the assets that are used in its operations.  DNC Yosemite is looking forward to the possibility of being awarded the next contract to provide visitor services in Yosemite National Park.  In the meantime, DNC Yosemite will continue to work with the NPS to create a clear understanding of its obligations and rights under its 1993 contract.

Add comment

CAPTCHA

This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.

Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.

The Essential RVing Guide

The Essential RVing Guide to the National Parks

The National Parks RVing Guide, aka the Essential RVing Guide To The National Parks, is the definitive guide for RVers seeking information on campgrounds in the National Park System where they can park their rigs. It's available for free for both iPhones and Android models.

This app is packed with RVing specific details on more than 250 campgrounds in more than 70 parks.

You'll also find stories about RVing in the parks, some tips if you've just recently turned into an RVer, and some planning suggestions. A bonus that wasn't in the previous eBook or PDF versions of this guide are feeds of Traveler content: you'll find our latest stories as well as our most recent podcasts just a click away.

So whether you have an iPhone or an Android, download this app and start exploring the campgrounds in the National Park System where you can park your rig.