It could be months before any decision is reached on whether the Majestic Yosemite Hotel will regain its original name, The Ahwahnee/Kurt Repanshek file
It could easily be mid-2019 before any clarity is shed on the dispute between DNC Parks & Resorts at Yosemite and the National Park Service over who owns the rights to such iconic Yosemite National Park names as The Ahwahnee, Curry Village, and the Wawona Hotel.
Court documents in the standoff that dates to 2014 show that the two sides have until July 23, 2019, to report back to U.S. District Judge Patricia E. Campbell-Smith on whether they are optimistic that they can negotiate a settlement.
The issue of trademarking words attached to properties in the National Park System arose in 2014 year when the Park Service released a prospectus for a 15-year contract involving lodging and dining concessions at Yosemite. During the process, DNC, which had held the concessions business in Yosemite since 1993, notified the Park Service that it owned "intellectual property" rights in the form of trademarks attached to lodgings in the park.
If Delaware North was unsuccessful in bidding for the new contract, the company said at the time, it would seek $51 million to relinquish those marks, and other intellectual property, to the new concessionaire. That led the Park Service to say it would allow a concessionaire other than Delaware North to propose name changes to the facilities, which in some cases have been in operation for more than a century under the same name.
DNC did indeed lose the contract.
After DNC lost the concessions contract, the Buffalo, New York, company filed a $10 million-plus claim against the government. In that claim, DNC alleged breach of contract by the Park Service for its failure to require Yosemite Hospitality, LLC, an Aramark subsidiary that won the contract, to purchase DNC's intangible properties.
Yosemite National Park officials, looking to avoid a costly trademark fight with DNC Parks & Resorts, announced in January 2016 that they would change the names of iconic lodges in the park. The Ahwahnee Hotel, for instance, would be known going forward as the Majestic Yosemite Hotel. The new names were chosen in order to minimize the impact on visitors, the park announced, and include:
● Yosemite Lodge at the Falls to become: Yosemite Valley Lodge
● The Ahwahnee to become: The Majestic Yosemite Hotel
● Curry Village to become: Half Dome Village
● Wawona Hotel to become: Big Trees Lodge
● Badger Pass Ski Area to become: Yosemite Ski & Snowboard Area
DNC Parks & Resorts officials quickly fired back, charging the Park Service with "using the beloved names of places in Yosemite National Park as a bargaining chip in a legal dispute between DNCY and the NPS involving basic contract rights."
Yosemite officials said they had no option but to change the names with the transition in concessionaires to Yosemite Hospitality, LLC.
By July 2019, the judge wants the two sides to either announce a settlement plan, or say whether they intend to file motions arguing why each should win the case.
Comments
Too bad DNC lost the contract, because aramark is HORRIBLE!!! The standard of service in Yosemite has really gone down since they took over, and many empolyees I've talked to said they hate how Aramark is running things.
If you look at the history of the Yosemite trademarks obtained by Delaware North, you will see the applications were submitted individually and over many years. The original was done on a lark and it was successful. Then, a second was applied for and obtained. This then became the mode of operation to gain as many trademarks on Yosemite landmarks, without drawing attention to themselves, before the contract ended
As mentioned in one of the comments, "Poison Pill" was the exact term used by a top DNC executive. However, it was not to keep other concessionaires away. It was to "force" the NPS to either renew the contract with DNC or pay, millions to gain the names back. Personally, I kept expecting a DNC executive to state the trademarks were DNCs intellectual property, but never did! Instead, I heard phases of force them to do business with us, either way they will have to pay us, and we're looking into doing this at other properties we manage.
It is a total tragedy, how the trademarks belonging to a Nation Park were obtained through another national agency. What Irony!