National Landmarks

[Mythios]

I have a particular historic landmark domain name, an actual place, that gets several direct hits a day. I want to develop this name to entertain the historic landmark that it is, but will I have legal problems doing such? Is there anyone here that has any such names, egs. LittleBighorn.com, VietnamMemorial.com, etc. and the like who knows any info on how the safe routes can be utilized without potential legal matters coming from some organization associated with the landmark? Thanks in advance for any input.

{edit spelling}

 

[DotComster]

You mean like WhiteHouse.com?
Most American landmarks are .Gov but not sure about the legal laws they have about this.

 

[Mythios]

Yes, something of that nature, as in my previous examples. As in MountRushmore.com (or a battlefield, digging ground, etc.) and the like. I'm curious if some organization can try to sue for rights to the historical landmark name. I'd like to find out as much as I can before I spend my time developing something that might be taken away.

 

[GypsyBee]

Hi Mythios,

I can only contribute some kind of idea to your quest by letting you know that government information is common property and is not copyrighted material.
http://www.copyright.gov/circs/circ1.html

We have a right to compile USA gov info word for word into salable publications. Many who buy this info are not aware that they have free access to it. However, it does save them the time it takes to research it themselves. Even many of those selling info also buy info. I can't recall the author's name offhand, but this person had compiled a lot of gov info that's best salable, into published books which many entrepreuneurs buy, as it saves them time to gather pertinent info to market. I'm sure you have come across many ads for gov info. One very popular category that sells very well is info on gov grants.

I'd imagine that having a domain name and site for a national monument wouldn't be any different than owning any given state, city or county name, etc in the USA would fall into the lines of public domain.

On these grounds, I can't see how any group who forms an association around a national monument, which is public domain, can sue you for owning such a domain name and website. However, if there were an existing association founded, called Mount Rushmore Climbers' Association or Mount Rushmore Foundation or whatever, and you had a domain and website with the exact name of the association, I would think that you would then fall into snarls.

 

[maxheadroom]

I agree totally with GypsyBee, Queen Bee. That information is right on the mark.

 

[Mythios]

Thanks a lot for the replies, especially GypsyBee, excellent link. I'll move forward on developing now.

 

[GypsyBee]

You're welcome, Mythios. I wish you much success with your site.

 

[jberryhill]

Government information is indeed not subject to copyright.

But copyright has absolutely nothing to do with disputes between trademark owners and domain registrants.

Can the US government own a trademark. Most certainly it can. In fact "Internic" is a registered trademark of the US Department of Commerce.

The answer can strongly depend on what your idea of a "national landmark" is. For example, if your idea of a national landmark is "Smithsonian Museum", then you are surely going to have a problem. If your idea of a national landmark is "Grand Canyon" then you are probably not going to have a problem.

 

[Mythios]

Nope, this is not something like Smithsonian Museum. It is an actual location, egs. Mount Rushmore, etc. By the looks of the documents I've been reading, I'll be ok, I believe.

 

[GeorgeK]

"Government information is indeed not subject to copyright" -- does this also apply to photos/images on U.S. government websites?

e.g. if one is looking for royalty-free images for one's own website, is a search using http://images.google.com/ and limiting the results to only .gov addresses ok?

 

[jberryhill]

Works by the United States Government are singled out and excluded by the copyright act itself. That would include photographs made by the United States Government.

However, just because something is on a U.S. government website does not mean it is a photo or image produced by the U.S. government. It could be something they are licensing from the copyright owner.

Also, what do you mean by "images".... do you mean, for example, the seals or official insignia on US government websites? They have protections which are thoroughly independent of the fact that they aren't subject to copyright.

You might want to read the information about such topics on US government websites themselves. For example, NASA images are very popular, and NASA.gov has quite a bit to say about what you can and cannot do. Some of the images there are private works, some belong to public institutions such as the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, and some are NASA works (which can be freely copied subject to the right of publicity of people who might be in them, etc.).

http://www.arc.nasa.gov/disclaimer.html

 

[GeorgeK]

Thanks. I was thinking in terms of pictures, and clipart that they might have on their websites.

I'll need to tread carefully, to ensure that any art/photos are indeed in the public domain.

 

[basscaster]

If a work is wholly created by a federal employee, then it is in the public domain - this is what I was recently told by an employee while making a request to reproduce content. For example, Census.gov features a huge database of public domain images taken by Census employees.

There are some goverment agencies that host copyrighted works, (Library of Congress, etc), that are not available for commercial use. This include collections of photos, recordings, and the like. Other sites rely on commercial contractors to provide content, photos, and other media. Often the copyrights remain with the contractor.

It is always a good practice to clear every image or written work with the source agency before using. Don't assume that if it's on a gov't site, it's in the public domain.