FEATURE

News Worth Noting

Maybe none of these stories would have warranted a long report elsewhere, but we think they're worth more than just a brief mention.....In Pennsylvania, for instance, there's a move on to add another "official state" item. This one seems to be the only one of its type - at least at this point.

Pennsylvania wants to designate the historic Pennsylvania Rifle as the official rifle of the Commonwealth. As the bill puts it "The Pennsylvania Rifle was the first truly American firearm and, due to its exceptional accuracy and range, was considered the greatest achievement in the development of firearms during the 18th century."

The move comes after what our pal J.R. Absher says was "several years of diligent, behind-the-scenes political maneuvering by hardcore, front-loading long rifle aficionados...especially those affiliated with the Jacobsburg Historical Society's Pennsylvania Long Rifle Museum."

"We have been working toward this resolution, actively with Rep. Craig Dally, for the last three years," museum president Dave Ehrig told Absher. "It was only after a summit at the museum, followed by a luncheon reception for Sen. Pat Browne, that the good senator became swayed."

Artistically made, but deadly effective, the Pennsylvania long rifle may be headed to official recognition by Pennsylvania.

Ehrig said he and other long rifle enthusiasts believe future generations deserve the right to appreciate the heritage of the Pennsylvania long-barreled rifle, borne to artistic gunsmiths of the Moravian communities of Christian's Spring, Northampton County, as well as by artistic rifle maker Martin Meylin, in Willow Street, Lancaster County.

"The color combinations, carvings, engravings and graceful slenderness of the Pennsylvania Rifle cause it to stand alone and remain unchallenged as a primary example of early American art," he said.

Hard to argue.

It's not nearly as harmonious a community in Harrison, Arkansas. That's where a running disagreement between the Harrison Chamber of Commerce, the Harrison Visitors Bureau, and photographer Glenn Wheeler has turned into a full-fledge lawsuit.

Wheeler contends the two organizations have abused a permission on a copyrighted photograph. After giving permission for his photograph to be used on a postcard, the Chamber of Commerce then used it in a variety of ways, including in its logo, website and marketing materials.

And, Wheeler says, they not only used them without permission, they removed copyright management information from the photo to conceal the infringement. Wheeler's not kidding around, either. He's asking for $150,000 for each infringement of the image under federal copyright law, $30,000 under a different section, and legal fees. In other words, they could be pretty expensive photographs.

Wheeler told me the whole acrimonious affair had been going on for some time, and he'd tried to settle it "with very reasonable terms" for some time, but the organizations did nothing, pushing him to the point of litigation.

Although the suit was filed by a local Harrison attorney, Wheeler's brought in Carolyn Wright, a recognized legal authority when it comes to intellectual property. Last year I attended a seminar given by Wright on intellectual property. I left it with two distinct impressions: it seems writers, photographers and other "creatives" in the outdoor industry are waking up to the inherent value of their work - beyond the fees paid for initial work, and, I would not want Carolyn Wright looking at me for infringement of intellectual property.

As you can imagine, the suit's causing quite a stir in Harrison, but the ripples from this case could pretty quickly spread. It might help quantify the value of intellectual property in this sort of instance. And establishment of a legal precedent just might move others to action over what is, unfortunately, a fairly frequent occurrence these days.

Last week, I wrote that we were going to be using digital watermarking on our original material. Some of you wanted to know if that was in response to someone "appropriating" our original content. The short answer is affirmative, but there's an ongoing problem with today's digital communications. When someone can offer your content to their friends, share it across their affinity groups and otherwise spread your words, do you really want to prevent that?

Another short answer - if they're using it to hype their competing service- absolutely.

It's a knotty question for everyone in today's "wired" world. Like other stories, however, we'll keep you posted.

--Jim Shepherd

Jul 4	California Free Fishing Day Statewide
Jul 4	Independence Day
Jul 15-17	ICAST Orange County Convention Center, Orlando, Florida

Subscribe to our RSS Feed