Yosemite deal has a bidder crying foul

Beneath the tranquil facade of Yosemite’s sun-splashed hills and canyons, an ugly spat simmers over the names of some of the park’s most notable sights.

The company that has long run the lodges, restaurants and visitor attractions at Yosemite National Park, but lost the high-dollar contract this spring, claims that such famous monikers as Badger Pass, Curry Village and the Ahwahnee Hotel — and, yes, even the name Yosemite — belong to it as valuable intellectual property.

In a lawsuit filed last week, Delaware North of Buffalo, N.Y., accuses the National Park Service of breach of contract. The company alleges that park officials were required to

force the incoming concessionaire to pay Delaware North for its landmark names, as it claims to have done when it took over, but officials never did.

The park service’s failure to make the new park operator pony up for the trademarks gave it an unfair advantage in bidding for the contract, the lawsuit states.

The complaint, filed in the U.S. Federal Court of Claims, does not seek to undo the new 15-year deal between the park service and Philadelphia-based Aramark, which is scheduled to start managing park services March 1. But it does ask for an unspecified sum for intellectual property, which includes the place names under its watch.

Delaware North has valued its intangible assets at up to $51 million.

Park officials, who said Thursday they couldn’t comment on pending litigation, have previously said concessionaires have no more claim to iconic names than anyone else.

“The Ahwahnee Hotel and Curry Village: These are as much a part of Yosemite as Half Dome and El Capitan,” park spokesman Scott Gediman told The Chronicle. “These names belong to the American people.”

Some of Yosemite’s longtime guests agree.

“All of the place names in Yosemite, whether it’s a natural feature or a business, are part of the treasure of the national parks,” said San Francisco resident Richard Bothwell, 48, who leads trips there. “If anyone owns them and capitalizes on them, it should be the people of the United States.”

The unusual dispute emerged when Yosemite officials began soliciting bids for the concession business last year as Delaware North’s contract was drawing to a close.

The contract entails operation of not only hotels and dining spots but also ski runs, stables and outdoor events and is considered the most valuable in the National Park Service, worth up to $2 billion.

Delaware North, which has managed the park’s concessions for 22 years, wrote a letter to the park service noting its ownership of Yosemite’s place names as well as the very name of the park for the purpose of licensing merchandise. Company officials said that if they lost the contract, they deserved compensation for the intellectual property.

Park officials disputed the extent of Delaware North’s claims. But they said that if the parties didn’t reach an agreement, the incoming concessionaire — if it wasn’t Delaware North — could work things out with the company.

The new company could choose to drop the historic names and come up with new ones, according to the contract — a possibility that still exists.

Despite generally good reviews for its work, park officials in June passed over Delaware North and chose Yosemite Hospitality, LLC, a subsidiary of Aramark. Aramark, like its predecessor, runs visitor services worldwide, including at several national parks.

The contact with Aramark is expected to be completed after a congressional review period ends Oct. 6.

Delaware North’s claim to the names at Yosemite is based on its initial 1993 contract with the park service. In the deal, the company was required to buy the assets of the previous concessionaire, which had owned the properties it managed, before turning them over to the park.

Delaware North maintains that it transferred ownership of many physical assets but kept furniture, vehicle fleets and intellectual property.

“We are now confused and disheartened that the National Park Service seems unwilling to honor its contractual obligation by failing to require the new concessioner to buy and pay fair value for the assets that we use to operate Yosemite,” company officials wrote in an e-mail to The Chronicle.

Attorney Kelly McCarthy, who specializes in intellectual property law at Sideman & Bancroft in San Francisco, said the fate of the case is likely to hinge on the details of the original contract. She said the onus will be on Delaware North to convince the courts it has a stake in the historic titles.

“These names are so old and have been used for such a long time,” McCarthy said. “In spite of my chosen career, the idea that these name would be up for grabs would be disturbing, to say the least.”