The Links Trust has always operated within a cloak of secrecy. They allocate teetimes in a very convoluted manner if you actually want a set teetime far in advance for an international traveler. On one hand they give the impression they have an open system but actually try to garner an advance time. Their stance on their name goes hand in hand with their allocation of advanced teetimes.....It smells.
Off the mark is the St Andrews Trust. Why the law agreed with their ridiculous claims is beyond me, with respect to copyright. The name (St Andrews) is the name of the town for goodness sake and anyone doing business in or near the town should have the right to incorporate the town's name into their business name should they so choose.
Just because the golf media often refer to the Old Course at St Andrews as simply 'St. Andrews' in the Open Championship rotation of courses, this misnomer should have nothing to do with it. However, if course owners in the area tried to use any of the actual course names operated by the Trust, ie Old Course, New Course, Jubilee, etc, then the Trust should intervene to prevent them from doing so by all means.
Otherwise, back off....in my opinion.
One wonders whether The St. Andrews Links Trust should start paying the Catholic Church for the right to use the name St. Andrews!!! Or perhaps they should sue Scotland for claiming it as their patron Saint without consulting the Trust or even suing Guttenberg for publishing a Bible that wantonly usurped the name of St Andrew for his own selfish reasons.
Bring on William Wallace and run the Weiskopf contingent out of the country. To hell with them.
As I recall, a Old Course greens fee receipt was required to purchase my wind resistant golf vest at the St. Andrews golf shop, midwinter 2006. The Old Course St. Andrews Golf Links logo means even more to me than the vest. I thank the Trust for preserving this heirloom for golf and for those fortunate to play there. Although my caddie remarked "the Trust is awash with money.
Since the clubmaker and retailer has been there 130 years, he should be in the clear. As for Wieskof, I think he could call it St Andrews something...but International was picked deliberately to mislead. That's a pity. The only thing the R&A should have absolute control over would be St Andrews followed by "Links", "Links Trust", "Golf Links" and "Golf Course" Other than that, they have no reasonable claim. St A is a town, a University, and an area. You cannot patent or restrict everything with St A in it.
However, I'm sure common sense will lose out to lawyers and the courts and it will be a long and protracted battle. I agree with the other comment..."buy out the clubmaker" only if he was agreeable of course, but otherwise leave him alone.
I'm on the clubmakers side and also agree that Weiskopf's course could use the name, if it's in St. Andrews. The course can also just drop the period after St as Fairmont did.
Claret Dreamer March 5, 2013 at 4:56 pm
i can’t understand how a group of men can decide to assert “intellectual property” to the name of one of the apostles. the town was around long before their grandparent’s grandparents were born and it will be there long after they are part of the sod. what would they expect a golf course in st. andrews to identify itself with? “disney world” and as for the st. andrews golf company….they have been making golf clubs since the time of old tom morris….but i’m sure they have dibs on his name as well.
Claret dremer, well said the whole matter is all about $$ and the trust is not a trust cause they can't be trusted! As an American, who married one of the Lovely Scotish woman and having been to St. Andrews and also played many of the Wonderful Scotish Courses around Scotland since 1963, sorry to say it takes an "outsiders" to change things, the hearts, minds? of the trust personall. All Scotland should be "Outraged" at these going on! Scotland is the "sccred" home of Golf and should be kept that way til the end of time, any real Golfer should share that view, unless, of course, there is something else to gain, which again is the case here. Employment seen is not held to the needy of the area but rather doled out to cheaper labor. Any "trust' that goes against the willl of the people is not a trust and therefore should be disolved of any responsibility of doing anything against the will of the people. I have seen many changes to the St.Andrews area and some have been good, however most have changed the "flavor" ot the Scotish lore that so many look forward to seeing...the people is what makes Scotland, Scotland and their desire should be honored, as welll as their names and namesakes. God Bless Scotland.
jack
Burr Ridge, illinois
USA
Two things: 1. Where do they get off calling the course "International" - 2. Why not arrive at a compromise that incorporates the location with the course name. E.g., "The Links at St. Andrews" refers to the town, clearly not the "The Old Course at St. Andrews".
I'm on the club-maker's side. 130 years in business, and suddenly the bully-boys across the road try this on. Stand up to them Ewan.
A possible solution - why don't they buy his business. There would be a price a canny Scot couldna say nae to, even with that family heritage, and it may be less than the cost of the legal battle, especially if the Trust loses.
As an aside,I wonder if Ewan Glen is a member of the R&A?
