Titanic Wreckage Can Be Photographed By Tourists
4.20 p.m. ET (2120 GMT) March 25, 1999
By Larry O'Dell
RICHMOND, Va. — Tours to gawk at the remains of the Titanic are legal as long as they don't interfere with the company that owns exclusive rights to the famous shipwreck, an appeals court has ruled.
The 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday unanimously reversed a judge's ruling that R.M.S. Titanic Inc.'s exclusive rights include viewing and photographing the wreckage in international waters, about 400 miles off Newfoundland.
Judge Paul Niemeyer wrote that "a property right does not normally include the right to exclude viewing and photographing of the property when it is located in a public place."
In June, U.S. District Judge Calvitt Clarke Jr. ruled against plans by a British company, Deep Ocean Expeditions Ltd., to ferry about 60 tourists to the Titanic site. Clarke said the expedition would devalue RMST's rights and encourage other would-be sightseers.
Clarke's decision was challenged by Deep Ocean Expeditions and Christopher Haver, a Phoenix businessman who wanted to participate in one of the expeditions.
"I think our position has been completely vindicated," said Alex Blanton, attorney for Haver and Deep Ocean Expeditions. "Basically, the court's conclusion was our position from day one."
R.M.S. Titanic lawyer F. Bradford Stillman said no decision has been made on whether to appeal the ruling to the U.S. Supreme Court.
Most of the adventure-seekers who signed up for Deep Ocean's dives last summer dropped out after Clarke barred them. But last September, about a dozen defied the judge's order and made the dive anyway, becoming the first tourists to view the ship 2 1/2 miles under the
Atlantic Ocean.
"I suspect there will be more this summer," Blanton said. "This will open the door to Deep Ocean Expeditions, which proposed this type of expedition to start with."
The movie Titanic, which won the 1998 Academy Award for best picture, included footage of the shipwreck shot by director James Cameron and his crew before Clarke's ruling.
Maybe this is what's moving the stock. I'm not sure why a negative court ruling would cause the stock to go up? Maybe I'm missing something.
-Sam |
