Chicago blogs weigh in on proposed MTCA rules

9-Nov-07 – Chicago architecture writer Lynn Becker gets right to the point. “What kind of idiot do you have to be,” he writes in his blog, ArchitectureChicago PLUS, “to actually insert the phrase ‘under Federal and Illinois law,’ when copyrights are a federal protection, and have nothing to do with state law?”

As Becker points out in his November 7 column, Stop Taking Pictures of Marina City!, there’s also “the inconvenient fact the condo owners only own the top 40 floors of each 60-story tower. Exactly how can they claim to own a copyright to ‘Marina Towers’ when the first 20 stories of the towers, and the other structures of the commercial complex, are owned by someone else?”

One quick Google later, the writer for such publications as Chicago Reader, Long Island Newsday, Metropolis Magazine, and Harvard Design Magazine came up with other buildings named ‘Marina Towers’ in seven cities throughout the world. Says Becker, “No doubt the MTCA will soon be attempting to shake them down for royalties.”

Becker’s blog was mentioned on November 9 by Gapers Block (Marina City Sick of All the Paparazzi), which calls the proposed MTCA ban on use of condo association name and image, “a head-scratchingly strange resolution.”

Meanwhile, communications consultant Mike Doyle, who writes the urban life blog Chicago Carless reflects on controversial statements by Marina Towers property manager David Gantt claiming that WBBM-TV paid the MTCA “for the image of Marina Towers,” a claim that has since been refuted by WBBM.

In his column, Lies, Busted Lies, and the Marina City Condo Board, Doyle writes, “The image copyright idea…is laughable. Given that the association doesn’t own the bottom 19 floors of either tower…the grounds on which yet another board-vs.-owner smackfest are being laid are once again like Emmentaler. That is, full of holes and cheesy.”

Chicagoist joined the fray on November 9. Filed under Marina Towers Owns You, Louis Frascogna wrote, “Such an ignorant rule suggests that any photo or film featuring any building would have to pay to use that building’s image. Since Chicagoist is a commercial venture, according to the Association we are potentially at risk for copyright violation merely by using the name Marina Towers (which search shows is in use by no less than 7 other cities). So let ‘er rip, Marina Towers, Marina Towers, Marina Towers!”