Read news from:
Austria
SHARE
COPY LINK

OFFBEAT

Elvis Presley heirs sue Danish Graceland

The estate of American icon Elvis Presley is seeking 1.5 million kroner from the operator of Graceland Randers, but the "professional Elvis fan" told The Local that he's done everything by the book and refuses to be bullied.

Published: 3 September 2015 15:15 CEST
There can only be one Graceland, according to the heirs of American icon Elvis Presley.
 
The Memphis mansion that was once Presley’s home draws over 600,000 visitors a year who come to see the singer and actor’s memorabilia, including gold records, jumpsuits and his famed pink Cadillac. 
 
Danish Elvis fan Henrik Knudsen is such a big admirer of the singer that he attempted to recreate the Graceland experience in the heart of Jutland. Knudsen owns and operates Graceland Randers, an ‘event house’ that includes the Elvis Museum, the Highway 51 Diner and an Elvis Shop. Since its opening in 2011, it has grown into one of Denmark’s top 50 tourist attractions. 
 
But Knudsen’s devotion to The King has ruffled some feathers. The company Elvis Presley Enterprises (EPE), which represents the Presley family, has been after Knudsen to drop the Graceland name for years and now its case against him is set for a January showdown in Denmark’s Maritime and Commercial Court (Sø- og Handelsretten). EPE is seeking 1.5 million kroner (around $225,000) for violating the Graceland trademark.
 
Knudsen, who describes himself as “a professional Elvis fan” said he is surprised by EPE's actions.  
 
“When I got this idea back in 2005, there was a lot of media that wrote about this crazy Dane who had this wacky idea and I head nothing [from EPE]. Then in 2010, we broke the news that we would build a house inspried by Graceland and suddenly got a letter from an attorney. But by then I had already trademarked the name,” Knudsen told The Local. 
 
Knudsen contends that EPE had every chance to stop his use of the Graceland name before he had invested so much into the project. He registered the name with the Danish Patent and Trademark Office, where there is a three-month objection period.
 
“Nobody said anything about it back then. EPE has attorneys in Denmark but nobody reacted. Now they want to do whatever they can to stop me and that's unfair. I did everything official, I did everything the right way. You can’t just come and bully me,” he said. 
 
When the EPE filed a complaint after the objection period expired, the Danish Patent and Trademark Office ruled against Knudsen. Rather than simply changing the name of his business, he appealed to the Maritime and Commercial Court.
 
Die-hard fan

Knudsen makes his living through Graceland Randers, where entry to the museum costs 99 kroner for adults and 69 kroner for kids, and where up to 6,000 items of Elvis memorabilia are for sale. But he insists this is not about the money.
 
“Of course I am running a business, but everything I've done has been with my heart in the right place. I am a die-hard Elvis fan and I was doing this when there was no money involved,” Knudsen said.

 
Knudsen also organizes trips from Denmark to the United States and says he has brought hundreds of Danish tourists to Graceland in Memphis. 
 
He even says that during his travels to the US, he has on numerous occasions met with The King’s former wife Priscilla and daughter Lisa-Marie, who expressed their approval of what he is doing in Denmark. 
 
“For more than 25 years, I've been working more or less as a full-time Elvis fan. Everyone has been thanking me for what I am doing in Denmark, and now suddenly this,” Knudsen said. 
 
Claus Barrett Christiansen is a lawyer representing EPE in its case against Graceland Randers. 
 
“We have said from the beginning that Graceland Randers should find a new name […] We think that Graceland Randers has been very arrogant in this case by refusing all suggestions about a solution,” Christiansen told the tabloid BT, adding that part of EPE’s case against Knudsen also involves the sale of “false Elvis products”. 
 
Knudsen told The Local that the alleged false products represent just a tiny sliver of the nearly 6,000 products sold in his shop and that EPE has not been able to document that the items were not legitimate. Nonetheless, he decided to discontinue the sale of the disputed items. 

 

 
Back in July 2014, Knudsen claimed that the company that owns Elvis’s two luxury airplanes, the Lisa Marie and the Hound Dog II, were “very positive” about moving the planes to Randers after EPE decided to get rid of them. In April, EPE reversed course and decided to keep the planes in Memphis. 
 
Knudsen thinks that the EPE should come see his Randers operation firsthand rather than just send their lawyers. 
 
“We really think that what we do is a great honour to Elvis and to Memphis,” he said. 

Member comments

Log in here to leave a comment.
Become a Member to leave a comment.
For members

OFFBEAT

Is Switzerland’s male-only mandatory military service ‘discriminatory’?

Under Swiss law, all men must serve at least one year in compulsory national service. But is this discriminatory?

Published: 7 December 2021 16:50 CET
Swiss military members walk across a road carrying guns
A new lawsuit seeks to challenge Switzerland's male-only military service requirement. Is this discriminatory? FABRICE COFFRINI / AFP

All men aged between the ages of 18 and 30 are required to complete compulsory military service in Switzerland. 

A lawsuit which worked its way through the Swiss courts has now ended up in the European Court of Human Rights, where the judges will decide if Switzerland’s male-only conscription requirement violates anti-discrimination rules. 

Switzerland’s NZZ newspaper wrote on Monday the case has “explosive potential” and has “what it takes to cause a tremor” to a policy which was first laid out in Switzerland’s 1848 and 1874 Federal Constitutions. 

What is Switzerland’s compulsory military service? 

Article 59 of the Federal Constitution of Switzerland says “Every man with Swiss citizenship is liable for military service. Alternative civilian service shall be provided for by law.”

Recruits must generally do 18 weeks of boot camp (longer in some cases). 

They are then required to spend several weeks in the army every year until they have completed a minimum 245 days of service.

Military service is compulsory for Swiss men aged 18 and over. Women can chose to do military service but this is rare.

What about national rather than military service? 

Introduced in 1996, this is an alternative to the army, originally intended for those who objected to military service on moral grounds. 

READ MORE: The Swiss army’s growing problem with civilian service

Service is longer there than in the army, from the age of 20 to 40. 

This must be for 340 days in total, longer than the military service requirement. 

What about foreigners and dual nationals? 

Once you become a Swiss citizen and are between the ages of 18 and 30, you can expect to be conscripted. 

READ MORE: Do naturalised Swiss citizens have to do military service?

In general, having another citizenship in addition to the Swiss one is not going to exempt you from military service in Switzerland.

However, there is one exception: the obligation to serve will be waved, provided you can show that you have fulfilled your military duties in your other home country.

If you are a Swiss (naturalised or not) who lives abroad, you are not required to serve in the military in Switzerland, though you can voluntarily enlist. 

How do Swiss people feel about military and national service? 

Generally, the obligation is viewed relatively positively, both by the general public and by those who take part in compulsory service. 

While several other European countries have gotten rid of mandatory service, a 2013 referendum which attempted to abolish conscription was rejected by 73 percent of Swiss voters. 

What is the court case and what does it say? 

Martin D. Küng, the lawyer from the Swiss canton of Bern who has driven the case through the courts, has a personal interest in its success. 

He was found unfit for service but is still required to pay an annual bill to the Swiss government, which was 1662CHF for the last year he was required to pay it. 

While the 36-year-old no longer has to pay the amount – the obligation only lasts between the ages of 18 and 30 – Küng is bring the case on principle. 

So far, Küng has had little success in the Swiss courts, with his appeal rejected by the cantonal administrative court and later by the Swiss Federal Supreme Court. 

Previous Supreme Court cases, when hearing objections to men-only military service, said that women are less suitable for conscription due to “physiological and biological differences”.

In Küng’s case, the judges avoided this justification, saying instead that the matter was a constitutional issue. 

‘No objective reason why only men have to do military service’

He has now appealed the decision to the European level. 

While men have previously tried and failed when taking their case to the Supreme Court, no Swiss man has ever brought the matter to the European Court of Human Rights. 

Küng told the NZZ that he considered the rule to be unjust and said the Supreme Court’s decision is based on political considerations. 

“I would have expected the Federal Supreme Court to have the courage to clearly state the obvious in my case and not to decide on political grounds,” Küng said. 

“There is no objective reason why only men have to do military service or pay replacement taxes. On average, women may not be as physically productive as men, but that is not a criterion for excluding them from compulsory military service. 

There are quite a few men who cannot keep up with women in terms of stamina. Gender is simply the wrong demarcation criterion for deciding on compulsory service. If so, then one would have to focus on physical performance.”

Is it likely to pass? 

Küng is optimistic that the Strasbourg court will find in his favour, pointing to a successful appeal by a German man who complained about a fire brigade tax, which was only imposed on men. 

“This question has not yet been conclusively answered by the court” Küng said. 

The impact of a decision in his favour could be considerable, with European law technically taking precedence over Swiss law.

It would set Switzerland on a collision course with the bloc, particularly given the popularity of the conscription provision. 

Küng clarified that political outcomes and repercussions don’t concern him. 

“My only concern is for a court to determine that the current regulation is legally wrong.”

SHOW COMMENTS