"you have to pay royalties to some American company that registered the music without anybody's approval"

No, this is more an urban legend. Check the wikipedia for the full story.

And the amount asked is a maximun of 250 USD per image with unlimited right for reproduction... No a very big amount.

And in Mexico, the mexican flag, the mexican simbols, historical and archeological sites, are protected in a way similar to trademark. IT is not about copyright....

really?.... counting up to 100,000 implies to understand the posicional value of the numbers... Hardly an iliterate would be able to do that...

try this... how many skulls are here?

http://freepages.family.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~jacklee/London/images_Italy/20030924-Rome-CimiterodeiCappuccini-CryptofSkulls.jpg

Yes, Starbuck had already agreed to pay... If i remember the series would have about 10 momuments.. i think Starbuck would have prefer to pay before all this blow out.... Really is not a very high amount, i guess they pay much more for the photographs... but it was a mexian newspaper that blow this issue out of proporcions...

No one (at least seriously) pretend human sacrifice did not exist.. but the number were probalby no that big.

As reference... Bernal diaz del Castillo reported the rack of skulls of Tlatelolco had 100 thousand skull. Archeologist found 300.. quite a diference. The people had to be sacrifice in the main temple., there is not much space there. The city had about 70 thousand people... not all warriors. so they could not handle so much prisioners... and archeologist have not found evidence of those numbers... this only lead to a conclusion... war propaganda...to inflate their victories...

Actually it took about 70 years to end human sacrifice... The aztec (meshica) were not the only one to do it..

And probalby it had more to do with the colapse of mesoamerican civilization due to the hight toll of the epidemies. In 70 years the population of mesoamerica went from 15 million to 2.5 million.

This is problem is not about trademarks... there is no trademark involved. think is more like a tax, for having permision to use the image for comercial use. The fee is about 250 US per image, with unlimited right to copy. This fee allows you put "with the aproval of the department of antropology and history" and a serial number to autentify the autentication...

mmhh. wehre do i start... the aztec were not aztec but "Meshicas"... their gods forbid to use the name aztec.

the mexica were most thatn just a tribe, they ruled over a four million people. Mesoamerica had about 15 million.

The aztec were only one of many civilizations, they were "the new kids on the block", most of them still survive, but their tradition have mixed. There are about 2 million of people that speek nahuatl, about a millon taht speaks mayan etc.

there were also, zapotec, mixe, maya, matlazinca, olmec, teotihuacan, mixteca, purepecha, tlaxcalan, etc etc. Some still retain their cultural heritage.

And the problem is not about copyright but about the use and conservation of the national heritage. It is way of supervise what comercial use would have the images. the fee is actually small. In mexico we do not like to use "native american"...we prefer "Indigena" o even "indio"... I consider myself "indio" altough i know is actually wrong...

• first... there are no aztec, olmec, maya, zapotec, miztec, olmec etc temples in the US. (no matter what the film "national treasue says")
• second.. if it is in the US, then the US laws apply
• Third The law is for the historical sites and monuments that are under custody of the NAtional intitute of Antropology and history, f you photograph a site that is not under protection, the law does not apply.

I

Not ot mention that Tenochtitlan had a population at that time of 60 to 80 thousand...

Another point. Bernal Diaz del Castillo claimed he counted 100,000 skulls...in the rack where the heads of the victims were put.

first.. he was iliterate... how an iliterate people can count up to 100,000 second. in the rack of skulls (tzompanti) there were 8 rows x 8 rows, with skulls separated by one yard.

What size would have require to have 100,000 skulls?

the actual rack measured 4 x 6 meters. and the archoelogist found "only" 300 skulls....

Actually... this is exactly the point, altough i think i did not put it properly. This law is rarely used... unfortunatelly there was a public denonce, because mexican have becaem hiperssensible to this isues. So it has to be applied. It it had not be denonuces by a newparep, it would not had happen anything... Usually the small fee asked, allows the user , not only unlimited copies, but also to put the legend "aproved by the INAH"... This makes your product oficially aproved and you can charge a little more.

The fee for the unlimitted right of reproduction has a maximun cost to 250 USD per orignal image... altough if you get a layer involve, it would cost 10 times more.

With this, they will have the right to put "autorized by the INAH" and a serial number.

This woul allow them to charge more for the mugs, and the fee would hardly impact in the cost

UNfortunatelly the news about thisproblem are mainly gibberish...

well.. usually only afects US tourist that dare to try some of our local cuisine, (touris should stick to comercial places...)...

probalby we already have developed a... darwinian adaptation...

Probably the newpaper "excelsior" did sell more copies, but i doubt the recieve anything else. The amount involved is actually very low, and Starbuck already agree to sign it. the core of the problem is that Starbucks did not receive the permision, (the claim to ask for it since 2008) so they decided to continue withouth it... Burocracy or maybe someone did not like how it was going to be use... but at the end they did it knowing it was not right.

All this has received a ridiculous amount of publicity... that has nothing to do with the actual problem.

El meollo del asunto está en la definición que se haga de esta reproducción. Si se trata de una reproducción de monumentos artísticos con fines comerciales, de conformidad con el artículo 288-B fracción I, de la Ley Federal de Derechos, por la reproducción fotográfica, dibujo o ilustración Starbucks tendría que pagar $1,342.62 por pieza. El artículo 33 de la Ley Federal sobre Monumentos y Zonas Arqueológicos, Artísticos e Históricos señala que son monumentos artísticos los bienes muebles o inmuebles que revisten un valor estético relevante.

Si se considera que la reproducción es de monumentos arqueológicos o históricos, se pagarán por concepto de derechos sin límites de reproducciones: $1,477.07 si es una reproducción fiel o $2,954.50 si es una reproducción libre

So the right to use the images, without limit of reproduction is a maximum of 2,954 mexian pesos per images... or about twenty cups of coffe...

the law involved has nothing to do with copyright.

http://www.cnmh.inah.gob.mx/ponencias/630.html

it is the "La Ley Federal sobre Monumentos y Zonas Arqueológicos, Artísticos e Históricos"
(federal law for monuments and archeological , artistics and historic sites)

It has the purpose of protect the national heritage. And what it is asking is a fee for taking the photographs for comercial use, stating what use would you give to it. It is no very high, and nowhere it goe to the amount if it were a copyright...

While Starbucks claimed the INAH had not gave them permision, i guess they did not made the correct way. the permision should not take more than five days. And if should cost form 100 to 250$ per image (for comercial use). For private of fair use, you do not need to pay.