How much information is too much?

[chalkoutline]

BTW, It seems to me as soon as you approach the landowner with an NDA, they'll realize there may be treasure so they may look for markers to locate the treasure themselves.
So the mere contact with landowner could be revealing part(s) of the trade secret....i.e., too much information.

 

[releventchair]

Well my quest for 'BOOTS ON THE GROUND" has hit a snag. After contacting the land owner with the most limited introduction, they prefer to just not talk to me.
I basically said I may have information of historical importance about their property. How do I approach them with with what I have without giving it all to them.

You already approached them. Plural? That offers conflicting potential consents right off the bat.

Consider the stranger at your door wanting to come in for a peek around.
What would you say?
My sisters have been given tours of childhood homes by current owners. That's a little crazy maybe.
I have pics of a home we lived in in the 60's I met the current owner at. No I'm not good a gaining permissions. But am prepared when I do.

From their perspective who /what did they see?
Was it someone nervous? Nosey? Crazy? Someone looking like a dog under a buffet table?
Someone dressed strangely for the area or the purpose?

"I've got something you need to see" might not be the right approach. (!)

I found a caretaker for a property and was straight up about wanting to detect it as a hobby due to it's age and locale.
The care taker demanded half the gold. (I did not mention gold or anything valuable).
I told him fine , but I get the container it's in.
He laughed and I went detecting. To my surprise an aged family member and an escort showed up and showed me some orienting some of the homestead atop a prior homestead stuff. I didn't ask if the caretaker alerted those still involved or it was happenstance. Good to have been permitted when asked if I was on thier arrival though!

Landowner and occupants are entitled to refusal same as you are.
The instant anything valuable or metal detecting or worse ; TREASURE is mentioned instant images of idiots tearing up the landscape arise. Then of course a knee jerk reaction of you are there to take something away from those not in the know or ability.

You already took that risk.
Next time either you are a slightly odd character enjoying a hobby; or are a thief asking permission.
Give them your name and contact number on something other than a scrap of paper or fast food receipt.
Assure them you won't remove anything without an agreement with them and that they are expected to be with you if they have any concern at all.
Be prepared for an agreement. In "their" best interest. Not yours. What is that? A split? A percentage? A nothing? Pictures only? 3/4 the recoveries? Owners first choice of thier share ; or you your first choice of your share? Ect. and so on.
Would you agree to a stranger with an interest just going poking around? I'd be telling him I can detect it just fine myself. Or have someone I trust (me) detect it. Or poke around it a little.

Would you agree to a stranger that just knocked on your door carefully removing a section of drywall and repairing it after removing it's contents you get none of IF you even know what was removed? Why or why not?
Same in a yard. Even if it's unkempt. Even out back in the field or woods or dirt floored barn.
Why should you be allowed?
Let alone on the property.
It's always best to tell strangers to leave. More so those interested in your property without explain why!

Now try to deceive a landowner of your intentions. As opposed to being truthful.
Trust that they can read you just fine regardless of what you say.
Meaning ; be prepared to negotiate in their interest first. Not yours.
If it is a treasure like the Beale is alleged to be you'd be better off buying the land outright.
If you don't have that kind of faith in it's existence being where you insist it is then quit acting like you do and give the landowner a sound reason to allow your trespass. You have more to gain with a trinket from an alleged cache than with nothing.

 

[Carl-NC]

The subject question is being asked because the TNET member believes they have solved the ciphers and they want to contact the landowner for permission to.
1. if they don't share enough, the landowner will not give permission.
2. If too much is shared, the landowner will dig the treasure alone.
So the question is how to legally protect the information in the event of #2.

If that's the case, the copyright is of no use. But neither is an NDA. An NDA is a promise that the signatory won't divulge any of the information to another person, but they are still free to act on it themself. Here's the rub: if there is treasure on the property, the property owner is the legal owner of that treasure. If they sign an NDA, you spill the beans, and then they dig up the treasure without you, you have nothing to fall back on -- it was their treasure to begin with. An NDA doesn't change that.

What you would need instead is a full-blown contract that stipulates a percentage split if the treasure is found, by anyone, using your information. That is, it includes non-use, non-circumvention, and exclusivity terms. I expect you will have to spill at least some of the beans in order to convince a landowner to sign that. Even then, I would expect them to want to "think about it for a while," the "while" being long enough to get a metal detector and look for it themself before signing a contract giving away 50%. Better hope their property is really big, or the treasure is really deep. The reality is, the landowner holds the cards that matter; they de facto already own the treasure, so convincing them to give away part of it is a steep hill to climb.

If it is a treasure like the Beale is alleged to be you'd be better off buying the land outright.
If you don't have that kind of faith in it's existence being where you insist it is then quit acting like you do

This is the most correct answer. Put your money where your research is, buy the property and then the treasure is 100% yours. Over & over I see braggarts posting on TNet, claiming that they've solved one of these treasure legends, but they never seem self-assured to the point where they are willing to act on it. Apparently, they just like to brag. If bragging is all you want to do, then the copyright will establish you as the original braggart for your particular solution.

 

[releventchair]

If that's the case, the copyright is of no use. But neither is an NDA. An NDA is a promise that the signatory won't divulge any of the information to another person, but they are still free to act on it themself. Here's the rub: if there is treasure on the property, the property owner is the legal owner of that treasure. If they sign an NDA, you spill the beans, and then they dig up the treasure without you, you have nothing to fall back on -- it was their treasure to begin with. An NDA doesn't change that.

What you would need instead is a full-blown contract that stipulates a percentage split if the treasure is found, by anyone, using your information. That is, it includes non-use, non-circumvention, and exclusivity terms. I expect you will have to spill at least some of the beans in order to convince a landowner to sign that. Even then, I would expect them to want to "think about it for a while," the "while" being long enough to get a metal detector and look for it themself before signing a contract giving away 50%. Better hope their property is really big, or the treasure is really deep. The reality is, the landowner holds the cards that matter; they de facto already own the treasure, so convincing them to give away part of it is a steep hill to climb.



This is the most correct answer. Put your money where your research is, buy the property and then the treasure is 100% yours. Over & over I see braggarts posting on TNet, claiming that they've solved one of these treasure legends, but they never seem self-assured to the point where they are willing to act on it. Apparently, they just like to brag. If bragging is all you want to do, then the copyright will establish you as the original braggart for your particular solution.

I can almost sense the disappointment of someone approaching me with an NDA ; on their way off my property.
Just because of the principle of it. And I get mighty principled about my meager land holdings. (Plural).

 

[Carl-NC]

I can almost sense the disappointment of someone approaching me with an NDA ; on their way off my property.

Yup. Bring me an NDA or a notarized document and I will take you to school.

 

[jeff of pa]

QUOTE : 'I basically said I may have information of historical importance about their property'.

that Could Help, However , That Could also Be a Permssion killer .

I Had a Site Once mid 1750's French & Indian war Fort/Morivian church/revolutionry War Soldiers camp site with a local rumor of a Soldiers Payment treasure

He Didn't Care What I Found, I Just had to Promise him not to
Contact the Histerical Society ! He wanted His Land and did Not want
anyone Telling him How He can use or Sell it.

I Recently seen he Sold His Land

Anything other then a Gentleman's Promise By Me Like Signatures on a Contract May Have Been a Permission Killer

 

[treasure1822]

I’d bet almost anything that it’s not buried in Virginia. I did have my notes, research, and my thesis notarized. That was my attempt at establishing prior discovery. Perhaps that’s an option for anyone else too. I wish I could explain all of my findings but I won’t in this forum. Like others, I’ve narrowed it down to a few acres of land. It is currently owned by someone else. Now I I have to silently wait until the property ever goes on the market, or try to engage the owners. The wait is the hardest part.

You and I are in the same "Boat" as it were...first I would check out the states "Treasure Trove Law"., that is the true "legal" ownership. Can you answer the five "W's"?

 

[treasure1822]

The subject question is being asked because the TNET member believes they have solved the ciphers and they want to contact the landowner for permission to.
1. if they don't share enough, the landowner will not give permission.
2. If too much is shared, the landowner will dig the treasure alone.
So the question is how to legally protect the information in the event of #2.

According to Google AI...
Only an NDA. The research must be treated as a trade secret.

The following will not
1. Registered/dated letter with research to self
2. Notarized/dated research
3. Copyrighted research

I am in question of a NDA to, the land owner could come up with a bogus reason for scanning their property. My problem is the land owner is elderly and I'm sure would prefer their children handling the legalities and I have found that to be a costly upfront venture.

 

[treasure1822]

You already approached them. Plural? That offers conflicting potential consents right off the bat.

Consider the stranger at your door wanting to come in for a peek around.
What would you say?
My sisters have been given tours of childhood homes by current owners. That's a little crazy maybe.
I have pics of a home we lived in in the 60's I met the current owner at. No I'm not good a gaining permissions. But am prepared when I do.

From their perspective who /what did they see?
Was it someone nervous? Nosey? Crazy? Someone looking like a dog under a buffet table?
Someone dressed strangely for the area or the purpose?

"I've got something you need to see" might not be the right approach. (!)

I found a caretaker for a property and was straight up about wanting to detect it as a hobby due to it's age and locale.
The care taker demanded half the gold. (I did not mention gold or anything valuable).
I told him fine , but I get the container it's in.
He laughed and I went detecting. To my surprise an aged family member and an escort showed up and showed me some orienting some of the homestead atop a prior homestead stuff. I didn't ask if the caretaker alerted those still involved or it was happenstance. Good to have been permitted when asked if I was on thier arrival though!

Landowner and occupants are entitled to refusal same as you are.
The instant anything valuable or metal detecting or worse ; TREASURE is mentioned instant images of idiots tearing up the landscape arise. Then of course a knee jerk reaction of you are there to take something away from those not in the know or ability.

You already took that risk.
Next time either you are a slightly odd character enjoying a hobby; or are a thief asking permission.
Give them your name and contact number on something other than a scrap of paper or fast food receipt.
Assure them you won't remove anything without an agreement with them and that they are expected to be with you if they have any concern at all.
Be prepared for an agreement. In "their" best interest. Not yours. What is that? A split? A percentage? A nothing? Pictures only? 3/4 the recoveries? Owners first choice of thier share ; or you your first choice of your share? Ect. and so on.
Would you agree to a stranger with an interest just going poking around? I'd be telling him I can detect it just fine myself. Or have someone I trust (me) detect it. Or poke around it a little.

Would you agree to a stranger that just knocked on your door carefully removing a section of drywall and repairing it after removing it's contents you get none of IF you even know what was removed? Why or why not?
Same in a yard. Even if it's unkempt. Even out back in the field or woods or dirt floored barn.
Why should you be allowed?
Let alone on the property.
It's always best to tell strangers to leave. More so those interested in your property without explain why!

Now try to deceive a landowner of your intentions. As opposed to being truthful.
Trust that they can read you just fine regardless of what you say.
Meaning ; be prepared to negotiate in their interest first. Not yours.
If it is a treasure like the Beale is alleged to be you'd be better off buying the land outright.
If you don't have that kind of faith in it's existence being where you insist it is then quit acting like you do and give the landowner a sound reason to allow your trespass. You have more to gain with a trinket from an alleged cache than with nothing.

That's the killer, buying the land outright is a major investment, and I mean major. My wife would not be understanding of that investment and my family may become more humoritive towards my research. I have done my research on the states "Treasure Trove Law and it is still to the finder but I'm sure even that would be contested. I'm looking for nothing more that a 50/50 split with the rights to the story.

 

[releventchair]

That's the killer, buying the land outright is a major investment, and I mean major. My wife would not be understanding of that investment and my family may become more humoritive towards my research. I have done my research on the states "Treasure Trove Law and it is still to the finder but I'm sure even that would be contested. I'm looking for nothing more that a 50/50 split with the rights to the story.

The owner holds the cookie. Some are content with that alone.

I know of a site watched by a couple competing particular interested passers by for many decades the owner refused trespassing to access .
Multiple would be treasure hunters had similar leads to the site.
One I knew.
The orchards trees were removed. That would have been a good time to search it.
I lost track of ownership. Not my lead to pursue.
But I do wonder when I go by once in a while if it was ever searched.
Those hunters of the past that were watching it are gone now.

Elsewhere a buyers desk type table was covered with a single layer of mostly gold.
More existed buried in the same yarded property in unknown spots but the person selling wasn't concerned about it being recovered just yet. If ever.
I suggested to the buyer I was available to help locate caches , ,to no avail.
His impression was that what remained was likely to remain.

Some people aren't worried about what's buried still. Let alone what might be buried.
A stranger approaching about a search? Who do you trust?
Could be stolen property involved from a prior heist. A prisoner freed and now back to recover something.
(Yes things can be buried on other peoples property. Reasons vary but the wrong thing recovered and seen can cause trouble by evidence.)
Could be someone's pet from a prior ownership they want recovered. Or a worse skeleton.
Hazardous material would be a expensive exposure.

When you don't specify what you expect to recover ; the owner/owners agent is left questioning much as I as to what you're up to.
And they should be.

 

[Carl-NC]

If a metal detector and normal digging is enough to find the alleged treasure, one thing to attempt is to get permission for a general metal detecting search. Don't mention the treasure; instead, make up some story that you're looking for evidence of such-and-such, like a Civil War encampment, or a stagecoach stop, or whatever fits the region. Offer a reasonable sharing contract, then if you find the treasure it's all legal. This is less likely to produce resistance from the land owner.

 

[treasure1822]

The owner holds the cookie. Some are content with that alone.

I know of a site watched by a couple competing particular interested passers by for many decades the owner refused trespassing to access .
Multiple would be treasure hunters had similar leads to the site.
One I knew.
The orchards trees were removed. That would have been a good time to search it.
I lost track of ownership. Not my lead to pursue.
But I do wonder when I go by once in a while if it was ever searched.
Those hunters of the past that were watching it are gone now.

Elsewhere a buyers desk type table was covered with a single layer of mostly gold.
More existed buried in the same yarded property in unknown spots but the person selling wasn't concerned about it being recovered just yet. If ever.
I suggested to the buyer I was available to help locate caches , ,to no avail.
His impression was that what remained was likely to remain.

Some people aren't worried about what's buried still. Let alone what might be buried.
A stranger approaching about a search? Who do you trust?
Could be stolen property involved from a prior heist. A prisoner freed and now back to recover something.
(Yes things can be buried on other peoples property. Reasons vary but the wrong thing recovered and seen can cause trouble by evidence.)
Could be someone's pet from a prior ownership they want recovered. Or a worse skeleton.
Hazardous material would be a expensive exposure.

When you don't specify what you expect to recover ; the owner/owners agent is left questioning much as I as to what you're up to.
And they should be.

I could state that I am in search of a metallic marker which is the starting reference to the quest. A slight embellishment but still true...Six plus feet straight down...

 

[treasure1822]

If a metal detector and normal digging is enough to find the alleged treasure, one thing to attempt is to get permission for a general metal detecting search. Don't mention the treasure; instead, make up some story that you're looking for evidence of such-and-such, like a Civil War encampment, or a stagecoach stop, or whatever fits the region. Offer a reasonable sharing contract, then if you find the treasure it's all legal. This is less likely to produce resistance from the land owner.

I like that!

 

[souce19]

You and I are in the same "Boat" as it were...first I would check out the states "Treasure Trove Law"., that is the true "legal" ownership. Can you answer the five "W's"?

Yes. No AI.

 

[souce19]

The nda’s and property ownership is one thing. The taxes implications, lawyers required, the security and storage of a cache this large is a whole other animal entirely.

 

[treasure1822]

The nda’s and property ownership is one thing. The taxes implications, lawyers required, the security and storage of a cache this large is a whole other animal entirely.

Oh I Agree with that...Mel Fisher had a large battle with ownership against Florida and the Supreme Court of the US finally ruled on their treasure trove law which forced a lot of states to change theirs.