Should Cambodia franchise Angkor Wat like America had franchised Disneyland?

Dear readers, a few days ago I asked readers to write a full length article about what they think of the Indian replication of Cambodia's iconic Angkor Wat, titled "Angkor Wat replica in India is a good or bad idea?". Many people have commented, with some supporting and some opposing the ideas. I picked four, one publish here and three published here. Please enjoy reading them.
**********************************************
By Neakareach

A wave of reactions to the news that an Indian NGO is planning to construct a replica of Cambodia’s iconic Angkor Wat temple has been mixed and, sometimes, confusing, with those supporting the idea are spruiking that it is a pride to have our national emblem copied by foreigners, while others are opposed to the idea, citing copyright, while at the same time, are adamant that the replication could undermine Khmer pride.

Angkor Wat is unique and is no doubt Cambodia’s national pride as it’s been described as the largest religious building in the world unrivalled by any other structures on this planet earth.
But, in order to answer Khmerization’s question of whether the Angkor Wat replica in India is good or bad for Cambodia, one must examine the pros and cons of this idea first.

Could the Angkor Wat replica in India help attract tourists to Cambodia or could it take away tourists from Cambodia?

No one knows for sure, but one thing is certain: that the replica in India cannot rival the real Angkor Wat in Cambodia because it is not the original and the designs, the architectures, the carvings, the bas-relief and the apsaras, will be no match for the real Angkor Wat.

The Angkor Wat replica in India could be a double-edged sword for Cambodia too. There is a room for an argument that the replica could help advertise the real Angkor Wat to Indian and international tourists. The publicity surrounding the controversy of the construction of the replica and the replica itself, if it is a fine a structure like the real Angkor Wat, could help attract more tourists to Cambodia as Indian and international tourists might want to make a pilgrimage to see the real thing, the original Angkor Wat in Cambodia, just to feed their curiosity.

Could the replica take away tourists from the real Angkor Wat in Cambodia? It is possible. For those tourists on low budget, seeing the replica with less spending might be enough rather than spending more money to see the real Angkor Wat.

Will the replica affect the reputation and fame or the architecture of the original Angkor Wat and will the replica undermine Khmer pride and culture?

There can be no reason why the Angkor Wat replica could affect the reputation and the fame or the architectures of the original Angkor Wat as they are two separate temples, located in different geographical locations, but only having very similar names. Angkor Wat in Cambodia is still Angkor Wat and the replica in India is just a replica and therefore it could not in any way affect the real Angkor Wat in Cambodia. I do not think that the replica will undermine Khmer pride, as I mentioned earlier, Angkor Wat is still Angkor Wat, it is still in its original grandeur and therefore Khmer national pride is still there whether a replica is being built or not. On the contrary, it is a national pride that other nations want to replicate or copy things from us. And how can the Indian replication of Angkor Wat undermine Khmer culture while the cornerstone of Khmer culture and architectures were replicated and copied from India in the first place more than 2000 years ago?

I am convinced that the replica, no matter how good or skilled the Indian architects are, would not be able to rival the real Angkor Wat in Siem Reap. The celestial apsara dancers, the stone carvings, the bas-relief, the designs and the architecture itself cannot rival with the architectures of the real Angkor Wat in Siem Reap.

Can Cambodia claim a patent/copyright violation?

Someone has mentioned about the issue of the copyright. In order to claim patent right or copyright, a certain thing or invention must be patented with the International Patent and Trademark Office. As far as the issue of patent and copyright is concerned, Angkor Wat has not been patented yet.

And as far as copyright is concerned, the Indians can argue that replicas of famous landmarks had been replicated and copied around the world without permission. An Australian replica of the Stonehenge, a mysterious rock formation in England, and an American copy of Italy's famous Leaning Tower of Pisa and the copy of the Statue of Liberty of France in New York as well as a replica of India's Taj Mahal in Bangladesh, had been replicated without prior permission. The Chinese theme park, Window of the World, in Shenzhen city near Hong Kong contained replicas of the Eiffel Tower and the Arc de Triomphe in Paris as well as the Egyptian pyramids and also the Niagara Falls.

There is no doubt that Angkor Wat is unique and is a Cambodian national icon. However, in my opinion, the copyright issue cannot come into play in this case because Cambodia has not yet patented Angkor Wat, even if it’s been inscribed as a world heritage site by Unesco. And if the builders of the replica will just call the temple with a different name then the copyright issue is out of the question, even if the replica looks like the real Angkor Wat.

Should Cambodia franchise Angkor Wat like America had franchised Disneyland?

America’s iconic Disneyland theme park has been franchised and many parks have now been built around the world, with money earned from the theme parks flowing back to America. There are Disneyland in Tokyo, Hong Kong and Paris. Seeing the benefits that Disneyland had brought to America, should Cambodia’s iconic Angkor Wat be franchised just like Disneyland? What do you think?