[IP] preventing repeal of tradedmark fair use protections
Begin forwarded message:
From: Paul Levy <plevy@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: May 5, 2006 10:26:34 AM EDT
To: dave@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Preventing repeal of tradedmark fair use protections
The effort to stop Congress from repealing current express statutory
protection for fair use and noncommercial use of trademarks against
statutory infringement claims continues, with the bill poised to move
forward in the House Judiciary Committee and toward final passage.
In addition to the letter set forth below, we have issued a more
detailed, "technical" legal analysis of trademark owners' defense of
their having sneaked this language into HR 683 without having
explained to anybody what they were doing. http://www.citizen.org/
documents/ResponsetoAIPLAon43(a).pdf
Paul Alan Levy
Public Citizen Litigation Group
1600 - 20th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20009
(202) 588-1000
http://www.citizen.org/litigation
Robert Yule 05/05/06 10:03 AM >>>
PUBLIC CITIZEN PRESS RELEASE
For Immediate Release: Contact: Robert Yule (202) 588-7703
May 5, 2006 Paul Levy (202) 588-1000
Groups Urge Change to Trademark Bill to Protect Free Speech of
Artists, Small Business Owners, Others
House Judiciary Committee to Reconsider Trademark Dilution Revision Act
WASHINGTON, D.C. - Several consumer, arts and public interest groups
sent a letter Thursday to the House Judiciary Committee to express
concern about a technical language change made by the Senate to the
Trademark Dilution Revision Act (H.R. 683) that threatens to harm
consumers, artists and small businesses. The change would have a
chilling effect on free speech and artistic expression by making it
more difficult to refer to big companies by mentioning their
trademarks. The groups - the American Library Association, Public
Citizen, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, the Authors Guild,
Public Knowledge, the Society of Children's Book Writers &
Illustrators, National Video Resources and Volunteer Lawyers for the
Arts - suggested eliminating the change in order to protect people
from being sued by big companies when they cite their trademarks. The
bill was passed by the Senate and must now be reconsidered in the House.
Consumers and artists are currently protected from being sued for
trademark infringement by companies if the use of the trademark is
for fair use, news reporting/commentary or non-commercial use. The
technical change in the bill by the Senate would eliminate these
three important defenses against charges of trademark infringement.
In one current case, Volkswagen of America is threatening to sue an
Alabama artist, Donald Stewart, who drew an automobile in the shape
of the classic VW "Bug" made out of insect parts. As passed by the
Senate, the bill would protect Stewart against claims of trademark
"dilution by blurring and dilution by tarnishment," but he would
still be exposed to the devastating prospect of having to defend a
trademark infringement lawsuit.
When a big company challenges a reference to its trademark, small
business owners, artists, photographers or illustrators are often
forced to yield to avoid costly infringement litigation. "Artists,
consumers and others need to be able to refer to trademarks when they
are discussing matters great and small," the letter from the groups
said. It urged the House to change the language of the bill back to
the way it appears in current law to avoid the potentially stifling
impact on free speech.
To read the letter to the House Judiciary Committee, visit http://
www.citizen.org/documents/trademarkletter.pdf
###
Public Citizen is a national, nonprofit consumer advocacy
organization based in Washington, D.C. For more information, please
visit www.citizen.org.
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/