[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 114 (Tuesday, July 17, 2007)]
[Senate]
[Page S9477]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. LEAHY (for himself, Mr. Craig, Mr. Bingaman, and Mr. 
        Roberts):
  S. 1806. A bill to restore to the judiciary the power to decide all 
trademark and trade name cases arising under the laws and treaties of 
the United States by repealing the prohibition on recognition by United 
States courts of certain rights relating to certain marks, trade names, 
and commercial names and impediments to registration of such marks, and 
for other purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I am pleased to introduce a bill to correct 
a most unfortunate piece of legislation that was slipped into an 
appropriations bill several years ago, which will restore the Federal 
courts to their proper position in considering certain trademark 
issues. I joined Senator Craig, Senator Bingaman, and Senator Roberts 
on a version of this bill in the 109th Congress. That bill did not 
reach final passage, but its importance demands our renewed attention. 
Together, we are reintroducing the Judicial Powers Restoration Act of 
2007.
  We will repeal Section 211 of the Omnibus Appropriations Bill of 
1999. Section 211 was slipped into that appropriations bill at the 
eleventh hour, under the radar of most members of the Senate. It was 
done in a way specifically intended to bypass the normal legislative 
process. Its intent was to affect the outcome of a dispute over the 
``Havana Club'' trademark for rum. Section 211 prohibits the 
registration or renewal of registration of a trademark of a business 
that was expropriated by the Cuban Government. It also disallows ``any 
assertion of rights'' by Cuban entities, or a foreign successor in 
interest to a Cuban entity, with respect to trademarks of expropriated 
businesses. Finally, the provision states that no U.S. Court may 
recognize the attempt by a Cuban entity or its successor in interest, 
from asserting treaty rights with respect to an expropriated mark 
unless the owner expressly consents.
  I am not here to help out a liquor company. Rather, I am here to 
ensure that intellectual property protections recognized by our laws 
are honored in our courts. I am here to ensure that U.S. courts may 
consider trademark cases arising under U.S. laws. Most importantly, I 
am here because the legislative process needs to take place in the open 
and in front of the people, not under cover of darkness and behind 
closed doors.
  I have been working with Senator Craig, Senator Bingaman, and Senator 
Roberts for more than three years on this issue, and I hope we can move 
quickly to pass this bipartisan legislation.
  I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the 
Record.
  There being no objection, the text of the bill was ordered to be 
printed in the Record, as follows:

                                S. 1806

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Judicial Powers Restoration 
     Act of 2007''.

     SEC. 2. PURPOSE.

       The purpose of this Act is to restore to the judiciary the 
     power to decide all trademark and trade name cases arising 
     under the laws and treaties of the United States by repealing 
     the prohibition on recognition by United States courts of 
     certain rights relating to certain marks, trade names, and 
     commercial names and impediments to registration of such 
     marks.

     SEC. 3. REPEAL.

       (a) In General.--Section 211 of the Department of Commerce 
     and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1999 (as contained 
     in section 101(b) of division A of Public Law 105-277; 112 
     Stat. 2681-88) is repealed.
       (b) Regulations.--Not later than 30 days after the date of 
     enactment of this Act, the Secretary of the Treasury shall 
     issue such regulations as are necessary to carry out the 
     repeal made by subsection (a), including removing or revoking 
     any prohibition on transactions or payments to which 
     subsection (a)(1) of section 211 of the Department of 
     Commerce and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 1999 
     applied.

                          ____________________