South Carolina

  Trademark.
HOME ABOUT US FAQ'S RESOURCES CONTACT US FREE CASE REVIEW
February 06, 2012
Trademark-Law
             
 
Selecting an attorney for legal cases is a very important decision. Please enter your information below to receive a Free Consultation from an attorney in your area:
 
Zip Code:   
 

Trademark News

 

2005 Family Entertainment And Copyright Act

ESTIMATED IMPACT ON THE PRIVATE SECTOR

S. 167
would impose two private-sector mandates as defined in UMRA. CBO estimates that the direct cost of those mandates would fall well below the annual threshold established by UMRA for private-sector mandates ($123 million in 2005, adjusted annually for inflation).

First, the bill would impose a private-sector mandate on copyright owners. Section 202 would limit the right of copyright owners to collect compensation under copyright law from persons using or manufacturing a technology that enables making limited changes to a motion picture for a private home viewing. According to testimony from the Patent and Trademark Office and other sources, no such compensation is currently received by copyright owners. Therefore, CBO estimates that the direct cost of the mandate, measured as net income forgone, would be small or zero.

Second, section 202 would impose a private-sector mandate on manufacturers, licensees, and licensors of technology (manufactured six months or more after the bill's enactment) that enables the making of limited portions of audio or video content of a motion picture imperceptible. Such manufacturers, licensees, or licensors would be required to ensure that the technology provides a clear and conspicuous notice that the performance of the motion picture is altered from the performance intended by the director or copyright holder of the motion picture.

Complying with the mandate would exempt such manufacturers, licensees, or licensors from liability under section 32 of the Trademark Act of 1946. The direct cost of the mandate on those private-sector entities would be the total cost of providing the notice less the direct savings achieved by limiting their liability. CBO has no basis for determining the direct savings for the exemption from trademark liability. However, according to government and other sources, the technology to provide the required notice is readily available and is currently used by some manufacturers. Thus, CBO expects that the direct cost to comply with the mandate, if any, would be minimal.

 

Contact our South Carolina Trademark Lawyer Now!

 

 
Did You Know?    
 
 
All your procedures for submitting amendments/corrections to trademark applications.
Once an application has been “approved for publication” by the examining attorney, all amendments and requests for corrections are processed as amendments/corrections after publication.

 


  News Room  
 


Latest news about Trademark cases in South Carolina and nationwide:

U.S. Government Brings Anti-Counterfeiting And Piracy Program To Ohio
Columbus, Ohio – United States Deputy Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property Stephen Pinkos and Senator George Voinovich (R-OH) toda...
Read more >


Patented And The Conditions Under Which A Patent
In the language of the statute, any person who “invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or...
Read more >


More Trademark News >

 
 

Trademark Terms

 


Today's Terms

Contributory Infringement

Definition:
Indirect infringement of intellectual property rights in which one person contributes to the direct act of infringement of another.

Renewal

Definition:
The extension of a registration of a trademark or the extension of a copyright.

Common Law Rights

Definition:
Property or other legal rights that do not absolutely require formal registration in order to enforce them.

More Trademark Terms >

 

Trademark Resources

 


Search Trademark resources in our resource center:

More Resources >

 

Trademark Hot Topics

 


Topics Related to Trademark Law:

  • Trademark Application
  • Trademark Infringement
  • Copyright
  • Patent
  • Intellectual Property
  • Lanham Act
  • USPTO

More Trademark Topics >

South Carolina Trademark-Law Attorney

 
If you live in the following cities and need an Trademark-Law attorney you should contact our Trademark-Law Attorney as soon as possible:

  • Abbeville
  • Aiken
  • Anderson
  • Beaufort
  • Belton
  • Bennettsville
  • Bluffton
  • Camden
  • Charleston
  • Chester
  • Clemson
  • Clover
  • Columbia
  • Conway
  • Darlington
  • Dillon
  • Easley
  • Elgin
  • Florence
  • Fort Mill
  • Fountain Inn
  • Gaffney
  • Gaston
  • Georgetown
  • Goose Creek
  • Greenville
  • Greenwood
  • Greer
  • Hartsville
  • Hilton Head Island
  • Inman
  • Irmo
  • Ladson
  • Lancaster
  • Laurens
  • Lexington
  • Marion
  • Moncks Corner
  • Mount Pleasant
  • Murrells Inlet
  • Myrtle Beach
  • Newberry
  • North Augusta
  • North Charleston
  • Orangeburg
  • Pickens
  • Piedmont
  • Rock Hill
  • Seneca
  • Simpsonville
  • Spartanburg
  • Summerville
  • Sumter
  • Taylors
  • Travelers Rest
  • Union
  • Walterboro
  • West Columbia
  • York
 


Legal Disclaimers
All attorney listings are a paid attorney advertisement, and do not in any way constitute a referral or endorsement by an approved or authorized lawyer referral service. The information provided on South Carolina Trademark.com is not intended to be legal advice, but merely conveys general information related to legal issues commonly encountered. Your access to and use of this website is subject to additional Terms and Conditions.

Local Professional? Generate new business today
Call 866-227-9356 or contact a sales rep


This site is part of the LawFirms.com Network
©2012 ExpertHub, wholly owned subsidiary of MoxyMedia, Inc.