We use cookies to give you the best online experience. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies in accordance with our cookie policy. Learn more here.Close Me
On February 22, 2012, the Office of Foreign Assets Control
(OFAC) issued
General License No. 15 for the Syria sanctions President Obama
implemented in August.
President Obama's
Executive Order No. 13582 blocked property of the Syrian
government and prohibited certain transactions with respect to
Syria, expanding on executive orders and sanctions that were
previously issued by the Bush II Administration. The Bush
Administration sanctions primarily applied to exports or reexports
of U.S. origin goods or goods containing more than a de
minimis U.S. content. The current Administration's
sanctions apply to a much wider scope of goods and services.
To date, however, the Administration has not implemented any
regulations relating to the Syrian sanctions, so U.S. persons have
been unsure as to how broadly the new sanctions would apply.
Therefore, most exporters have taken a conservative stance and
presumed they cannot transact any business with Syria, directly or
indirectly, similar to other sanctions programs, like those against
Iran.
Similar to the other sanctions programs, OFAC has issued a
series of general licenses for certain services and transactions
relating to Syria. These general licenses range from diplomatic
activities to noncommercial remittances. The newest general license
for Syria allows certain transactions relating to patents,
trademarks, and copyrights. It allows companies to pay fees to the
Syrian government to maintain their IP licenses and mirrors the
General Licenses in place in other sanctions programs.
It is important to understand the distinction between general
licenses and specific licenses issued by OFAC. A general license is
an open authorization for U.S. persons to engage in activity that
would otherwise be prohibited by sanctions. It is not an exemption
because it can be revoked at any time by OFAC. Specific licenses
are authorizations granted on a case-by-case basis after a party
applies for them.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.
Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.
As is well known, patent trolls often threaten dozens of alleged infringers in the hope of scoring quick license fees from those who understandably prefer to provide a modest payoff, thereby avoiding expensive and protracted litigation.
In order to best protect the IP rights of a U.S. company seeking to produce goods through a Chinese manufacturer by providing a protected design, the U.S. company needs to take actions even before the contracting stages.
On November 12, 2012, the State Intellectual Property Office of the People’s Republic of issued the Draft Rules on Inventor-Employee Inventions for public comment, and this article seeks to reconcile the different provisions between the Implementing Rules and the Draft Rules.
A discussion following Shepard Fairey pleading guilty to the misdemeanor charge of criminal contempt for destroying and altering documents in his civil lawsuit against The Associated Press.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed a summary judgment ruling in favor of seven film studios finding that the defendant induced third parties to download infringing copies of the plaintiffs’ copyrighted works.
