No Stolen Trademarks Honored in America Act of 2023

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill (H.R. 1505) to modify the prohibition on recognition by United States courts of certain rights relating to certain marks, trade names, or commercial names, as amended.

The Clerk read the title of the bill.

The text of the bill is as follows: H.R. 1505

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 ``No Stolen Trademarks Honored in America Act of 2023''. SEC. 2. MODIFICATION OF PROHIBITION.

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 amended--

(1) in subsection (a)(2)--

(A) by inserting ``or entity of the executive branch'' after ``U.S. court'';

(B) by striking ``by a designated national''; and

(C) by inserting before the period ``that was used in connection with a business or assets that were confiscated unless the original owner of the mark, trade name, or commercial name, or the bonafide successor-in-interest has expressly consented'';

(2) in subsection (b)--

(A) by inserting ``or entity of the executive branch'' after ``U.S. court''; and

(B) by striking ``by a designated national or its successor-in-interest'';

(3) by redesignating subsection (d) as subsection (e);

(4) by inserting after subsection (c) the following:

``(d) Subsections (a)(2) and (b) of this section shall apply only if the person or entity asserting the rights knew or had reason to know at the time when the person or entity acquired the rights asserted that the mark, trade name, or commercial name was the same as or substantially similar to a mark, trade name, or commercial name that was used in connection with a business or assets that were confiscated.''; and

(5) in subsection (e), as so redesignated, by striking ``In this section:'' and all that follows through ``(2) The term'' and inserting ``In this section, the term''.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. ISSA. 1505.

Mr. Speaker, it is hard for the American people to believe, but it is true that foreign actors--foreign countries--have, in fact, stolen trademarks, absconded with the actual factories and the ability to produce various items and then had the gall to, in fact, use American law to sell America products that they in reality had already stolen.

This is no more truer than in the case of the communist nation of Cuba.

Under Fidel Castro, Cuba took everything. They took Coca-Cola. They took every possible item they could take, and then they took trade names. In some cases, like Coca-Cola, Coke continued to be produced in the United States, so it had no rights.

In the case of Bacardi, Bacardi moved to Puerto Rico and began making it there and selling it in the United States. In the case of, for example, Havana Club, they found themselves without any factories, so they worked together with other producers to continue their brand. While their brand was, in fact, being produced in America, the Castro regime--and now the Cuban Government--continued to apply year after year until eventually, due to what we would consider to be a wrongful act by the United States Patent and Trademark Office, awarded this country, who had stolen and still to this day uses the factories and the lands belonging to the family that produced Havana Club, they continue to sell Havana Club.

Now, to make matters worse, we are only talking about the United States because most of the world, in fact, took that brand name and was able to sell it in other countries. So the family that owned worldwide rights lost all but the United States, and if not for this piece of legislation, they and others would lose even their right here.

I am delighted to join with my colleague, Ms. Wasserman Schultz of Florida, to introduce this bill. It has 17 cosponsors, and it passed through the Judiciary Committee on a bipartisan basis.

We all agree that the U.S. Government should not award those who steal and exploit trademarks or any other intellectual property from its legitimate owners to then benefit from U.S. law. Allowing Cuba to propagate its misappropriations would be and is currently a travesty.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. ISSA. Mr. Speaker, in closing, I will make it very clear, if this product's trademark becomes available to its rightful owners again, the well-known company Bacardi will, in fact, have this product on the shelves again. If it is not passed, Cuba will not be able to sell under this name. In fact, these products would be prohibited if they came from Cuba.

The only purpose of Cuba trying to take this was to deny Cuban Americans the ability to sell a product that they owned before it was taken from the country.

There was an injustice that occurred before many in this room were born. We can only cure that injustice now by, in fact, passing this legislation.

I join with the gentlewoman from Florida (Ms. Wasserman Schultz) in urging all to vote for this bill as they have in this body, and then we will work on the people across the dome.

Mr. Speaker, I urge passage of this bill, and I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source