All News
Four of the five largest tobacco producing companies of the USA, R.J.
Reynolds, Lorillard, Commonwealth Brands, Liggett Group and Santa Fe
Natural Tobacco Company are suing the U.S. federal government over a law
which will require them to print government created warning labels on
the package of their tobacco products.
The free speech
complaint is directed towards a law created by the Food and Drug
Administration (FDA) which requires larger and more prominent health
warnings on the labels of tobacco products starting in September 2012.
The
nine graphic images show among other things organs before and after the
regular use of tobacco products as well an image of a dead body after a
post mortem examination. Alongside the images, phrases are printed
informing the reader that smoking can be deadly or that smoking harms
children. Also posted on the labels is the number of a hotline that is
meant to assist tobacco consumers in quitting. The warning label will
take up 50% of the entire packaging and will cover the front, top and
back.
The FDA argues that the images are the first change in
cigarette marketing in 25 years and are therefore more than necessary to
inform the modern consumer of the dangers of smoking. The images are to
serve as a reminder of the great danger and health problems smoking
causes. They are also a tool of the public policy of reducing the costs
which smoke related diseases cause in the public health care system, as
well as avoiding unnecessary smoking related deaths and prevent young
people from starting to smoke. The FDA therefore believes the warnings
will have a positive effect on public health.
The tobacco
companies on the other side claim that the law violates their right to
free speech, which according to them protects their freedom of deciding
what to print on their labels. They also argue that the warnings do not
simply convey the message of informing the consumer. Instead, the
companies believe the labels are designed to evoke an emotional reaction
and therefore are meant to “scare” consumers away from the tobacco
products. Additionally, the tobacco companies claim that the organs and
body on the pictures are made to look worse by sanitizing them and using
actors. Furthermore, the companies complain that they will have to
spent millions on altering their brand logos and change the layout of
their packaging as well as invest in equipment to match the requirements
of the FDA law.
Printing warning images on tobacco product
packaging is already a part of public health strategies in Great
Britain, Romania, Belgium and Lithuania. It remains to be seen what
effect the new FDA law will have on consumers in the United States.
|
|
|
The North Carolina Bar Association International Law & Practice Section
in cooperation with
The Charlotte School of Law
Invites all Members of the International Law & Practice Section to attend
on Friday, August 26, 2011 10:45 AM – 1:30 PM
a Presentation and Luncheon*
"Politics and Precedents in Germany"
by
Prof. Dr. Thomas Lundmark
Professor of Common Law & Comparative Jurisprudence
at University of Münster, Germany
10:45 AM – 12:10 PM Lecture (Rm. 402)
12:20 PM – 1:30 PM Luncheon (Rm. 408)
at
Charlotte School of Law 2145 Suttle Avenue, Charlotte, NC 28208
RSVP:
Thursday, August 25, 2011 by 3 PM (limited space available – first-come, first-served)
This e-mail address is being protected from spam bots, you need JavaScript enabled to view it
or 704.333.5230
_______________________
*You may attend both or either parts of the program, as your schedules permit.
|
|
Die amerikanische Einwanderungsbehörde USCIS gab letzte Woche bekannt,
dass weiterhin H-1B Visaanträge für das Steuerjahr 2012 (Oktober 2011 -
September 2012) eingereicht werden können.
Die seit dem 1. April
laufende Frist zur Einreichung der Anträge läuft solange, bis die
Obergrenzen von 65.000 Anträgen für ein H-1B Visum bzw. 20.000 Anträgen
für das „H-1B Masters Exemptions“ Programm erreicht sind.
Das H-1B
Visum ist ein Arbeitsvisum, dass sich an Personen richtet, die einen
dem amerikanischem „bachelor degree“ entsprechenden Hochschulabschluss
vorweisen können. Des Weiteren wird eine schriftliche Stellenzusage von
einem US-Arbeitgeber vorrausgesetzt.
Aktuell sind ca. 19.000
Anträge für das H-1B Visum bei der USCIS eingeangen. Auch für das „H-1B
Master’s Exemption“ Programm, welches sich an Antragsteller richtet, die
mindestens einen US amerikanischen Magistergrad erworben haben, werden
noch Anträge entgegengenommen. Hier sind bisher 12.200 Anträge für das
Steuerjahr 2012 engereicht worden.
Die USCIS
veröffentlicht in regelmässigen Abständen auf ihrer Homepage aktuelle
Zahlen und weitere nützliche Informationen zu dem H-1B Visum. Weitere
Immigration Law News finden Sie natürlich auch auf unserem Blog .
|
|
We previously reported on our blog
about Texas' aim to follow the English Rule that requires the loser of a
civil suit to compensate the winner for his or her attorney's fees. At
the end of May, Texas Governor Rick Perry signed the Texas "Loser Pays"
bill into law, after both Texas Houses adopted the ‘Loser Pays’ lawsuit
reform.
Under the new law, a plaintiff must pay the winning
party’s legal fees if the complaint is found to be groundless. The law
creates expedited civil actions for cases less than $100.000 and allows
judges to dismiss meritless lawsuits early in the process. It is now on
Texas Supreme Court to define and to adopt rules for early dismissal of
lawsuits that have no basis in law or fact.
Although the new law
is not the groundbreaking “Loser Pays” system that some believed, it
should result in fewer frivolous lawsuits, lower litigation costs, and
release more capacity for legitimate claims. The reactions before and
after signing of the bill were and are very controversial and especially
the question whether the bill is good for small businesses are assessed
differently.
Supporters point out the new bill will help to
create jobs, still allow legitimate cases to proceed but protect
defendants from meritless cases. And, if Texas "Loser Pays" law leads to
fewer tort lawsuits overall, small business owners should see a drop in
those numbers. Some trial lawyer groups oppose the bill, claiming it
would give corporations the upper hand in lawsuits, especially in
situations where a dispute arises between a small business owner and a
company that has more resources. The law might also prevent individuals
who want to file a lawsuit, because people would not risk paying the
defendant's legal fees.
The Texas "Loser Pays" law will go into effect on September 1, 2011.
|
|
|
The long awaited patent reform legislation has been slowly making
its way through Congress. The Senate is expected to reconcile the
version that it passed back in March with the version that passed the
House of Representatives on June 23, 2011. Although it should not be
too difficult for the two bills to be reconciled and then sent to the
President, the issue of the debt ceiling has been taking up all of
Congress’s time and may push the reconciliation of the bills over to the
next session of Congress.
Known as the “America Invents
Act”, the proposed legislation changes several important things about
patent law in the United States. Most significantly it would change the
U.S. to a “first to file” system, rather than a “first to invent”
system. Currently, the rightful owner of the invention is the first
person to create the subject of the patent. Understandably, this can
cause problems of proof and sometimes leads to litigation between
competitors who file very similar patent applications. The “first to
file” system theoretically removes this problem because it should be
easy to determine who filed their application with the Patent and Trade
Office first. Several large companies are supporting the change to
“first to file”, and this is more consistent with most patent systems in
the rest of the world, but small businesses and individual inventors
are arguing that patent filing can be expensive and time consuming, and
without the resources to file immediately and often they will be left at
a disadvantage compared to larger corporations.
Another
change proposed in the American Invents Act would affect who can file
lawsuits under the false marking statute. Although the false marking
statute has enjoyed over 100 years without substantive change, several
recent court decisions have greatly increased the awards for successful
plaintiffs, which has in turn caused a dramatic rise in the number of
lawsuits filed. False marking is nearly unique in the United States,
in that anyone can file a claim, regardless of actual injury. The new
bill would limit the right to file false marking claims to individuals
and businesses who have suffered an actual competitive injury.
Many
other issues are set to be changed with the passage of the bill,
including the allocation of Patent and Trademark Office fees, and the
denial of state court jurisdiction over claims that involve patents,
plant variety protection, and copyrights.
|
|
| | << Start < Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next > End >>
| | Results 1 - 15 of 243 |
|
|
Did you know? You can receive our free monthly NewsLetter from Reinhard von Hennigs, written in German and English. Tons of useful information each month about German and American law.
