Hadopi, the French anti-piracy body created by the controversial law on creation and the Internet, is facing budget cuts amid growing criticism that it’s too expensive and ineffective. The institution, dedicated to distributing protected works and safeguarding digital rights, enforces a gradual response system in which suspected infringers first receive warning emails and letters, then can be prosecuted, and, finally, face Internet cut-off. Graduated response, or “three-strikes,” has been held out as a model that other countries could use against illegal downloading. Given Hadopi’s problems, it’s hard to believe other nations will pursue it, said digital rights activists. The body may survive in France, but under a new merged regulator akin to the Office of Communications in the U.K., said Hogan Lovells (Paris) media and communications lawyer Winston Maxwell.
The Court of Appeals docketed Since Hardware (Guangzhou) Co. Ltd.’s appeal of the Court of International Trade’s rulings in Home Products International, Inc. v. United States. Since Hardware, defendant-intervenor in the case, filed the appeal on Aug. 10 concerning three CIT rulings in January, May, and June. At issue were surrogate values calculated for Since Hardware’s imports in the International Trade Administration’s 2007-08 administrative review of the antidumping duty order on floor-standing, metal-top ironing tables and certain parts thereof (A-570-888). CIT remanded the final results in January, and sustained the resulting remand determination in June.
Hitachi Home Electronics (America) wants the U.S. Supreme Court to step in and give teeth back to a 42-year-old federal statute that bars U.S. Customs and Border Protection from dragging its feet on import duty protests, it said in a July 30 petition. In 2003, Hitachi began importing plasma TVs into the U.S. produced at its factories in Mexico, the petition said. Hitachi paid 5 percent import duty on every set it shipped into the U.S., it said. It filed 10 protests with Customs claiming it should have been allowed to ship the sets duty-free under the North American Free Trade Agreement, it said. But Customs never acted on the protests, contrary to the Customs Courts Act of 1970, which places a “two-year limitation” on granting or denying such protests, it said. Hitachi filed and lost its suit in the Court of International Trade, and last October, the U.S. Appeals Court for the Federal Circuit ruled that notwithstanding the two-year limitation in the statute, “Customs may take as long as it wants to allow or deny protests,” the petition said. Problem is, “importers file tens of thousands of such protests annually, disputing the assessment and collection of billions of dollars in duty assessments and payments,” it said. Unless the Supreme Court intervenes, letting stand the appeals court ruling “will embolden Customs’ practice of ignoring the two-year limitation” in the statute and will “empower Customs to refuse to decide any protests, thus increasing uncertainty and costs to U.S. consumers and businesses,” it said. Only the Supreme Court “can remedy the harm caused by the Federal Circuit’s decision which affects all customs duty protests and, potentially, all imports into the United States,” it said. “This case, containing no factual disputes, offers this Court a clean opportunity to examine the federal question of paramount importance raised in this case.” Except for a few product categories like front projectors, Hitachi has largely abandoned the CE business in the U.S. and stopped shipping plasma TVs and other CE products here at least two years ago.
Hitachi Home Electronics (America) wants the U.S. Supreme Court to step in and strengthen a 42-year-old federal statute that bars CBP from dragging its feet on import duty protests, it said in a July 30 petition. Only the Supreme Court "can remedy the harm caused by the Federal Circuit's decision which affects all customs duty protests and, potentially, all imports into the United States," it said. "This case, containing no factual disputes, offers this Court a clean opportunity to examine the federal question of paramount importance raised in this case." Responses to Hitachi's Supreme Court request are due Aug. 31.
International Trade Today is providing readers with some of the top stories for July 30-Aug. 3 in case they were missed last week.
An Advisory Committee On Commercial Operations (COAC) subcommittee has renewed discussion of an AD/CV duty bond as a possible solution to the concerns surrounding the collection of AD/CV duties, said CBP in its Bond Subcommittee report. The report was among a number of documents released in preparation for the Aug. 15 COAC meeting. The CBP Bond report is (here).
The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed part the Court of International Trade’s July 2010 dismissal of Ford’s request to liquidate and refund duties paid on ten reconciliation entries of imported Jaguar brand vehicles that Ford argued should have been deemed liquidated. In 2010, CIT had dismissed Ford’s claims for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and lack of controversy, and had declined to issue a judgment on other claims. CAFC reversed CIT’s jurisdiction ruling because CIT’s ruling was based on events that occurred after Ford filed its court complaint, reversed CIT’s dismissal for lack of controversy, and vacated CIT’s decision to dismiss other Ford claims.
China criticized the International Trade Administration’s proposal to increase the threshold at which market economy prices can be used to value inputs for antidumping investigations and reviews involving China and Vietnam, but domestic industry representatives were in favor of the change, and even suggested more-stringent requirements, in comments submitted in response to the ITA’s June 28 proposed rule. Comments were due July 30.
Zynga shares were up slightly Monday despite the suits filed against the company last week. The company declined to comment Monday about the several legal actions seeking class action status, accusing it and its top executives of insider trading and other securities violations. Zynga shares closed 8.1 percent higher Monday at $2.94 -- still a far cry from its 52-week high of $15.91 in March.
Zynga shares were up slightly Monday despite the suits filed against the company last week. The company declined to comment Monday about the several legal actions seeking class action status, accusing it and its top executives of insider trading and other securities violations. Zynga shares closed 8.1 percent higher Monday at $2.94 -- still a far cry from its 52-week high of $15.91 in March.