Merchandise Marks Amendment Bill: finalisation

Meeting report

TRADE AND INDUSTRY PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE
29 October 2002
MERCHANDISE MARKS AMENDMENT BILL: FINALISATION

Merchandise Marks Amendment Bill B63-2002
Amendments agreed to (Appendix 1)
Cape Media Corporation (Appendix 2)

SUMMARY
Input was heard from the Department, Cape Business Chamber, Cape Media Corporation
and the United Cricket Board. While all agreed that ambush marketing should be prevented they disagreed on the degree of protection given to major sponsors and the level of power given to the Minister.

The Committee then proposed amendments that narrowed the definition of "event", ensured that there was proper consultation by the Minister before designating an event to be a protected event, reducing the period of protection and ensuring that sufficient opportunities for small businesses, particularly those from previously disadvantaged communities, are provided. The Bill was passed with these amendments.

MINUTES
Ms Ludin from the department reviewed the rationale behind the Merchandise Marks Amendment Bill as she went through each clause. She spent some time giving practical examples of the benefits of the Bill (see original briefing).

Cape Business Chamber oral submission
Mr Boise made a brief presentation about his organisation's view of the Bill. He stated that his organisation understood and welcomed the motive of the Bill but that certain factors should be taken into account. He argued that the Bill did not take into consideration small businesses, especially informal traders. He also stated that the Minister's powers were too broad. He concluded by stating that the Bill needed to balance big and small business.

Cape Media Corporation oral submission
Mr Pienaar of Brian Bacon Associates welcomed the principle of the Bill but argued that there was too much power given to the major sponsors. He felt that the restrictions of the Merchandise Marks Amendment Bill were contrary to the TRIPS agreement because they were in conflict with the interests on non-sponsors.

Please refer to Appendix 2

United Cricket Board oral submission

Ms Bodasing of Spoor & Fisher representing UCB and others, noted that it understood the principle behind the amendment as expanding the scope of property rights. The move to curb ambush marketing and the protection of sponsors was welcomed. She reckoned that the Minister's powers would not be unfettered and the public interest would be a priority for the Minister. She was in favour of the Bill and said that it was positively anti-competitive in a sense that it protected intellectual rights.

Discussion
One member commented that the Bill was badly structured and ambiguous.

The Chairperson was not sure what Clause 2 of the Bill meant.

Ms Ludin explained that the clause empowered the Minister to carry out his investigation in order to determine if an event could be designated as protected from ambush marketing.

The Chairperson suggested that the words "and proper consultation" should be added after the word "investigation" in 15A (1)(a). The amendment was agreed to.

Ms September (ANC) commented that the explanation of what constituted a protected event was confusing and she reminded the department that they were legislating for the country and the Bill could not be passed as it was.

Prof. Turok (ANC) suggested that the protection period should be changed from two months to one month in 15A (1a)(ii) of the amendment. The amendment was agreed to.

The committee also agreed that the word "conference", "cultural" and "religious" in Clause 1 be deleted from the definition of "events". The deletion was agreed to.

Mr. Pienaar suggested that the word "intentionally" be inserted after "indirectly, is" in 15A (3)(c) of the amendment. The amendment was agreed to.

Upon the suggestion of the Chairperson it was resolved that the Bill should clearly state the protection of small business from disadvantaged backgrounds. Hence in 15(1)(b) it will read:

and the Minister is satisfied that the organisers have created sufficient opportunities for small businesses and in particular those of the previously disadvantaged communities.

Voting
The Chairperson read the motion of desirability and the Bill was passed subject to the agreed amendments.

The meeting was adjourned

Appendix 1
AMENDMENTS AGREED TO: MERCHANDISE MARKS AMENDMENT BILL [B 63-2002]

CLAUSE 1

1. On page 2, in line S and 9, to omit 'conference', 'cultural' and religious'.
2. On page 2, in line 14, to omit 'conference'

CLAUSE 2

1. On page 2, in line 23, after "investigation" to insert "proper consultation".
2. On page 3, in line 1 to omit "two" and to substitute ''one''.
3. On page 3, in line 2 to omit "months" and to substitute "month"
4. On page 3, in line 4, after interest, to insert;

and the Minister is satisfied that the organisers have created sufficient opportunities for small businesses and in particular those of the previously disadvantaged communities.

5. On page 3, in line 16 , after "is" to insert "intentionally"
6. On page 3, in line 17, to omit "alludes" and to substitute "alluding".