Featured Publications

Daniel Fridman Joins Holland & Knight's Miami Office as a Partner in the South Florida Litigation Group

MIAMI – Holland & Knight announced today that Daniel Fridman has joined the firm's Miami office as a partner in the South Florida Litigation Group.

More

Construction: Alert - January 2, 2009

On November 12, 2008, the FAR Councils issued a final rule that further amends the FAR (Federal Acquisition Regulation) to amplify existing compliance program provi­sions (Subpart 3.10) and clauses (52.203-13 and 52.203-14). The rule also added requirements that contrac­tors and subcontractors disclose certain viola­tions of criminal law, violations of the civil False Claims Act, and significant overpayments.1 The new rule took effect on December 12, 2008. This new rule builds upon earlier compliance program requirements established in a December 2007 amendment to the FAR.

More

Search Our Library

Search

  • Printer friendly
  • Email this page to a friend
  • Generate a PDF version of this page
Government Contracts
Newsletter - October 2001
 
In this Issue...
Proposed Changes Could Affect Intellectual Property Rights in Federal Contracts
 
September 27, 2001
 

A proposed modification to the Federal Acquisition Regulation would require contractors to receive government permission before registering or asserting rights in "government-unique" trademarks and service marks. For purposes of the rule, a government-unique mark is a mark that identifies goods first developed or manufactured or services first rendered in the performance of a government contract.

The proposed regulation, published in the August 9, 2001 Federal Register, would require a contractor to notify the government of its intent to assert rights in or to file an application to register a government-unique mark. The contractor would be prohibited from exercising its rights in the mark if the government chooses to assert rights in or register the mark or otherwise objects to the contractor’s intended action. The government also might condition the contractor’s ability to assert its rights to the mark by requiring licensing of the use of the government-unique mark to third parties and by limiting the contractor’s use of the mark.

Comments on the proposed rule are due on or before October 9. However, initial reaction of the proposal has not been favorable. Some commentators consider it inappropriate for the federal government to assert ownership rights in the trademarks. Others find the rule to be too broad and contrary to the government’s avowed intention of encouraging more commercial companies to enter the federal arena.

On another front, in July, Representative Tom Davis (R-Va) chaired a hearing of the House Government Reform Subcommittee on Technology and Procurement Policy. The Subcommittee heard testimony from government and industry representatives on whether current policies on the treatment of intellectual property rights in federal contracts discourage commercial companies from doing business with the federal government. It is doubtful that any major legislation to change the current framework for allocating intellectual property rights will be forthcoming in the near future. However, there may be some minor changes to the Bayh-Dole Act that will give government officials more flexibility in negotiating patent rights.

For more information, contact Frank Peterson at 1-888-688-8500 or via e-mail at fpeterso@hklaw.com.