Thanks for the explanation below

"Gregory Morrow" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
> Owen Roberts wrote:
>
> > Why is it that when I visit the USA I can't buy the best rum i.e. Havana
> > Club, and have to put up with Bacardi crap
>
>
> There is a big trademark dispute this subject:
>
> http://www.havana-club.com/uk/conflit02.html
>
> "The United States is, by far, the world's largest rum market in terms of
> value (approximately $1.5 billion). Americans consume 12 million cases
each
> year, half of which are sold by Bacardi. The United States accounts for
> one-third of the global brand's sales. Legislative protection is allowing
> Bacardi to treat this market as its own private backyard. The 1962 embargo
> law that bans imports of the only serious competitor in terms of image,
the
> genuinely Cuban Havana Club, has enabled Bacardi to keep its near-monopoly
> on this market.
>
> In 1996, the Helms-Burton Act was passed on the initiative
> of federal legislators close to Bacardi's interests. The law further
> tightens the embargo by providing for retaliatory measures against
> companies, especially foreign ones, that have established trade relations
> with Cuba.
>
> Lastly, Section 211, a measure passed in October 1998 to protect Bacardi
in
> the dispute with Havana Club Holding, forbids
> the registration in the United States of trademarks that belonged
> to Cubans before they went into exile, even if they brands were
voluntarily
> relinquished by their former owners or have fallen into
> the public domain. In fact, this clause of the law was made-to-order to
> serve Bacardi's interests and is retroactively applied to Havana Club. But
> soon it could concern a large number of European companies".
>
> </>
>
> http://havanajournal.com/business_co.../A590_0_4_0_C/
>
> The worldwide dispute over rum hit Washington on Tuesday as the US
Congress
> considered a bill that would bring a longstanding trademark dispute
between
> Pernod Ricard, the spirits company, and its rival Bacardi to a federal
> court.
>
> At stake is control of the Havana Club brand name, a foothold in the
> potentially lucrative US market for Cuban rum and worldwide trademark
> protocols.
>
> Tuesday's bipartisan measure would repeal an obscure, Bacardi-backed
passage
> of a 1998 appropriations bill, Section 211, that halted a pending trial to
> award the Havana Club trademark and send the dispute back to federal
court.
>
> Like so many disputes involving Cuba and the US, the issue is deeply
rooted
> in Fidel Castro's socialist revolution and his nationalisation drive of
> 1961.
>
> When the island's rum distilleries were seized, Bacardi, then Cuba's
leading
> rum producer, moved its headquarters to the Bahamas, while José Arechabala
> SA, manufacturer of the struggling Havana Club brand, quit the business
and
> José Arechabala returned to Spain.
>
> As the Havana Club trademarks lapsed in the few foreign countries in which
> they were registered, the Castro government renewed them until November
> 1993. With the trademark renewed and consolidated in the US and registered
> by Cuba in over 60 other countries, Pernod Ricard and the Cuban government
> began a joint venture, Havana Club Holdings, to market the brand
worldwide.
>
> Bacardi responded by importing its Havana Club brand rum into the US and
> paying the Arechabala family $1.25m for their claimed interest in the
trade
> name that they say was stolen by the Cuban government.
>
> Pernod Ricard sued Bacardi for brand infringement, but before a New York
> federal court could give its decision, Bacardi-allies in Congress slipped
> Section 211 into a 4,000-page appropriations bill and took the dispute out
> of federal jurisdiction.
>
> Since its passage, Section 211 has caused grumbling among free-trade
> advocates. While the law restricts foreign companies from using trademarks
> allegedly confiscated by the Castro government, a loophole allows American
> firms to use such trademarks.
>
> The World Trade Organisation ruled the law discriminatory against non-US
> business and has given a deadline of June 30th to correct the legislation.
A
> repeal, as proposed on Tuesday would also bring the United States into WTO
> compliance.
>
> "The WTO deadline drives the train on this," said Bill Reinsch, president
of
> the National Foreign Trade Council, a Washington-based lobby group for
free
> trade.
>
> "There are key congressman who want to put us back in compliance, to
> strengthen our trade credentials, and repealing Section 211 is the
simplest,
> cleanest fix. It removes an obstacle in the US free-trade agenda."
>
> "We expect a similar bill to be introduced in the senate soon," said a
> senior Democratic congressional aide. "It has good bipartisan support."
The
> legislation would also head off a potential trademark duel with Cuba
itself.
> While the United States and Cuba have had rocky trade and political
> relations, the two nations are bound to honour each other's trademarks as
> signatories to the 1931 Inter-American Convention on Trademarks.
>
> If Cuba determines that its Havana Club trademark has been compromised in
> the United States, it could retaliate by ignoring the 5,000 US trademarks
> registered in Cuba, such as McDonald's, Coca-Cola, Calvin Klein, Gillette
> and Heinz.
>
> </>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>