Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Vanderbilt University Law School

Journal

1985

International trade law

Articles 1 - 2 of 2

Full-Text Articles in Law

Civil Customs Penalties Under Section 592 Of The Tariff Act: Current Practice And The Need For Further Reform, John M. Peterson Jan 1985

Civil Customs Penalties Under Section 592 Of The Tariff Act: Current Practice And The Need For Further Reform, John M. Peterson

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

Civil Customs penalties imposed under Section 592 of the Tariff Act are among the harshest allowed by federal law. Multi-million-dollar penalty claims and settlements are not uncommon. Since the early 1970s, Section 592 has emerged as the Customs Service's (Customs) most powerful weapon in its war against allegedly negligent and fraudulent import practices.

For years, many commentators had criticized Section 592 as being an unduly harsh remedy that often imposed unintended hard-ships on importers. Much of this criticism subsided when Congress adopted the Customs Procedural Reform and Simplification Act of 1978, which importers hailed as a major victory. Many believed …


The Validity Of The Manufacturing Clause Of The United States Copyright Code As Challenged By Trade Partners And Copyright Owners, Annette V. Tucker Jan 1985

The Validity Of The Manufacturing Clause Of The United States Copyright Code As Challenged By Trade Partners And Copyright Owners, Annette V. Tucker

Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law

Trade treaty partners recently have determined that the manufacturing clause violates United States obligations under the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT). If the clause does violate GATT, sanctions may be imposed unless the clause is eliminated. Even so, two bills have been introduced in the United States Congress to make the clause a permanent feature of the copyright law, and to apply the manufacturing requirement to all printed materials. Meanwhile, a group of United States publishers and authors is challenging the clause in court, claiming it violates both the first and fifth amendments to the United States Constitution. …