Is it proposed to deal with the Bill now?
Committee on Finance. - Industrial and Commercial Property (Protection) (Amendment) Bill, 1957—from the Seanad.
I take it that there is no objection. There were just typing errors which were corrected in the Seanad.
I would ask that the Minister would formally ask for leave, having regard to what happened to me on a certain occasion.
I respectfully request that the amendments be taken now.
Certainly.
The Dáil went into Committee to consider amendments from the Seanad.
I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 1:—
In page 3, before Section 5, a new section inserted as follows:—
Paragraph (b) of sub-section (1) and sub-section (2) of Section 71 of the Principal Act (which relates to delivery on sale of articles to which a registered design has been applied) are hereby repealed.
This amendment corrects an error which occurred inadvertently in Section 5 of the Bill as introduced and advantage was taken of the fact that the Seanad was dealing with it to have this omission corrected.
What was the effect of the error?
It was a sub-section that automatically went with the elimination of a previous sub-section and it had been retained inadvertently. It should have gone.
Question put and agreed to.
I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 2:—
Section 5. The section deleted.
Question put and agreed to.
I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 3:—
Section 13. In sub-section (1), page 5, line 18, "its organs and specialised agencies," deleted and "the organs thereof and the specialised agencies in relationship therewith" substituted.
This is just a change in the wording. In sub-section (1), page 5, line 18, "its organs and specialised agencies" is the form of words used and it has been suggested that the following form is more appropriate: "the organs thereof and the specialised agencies in relationship therewith". The amendment gives effect to the suggestion of the parliamentary draftsman.
Question put and agreed to.
Amendments reported and agreed to.
Ordered: That a message be sent to the Seanad accordingly.
May I refer to one matter? I promised Deputy Sweetman that I would have a certain matter which he raised dealt with. He asked was there protection under the conventions for coats of arms of public bodies such as corporations. He referred to copyright in those coats of arms. In my reply I possibly misled him because I was referring to copyright and copyright, even possessed by a corporation, would be protected by the conventions in question but I have been informed that there is no copyright in the coats of arms. If I misled the Deputy in the matter, I now wish to correct it. There is no objection, from the copyright point of view or from the viewpoint of the Offices of Heraldry, to using these coats of arms as trade marks, on souvenirs, etc.
I am obliged to the Parliamentary Secretary. Do I understand that I can if I wish use the Parliamentary Secretary's coat of arms without his having any redress against me?
Certainly, the Deputy may, and I invite him to do so if he intends to use it in connection with the sale of Galway souvenirs.