40-Year-Old US Law Still Provides Sports Opportunities for Girls

The United States is marking the 40th anniversary of a law that
requires schools using federal funds to provide male and female
students with equal opportunities in sports and other programs.
Supporters say Title IX has dramatically increased the number of
female athletes in the country, but critics say that has come at a
cost, reducing opportunities for young men to compete at the highest
level of collegiate sports.

At a recent Washington tournament, America's top high school girls'
basketball teams did more than just play the game. They learned about
a 40-year-old law that has helped many girls pursue their athletic
ambitions.

"Here, we get to play basketball and learn new things," stated Nira
Fields, who came from California for the event. "The main thing I
learned was equality among sports for the women's and the men's side."

The Title IX act of 1972 says schools receiving federal funds must not
discriminate against males or females in programs such as sports.
That has led universities to offer more scholarships to female
athletes, giving many an education and a chance to compete.

Tina Thompson, the top scorer in the professional Women's National
Basketball Association, says scholarships made university affordable
for her.

"I'm one of five children, and so, going to a university like Southern
California was something that I probably would not have had the
opportunity to go to," Thompson explained. "I mean, I could have
picked any school that I wanted to go to in the country, because of
Title IX."

Since Title IX took effect, female U.S. athletes also have had
increasing international success. The United States reached the
Women's World Cup final against Japan last year. But there is also
some controversy.

Critics say the law actually discriminates against male athletes by
pressuring universities to offer them fewer programs in low-profile
sports, like wrestling. Many universities have eliminated some men's
teams to cut costs and to make sure they meet Title IX's requirement
for gender balance among programs.

Bryan Hazard, a head wrestling coach at Robinson Secondary School,
hosted a tournament in northern Virginia. He says the university
wrestling program that attracted him in high school was dropped
because of Title IX.

"So, you know, is that fair? To me, it wasn't. I was one of the
numbers," Hazard said.

Sabrina Schaeffer, the executive director of the Independent Women's
Forum, argues that Title IX effectively imposes gender quotas on
schools.

"There are legitimate and real differences between the sexes, and we
shouldn't try to paper that over with legislation," Schaeffer
stressed.

Title IX supporters say schools often cut smaller men's sports to
maintain expensive American football and basketball programs.

As the law marks its 40th anniversary, those supporters vow to keep
fighting for more resources for girls' sports.

For more information on these matters, please call our office at 305
548 5020, option 1.

Twitter: www.twitter.com/yoelmolina_mo
Faceback page: www.facebook.com/lawofficeofyoelmolina
Linkedin profile: http://tinyurl.com/linkedinpagemo
Blog: http://tinyurl.com/molawblog

"Turn to us when you need help"

California legislator proposes banning violent fans from pro sports games

By Jim Sander,

Take me out to the ballgame? Maybe not.
California would become the first state to create a "Ban List"
prohibiting violent fans from attending professional sports events
anywhere in the state under newly proposed legislation.
The list would operate much like a restraining order: Anyone listed
who went anyway would be guilty of a misdemeanor.
Offenders' names and photos would be published on the Internet and
sent to sports arenas, police agencies and ticket vendors by the
attorney general's office, which would maintain the list.
Sure, banned fans could sidestep the law and have relatives or friends
buy tickets for them, but if they subsequently caused a commotion and
were discovered at a stadium, their presence could draw a one-year
jail sentence and a $10,000 fine.
Assemblyman Mike Gatto said his measure is aimed at senseless violence
such as the nearly fatal beating of San Francisco Giants fan Bryan
Stow outside Dodger Stadium last year.
"Violence is something that has made a lot of parents be a little
afraid to take their kids to the ball games, so I think we need to
step in and do something," said Gatto, D-Los Angeles.
Under Gatto's Assembly Bill 2464, a judge could place a violent
offender on the ban list for up to five years for a first offense, up
to 10 years for a second, and up to 25 years for a third. The bill
also provides sentencing enhancements to extend offenders' prison
terms.
Verbal harassment or throwing beer are not covered by AB 2464, only
serious felonies ranging from robbery to assault with a deadly weapon
or infliction of great bodily injury committed inside or outside a
stadium, while tailgating, watching, entering or leaving a stadium.
Incidents like Stow's beating would be covered by AB 2464, for
example, as would the violence last year at Candlestick Park during a
San Francisco 49ers-Oakland Raiders preseason game that left one man
unconscious in an upper level restroom and two men shot outside the
stadium.
Gatto's measure would charge each professional sports team $10,000 to
create the ban list and a rewards fund for crime witnesses. Teams
would supplement the fund if it fell below $180,000.
AB 2464 would apply to the Sacramento Kings but not to the Sacramento
River Cats. It would cover major-league baseball, football,
basketball, hockey and soccer teams, beginning July 2013.
No professional league or team has taken a position yet on the bill,
introduced Feb. 24. National Basketball Association spokesman Tim
Frank said he is not familiar with AB 2464. Baseball and football
officials could not be reached for comment Monday.
Italy and England have adopted similar laws to crack down on hooligans
at soccer games, Gatto said.
"Everybody who is at these ballparks are sports fans," Gatto said. "So
to take away what they love, to say, 'You can't attend a game
anymore,' that's a real penalty to them."
Republican lawmakers have not yet seen AB 2464, but two interviewed
Monday said they were wary of its $10,000 cost to each team and the
viability of requiring the state to maintain the ban list.
Assemblyman Kevin Jeffries, R-Lake Elsinore, questioned the wisdom of
banning violent felons who commit their crime at a stadium but not
violent felons who commit their crime elsewhere.
"I don't feel that we, with a straight face, can say that one violent
felon is OK but another is not," Jeffries said.
Gatto countered that it makes no sense to penalize felons who
committed their crimes decades ago, far from any stadium.
Sacramentans at MVP's sports bar Friday had mixed feelings about AB 2464.
Bill Witry, 48, said he sees no reason to create another layer of
bureaucracy when violent offenders will be jailed "for a long time
anyway."
Kelsey Taylor, 22, said she has worn opposing jerseys to Oakland
Raiders and San Jose Sharks games and never felt threatened. She
doubts that extreme violence at stadiums is common.
"I've never had a problem yet," she said.
Other sports fans applauded Gatto.
"I'm a hockey fan -- I like my violence on the ice," said Douglas Mower, 29.
"You have people of all ages at the games, so I think people should be
held accountable," said Craig Shoemaker, 37.
John Lovell, lobbyist for the California Police Chiefs Association,
called the bill thought-provoking but said he has taken no position on
it, pending analysis.
"I think it's a good idea," Lovell said of a ban list. "And I think
what you're going to see is the general public look at that and say,
"Finally -- someone's addressing this.' "

For more information on these matters, please call our office at 305
548 5020, option 1.

Twitter: www.twitter.com/yoelmolina_mo
Faceback page: www.facebook.com/lawofficeofyoelmolina
Linkedin profile: http://tinyurl.com/linkedinpagemo
Blog: http://tinyurl.com/molawblog

"Turn to us when you need help"

Olympics: BOA confident they will win drugs ruling

The British Olympic Association are confident that they will win the
landmark doping case which will determine whether drug cheats like
Dwain Chambers will be allowed to compete for Great Britain at London
2012.

For the last 20 years any British athlete found guilty of taking
performance-enhancing drugs has been banned for all future Olympic
Games under a BOA by-law, but that could all change during a court
hearing in London tomorrow.

The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) will hear a challenge to the
by-law from the World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA), who have accused the
BOA of breaking their anti-doping code. Should CAS rule that the BOA's
by-law is illegal, sprinter Chambers will be able to compete for
Britain at the Olympics despite previously serving a two-year
suspension for taking banned substance THG.

Britain is the only nation who ban drug cheats from the Olympics for
life, but BOA chairman Lord Moynihan insists their stance on drug
cheats is fair and just - and is confident of winning the case.

"I think we have a strong case," said Moynihan, who has spoken
strongly on the matter since WADA challenged the BOA's by-law last
year.

"I think we have taken this very seriously and we are cautiously
optimistic that we can put a convincing case forward.

"We have been working pretty hard to do that and we are clear that
there is no room in Team GB for people who have knowingly cheated
through the use of drugs.

"The values in the Olympic movement are the highest in sport and we
will be selecting a team to meet those values.

"We have to make sure that the Olympics is a big celebration of sport
– and not competition between chemists laboratories."

Although the hearing is tomorrow, a ruling will not be announced until
next month.

The BOA, represented by a crack legal team including QCs Lord David
Pannick and Adam Lewis, will argue that as Britain's national Olympic
committee, they alone should be the ones who determine who should
represent the country at the Games.

"We have the right to select athletes who we feel will be right for
Team GB," Moynihan added.

"This is no different to Sir Alex Ferguson being told he can't pick
his Manchester United team on a Saturday.

"That's the right of selection which the BOA have and that will be at
the heart of our case before CAS."

Should Chambers be allowed to take part in London 2012, he stands a
decent chance of winning a medal – a fact underlined by his
third-place finish in the 60 metres at this week's World Indoor
Championships in Istanbul.

Cyclist David Millar is another athlete who has taken
performance-enhancing drugs but could compete in London if CAS rule
against the BOA.

Moynihan acknowledges that both are hugely remorseful for their
actions, but is unrepentant over their punishment and insists getting
rid of the BOA by-law would send the wrong message to the next
generation of British athletes.

"Their decision to take drugs was disappointing. They knew the
consequences," he said.

"I know both of them have campaigned strongly against drugs in sport
but they have campaigned in full knowledge that our selection policy
has not changed.

"Those who argue there should be redemption should think about those
who have been denied a chance to compete at an Olympics because of
drug cheats.

"It's also important to send a clear signal to every kid who is keen on sport.

"Those kids need to know that if they reach the top, the Olympics will
be clean and that's what we are fighting to do."

For more information on these matters , please call our office at 305
548 5020, option 1.

Twitter: www.twitter.com/yoelmolina_mo
Faceback page: www.facebook.com/lawofficeofyoelmolina
Linkedin profile: http://tinyurl.com/linkedinpagemo
Blog: http://tinyurl.com/molawblog

"Turn to us when you need help"

London 2012: Banned Chambers and Millar 'could compete'

Dwain Chambers and David Millar will be free to compete for Great
Britain at the London Olympics, according to a leading sports lawyer.
The pair are currently banned because of a British Olympic Association
(BOA) by-law which prevents drug cheats from competing at the Games.
However, lawyer Howard Jacobs predicts that the by-law will be ruled
invalid following a special hearing on Monday.
If that happened, sprinter Chambers and cyclist Millar would be
eligible to wear a Team GB vest this summer.
The BOA goes to the Court of Arbitration for Sport (Cas) to challenge
a ruling from the World Anti-Doping Agency (Wada) that its by-law is
not compliant with the Wada code and is therefore unenforceable.
The by-law was introduced more than 20 years ago and has kept a number
of British athletes, among them Chambers and Millar, out of past
Olympics.
The BOA says its rule is not a sanction but is part of its selection
policy. It also argues that it is entitled to decide who can and
cannot represent the nation.

However, Jacobs, who helped American 400m runner LaShawn Merritt
overturn his Olympic doping ban , believes the BOA will end up on the
"losing side".
He told BBC Sport: "When I heard the BOA's response to the Cas
decision, what they were saying sounded a lot like what the
International Olympic Committee were saying, trying to characterise
the rule as an eligibility rule as opposed to a sanction.
"It was exactly the same thing as the IOC did in our case, so it
strikes me that this type of characterisation is not likely to be
successful."
Jacobs was instrumental in helping Beijing gold medallist Merritt win
his case against the IOC whose Rule 45 barred any athlete who had
received a doping suspension of more than six months from competing in
the next Games.
The 25-year-old Merritt, who was given a two-year suspension later
reduced to 21 months for failing three tests for a banned steroid in
early 2010, argued it went beyond Wada sanctions of a maximum two-year
ban.
The case went to Cas, who judged that the IOC's rule did amount to an
additional sanction and therefore was not legitimate.
Jacobs believes it will be the same outcome when the BOA presents its
case on Monday.
"I think it's most likely that the rule will be found to be a
sanction," he said. "Then it will be a question, as it was in our
case, of whether the rule is invalid.

"Essentially, all the anti-doping rules are bound by the concept that
the penalty has to be proportionate to the offence.
"As you start adding additional penalties, you get closer and closer
to the point where perhaps penalties are disproportionate.
"One of the arguments made in our case was that if the IOC and others
want a rule like this, then the way was not to introduce it
unilaterally but to attempt to go through the Wada process and have a
debate among stakeholders.
"The legal minds could weigh in as to whether that type of rule would
be enforceable or not."
Monday will not be the first time the BOA has been before lawyers to
defend its position.
Chambers, 33, attempted to challenge the by-law through the High Court
before the Beijing Olympics in 2008, but his case failed.
The BOA has insisted from the start it believes it has a strong case
that it will defend vigorously.
However, Jacobs says excluded athletes like Chambers ought to feel
encouraged this time.
"Frankly, Dwain Chambers, his situation was nine years ago," said Jacobs.
"He's served his penalty, he's come back, he's allowed to participate
as a member of other British teams.
"To me, it doesn't make sense that you're going to keep him out of the
biggest competition for his sport and somehow say that's not an
additional sanction."

For more information on these matters please call our office at 305
548 5020, option 1.

Twitter: www.twitter.com/yoelmolina_mo
Faceback page: www.facebook.com/lawofficeofyoelmolina
Linkedin profile: http://tinyurl.com/linkedinpagemo
Blog: http://tinyurl.com/molawblog

"Turn to us when you need help"

'Tim Tebow Law' Killed In Va. Senate Committee

RICHMOND, Va. (AP) - Legislation to let home-schooled children play
public school sports has died in the Virginia General Assembly.

The Senate Education and Health Committee voted 8-7 Thursday to reject
Republican Del. Rob Bell's bill.

The measure is known as the "Tim Tebow bill" - a reference to the
Denver Broncos quarterback who was home-schooled and went on to win a
Heisman Trophy at the University of Florida.

Supporters of the bill say parents who homeschool their children pay
taxes like everyone else, so their children should have the
opportunity to compete in interscholastic sports. Opponents argue that
parents who choose to teach their children at home know the rules, and
it would be unfair to let those kids play without meeting eligibility
standards that public school students must meet.

EARLIER:

RICHMOND, Va. (WUSA) -- Virginia lawmakers could pass their own
version of what's been nicknamed the "Tim Tebow law."

Tebow, now the quarterback of the Denver Broncos, was home-schooled
growing up in Florida. But in that state, he was allowed to play
football on a high school team near his home.

This bill has been in talks for several years now but this is the
first year it's gotten this far, but a down vote in subcommittee
Thursday could spell the end of the bill.

9 News Now reporter Delia Goncalves met with a group of parents on
Wednesday who have home schooled their children for nearly a dozen
years in Loudoun County. All the kids play community sports and have
excelled in their age groups, but they want to take it to the next
level. According to the Virginia Home School Association, there are
roughly 6,000 home schooled children in the state and only a small
percentage actually would qualify to play or even try out for high
school sports.

The bill sponsor has said since home schooled parents pay taxes their
children should be afforded the right to play in high school sports.
But the Virginia High School League argues that point, adding home
school children could take spots away from public school players.

"I had a conversation with a friend and he thought home school
children would take spots away, and we were actually at a lacrosse
game and I said to him, 'here's the U-15 players -- only 2 children
who play in our U-15 program, there's only two home schoolers and they
feed into 3 schools. So those two future ninth graders aren't going to
take spots away from anyone," explained Mary-Chris Beardsley, who home
schools her children Ronana, McKenzie and Carter.

Eleven-year-old Ronan Beardsley said, "There are two teams in most
schools -- JV and Varsity."

McKenzie Beardsley said, "We're not asking for an automatic spot on
team. We're only asking them to try out."

"Biggest thing for me is to play with my friends and represent the
community I've lived in for most of my life," shared Carter Beardsley.

But opponents say players not only represent the community, they
represent their high school and home school parents have chosen to
take their children out of the public schools so should not be
afforded the same rights.

Also, critics claim the nearly 13 requirements public school students
must pass in order to play cannot be met by home schoolers.
Thirteen-year-old Campbell Niehaus has been a star athlete for several
years now and testified for the bill. His mom says the only
qualification they don't meet are the one that require public school
attendance.

Kendra Niehaus said, "They are held to higher standard in terms of
having to have two years of experience and worth of academic
progress."

"I've been playing sports with my public school friends for years and
I want to keep playing with them and I also think I would have a
better chance to be scouted if I was in a high school team," said
13-year-old Campbell Niehaus.

Ken Tilley with The Virginia High School League says: "parents of home
schooled children have voluntarily chosen not to participate in the
free public education system in order to educate their children at
home; in making this choice, these parents have also chosen to forego
the privileges incidental to a public education."

The former school superintendent is on the record saying, "As for
priorities, home school families should fight first for access to
algebra and chemistry...not football and soccer. The General Assembly
should "take a knee" on this one!"

If the bill is passed it would just give high schools the option of
allowing home schooled athletes to try out for teams. The bill would
take effect in the fall and each individual school would have to come
up with its own policy so all players are given equal opportunity.

For more information on these matters please call our office at 305
548 5020, option 1.

Twitter: www.twitter.com/yoelmolina_mo
Faceback page: www.facebook.com/lawofficeofyoelmolina
Linkedin profile: http://tinyurl.com/linkedinpagemo
Blog: http://tinyurl.com/molawblog

"Turn to us when you need help"

Feds Indict Former Online Gambling Billionaire Calvin Ayre

Nathan Vardi, Forbes Staff

Federal prosecutors in Baltimore on Tuesday unsealed an indictment
against Calvin Ayre, the former Canadian billionaire who founded
Bodog, one of the world's biggest online gambling firms. Ayre is
accused of operating an illegal gambling business involving sports
betting and conspiring to commit money laundering.

For years Ayre taunted and dodged U.S. law enforcement, specializing
in offering online sports betting and casino games to U.S. gamblers.
He was the subject of a 2006 Forbes cover story titled Catch Me If You
Can, in which he said "we run a business that can't actually be
described as gambling in each country we operate in. But when you add
it together, it's Internet gambling."

The son of grain and pig farmers in Saskatchewan, Ayre, 50, set up his
company in Costa Rica and handled billions of dollars in online
wagers. He appeared on People magazine's Hottest Bachelor List and
tried to market himself as a kind of Hugh Hefner of online gambling.

Rod Rosenstein, the U.S. Attorney in Baltimore, indicted Ayre and
three other Canadian men, James Philip, David Ferguson and Derrick
Maloney. None of the men are in custody and they are believed to be in
Canada. The company, Bodog Entertainment Group, is also under
indictment and its domain name has been seized by federal prosecutors.

According to the six-page indictment filed by Rosenstein, Ayre worked
with Philip, Ferguson and Maloney to supervise an illegal gambling
business from June 2005 to January 2012 in violation of Maryland law.
The indictment focuses on the movement of funds from accounts outside
the U.S., in Switzerland, England, Malta, and Canada, and the hiring
of media resellers and advertisers to promote Internet gambling.

"Sports betting is illegal in Maryland, and federal law prohibits
bookmakers from flouting that law simply because they are located
outside the country," Rosenstein said in a statement. "Many of the
harms that underlie gambling prohibitions are exacerbated when the
enterprises operate over the Internet without regulation."

The indictment is the latest move by the Department of Justice to
crack down on Internet gambling. In April 2011, federal prosecutors in
Manhattan shut down the U.S. operations of the world's biggest online
poker companies, PokerStars and Full Tilt Poker, indicting their
founders for operating illegal gambling businesses. Federal
prosecutors in Baltimore, led by Assistant U.S. Attorney Richard Kay,
have also been conducting several online gambling investigations,
building up to the indictment of Ayre.

Federal prosecutors allege that Ayre conspired to direct at least $100
million in sports gambling winnings by wire and by check to gamblers,
working with payment processors located both in the U.S. and
elsewhere, such as JBL Services, which processed at least $43 million,
and ZipPayments, which processed at least $57 million. In addition,
prosecutors claim that Ayre and Bodog caused an unnamed media broker
to launch a $42 million advertising campaign between 2005 and 2008 to
attract gamblers in the United States to the Bodog.com website.

For his part, Ayre has claimed that he has retired and transferred the
Bodog brand to the Morris Mohawk Gaming Group, which is located on the
Kahnawake territory near Montreal. Bodog itself has changed its
branding in the U.S. to Bovada.

In a defiant statement made to his web site, Ayre said: "These
documents were filed with Forbes magazine before they were filed
anywhere else and were drafted with the consumption of the media as a
primary objective. We will all look at this and discuss the future
with our advisors, but it will not stop my many business interests
globally that are unrelated to anything in the U.S. and it will not
stop my many charity projects through my foundation."

For more information on these matters, please call our office at 305
548 5020, option 1.

Twitter: www.twitter.com/yoelmolina_mo
Faceback page: www.facebook.com/lawofficeofyoelmolina
Linkedin profile: http://tinyurl.com/linkedinpagemo
Blog: http://tinyurl.com/molawblog

"Turn to us when you need help"

Trademark dispute looming over who discovered Jeremy Lin

Benjamin Kang Lim

BEIJING (Reuters) - The New York Knicks may have given Jeremy Lin his
break in the NBA, but a sports ball maker in eastern China saw
potential in the Harvard-educated Chinese-American more than a year
and a half ago -- and quietly registered his trademark for $700.

The issue is the latest in a series of China trademark troubles for
Western sports stars and companies that have ensnared American icons
ranging from basketball star Michael Jordan to Apple's iPad in recent
disputes.

Registering is cheap and relatively easy, and since Chinese law favors
those who register trademarks first, squabbles over them can prove
thorny to unravel, legal experts said.

Lin, 23, the son of Taiwanese immigrants who had been cut by two
National Basketball Association teams before getting his chance with
the Knicks, rocketed from obscurity to worldwide celebrity this
season, coming off the bench to spark a team that had been forced to
play without its top players.

But before Lin got hot, in July 2010, Wuxi Risheng Sports Utility Co,
which makes about one million basketballs, volleyballs and soccer
balls a year, registered his name as a trademark.

The company applied to trademark a variation of Lin's name, "Lin
Shuhao (in Chinese characters) Jeremy S.H.L. (initials of Lin's
Chinese name)," according to the website of the trademark office of
China's State Administration of Industry and Commerce.

The application was approved in August, with the company paying just
4,460 yuan ($710) for the rights and creating a headache for Lin and
his corporate partner Nike, with which he signed a three-year contract
in 2010.

Nike and Lin could not be reached for immediate comment.

China's relatively relaxed trademark policies could prove costly for
Lin, whose $800,000 salary this season is modest by NBA standards.
Forbes SportsMoney said on its online edition that he is worth $15
million.

"In China, first-to-register gets the rights. You may have an idea,
and you can register its trademark without ever using it. Unlike in
the U.S., where one must first show actual use or an intention to use
before one can apply for a trademark," Horace Lam, Beijing-based
intellectual property partner of global law firm Jones Day, said in an
interview.

"This trademark will be difficult to take from Risheng because Risheng
applied for these trademarks ... for use in the same products that
Nike sells: a wide array of athletic apparel and sports equipment.

"Nike and Jeremy Lin could buy the trademark from Risheng, which could
potentially cost millions of RMB," Lam said.

Nike Inc started selling Jeremy Lin-themed shoes on its website and
launched its "Linsanity" line of clothes at Foot Locker Inc stores
this month, cashing in on the point guard's fame.

Lin himself is applying for a trademark in the United States to the
term "Linsanity," widely used to describe his meteoric rise, according
to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

EYE FOR TALENT

Risheng's legal representative, Yu Minjie, said Lin caught her eye
when she saw him playing on Chinese television in 2010.

"I'm a Harvard fan ... I like him very much. He gave me a lot of
surprises and inspiration," Yu told Reuters.

Risheng will start selling basketballs under the "Lin Shuhao Jeremy
S.H.L." trademark across China in March.

"Several big companies looked me up to cooperate or buy (the
trademark). I'm willing to sell, but there is no ideal offer now," she
added.

Lin's is the latest in a series of China-related trademark disputes
that have arisen. Last week, basketball legend Michael Jordan filed a
lawsuit in China against Qiaodan Sports Co, accusing the firm of
unauthorized use of his Chinese name and jersey number.

Jordan is known as "Qiaodan" in China, where basketball is one of the
most popular sports with its own superstar, Yao Ming.

In another high-profile case, a unit of Proview International Holdings
has sought to stop Apple Inc from using the iPad name in China, filing
a lawsuit in California.

Last week, a Shanghai court threw out Proview's request to halt iPad
sales in the city. But the outcome hinges on a high court in the
southern province of Guangdong, which earlier ruled in Proview's
favor.

China's trademark system is a minefield of murky rules and
opportunistic squatters that even the world's biggest companies and
their highly-paid lawyers find hard to navigate.

"Trademark hijacking issues are happening every day in China," Lam,
the lawyer, said. "Looking from a pure legal issue, the system allows
this to happen."

"This is a big problem for companies and people trying to protect
their IP in China when they are not familiar with the Chinese system."
($1 = 6.2978 Chinese yuan)

For more information on these matters, please call our office at 305
548 5020, option 1.

Twitter: www.twitter.com/yoelmolina_mo
Faceback page: www.facebook.com/lawofficeofyoelmolina
Linkedin profile: http://tinyurl.com/linkedinpagemo
Blog: http://tinyurl.com/molawblog

"Turn to us when you need help"