Grab your Swords? Arming Shipping Vessels Against Somalian Pirates

Red sky warning, pirate season is fast approaching. As the promise of calmer seas in springtime Somalia nears, international ships are readying themselves for the next wave of attacks. While many ships are deploying defensive measures such as radar, thermal video equipment, fire hoses, electric fences and ingenious acoustic distractions (such as the sound of dogs barking), an increasing number of ships are stocking up on something that comes with much weightier legal dilemmas: armed guards.

In order to combat the oldest recognized international crime commercial ships are taking notes from the violent pirate days of yore – and this is quickly escalating the threat of violence and raising tricky issues of legal liability.

In early March, Somali pirates hit a Spanish fishing boat off the coast of Kenya with a rocket-propelled grenade while private security guards on board shot at the pirates. In the early days of Somalian pirating, such sophisticated weaponry was unknown – all the pirates needed to do was wave a rusty gun at the surprised crew jumped into action.

Hostage-taking may result in huge ransoms and a flurry of media attention yet, despite the number of pirate attacks at sea increasing each year, deaths among the crew are uncommon (four in total in 2009) and international businesses have continued to risk the odds against attacks by sailing through the narrow Somalian seaway and trusting their insurance companies to cover the…

Continue reading this entry ➔

Kangaroos and Ambush Marketing

Canada has recently enacted brand-new intellectual property legislation in preparation for the 2010 Olympic Games in Vancouver. The legislation targets ambush marketing, a topic about which Canadians know very little. Teresa Scassa, speaking at McGill’s Law Faculty last Friday, explained that ambush marketing is when a company carefully builds an association in the minds of the public between the company’s trademark and a major event – misleading its audience into falsely believing the company is an official sponsor.

One of the first cited examples of ambush marketing occurred during the 1984 Olympic Games, where Fuji was an official sponsor of the games but its commercial objectives were undermined by Kodak’s sponsorship of a major television broadcast and its association as the ‘official film’ of the US track team. Here Kodak used legitimate sponsorships to foster Olympic associations, but it seems big companies’ creative and legally-savvy marketers can always find ways to link their brand with an event.  Interestingly, the situation reversed itself for the 1988 Olympic Games, showing Kodak was perfectly willing to officially sponsor the event, while Fuji was equally willing to use ambush marketing techniques.

The International Olympic Committee (IOC) claims the rise of ambush marketing has been undermining the commercial objectives of official sponsors and consequently attracting sponsors is now a more difficult task for event organizers. In response, countries are compelled to enact legislation banning ambush marketing if they want their Olympic…

Continue reading this entry ➔

Last Week in International Law

1. Prosecutor v. Karadzic

On November 5, the UN International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia postponed the trial against former Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadzic until March 2010. Karadzic ended his boycott of the proceedings earlier this week, saying it would be “criminal” if he had “to enter a trial for which I am not prepared.”

As discussed last week, Karadzic’s boycott of the trial led judges to begin hearing the prosecution’s case and warning Karadzic to appear in court or risk being tried in absentia.  Besides postponing the trial, the tribunal has also appointed a lawyer to represent Karadzic.

Karadzic has vowed to resist the imposition of counsel.  He has seven days to apply for permission to appeal the ruling, and another seven days thereafter to file an appeal.

2. Lisbon Treaty

The Lisbon Treaty was officially ratified by the last European Union member state, the Czech Republic, on 3 November 2009. It is expected to officially become law in December.

The treaty is an attempt to make the EU more cohesive and influential on the worldwide stage, though some critics have seen it as a threat to national sovereignty. The treaty grants new powers to the European Commission, the European Parliament and the European Court of Justice.  Legislation will now be decided by “co-decision” by the parliament and the European Council.  A major change regards the president of the Council.  Currently, countries take turns at being president for six…

Continue reading this entry ➔