PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Failed by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 245 - 167 (Roll No. 470).
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 19, 1998
Trademark Anticounterfeiting Act of 1998 - Amends the Trademark Act of 1946 (Lanham Act) and the Federal criminal code to declare unlawful unauthorized modification of product identification codes, including: (1) specified acts of tampering with the product identification code of any good; as well as (2) importing, exporting, distributing, or brokering goods whose product identification codes have been so tampered with. Subjects violators to liability for: (1) civil and criminal penalties; (2) general and statutory damages; and (3) court costs and attorney's fees. Designates the Attorney General and the Secretary of the Treasury as the chief enforcement officials. Grants Federal agency heads investigatory powers with respect to goods within their regulatory purview.
People & committees
Rep. Goodlatte, Bob [R-VA-6] · R–VA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Failed by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 245 - 167 (Roll No. 470).
House roll call 470 · Individual votesFailed of passage/not agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Failed by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 245 - 167 (Roll No. 470).
House roll call 470 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H9148)
At the conclusion of debate, the chair put the question on the motion to suspend the rules. Mr. Forbes objected to the vote on the grounds that a quorum was not present. Further proceedings on the motion were postponed. The point of no quorum was withdrawn.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H9110-9117)
Mr. Goodlatte moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 366.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 105-650.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 105-650.
Ordered to be Reported (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Forwarded by Subcommittee to Full Committee (Amended) by Voice Vote.
Subcommittee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Courts and Intellectual Property.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR E887)
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Apr 7, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.3891 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.3891 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.3891 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.3891 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.