

Currently released so far... 6239 / 251,287
Articles
Browse latest releases
2010/12/01
2010/12/02
2010/12/03
2010/12/04
2010/12/05
2010/12/06
2010/12/07
2010/12/08
2010/12/09
2010/12/10
2010/12/11
2010/12/12
2010/12/13
2010/12/14
2010/12/15
2010/12/16
2010/12/17
2010/12/18
2010/12/19
2010/12/20
2010/12/21
2010/12/22
2010/12/23
2010/12/24
2010/12/25
2010/12/26
2010/12/27
2010/12/28
2010/12/29
2010/12/30
2011/01/01
2011/01/02
2011/01/04
2011/01/05
2011/01/07
2011/01/09
2011/01/10
2011/01/11
2011/01/12
2011/01/13
2011/01/14
2011/01/15
2011/01/16
2011/01/17
2011/01/18
2011/01/19
2011/01/20
2011/01/21
2011/01/22
2011/01/23
2011/01/24
2011/01/25
2011/01/26
2011/01/27
2011/01/28
2011/01/29
2011/01/30
2011/01/31
2011/02/01
2011/02/02
2011/02/03
2011/02/04
2011/02/05
2011/02/06
2011/02/07
2011/02/08
2011/02/09
2011/02/10
2011/02/11
2011/02/12
2011/02/13
2011/02/14
2011/02/15
2011/02/16
2011/02/17
2011/02/18
2011/02/19
2011/02/20
2011/02/21
2011/02/22
2011/02/23
2011/02/24
2011/02/25
2011/02/26
2011/02/27
2011/02/28
2011/03/01
2011/03/02
2011/03/03
2011/03/04
2011/03/05
2011/03/06
2011/03/07
2011/03/08
2011/03/09
2011/03/10
2011/03/11
2011/03/13
2011/03/14
2011/03/15
2011/03/16
2011/03/17
2011/03/18
2011/03/19
2011/03/20
2011/03/21
2011/03/22
Browse by creation date
Browse by origin
Embassy Athens
Embassy Asuncion
Embassy Astana
Embassy Asmara
Embassy Ashgabat
Embassy Ankara
Embassy Amman
Embassy Algiers
Embassy Addis Ababa
Embassy Accra
Embassy Abuja
Embassy Abu Dhabi
Embassy Abidjan
Consulate Amsterdam
American Institute Taiwan, Taipei
Embassy Bujumbura
Embassy Buenos Aires
Embassy Budapest
Embassy Bucharest
Embassy Brussels
Embassy Bridgetown
Embassy Bratislava
Embassy Brasilia
Embassy Bogota
Embassy Bishkek
Embassy Bern
Embassy Berlin
Embassy Belgrade
Embassy Beirut
Embassy Beijing
Embassy Banjul
Embassy Bangkok
Embassy Bandar Seri Begawan
Embassy Bamako
Embassy Baku
Embassy Baghdad
Consulate Barcelona
Embassy Copenhagen
Embassy Conakry
Embassy Colombo
Embassy Chisinau
Embassy Caracas
Embassy Canberra
Embassy Cairo
Consulate Curacao
Consulate Ciudad Juarez
Consulate Chennai
Consulate Casablanca
Consulate Cape Town
Embassy Dushanbe
Embassy Dublin
Embassy Doha
Embassy Djibouti
Embassy Dhaka
Embassy Dar Es Salaam
Embassy Damascus
Embassy Dakar
Consulate Dubai
Embassy Kyiv
Embassy Kuwait
Embassy Kuala Lumpur
Embassy Kinshasa
Embassy Kigali
Embassy Khartoum
Embassy Kathmandu
Embassy Kampala
Embassy Kabul
Consulate Kolkata
Embassy Luxembourg
Embassy Luanda
Embassy London
Embassy Ljubljana
Embassy Lisbon
Embassy Lima
Embassy Lilongwe
Embassy La Paz
Consulate Lagos
Mission USNATO
Embassy Muscat
Embassy Moscow
Embassy Montevideo
Embassy Monrovia
Embassy Minsk
Embassy Mexico
Embassy Mbabane
Embassy Maputo
Embassy Manama
Embassy Managua
Embassy Malabo
Embassy Madrid
Consulate Munich
Consulate Mumbai
Consulate Montreal
Consulate Monterrey
Consulate Milan
Embassy Pristina
Embassy Pretoria
Embassy Prague
Embassy Port Au Prince
Embassy Phnom Penh
Embassy Paris
Embassy Paramaribo
Embassy Panama
Consulate Peshawar
REO Basrah
Embassy Rome
Embassy Riyadh
Embassy Riga
Embassy Reykjavik
Embassy Rangoon
Embassy Rabat
Consulate Rio De Janeiro
Consulate Recife
Secretary of State
Embassy Stockholm
Embassy Sofia
Embassy Skopje
Embassy Singapore
Embassy Seoul
Embassy Sarajevo
Embassy Santo Domingo
Embassy Santiago
Embassy Sanaa
Embassy San Salvador
Embassy San Jose
Consulate Strasbourg
Consulate Shenyang
Consulate Shanghai
Consulate Sao Paulo
Embassy Tunis
Embassy Tripoli
Embassy Tokyo
Embassy The Hague
Embassy Tel Aviv
Embassy Tehran
Embassy Tegucigalpa
Embassy Tbilisi
Embassy Tashkent
Embassy Tallinn
Consulate Tijuana
USUN New York
USEU Brussels
US Mission Geneva
US Interests Section Havana
US Delegation, Secretary
UNVIE
Embassy Ulaanbaatar
Browse by tag
ASEC
AU
AORC
AF
AM
AFIN
AEMR
AR
ASIG
AMGT
AG
APER
AL
ABLD
ASUP
AA
ASECKFRDCVISKIRFPHUMSMIGEG
AE
AMED
AS
AGMT
APECO
AO
AFFAIRS
AJ
ACOA
AX
AROC
ATFN
ASEAN
AFGHANISTAN
ADCO
AFU
AER
ALOW
AODE
ABUD
ATRN
AID
AC
AVERY
APCS
CASC
CJAN
CVIS
CS
COUNTER
CD
CU
CI
CO
CG
CE
CA
CMGT
CH
CWC
CBW
CKGR
CR
CN
CPAS
CONS
CDG
CLINTON
CT
CJUS
CY
CV
COUNTERTERRORISM
CIA
CACM
CDB
CAN
COE
CM
COUNTRY
CLEARANCE
CACS
CF
CONDOLEEZZA
CARSON
CL
CIS
CODEL
CTM
CB
COM
ECON
EFIN
ETRD
EAIR
EAID
ET
EFIS
ENRG
EPET
ETTC
ER
EG
EINV
EAGR
ELAB
EUN
EWWT
ENGR
EMIN
ECIN
ENIV
ES
EC
ECPS
EIND
EI
EU
ENVI
ETRDEINVECINPGOVCS
ELTN
EZ
EINT
ELN
EUR
EUNCH
EN
EINVECONSENVCSJA
ELECTIONS
EINVEFIN
ENNP
ECUN
EXTERNAL
EK
EFINECONCS
ECINECONCS
ECIP
EINDETRD
EUC
EREL
ENVR
ECA
ENERG
ENGY
ETRO
EFTA
ECONCS
ECONOMICS
ECONEFIN
EINVETC
EINN
ESA
ETC
ETRDEINVTINTCS
ESENV
ETRDECONWTOCS
IR
IZ
IWC
IC
ILC
IO
IAEA
IN
IS
IT
ICRC
INTELSAT
ILO
IBRD
IMF
ICAO
IMO
ITALY
ITALIAN
IRAQI
ITRA
ISRAELI
ICJ
IACI
INTERPOL
ID
IV
ICTY
IQ
IPR
INRB
ITPHUM
IIP
IL
IA
INR
ITPGOV
IZPREL
IRC
INRA
INRO
IRAJ
IEFIN
IF
KE
KCRM
KDRG
KIPR
KCOR
KSCA
KBIO
KDEM
KMCA
KMPI
KNNP
KJUS
KOMC
KGHG
KSUM
KSTC
KIRF
KTIP
KWMN
KZ
KG
KTFN
KHLS
KPAO
KFRD
KTIA
KOLY
KCFE
KISL
KFLU
KPKO
KWBG
KTBT
KTDB
KOCI
KUNR
KAWK
KICC
KPAL
KSTH
KN
KS
KGIC
KNPP
KWAC
KMDR
KAWC
KBCT
KIDE
KFLO
KWMNCS
KSEP
KU
KNEI
KVPR
KACT
KRAD
KFRDKIRFCVISCMGTKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG
KCIP
KSAF
KV
KSPR
KPRP
KFSC
KCRS
KR
KRFD
KX
KO
KPWR
KMIG
KSEC
KIFR
KDEMAF
KFIN
KGCC
KPIN
KHIV
KPLS
KIRC
KFRDCVISCMGTCASCKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG
KGIT
KBTS
KPRV
KBTR
KERG
KWMM
KRVC
KNSD
KVIR
KNUP
KTER
KDDG
KHSA
KMRS
KHDP
KTLA
KPAK
KNAR
KREL
KPAI
KTEX
KCOM
KNNPMNUC
KPOA
KLIG
KHUM
KDEV
KNUC
KCFC
KREC
KOMS
KWWMN
MASS
MP
MARR
MOPS
MNUC
MX
MO
MCAP
MY
ML
MU
MIL
MC
MTRE
MA
MD
MTCRE
MEPI
MAR
MRCRE
MR
MV
MPOS
MZ
MEPP
MOPPS
MAPP
MASC
MT
MERCOSUR
MK
MDC
MI
MAPS
MCC
MASSMNUC
MQADHAFI
MUCN
MTCR
MG
OVIP
OREP
OTRA
OSCE
OECD
OIIP
OEXC
OPCW
OPIC
OPDC
OPRC
ODIP
OVP
OSCI
OAS
OFDP
OTR
OSAC
OIC
OFFICIALS
OIE
PREL
PGOV
PHUM
PTER
PE
PINR
PINS
PARMS
PARM
PHSA
PA
PK
PBTS
PO
PREF
POL
PLN
POLITICS
PROP
PL
PM
PAO
PSI
PG
PEPR
POV
PALESTINIAN
PINT
PSOE
PU
POLITICAL
PARTIES
PBIO
PECON
PAK
POGOV
PINL
PKFK
PMIL
PY
PFOR
PHALANAGE
PARTY
PRAM
PMAR
PGOVLO
PUNE
PORG
PHUMPREL
PF
POLINT
PHUS
PGOC
PNR
PGGV
PNAT
PGOVE
PRGOV
PRL
PROV
PTERE
PGOF
PHUMBA
PINF
PEL
SNAR
SO
SENV
SU
SCUL
SOCI
SP
SC
SA
SMIG
SAN
SZ
SW
SN
SY
SR
SL
SEVN
SF
SYR
SI
SG
STEINBERG
SIPRS
SH
SNARCS
SOFA
SANC
SHUM
SK
ST
TERRORISM
TRGY
TZ
TX
TBIO
TSPA
TS
TSPL
TW
TU
TD
TIP
TURKEY
TP
TI
TC
TPHY
TH
TO
TK
TNGD
TINT
TRSY
TR
TFIN
TT
UG
UK
UP
UNGA
UNHRC
UZ
UN
UNAUS
USTR
UNSC
US
UNEP
UY
UNESCO
USUN
UNHCR
UAE
UNMIK
USEU
UV
UNO
UNDP
UNCHS
UNVIE
UNCHC
UE
UNDESCO
USAID
UNDC
Browse by classification
Community resources
courage is contagious
Viewing cable 08SANJOSE155, 2008 SPECIAL 301 REVIEW - COSTA RICA
If you are new to these pages, please read an introduction on the structure of a cable as well as how to discuss them with others. See also the FAQs
Understanding cables
Every cable message consists of three parts:
- The top box shows each cables unique reference number, when and by whom it originally was sent, and what its initial classification was.
- The middle box contains the header information that is associated with the cable. It includes information about the receiver(s) as well as a general subject.
- The bottom box presents the body of the cable. The opening can contain a more specific subject, references to other cables (browse by origin to find them) or additional comment. This is followed by the main contents of the cable: a summary, a collection of specific topics and a comment section.
Discussing cables
If you find meaningful or important information in a cable, please link directly to its unique reference number. Linking to a specific paragraph in the body of a cable is also possible by copying the appropriate link (to be found at theparagraph symbol). Please mark messages for social networking services like Twitter with the hash tags #cablegate and a hash containing the reference ID e.g. #08SANJOSE155.
Reference ID | Created | Released | Classification | Origin |
---|---|---|---|---|
08SANJOSE155 | 2008-02-26 21:09 | 2011-03-02 16:04 | UNCLASSIFIED | Embassy San Jose |
Appears in these articles: http://www.nacion.com/2011-03-02/Investigacion.aspx |
VZCZCXYZ0014
RR RUEHWEB
DE RUEHSJ #0155/01 0572158
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 262158Z FEB 08
FM AMEMBASSY SAN JOSE
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 9473
INFO RUEHZA/WHA CENTRAL AMERICAN COLLECTIVE
UNCLAS SAN JOSE 000155
SIPDIS
SIPDIS
DEPT FOR WHA/CEN
EEB/TPP/IPE FOR JBOGER
STATE PASS TO USTR FOR JENNIFER CHOE GROVES
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: ETRD ECON KIPR CS
SUBJECT: 2008 SPECIAL 301 REVIEW - COSTA RICA
REF: A) 05 SAN JOSE 0508
B) 06 SAN JOSE 0464
C) 07 SAN JOSE 0335
=======
SUMMARY
=======
¶1. Since last year's report (Ref C), the GOCR has made
some progress in advancing laws related to Intellectual
Property Rights (IPR) required by the Central American Free
Trade Agreement (CAFTA-DR). However, Costa Rica must still
take several major steps to adequately protect and enforce
IPR, beginning with enacting the necessary IPR laws and
regulations to meet its CAFTA-DR obligations. In addition,
Costa Rica has not demonstrated a concerted resolve to
enforce its current IPR laws. Instead, the country's
Attorney General has publicly and repeatedly stated that
Costa Rica should use its limited investigative and
prosecutorial resources to pursue violent and drug-related
crimes. Nonetheless, there has been some progress. The
Costa Rican office that issues patents has recently ended a
lengthy pause in examining patent applications. A number
of Costa Rican officials have received training in IPR
enforcement, administration, prosecution, and customs from
USPTO, DHS, WIPO, and others. Due to these slight
improvements, as well as to the understanding that the GOCR
will address the additional shortcomings in Costa Rica's
laws and regulations this year, Post recommends that Costa
Rica remain on the Watch List.
============================
IPR BACKGROUND IN COSTA RICA
============================
¶2. Issues related to IPR rose to the forefront of Costa
Rica's public debate during the campaign leading up to the
October 7, 2007 nationwide referendum to ratify the
country's participation in CAFTA-DR. This was the first
referendum in Costa Rica's history and generated enormous
national interest in all of the issues associated with
CAFTA-DR, including IPR. Those opposed to CAFTA-DR
routinely spoke out against the agreement's requirements to
create effective deterrents against IPR infringement as
well as protections for IPR, politicizing the issues.
Opposition leaders asserted that increased penalties for
IPR violators would "send students to jail for copying
textbooks" and increased IPR protection would bankrupt the
local social security system that would be forced to
purchase original, innovative pharmaceuticals rather than
generics. The Costa Rican public ultimately rejected such
arguments and approved CAFTA-DR by a slim margin, but the
negative campaign created an environment where issues
related to IPR remained controversial.
============================================= ==============
AIMING FOR TRIPS COMPLIANCE THROUGH A LEGISLATIVE AGENDA
============================================= ==============
¶3. After Costa Rica was included in the Priority Watch
List in 2001, the country took the necessary steps to bring
into force the WIPO Copyright Treaty (WCT) and the WIPO
Performance and Phonograms Treaty (WPPT) on March 6, 2002
and May 20, 2002, respectively. Costa Rica has also
ratified the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT).
Nevertheless, the country remained non-compliant with
several TRIPS measures, such as data protection and
deterrent measures. These deficiencies are addressed in
CAFTA-DR, which the country signed in 2004, but has not yet
implemented and entered-into-force.
¶4. Since last year's Special 301 Report, Costa Rica has
made some progress in enacting needed legislative reforms
to become compliant with CAFTA-DR obligations related to
IPR. The legislature is working one four bills and the
ratification of two treaties that deal with IPR. When
these bills are enacted and the treaties ratified, Costa
Rica should be compliant with TRIPS. Since the opponents
of increased IPR protection attempted to water-down the IPR
bills through the introduction of hundreds of amendments,
the progress of bills has been very slow. Nevertheless,
the GOCR is energetically directing the legislative process
and is confident that the laws, when finally enacted, will
meet the country's CAFTA-DR obligations. To date, the
legislature has approved one of the four IPR-related laws
(on trademarks) and both of the treaties (Budapest and
UPOV). Supreme Court review and further legislative action
remain to be completed, however.
===================================
BUT SADDLED BY ENFORCEMENT PROBLEMS
===================================
¶5. Despite these legislative victories, real challenges
remain in effectively ensuring that the laws have an impact
on the local IPR environment. Throughout 2007, Costa Rica
continued to falter in enforcing its current IPR laws.
While the country's current laws do not provide for
significant prison time or monetary damages for IPR
violators, they do criminalize counterfeiting and piracy.
Nevertheless, the country's public prosecutors have
consistently demurred from prosecuting IPR cases. The
prosecution of IPR crimes is handled by public prosecutors
in the "various crimes" divisions of the branch offices of
the Attorney General's office. Crimes related to IPR,
however, form only a small portion of the portfolio of
these prosecutors and receive little or no attention.
Rather, the prosecutors invoke "opportunity criteria" (akin
to prosecutorial discretion) to avoid opening an
investigation into reported IPR crimes.
¶6. In late 2007, the Attorney General of Costa Rica,
Francisco Dall'anese, publicly reiterated that he does not
support diverting limited resources to the prosecution of
IPR crimes. Rather, he maintains that private companies
can seek redress in civil courts or can initiate a criminal
public action through private application. By this
process, a private party (almost always through an
attorney) files a complaint and jointly conducts the
investigation and prosecution of the case with the public
prosecutor. While this could be an effective means of
prosecuting IPR violators, the reality is that prosecutors
continue to avoid handling IPR cases by invoking
opportunity criteria. When that occurs, private attorneys
do not have the standing to petition for the seizure of
counterfeit goods. Likewise, the use of the civil courts
to pursue private cases against IPR violators is hampered
by the extreme length of time it takes to receive a civil
judgment (up to 15 years) and the small monetary damages
awarded.
¶7. Industry and others have asked Dall'anese to halt the
nearly automatic use of opportunity criteria with IPR
crimes, but he has rebuffed their calls. The position of
Attorney General in Costa Rica is entirely independent of
the Costa Rican Executive and Legislative Branches.
Constitutionally, the position falls under the Judiciary,
but, in practice, it is almost completely autonomous.
Dall'anese was unexpectedly reelected to another four year
term as Attorney General in late 2007.
¶8. The few prosecutions that have wound their way through
the criminal court system over the last two years were
originally started several years ago. In February 2008,
industry successfully concluded a prosecution against a
counterfeiter of apparel. As has been the case in previous
successful prosecutions of IPR violators, the judge
immediately paroled the convicted counterfeiter as it was
her first offense and the sentence was for less than three
years. (COMMENT: No matter the crime, judges in Costa Rica
have the latitude to immediately parole first-offenders who
have been sentenced to less than three years of prison.
Judges generally use this power in all criminal cases when
it can be applied. END COMMENT.)
======================================
AT THE BORDER: ARE THE GOODS GENUINE?
======================================
¶9. Costa Rica's Customs service continues to face
difficulties in halting the flow of counterfeit goods into
the country. The leadership of Customs is aware of the
importance of seizing pirated goods, but most customs
agents lack the necessary training to recognize
counterfeits. In April 2007, the U.S. Embassy took
advantage of a regional program offered by DHS to send a
number of Costa Rican officials for training in recognizing
counterfeits. Local industry has also expressed an
interest in providing counterfeit recognition training to
Customs officials.
¶10. In addition, the laws regulating the filing of criminal
cases can impede the seizure of pirated goods at the
border. If a customs agent recognizes that a shipment
contains pirated goods, the agent can order the shipment
seized for 48 hours. If, at the end of that period, the
holder of the IPR has not filed a criminal complaint
against the importer, the customs agent must either release
the goods or file a criminal complaint, which can open the
agent up to personal liability through a countersuit by the
importer if the criminal complaint is ultimately
unsuccessful. Increased communication between Customs and
industry would help solve this problem by providing time
for the owner of the trademark or patent to file the police
report. In such cases, even if the prosecutor ultimately
invokes opportunity criteria and abandons his/her role in
the criminal prosecution, the private party could continue
the action, aided by the fact that the goods have already
been seized by Customs.
============================================= ===
COSTA RICAN PATENT OFFICE: CAPACITY BY CONTRACT
============================================= ===
¶11. Throughout most of 2007, the Costa Rican Industrial
Property (IP) Office continued to experience severe delays
in processing patent applications. Patent attorneys in
Costa Rica relate that the office has not yet begun
processing patent cases first submitted in 2004 and 2005.
Currently, the IP Office does not have any in-house patent
examiners. Instead, the office relies on a contract
relationship with the Costa Rican Technical Institute and
the Pharmacists Board Association to provide technical
experts to serve as examiners. The IP Office has been
formalizing this arrangement for at least two years. It
previously contracted with the University of Costa Rica's
PROINNOVA office to conduct patent examinations. That
entity, however, never began concerted work in examining
patents, and its relationship with the IP Office terminated
in late 2006.
¶12. This "out-sourcing" arrangement has only just begun to
result in examined applications, with the examiners
affiliated with the Pharmacists Board completing the first
20 pharmaceutical examinations in December 2007. The IP
Office will likely use these outside examiners to move
through the enormous backlog of thousands of patent
applications that have accumulated over the last several
years (during which virtually no applications were
examined). Additionally, the IP Office intends to hire its
own in-house experts to better oversee the work of the
outside examiners.
¶13. The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)
has worked closely with the Costa Rican IP Office to train
employees. WIPO has also started to offer training to
officials in the judiciary that have an interest in IPR.
In addition, the U.S. Embassy has sent several Costa Rican
officials to the USPTO's Global Intellectual Property
Academy for training.
======================================
USE/PROCUREMENT OF GOVERNMENT SOFTWARE
======================================
¶14. The 2002 Executive Decree #30, 151-J, mandated that
all government ministries use only legally licensed
computer software. According to this decree, each ministry
was to conduct an internal audit and submit a statement of
compliance no later than July 31, 2003. The government
subsequently claimed full certification of all ministries,
although there had been no independent confirmation.
=======
COMMENT
=======
¶15. In general, Costa Rica does not yet view IPR as a tool
to spur innovation. The measures underway in the
legislature are more the result of outside pressure, than
of a home-grown realization that increased IPR protections
can spark innovation which can fuel greater high-tech
economic development. However, the GOCR's incremental
improvements to the IPR protection and enforcement regime
are a positive sign. The GOCR must further advance by
finalizing the related IPR bills and corresponding
regulations so that the country will be compliant with its
CAFTA-DR obligations. Post believes that the GOCR will
ultimately complete all the CAFTA-DR required implementing
legislation and regulations in 2008. Therefore, based on
the GOCR's progress to date (albeit limited) in improving
the country's IPR regime, Post recommends that Costa Rica
remain on the Watch List. This is the properly-modulated
message, in our view. To lower Costa Rica's standing at
precisely the time the GOCR is (finally) completing its
CAFTA-DR implementation obligations would be too harsh a
signal that might risk stalling the current CAFTA-DR
momentum. Such a move might also be viewed as provocative
by the Arias administration, and especially by the Attorney
General. This would be counterproductive to our low-key
but steady efforts to work with the GOCR to improve IPR
protection.
BRENNAN