

Currently released so far... 12478 / 251,287
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
2011/03/23
2011/03/24
2011/03/25
2011/03/26
2011/03/27
2011/03/28
2011/03/29
2011/03/30
2011/03/31
2011/04/01
2011/04/02
2011/04/03
2011/04/04
2011/04/05
2011/04/06
2011/04/07
2011/04/08
2011/04/09
2011/04/10
2011/04/11
2011/04/12
2011/04/13
2011/04/14
2011/04/15
2011/04/16
2011/04/17
2011/04/18
2011/04/19
2011/04/20
2011/04/21
2011/04/22
2011/04/23
2011/04/24
2011/04/25
2011/04/26
2011/04/27
2011/04/28
2011/04/29
2011/04/30
Browse by creation date
Browse by origin
Embassy Athens
Embassy Asuncion
Embassy Astana
Embassy Asmara
Embassy Ashgabat
Embassy Apia
Embassy Ankara
Embassy Amman
Embassy Algiers
Embassy Addis Ababa
Embassy Accra
Embassy Abuja
Embassy Abu Dhabi
Embassy Abidjan
Consulate Auckland
Consulate Amsterdam
Consulate Adana
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 Belmopan
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
Consulate Calgary
Embassy Dushanbe
Embassy Dublin
Embassy Doha
Embassy Djibouti
Embassy Dili
Embassy Dhaka
Embassy Dar Es Salaam
Embassy Damascus
Embassy Dakar
Consulate Dubai
Embassy Helsinki
Embassy Harare
Embassy Hanoi
Consulate Ho Chi Minh City
Consulate Hermosillo
Consulate Hamilton
Consulate Hamburg
Consulate Halifax
Embassy Kyiv
Embassy Kuwait
Embassy Kuala Lumpur
Embassy Kinshasa
Embassy Kingston
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 Lahore
Consulate Lagos
Mission USOSCE
Mission USNATO
Mission UNESCO
Embassy Muscat
Embassy Moscow
Embassy Montevideo
Embassy Monrovia
Embassy Minsk
Embassy Mexico
Embassy Mbabane
Embassy Maputo
Embassy Manila
Embassy Manama
Embassy Managua
Embassy Malabo
Embassy Madrid
Consulate Munich
Consulate Mumbai
Consulate Montreal
Consulate Monterrey
Consulate Milan
Consulate Melbourne
Embassy Nicosia
Embassy Niamey
Embassy New Delhi
Embassy Ndjamena
Embassy Nassau
Embassy Nairobi
Consulate Naples
Consulate Naha
Embassy Pristina
Embassy Pretoria
Embassy Prague
Embassy Port Of Spain
Embassy Port Louis
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 Suva
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 St Petersburg
Consulate Shenyang
Consulate Shanghai
Consulate Sapporo
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 Toronto
Consulate Tijuana
USUN New York
USEU Brussels
US Office Almaty
US Mission Geneva
US Interests Section Havana
US Delegation, Secretary
UNVIE
Embassy Ulaanbaatar
Embassy Vilnius
Embassy Vienna
Embassy Vatican
Embassy Valletta
Consulate Vladivostok
Consulate Vancouver
Browse by tag
AU
ASEC
AE
AF
AORC
AEMR
AMGT
ABUD
AFFAIRS
APER
AS
AMED
AY
AG
AR
AJ
AL
AID
AM
AODE
ABLD
AMG
AFIN
ATRN
AGAO
AFU
AN
AA
ALOW
APECO
ADM
ARF
ASEAN
APEC
AMBASSADOR
AO
ASUP
AZ
AADP
ACOA
ANET
AMCHAMS
ACABQ
ASECKFRDCVISKIRFPHUMSMIGEG
APCS
AGMT
AINF
AIT
AORL
ACS
AFSI
AFSN
ACBAQ
AFGHANISTAN
ADANA
ADPM
AX
ADCO
AECL
AMEX
ACAO
ASCH
AORG
AGR
AROC
ASIG
AND
ARM
AQ
ATFN
AC
AUC
ASEX
AER
AVERY
AGRICULTURE
BL
BR
BO
BA
BD
BM
BK
BG
BU
BB
BH
BTIO
BY
BEXP
BP
BE
BRUSSELS
BF
BIDEN
BT
BX
BC
BILAT
BN
BBSR
BTIU
BWC
BMGT
CA
CASC
CVIS
CM
CH
CO
CU
CD
CWC
CI
CS
CY
CMGT
CF
CG
CR
CB
CV
CW
CE
CBW
CT
CPAS
COUNTERTERRORISM
CJAN
CODEL
CIDA
CDG
CDC
CIA
CTR
CNARC
CSW
CN
CONS
CLINTON
COE
CROS
CARICOM
CONDOLEEZZA
COUNTER
CL
COM
CICTE
CIS
CFED
COUNTRY
CJUS
CBSA
CEUDA
CLMT
CAC
COPUOS
CIC
CBE
CHR
CTM
CVR
CITEL
CLEARANCE
CACS
CAN
CITT
CARSON
CACM
CDB
CAPC
CKGR
CBC
EC
EG
EPET
ECON
ETRD
EFIN
EIND
EMIN
ENRG
EAID
EAGR
EUN
ETTC
EAIR
ENIV
ES
EU
EINV
ELAB
ECIN
EFIS
ELTN
EWWT
ECPS
ECONOMIC
ENGR
EN
EINT
EPA
ELN
ESA
EZ
ER
ET
EFTA
EINVECONSENVCSJA
EUMEM
ETRA
EXTERNAL
EI
EUR
EK
ERNG
ENGY
ETRDEINVECINPGOVCS
ENERG
EINVEFIN
ENVR
ECA
ELECTIONS
ETC
EUREM
ENNP
EFINECONCS
EURN
ECINECONCS
EEPET
EXIM
ERD
ENVI
ETRC
ETRDEINVTINTCS
ETRO
EDU
ETRN
EAIG
ECONCS
ECONOMICS
EAP
ECONOMY
EINN
EIAR
EXBS
ECUN
EINDETRD
EREL
EUC
ESENV
ECONEFIN
ECIP
EFIM
EAIDS
ETRDECONWTOCS
EUNCH
EINVETC
IZ
IT
IR
IS
IN
IC
IAEA
IO
ICAO
IWC
ID
IV
ISRAEL
IAHRC
IQ
ICTR
IMF
IRS
IDP
IGAD
ICRC
ICTY
IMO
IL
INRA
INRO
ICJ
ITU
IBRD
INMARSAT
IIP
ITALY
IEFIN
IACI
ILO
INTELSAT
ILC
ITRA
IDA
INRB
IRC
INTERPOL
IA
IPR
IRAQI
ISRAELI
INTERNAL
ISLAMISTS
INDO
ITPHUM
ITPGOV
ITALIAN
IBET
INR
IEA
IZPREL
IRAJ
ITF
IF
KDEM
KU
KPAL
KNNP
KCRM
KZ
KN
KS
KJUS
KTFN
KSCA
KV
KISL
KPAO
KPKO
KIRF
KTIA
KIPR
KFLO
KFRD
KTIP
KAWC
KSUM
KCOM
KAID
KE
KTDB
KMDR
KOMC
KWBG
KDRG
KVPR
KTEX
KGIC
KWMN
KSCI
KCOR
KACT
KDDG
KHLS
KSAF
KFLU
KSEO
KMRS
KSPR
KOLY
KSEP
KVIR
KGHG
KIRC
KUNR
KIFR
KCIP
KMCA
KMPI
KBCT
KHSA
KICC
KIDE
KCRS
KMFO
KRVC
KRGY
KR
KAWK
KG
KFIN
KHIV
KBIO
KOCI
KBTR
KNEI
KPOA
KCFE
KPLS
KSTC
KHDP
KPRP
KCRCM
KLIG
KCFC
KTER
KREC
KTBT
KPRV
KSTH
KRIM
KRAD
KWAC
KWMM
KFRDCVISCMGTCASCKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG
KOMS
KX
KMIG
KRCM
KVRP
KBTS
KPAONZ
KNUC
KNAR
KPWR
KNPP
KDEMAF
KNUP
KNNPMNUC
KERG
KGIT
KPAI
KTLA
KFSC
KCSY
KSAC
KTRD
KID
KOM
KMOC
KJUST
KGCC
KREL
KFRDKIRFCVISCMGTKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG
KFTFN
KO
KNSD
KHUM
KSEC
KCMR
KCHG
KICA
KPIN
KESS
KDEV
KCGC
KWWMN
KPAK
KWNM
KWMNCS
KRFD
MOPS
MCAP
MPOS
MARR
MO
MNUC
MX
MASS
MG
MY
MU
ML
MR
MILITARY
MTCRE
MT
MEPP
MA
MDC
MP
MAR
MASSMNUC
MARAD
MAPP
MZ
MD
MI
MEETINGS
MK
MCC
MEPN
MRCRE
MAS
MIL
MASC
MC
MV
MTCR
MIK
MUCN
MEDIA
MERCOSUR
MW
MOPPS
MTS
MLS
MILI
MTRE
MEPI
MQADHAFI
MAPS
NO
NATO
NL
NP
NZ
NSF
NI
NH
NG
NAFTA
NU
NASA
NR
NATOPREL
NSSP
NSG
NA
NT
NW
NK
NPT
NPA
NATIONAL
NPG
NSFO
NS
NSC
NE
NGO
NDP
NIPP
NRR
NEW
NZUS
NC
NAR
NV
NORAD
OTRA
OPCW
OVIP
OAS
OREP
OPIC
OIIP
OPRC
ODIP
OEXC
OPDC
OSCE
OIC
OSCI
OECD
OFDP
OFDA
OMIG
OPAD
OFFICIALS
OVP
OIE
OHUM
OCS
OBSP
OTR
OSAC
ON
OCII
OES
PGOV
PREL
PHUM
PTER
PINS
PINR
PREF
PK
PROP
PA
PARM
PBTS
PMAR
PM
PGIV
PE
PRAM
PHUH
PHSA
PL
PNAT
PO
PLN
PAO
PSA
PHUMPGOV
PF
PEL
PBIO
POLITICS
PHUMBA
PAS
POL
PREO
PAHO
PMIL
POGOV
POV
PAK
PNR
PRL
PG
PREFA
PSI
PINL
PU
PARMS
PRGOV
PALESTINIAN
PAIGH
POLITICAL
PARTIES
POSTS
PROG
PORG
PTBS
PUNE
POLICY
PDOV
PCI
PGOVSMIGKCRMKWMNPHUMCVISKFRDCA
PBT
PP
PS
PY
PTERE
PGOF
PKFK
PSOE
PEPR
PPA
PINT
PRELP
PSEPC
PGOVE
PINF
PNG
PGOC
PFOR
PCUL
POLINT
PGGV
PHALANAGE
PARTY
PGOVLO
PHUS
PDEM
PECON
PROV
PHUMPREL
RS
RU
RELATIONS
RW
RO
RM
RP
ROOD
RICE
RUPREL
RSO
RCMP
REACTION
REPORT
REGION
RIGHTS
RF
RFE
RSP
RIGHTSPOLMIL
ROBERT
SU
SCUL
SNAR
SOCI
SF
SA
SHUM
SENV
SP
SR
SY
SANC
SC
SMIG
SZ
SARS
SW
SEVN
SO
SEN
SL
SNARCS
SNARN
SI
SG
SN
SH
SYR
SAARC
SPCE
SHI
SCRS
SENVKGHG
SYRIA
SWE
STEINBERG
SIPRS
ST
SNARIZ
SSA
SK
SPCVIS
SOFA
SIPDIS
SAN
TC
TI
TBIO
TH
TSPL
TRGY
TSPA
TPHY
TU
TW
TS
TAGS
TK
TX
TNGD
TZ
TF
TL
TV
TN
TD
TIP
TR
TP
TO
TT
TFIN
THPY
TERRORISM
TINT
TRSY
TURKEY
TBID
US
UK
UNGA
UP
UZ
UNMIK
USTR
UNO
UNSC
UN
UNESCO
UNAUS
UNHRC
UY
UG
UNHCR
UNCND
USOAS
USEU
UNICEF
UNEP
UV
UNPUOS
UNCSD
USUN
UNCHR
UNDC
USNC
UE
UNDP
UNC
USPS
USAID
UNVIE
UAE
UNFICYP
UNODC
UNCHS
UNIDROIT
UNDESCO
UNCHC
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 21:58 | 2011-03-02 16:00 | 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