

Currently released so far... 12553 / 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
2011/05/01
2011/05/02
2011/05/03
2011/05/04
2011/05/05
2011/05/06
2011/05/07
2011/05/08
2011/05/09
2011/05/10
2011/05/11
2011/05/12
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
APECO
ASEC
AMGT
AFIN
APER
ACABQ
AORC
AEMR
AF
AE
AR
AGMT
AU
AY
ABLD
AS
AG
AJ
APCS
AX
AM
AMEX
ATRN
ADM
AMED
AFGHANISTAN
AZ
AL
ASUP
AND
ARM
ASEAN
AFFAIRS
AQ
ATFN
AMBASSADOR
AODE
APEC
ACBAQ
AFSI
AFSN
AO
ABUD
AC
ADPM
ADCO
ASIG
ARF
AUC
ASEX
AGAO
AA
AER
AVERY
AGRICULTURE
AIT
AADP
ASCH
AORL
AROC
ACOA
ANET
AID
AMCHAMS
AINF
AMG
AFU
AN
ALOW
ASECKFRDCVISKIRFPHUMSMIGEG
ACS
ADANA
AECL
ACAO
AORG
AGR
BEXP
BR
BM
BG
BL
BA
BTIO
BO
BP
BC
BILAT
BK
BU
BD
BRUSSELS
BB
BF
BBSR
BIDEN
BX
BE
BH
BT
BY
BMGT
BWC
BTIU
BN
CA
CASC
CFED
CO
CH
CS
CU
CE
CI
CM
CMGT
CJAN
COM
CG
CIS
CVIS
CR
CKGR
CHR
CVR
COUNTER
CIA
CLINTON
CY
CPAS
CD
CBW
COUNTERTERRORISM
CITEL
CDG
CW
CODEL
COUNTRY
CLEARANCE
COE
CN
CARICOM
CB
CONDOLEEZZA
CWC
CACS
CSW
CIDA
CIC
CITT
CONS
CL
CACM
CDB
CDC
CAN
CF
CJUS
CTM
CBSA
CARSON
CT
CLMT
CBC
CEUDA
CV
COPUOS
CTR
CROS
CAPC
CAC
CNARC
CICTE
CBE
ECON
ETRD
EIND
ENRG
EC
ELAB
EAGR
EAID
EFIS
EFIN
EINV
EUN
EG
EPET
EAIR
EU
ELTN
EWWT
ECIN
ERD
EI
ETTC
EUR
EN
EZ
ETC
ENVI
EMIN
ET
ENVR
ER
ECPS
EINT
EAP
ES
ENIV
ECONOMY
EXTERNAL
EINN
EFTA
ECONOMIC
EPA
EXBS
ECA
ELN
ETRDEINVECINPGOVCS
ENGR
ECUN
ENGY
ECONOMICS
ELECTIONS
EIAR
EINDETRD
EREL
EUC
ECONEFIN
EURN
EDU
ETRDEINVTINTCS
ECIP
ENERG
EFIM
EAIDS
EK
ETRDECONWTOCS
EINVETC
ECONCS
EUNCH
ESA
ECINECONCS
EUREM
ESENV
EFINECONCS
ETRC
ENNP
EAIG
EXIM
EEPET
EINVECONSENVCSJA
EUMEM
ETRA
ERNG
ETRO
ETRN
EINVEFIN
ICTY
IN
IS
IR
IC
IZ
IA
INTERPOL
IAEA
IT
IMO
IO
IV
ID
IRAQI
IEA
INRB
IL
IWC
ITU
ICAO
ISRAELI
ICRC
IIP
IMF
IBRD
ISLAMISTS
ITALY
ITALIAN
ILO
IPR
IQ
IRS
IAHRC
IZPREL
IRAJ
IDP
ILC
ITF
ICJ
IF
ITPHUM
INMARSAT
ISRAEL
IACI
IBET
ITRA
INR
IRC
IDA
ICTR
IGAD
INRA
INRO
IEFIN
INTELSAT
INTERNAL
INDO
ITPGOV
KWMN
KSCA
KDEM
KTFN
KIPR
KCRM
KPAL
KE
KPAO
KPKO
KS
KN
KISL
KFRD
KJUS
KIRF
KFLO
KG
KTIP
KTER
KRCM
KTIA
KGHG
KIRC
KU
KPRP
KMCA
KMPI
KSEO
KNNP
KZ
KNEI
KCOR
KOMC
KCFC
KSTC
KMDR
KFLU
KSAF
KSEP
KSAC
KR
KGIC
KSUM
KWBG
KCIP
KDRG
KOLY
KAWC
KCHG
KHDP
KRVC
KBIO
KAWK
KGCC
KHLS
KBCT
KPLS
KREL
KCFE
KMFO
KV
KFRDKIRFCVISCMGTKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG
KFTFN
KVPR
KTDB
KSPR
KIDE
KVRP
KTEX
KBTR
KTRD
KICC
KCOM
KO
KLIG
KDEMAF
KMRS
KRAD
KOCI
KSTH
KUNR
KNSD
KGIT
KFSC
KHIV
KPAI
KICA
KACT
KHUM
KREC
KSEC
KFRDCVISCMGTCASCKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG
KCMR
KPIN
KESS
KDEV
KNAR
KNUC
KPWR
KENV
KWWMN
KWMNCS
KPRV
KOM
KBTS
KCRS
KNPP
KWNM
KRFD
KVIR
KTBT
KAID
KRIM
KDDG
KRGY
KHSA
KWMM
KMOC
KSCI
KPAK
KX
KPAONZ
KCGC
KID
KPOA
KIFR
KFIN
KWAC
KOMS
KCRCM
KNUP
KMIG
KNNPMNUC
KERG
KTLA
KCSY
KJUST
MOPS
MARR
MASS
MNUC
MX
MCAP
MO
MR
MI
MD
MK
MA
MP
MY
MTCRE
MOPPS
MASC
MIL
MTS
MLS
MILI
MAR
MU
MEPN
MAPP
MTCR
MEPI
MZ
MEETINGS
MG
MW
MAS
MT
MCC
MIK
ML
MARAD
MV
MERCOSUR
MTRE
MPOS
MEPP
MILITARY
MDC
MQADHAFI
MUCN
MRCRE
MAPS
MEDIA
MASSMNUC
MC
NZ
NZUS
NL
NU
NATO
NP
NO
NIPP
NE
NH
NR
NA
NPT
NI
NSF
NG
NSG
NAFTA
NC
NDP
NEW
NRR
NATIONAL
NT
NS
NASA
NAR
NV
NORAD
NSSP
NK
NPA
NGO
NSC
NATOPREL
NW
NPG
NSFO
OPDC
OTRA
OIIP
OREP
OVIP
OSCE
OEXC
OIE
OPRC
OAS
OPIC
OTR
OMIG
OSAC
OFFICIALS
OECD
OSCI
OBSP
OFDA
OPCW
ODIP
OFDP
OES
OPAD
OCII
OHUM
OVP
ON
OIC
OCS
PHUM
PREL
PGOV
PINR
PTER
PARM
PREF
PM
PE
PINS
PK
PHSA
PBTS
PRGOV
PA
PORG
PP
PS
PGOF
PL
PO
PARMS
PKFK
PSOE
PEPR
PAK
POL
PPA
PINT
PMAR
PRELP
PREFA
PALESTINIAN
PBIO
PINF
PNG
PMIL
PFOR
PUNE
PGOVLO
PAO
POLITICS
PHUMBA
PSEPC
PTBS
PCUL
PROP
PNAT
PNR
POLINT
PGOVE
PROG
PHALANAGE
PARTY
PDEM
PECON
PROV
PHUMPREL
PGOC
PY
PCI
PLN
PDOV
PREO
PGIV
PHUH
PAS
PU
POGOV
PF
PINL
POV
PAHO
PRL
PG
PRAM
POLITICAL
PARTIES
POLICY
PGOVSMIGKCRMKWMNPHUMCVISKFRDCA
PGGV
PHUS
PSA
PHUMPGOV
PEL
PSI
PAIGH
POSTS
PBT
PTERE
RS
RU
RW
RM
RO
RP
REGION
RSP
RF
RICE
RCMP
RFE
RIGHTS
RIGHTSPOLMIL
ROBERT
RUPREL
RELATIONS
ROOD
REACTION
RSO
REPORT
SENV
SNAR
SCUL
SR
SC
SOCI
SMIG
SI
SP
SU
SO
SW
SY
SA
SZ
SAN
SF
SN
STEINBERG
SG
ST
SIPDIS
SNARIZ
SNARN
SSA
SK
SPCVIS
SOFA
SAARC
SL
SEVN
SARS
SIPRS
SHUM
SANC
SWE
SHI
SYR
SNARCS
SPCE
SYRIA
SEN
SH
SCRS
SENVKGHG
TRGY
TSPL
TPHY
TSPA
TBIO
TI
TW
THPY
TX
TU
TS
TZ
TC
TH
TT
TIP
TO
TERRORISM
TRSY
TINT
TN
TURKEY
TBID
TL
TV
TNGD
TD
TF
TP
TFIN
TAGS
TK
TR
UNSC
UK
UNGA
UN
US
UNHRC
UG
UP
UNMIK
UNHCR
UE
USTR
UNVIE
UAE
UZ
UY
UNO
UNESCO
USEU
USOAS
UV
UNODC
UNCHS
UNFICYP
UNEP
UNIDROIT
UNDESCO
UNDP
UNPUOS
UNC
UNAUS
USUN
UNCHC
UNCHR
UNCND
UNICEF
UNCSD
UNDC
USNC
USPS
USAID
Browse by classification
Community resources
courage is contagious
Viewing cable 09SANJOSE138, 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. #09SANJOSE138.
Reference ID | Created | Released | Classification | Origin |
---|---|---|---|---|
09SANJOSE138 | 2009-03-04 15:38 | 2011-03-21 16:30 | UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY | Embassy San Jose |
VZCZCXYZ0001
RR RUEHWEB
DE RUEHSJ #0138/01 0631538
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 041538Z MAR 09
FM AMEMBASSY SAN JOSE
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 0545
INFO RUEHZA/WHA CENTRAL AMERICAN COLLECTIVE
UNCLAS SAN JOSE 000138
SENSITIVE
SIPDIS
EEB/TPP/IPE FOR TMCGOWAN AND SKEAT
PLEASE PASS TO USTR FOR JGROVES AND GVETERE
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: ETRD ECON KIPR CS
SUBJECT: 2008 SPECIAL 301 REVIEW - COSTA RICA
REF: A) 09 STATE 8410
B) 06 SAN JOSE 0464
C) 07 SAN JOSE 0335
D) 08 SAN JOSE 0155
E) 08 SAN JOSE 0959
-------
SUMMARY
-------
¶1. (U) Since last year's report (Ref D), the GOCR enacted a number
of laws related to Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) as required by
the Central American Free Trade Agreement (CAFTA-DR), but the
success in passing new IPR legislation highlighted the country's
failure to enforce existing laws. Costa Rica's Attorney General
publicly and repeatedly stated that Costa Rica should use its
limited investigative and prosecutorial resources to pursue violent
and drug-related crimes and instructed staff prosecutors to pursue
IPR cases only if they implied harm to people or the environment.
¶2. (U) Nonetheless, there was IPR progress. The Costa Rican
Industrial Registry issued many more patents than in recent years.
A number of Costa Rican officials received training in IPR
enforcement, administration, prosecution, and customs from USPTO,
DHS, WIPO, and others. The Judicial Branch, through the Judicial
School, has engaged in IPR training and wants to provide more
training opportunities for judges and prosecutors. Due to the
CAFTA-DR-related legislative gains (which required significant
political will by the executive branch), and improvements with
registrations, Post recommends that Costa Rica's ranking not be
lowered, and that the country remain on the Watch List for the 2009
Special 301 Report (Ref A). END SUMMARY.
----------------------------
IPR BACKGROUND IN COSTA RICA
----------------------------
¶3. (U) After a difficult and extended implementation review
process, CAFTA-DR entered into force (EIF) for Costa Rica on January
1, 2009. However, entry into force did not quiet CAFTA and IPR
critics. Issues related to IPR rose to the forefront of public
debate during the campaign leading up to the October 7, 2007
nationwide referendum to ratify the country's participation in
CAFTA-DR. Those opposed 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 since it
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
remain politically controversial.
--------------------------------------------- --
NOW CAFTA-DR COMPLIANT. . .WITH AN IPR FOOTNOTE
--------------------------------------------- --
¶4. (U) 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 also ratified the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT). Costa
Rica posted incremental -- but limited -- IPR progress over the past
several years (Refs B and C).
¶5. (SBU) Since last year's Special 301 Report, Costa Rica made all
the necessary legislative reforms to comply with CAFTA-DR
obligations related to IPR. In recognition of meeting CAFTA
standards through legislative reforms, the United States Trade
Representative (USTR) certified Costa Rican CAFTA-DR compliance in
late 2008, paving the way for EIF a few weeks later. However, three
technical corrections remain for legislative action by the Costa
Rican national assembly. Packaged into one final piece of
legislation, the corrections (Ref E) must be passed into law by
January 1, 2010. Failure to do so will result in a holdback of
tariff preferences on a select category of Costa Rican export
products, most likely sugar. The Arias Administration is confident
that the process will be completed in 2009.
-------------------------------------------
. . . BUT SADDLED BY ENFORCEMENT CHALLENGES
-------------------------------------------
¶6. (U) Despite these legislative victories, real challenges remain
in effectively ensuring that the laws have an impact on the local
IPR environment. Throughout 2008, Costa Rica continued to falter in
enforcing its IPR laws, which criminalize counterfeiting and piracy.
The country's public prosecutors have consistently demurred from
prosecuting IPR cases unless they involve potential harm to people
or the environment. 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 (in which an individual was
appointed with responsibility for IPR prosecution). Crimes related
to IPR form only a portion of the portfolio of these prosecutors and
receive little attention. Rather, the prosecutors tend to invoke
"opportunity criteria" (akin to prosecutorial discretion) to avoid
opening investigations into reported IPR crimes.
¶7. (U) The Attorney General of Costa Rica, Francisco Dall'Anese,
publicly and privately 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 the private sector and the prosecutor's office have
yet to coordinate in a meaningful way. 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.
¶8. (SBU) 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, and is in a position to do so. 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
reelected to a second four year term as Attorney General in late
¶2007. (COMMENT: Knowledgeable local contacts tell us that
Dall'Anese is unlikely to run for a third term in 2011. END
COMMENT.)
¶9. (U) The few prosecutions that wound their way through the
criminal court system over the last two years were originally
started long before. In February 2008, industry successfully
concluded a prosecution against a counterfeiter of apparel. As has
been the case in previous successful IPR prosecutions, 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?
--------------------------------------
¶10. (U) Officers within the FBI-equivalent Judicial Police (OIJ)
state that most counterfeit goods within Costa Rica are imported
from elsewhere rather than manufactured in the country.
Unfortunately, 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. Local industry has also
expressed an interest in providing counterfeit recognition training
to Customs officials.
¶11. (U) 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 for the product involved has not
filed a criminal complaint against the importer, the customs agent
must either release the goods or file a criminal complaint. The
latter action can open the agent up to personal liability through a
countersuit by the importer if the criminal complaint is ultimately
unsuccessful.
¶12. (U) Recent changes in the law give the customs agent ten days
from seizure to file the criminal complaint, but the customs agent
continues to be personally liable if the complaint is 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
--------------------------------------------- ---
¶13. (SBU) In 2008 the Costa Rican Industrial Property (IP) Office
of the National Registry finally began to address severe delays in
processing patent applications. Through 2007, patent attorneys in
Costa Rica related that the office had not yet begun processing
patent cases first submitted in 2004 and 2005. The table below
illustrates progress, although the backlog may take years to erase.
Number of Application Approvals
Year 2005 2006 2007 2008
Patent 13 4 13 53
Utility Model 0 1 1 2
Industrial Model 4 3 2 21
Industrial Design 1 1 - 15
TOTAL 18 9 16 91
Source: Industrial Property Registry
The IP Office informs us that in 2008 the office completed the
review of a total of 140 applications, approving the 91 shown above
and rejecting 49. While new patent applications are immediately
processed, there is still a backlog of about 1,200 patent
applications waiting for technical review.
¶14. (U) The IP Office believes that it is on the verge of hiring
five in-house patent examiners with training and experience in
specific areas of science and technology. It has taken several
years to create these positions. These in-house examiners will not
be hired within the Civil Service structure and therefore may be
paid salaries commensurate with their expertise. To date, the IP
office has relied heavily on contract relationships with the Costa
Rican Technical Institute and the Pharmacists Board Association to
provide experts to serve as outside examiners. The IP Office will
continue to use these and other outside examiners to move through
the backlog of patent applications.
¶15. (U) The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) has
worked closely with the Costa Rican IP Office to train employees.
WIPO also offered training to officials in the judiciary that have
an interest in IPR. In addition, the U.S. Embassy sent eight Costa
Rican officials to the USPTO's Global Intellectual Property Academy
for training.
--------------------------------------
USE/PROCUREMENT OF GOVERNMENT SOFTWARE
--------------------------------------
¶16. (U) 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
-------
¶17. (SBU) In general, parts of the Costa Rican government, notably
the judiciary, do not yet view IPR as a tool to spur innovation.
The executive branch recognizes the value of IPR enforcement and
prosecution and the private sector wants judicial action on IPR
cases. After making progress in IPR legislation as instituted by
CAFTA-DR's entry into force, the focus of attention is now on the
judiciary and how it handles cases in a CAFTA-DR compliant IPR
regime.
¶18. (SBU) Therefore, based on the GOCR's progress to date in
improving the country's IPR framework -- legislative reforms,
political will in the executive branch, sharp increase in patent
application approvals, and receptivity to training opportunities --
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 immediately after the GOCR finally completed its CAFTA-DR
implementation obligations would be too harsh a signal. Such a move
would likely be viewed as provocative by the Arias administration,
which worked very hard to pass the necessary IPR legislation for
CAFTA-DR EIF. This would also be counterproductive to our low-key
but steady efforts to work with the GOCR and the private sector (and
around the Attorney General, if necessary) to improve IPR
protection.
CIANCHETTE