Keep Us Strong WikiLeaks logo

Currently released so far... 97115 / 251,287

Articles

Browse latest releases

Browse by creation date

Browse by origin

A B C D F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W Y Z

Browse by tag

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z
ETRD EAGR ETTC EAID ECON EFIN ECIN EINV ELAB EAIR ENRG EPET EWWT ECPS EIND EMIN ELTN EC ETMIN EUC EZ ET ELECTIONS ENVR EU EUN EG EINT ER ECONOMICS ES EMS ENIV EEB EN ECE ECOSOC EK ENVIRONMENT EFIS EI EWT ENGRD ECPSN EXIM EIAD ERIN ECPC EDEV ENGY ECTRD EPA ESTH ECCT EINVECON ENGR ERTD EUR EAP EWWC ELTD EL EXIMOPIC EXTERNAL ETRDEC ESCAP ECO EGAD ELNT ECONOMIC ENV ETRN EIAR EUMEM ENRGPARMOTRASENVKGHGPGOVECONTSPLEAID EREL ECOM ECONETRDEAGRJA ETCC ETRG ECONOMY EMED ETR ENERG EITC EFINOECD EURM EENG ERA EXPORT ENRD ECONEINVETRDEFINELABETRDKTDBPGOVOPIC EGEN EBRD EVIN ETRAD ECOWAS EFTA ECONETRDBESPAR EGOVSY EPIN EID ECONENRG EDRC ESENV ETT EB ENER ELTNSNAR ECHEVARRIA ETRC EPIT EDUC ESA EFI ENRGY ESCI EE EAIDXMXAXBXFFR EETC ECIP EIAID EIVN EBEXP ESTN EING EGOV ETRA EPETEIND ELAN ETRDGK EAIDRW ETRDEINVECINPGOVCS EPEC ENVI ELN EAG EPCS EPRT EPTED ETRB EUM EAIDS EFIC EFINECONEAIDUNGAGM EAIDAR ESF EIDN ELAM EDU EV EAIDAF ECN EDA EXBS EINTECPS ENRGTRGYETRDBEXPBTIOSZ EPREL EAC EINVEFIN ETA EAGER EINDIR ECA ECLAC ELAP EITI EUCOM ECONEFINETRDPGOVEAGRPTERKTFNKCRMEAID EARG ELDIN EINVKSCA ENNP EFINECONCS EFINTS ECCP ETC EAIRASECCASCID EINN ETRP EAIDNI EFQ ECOQKPKO EGPHUM EBUD ECONEINVEFINPGOVIZ ENERGY ELB EINDETRD EMI ECONEFIN EIB EURN ETRDEINVTINTCS EIN EFIM ETIO ELAINE EMN EATO EWTR EIPR EINVETC ETTD ETDR EIQ ECONCS EPPD ENRGIZ EISL ESPINOSA ELEC EAIG ESLCO EUREM ENTG ERD EINVECONSENVCSJA EEPET EUNCH ECINECONCS ETRO ETRDECONWTOCS ECUN EFND EPECO EAIRECONRP ERGR ETRDPGOV ECPN ENRGMO EPWR EET EAIS EAGRE EDUARDO EAGRRP EAIDPHUMPRELUG EICN ECONQH EVN EGHG ELBR EINF EAIDHO EENV ETEX ERNG ED
KMDR KPAO KPKO KJUS KCRM KGHG KFRD KWMN KDEM KTFN KHIV KGIC KIDE KSCA KNNP KHUM KIPR KSUM KISL KIRF KCOR KRCM KPAL KWBG KN KS KOMC KSEP KFLU KPWR KTIA KSEO KMPI KHLS KICC KSTH KMCA KVPR KPRM KE KU KZ KFLO KSAF KTIP KTEX KBCT KOCI KOLY KOR KAWC KACT KUNR KTDB KSTC KLIG KSKN KNN KCFE KCIP KGHA KHDP KPOW KUNC KDRL KV KPREL KCRS KPOL KRVC KRIM KGIT KWIR KT KIRC KOMO KRFD KUWAIT KG KFIN KSCI KTFIN KFTN KGOV KPRV KSAC KGIV KCRIM KPIR KSOC KBIO KW KGLB KMWN KPO KFSC KSEAO KSTCPL KSI KPRP KREC KFPC KUNH KCSA KMRS KNDP KR KICCPUR KPPAO KCSY KTBT KCIS KNEP KFRDCVISCMGTCASCKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG KNNB KGCC KINR KPOP KMFO KENV KNAR KVIR KDRG KDMR KFCE KNAO KDEN KGCN KICA KIMMITT KMCC KLFU KMSG KSEC KUM KCUL KMNP KSMT KCOM KOMCSG KSPR KPMI KRAD KIND KCRP KAUST KWAWC KTER KCHG KRDP KPAS KITA KTSC KPAOPREL KWGB KIRP KJUST KMIG KLAB KTFR KSEI KSTT KAPO KSTS KLSO KWNN KPOA KHSA KNPP KPAONZ KBTS KWWW KY KJRE KPAOKMDRKE KCRCM KSCS KWMNCI KESO KWUN KPLS KIIP KEDEM KPAOY KRIF KGICKS KREF KTRD KFRDSOCIRO KTAO KJU KWMNPHUMPRELKPAOZW KEN KO KNEI KEMR KKIV KEAI KWAC KRCIM KWCI KFIU KWIC KCORR KOMS KNNO KPAI KBWG KTTB KTBD KTIALG KILS KFEM KTDM KESS KNUC KPA KOMCCO KCEM KRCS KWBGSY KNPPIS KNNPMNUC KWN KERG KLTN KALM KCCP KSUMPHUM KREL KGH KLIP KTLA KAWK KWMM KVRP KVRC KAID KSLG KDEMK KX KIF KNPR KCFC KFTFN KTFM KPDD KCERS KMOC KDEMAF KMEPI KEMS KDRM KEPREL KBTR KEDU KNP KIRL KNNR KMPT KISLPINR KTPN KA KJUSTH KPIN KDEV KTDD KAKA KFRP KWNM KTSD KINL KJUSKUNR KWWMN KECF KWBC KPRO KVBL KOM KFRDKIRFCVISCMGTKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG KEDM KFLD KLPM KRGY KNNF KICR KIFR KM KWMNCS KAWS KLAP KPAK KDDG KCGC KID KNSD KMPF KPFO KDP KCMR KRMS KNPT KNNNP KTIAPARM KDTB KNUP KPGOV KNAP KNNC KUK KSRE KREISLER KIVP KQ KTIAEUN KPALAOIS KRM KISLAO KWM KFLOA
PHUM PINR PTER PGOV PREL PREF PL PM PHSA PE PARM PINS PK PUNE PO PALESTINIAN PU PBTS PROP PTBS POL POLI PA PGOVZI POLMIL POLITICAL PARTIES POLM PD POLITICS POLICY PAS PMIL PINT PNAT PV PKO PPOL PERSONS PING PBIO PH PETR PARMS PRES PCON PETERS PRELBR PT PLAB PP PAK PDEM PKPA PSOCI PF PLO PTERM PJUS PSOE PELOSI PROPERTY PGOVPREL PARP PRL PNIR PHUMKPAL PG PREZ PGIC PBOV PAO PKK PROV PHSAK PHUMPREL PROTECTION PGOVBL PSI PRELPK PGOVENRG PUM PRELKPKO PATTY PSOC PRIVATIZATION PRELSP PGOVEAIDUKNOSWGMHUCANLLHFRSPITNZ PMIG PREC PAIGH PROG PSHA PARK PETER POG PHUS PPREL PS PTERPREL PRELPGOV POV PKPO PGOVECON POUS PGOVPRELPHUMPREFSMIGELABEAIDKCRMKWMN PWBG PMAR PREM PAR PNR PRELPGOVEAIDECONEINVBEXPSCULOIIPBTIO PARMIR PGOVGM PHUH PARTM PN PRE PTE PY POLUN PPEL PDOV PGOVSOCI PIRF PGOVPM PBST PRELEVU PGOR PBTSRU PRM PRELKPAOIZ PGVO PERL PGOC PAGR PMIN PHUMR PVIP PPD PGV PRAM PINL PKPAL PTERE PGOF PINO PHAS PODC PRHUM PHUMA PREO PPA PEPFAR PGO PRGOV PAC PRESL PORG PKFK PEPR PRELP PREFA PNG PGOVPHUMKPAO PRELECON PINOCHET PFOR PGOVLO PHUMBA PRELC PREK PHUME PHJM POLINT PGOVPZ PGOVKCRM PGOVE PHALANAGE PARTY PECON PEACE PROCESS PLN PRELSW PAHO PEDRO PRELA PASS PPAO PGPV PNUM PCUL PGGV PSA PGOVSMIGKCRMKWMNPHUMCVISKFRDCA PGIV PRFE POGOV PEL PBT PAMQ PINF PSEPC POSTS PHUMPGOV PVOV PHSAPREL PROLIFERATION PENA PRELTBIOBA PIN PRELL PGOVPTER PHAM PHYTRP PTEL PTERPGOV PHARM PROTESTS PRELAF PKBL PRELKPAO PKNP PARMP PHUML PFOV PERM PUOS PRELGOV PHUMPTER PARAGRAPH PERURENA PBTSEWWT PCI PETROL PINSO PINSCE PQL PEREZ PBS

Browse by classification

Community resources

courage is contagious

Viewing cable 03OTTAWA619, 2003 SPECIAL 301 REVIEW - CANADA

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.
To understand the justification used for the classification of each cable, please use this WikiSource article as reference.

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. #03OTTAWA619.
Reference ID Created Released Classification Origin
03OTTAWA619 2003-03-06 20:07 2011-04-28 00:00 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Embassy Ottawa
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 OTTAWA 000619 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
STATE FPR WJA/EPSC; EB/IPC - WILSON; WHA/CAN 
 
EB/DBT-CLTURNER AND EB/BTA/TDC 
 
STATE PASS USTR FOR ALVAREZ 
 
USDOC FOR LASHLEY 
 
USDOC ALSO USPTO - URBAN 
 
STATE PASS LIBRARY OF CONGRESS FOR TEPP 
 
E.O.  12958: N/A 
TAGS: KIPR ETRD ECON CA
SUBJECT: 2003 SPECIAL 301 REVIEW - CANADA 
 
REFS: (A) STATE 43677 (B) OTTAWA 0501 (C) 02 OTTAWA 3439 
 
     (D) 02 OTTAWA 3576 (E) 02 OTTAWA 3602 
     (F) 02 OTTAWA 3172 
 
1. SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED. PLEASE PROTECT ACCORDINGLY. 
 
2. (SBU) Summary and Introduction - Post recommends that 
Canada not be placed on the Special 301 Watch List.  Recent 
Canadian legislation has addressed several of the concerns 
outlined in previous 301 reports, such as the exclusion of 
Internet retransmission from the compulsory licensing 
regime, and thereby enhanced intellectual property 
protection in Canada.  Several long-standing 301 issues, 
including national treatment of U.S. artists in the 
distribution of proceeds from Canada's private copying levy 
and "neighboring rights" regime, have received little 
private sector support (Post has received no queries from 
U.S. interests on either of these issues) and may no longer 
warrant a Watch List recommendation.  Other high-profile 
issues that are of concern to U.S. interests, including the 
delisting of pharmaceutical patents and patenting of higher 
life forms, are currently being reviewed by the GOC and are 
not ripe for inclusion in the Watch List at this time.  Post 
is mindful of the various IP concerns and will continue to 
closely monitor these issues and raise them in meetings with 
GOC officials.  End Summary and Introduction. 
 
-- LEGISLATIVE AND JUDICIAL SUCCESS -- 
 
3. (SBU) Canada has made real progress in improving its IPR 
regime over the last couple of years. In December 2002, the 
GOC revised its Copyright Act (Bill C-11) to explicitly 
exclude Internet retransmissions from its compulsory 
licensing regime to the satisfaction of U.S. interests (ref 
E).  An Order-In-Council is expected on March 21, 2003, 
which will make C-11 enter into force immediately.  In 2001, 
the government amended its patent law to provide at least a 
20-year term of protection for patents filed before October 
1, 1989. 
 
4. There are legitimate concerns about Canada's border 
measures and weak enforcement of IP, both at the borders and 
throughout the country.  Canadian Customs and the Royal 
Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) are required by law to take a 
passive approach to border enforcement and have not 
committed the necessary resources to address counterfeiting 
and piracy.  A recent judicial decision, however, is a step 
in the right direction.  In April 2002 the Supreme Court 
decided that Canadian law prohibits the decoding of all 
encrypted satellite signals.  Since this time the GOC, 
working with several cable associations, has stepped up 
efforts to both improve enforcement and address underlying 
legislative issues.  These efforts have not yet crossed over 
to problems related to border enforcement. 
 
-- LIMITED PRIVATE SECTOR INTEREST -- 
 
5. (SBU) The GOC has not resolved the outstanding issue of 
national treatment of U.S. artists in the distribution of 
proceeds from Canada's private copying levy and its 
"neighboring rights" regime and considers these issues to be 
relatively low priorities (Ref F).  Post has not received 
any support from U.S. industry on these issues in the five 
years that we have recommended Canada be placed on USTR's 
Watch List.  Since U.S. industry does not consider these 
issues significant enough for their involvement, we do not 
believe they warrant a Watch List recommendation. 
 
-- ISSUES NOT YET RIPE FOR INCLUSION ON THE WATCH LIST -- 
 
6. (SBU) Health Canada is currently engaged in an internal 
policy review of several patent issues, including delisting 
specific patents, and Notice of Compliance "linkage" 
regulations.  At the same time, Industry Canada is holding 
public hearings this month on a number of IP issues and will 
focus on linkage regulations.  Until the GOC publishes a 
report that indicates in what direction it will actually 
move, we believe it would be premature at this time to 
recommend placing the GOC on the Watch List because the GOC 
is, in fact, addressing these issues.  In their response to 
PhRMA's 301 submission, the GOC noted the complexity of the 
issues and regulations at hand and the fact that "Canada is 
not alone in facing difficult issues regarding patent 
eligibility as it relates to its linkage regime.  Issues 
surrounding patent eligibility and abuse are often the 
subjects of debate in US Congress.  For example, on October 
21, 2002, President Bush announced US intentions to address 
problems relating to perceived delays in the market entry of 
generic drugs." 
 
7. (SBU) In December 2002 the Canadian Supreme Court decided 
against allowing the patent on the "Harvard Mouse" on the 
basis that "a higher life form is not patentable because it 
is not a "manufacture" or "composition of matter" within the 
meaning of "invention" in s.2 of the Patent Act." (See ref 
C)  U.S. biotech companies are concerned that the Court's 
decision, if left intact, would exclude from patent 
eligibility any invention that is a higher life form.  In 
their decision the Supreme Court Justices made it explicit 
that their word is not the final one on this issue; that it 
is up to Parliament to bring in new legislation to deal with 
the patentability of higher life forms.  As reported in ref 
D, the GOC has stated its intent to modernize Canada's 
Patent Act.  While no definite timeline has been announced 
as yet, we do not see a justification to place Canada on the 
Watch List unless the GOC fails to make clear this year its 
determination to amend the Act.  Cellucci