Cable reference id: #09ROME1396
Subject Ipr In Italy – American Voices Among Italian Elite
Origin Embassy Rome (Italy)
Cable time Mon, 21 Dec 2009 15:30 UTC
Classification UNCLASSIFIED
Source http://wikileaks.org/cable/2009/12/09ROME1396.html
History First published on Fri, 26 Aug 2011 02:34 UTC
Modified on Thu, 1 Sep 2011 23:24 UTC
Media?Add media item
Comments 0 Comments
VZCZCXRO2026 RR RUEHFL RUEHNP DE RUEHRO #1396 3551530 ZNR UUUUU ZZH R 211530Z DEC 09 FM AMEMBASSY ROME TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 3031 INFO RUEHFL/AMCONSUL FLORENCE 3939 RUEHMIL/AMCONSUL MILAN 0377 RUEHNP/AMCONSUL NAPLES 4160 RUEAHLC/DEPT OF HOMELAND SECURITY WASHINGTON DC RUCPDOC/DEPT OF COMMERCE WASHDC
Hide header UNCLAS ROME 001396 SIPDIS STATE PLEASE PASS TO USTR FOR ERIN MCCONAHA, JENNIFER CHOE GROVES, CHRISTOPHER WILSON STATE PLEASE PASS TO EEB/TPP/IPE FOR TOM O’KEEFE, JOELLEN URBAN, TIMOTHY MCGOWAN DEPT OF COMMERCE FOR SUSAN WILSON DHS PLEASE PASS TO ICE E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: IT?[Italy], KIPR?[Intellectual Property Rights], ETRD?[Foreign Trade], ECON?[Economic Conditions], EINT?[Economic and Commercial Internet] SUBJECT: IPR IN ITALY – AMERICAN VOICES AMONG ITALIAN ELITE REF: (A) ROME 1047 – – – – – – – – – – Summary – – – – – – – – – –
¶1. (U) Three American speakers, recruited by Embassy Rome, recently spoke at an intellectual property rights (IPR) conference held in Rome. The two USG speakers and one private sector speaker spoke on issues of IPRs and competition law, emerging areas of patent law, and U.S. approaches to copyright. This conference allowed U.S. perspectives to be heard at a gathering of Italian academics and IP professionals who are influential in the field. End summary. – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – LUISS CONFERENCE – IPR: CONVERGENCES AND DIVERGENCES – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
¶2. (U) Embassy Rome was co-sponsor of a seminar hosted by LUISS Guido Carli University. LUISS is a prestigious private university sponsored by Confindustria, Italy’s largest industry association. The Queen Mary Intellectual Property Research Institute of the University of London was also a sponsor. The goal was to discuss differences and similarities in IPR law in the U.S., Europe and Asia.
¶3. (U) The Embassy, with assistance from USTR and the IP office at the State Department, recruited three speakers: Michael Shapiro, from the USPTO, Alden Abbott, deputy director of special projects in the international office of the Federal Trade Commission, and Jorge Goldstein, a leading American biotech patent attorney. Speakers from LUISS University addressed EU issues, while the Queen Mary Institute provided lectures focusing on China and India.
¶4. (U) Participants addressed a number of complex matters including the intersection of IPR and competition law, the patenting of genetic resources, and fair use. Differences in legislation, approach and philosophy emerged, but there was much discussion of similarities. There was a particular interest in the U.S. approach to fair use. – – – – – COMMENT – – – – –
¶5. (U) Participants and speakers were scholars and professionals who wield influence in the IPR realm, in Italy and in some cases in other parts of the EU. For example, the GOI often creates consulting committees when studying reforms or proposing new legislation and university professors are usually a large part of these committees. As such, this forum provided an important opportunity for a U.S. perspective to be heard.
¶6. (U) Italian academics, while willing to discuss the value of patents and recognizing the need for trademark protection, are often weak supporters of strong copyright protection. The conference offered one immediate example of the importance of a U.S. perspective in this debate. Gustavo Ghidini, conference organizer and one of Italy’s IP czars, has often taken position against strong copyright protection. Under the previous Prodi government, Ghidini was an active and influential member of the Culture Ministry committee tasked with drafting a comprehensive IP reform package. On that project, Ghidini had been an advocate of significantly weaker copyright protection legislation which the draft package reflected. Although the draft legislation was scuttled after the fall of the Prodi government, we have had an ongoing dialogue with Ghidini on this matter. At the conference, in his closing remarks, Ghidini actually spoke in favor of copyright protection as a key, alongside with patents, to advancing the process of innovation and progress in knowledge-based societies. THORNE
Reference id aka Wikileaks id #240991 ???
…
Subject Ipr In Italy – Usg Cooperation With Italian Ip Directorate
Origin Embassy Rome (Italy)
Cable time Mon, 21 Dec 2009 15:29 UTC
Classification UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Source http://wikileaks.org/cable/2009/12/09ROME1395.html
History First published on Fri, 26 Aug 2011 02:34 UTC (original)
Modified on Thu, 1 Sep 2011 23:24 UTC (diff from original)
Media?Add media item
Comments 0 Comments
VZCZCXRO2021 RR RUEHFL RUEHNP DE RUEHRO #1395/01 3551529 ZNR UUUUU ZZH R 211529Z DEC 09 FM AMEMBASSY ROME TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 3029 INFO RUEHFL/AMCONSUL FLORENCE 3937 RUEHMIL/AMCONSUL MILAN 0375 RUEHNP/AMCONSUL NAPLES 4158 RUEAHLC/DEPT OF HOMELAND SECURITY WASHINGTON DC RUCPDOC/DEPT OF COMMERCE WASHDC
Hide header UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 ROME 001395 SIPDIS SENSITIVE STATE PLEASE PASS TO USTR FOR ERIN MCCONAHA, JENNIFER CHOE GROVES, CHRISTOPHER WILSON STATE PLEASE PASS TO EEB/TPP/IPE FOR TOM O’KEEFE, JOELLEN URBAN, TIMOTHY MCGOWAN DEPT OF COMMERCE FOR SUSAN WILSON DHS PLEASE PASS TO ICE E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: IT?[Italy], KIPR?[Intellectual Property Rights], ETRD?[Foreign Trade], ECON?[Economic Conditions], EINT?[Economic and Commercial Internet] SUBJECT: IPR IN ITALY – USG COOPERATION WITH ITALIAN IP DIRECTORATE REF: (A) ROME 1047 (B) ROME 535 – – – – – – – – – – Summary – – – – – – – – – –
¶1. (U) Italian officials have expressed interest in closer collaboration with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office on intellectual property (IP) issues. They also seem eager to take steps that could lead to Italy being taken off the USG’s 301 Watch List, but it is not clear that they will succeed in bringing about needed policy changes. End summary. – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – USPTO-IPTO MEETING – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
¶2. (U) Michael Shapiro of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office met with Isabella Flajban,chief of international relations at the Italian Patent and Trademarks Office (IPTO) and one ofthe leaders of the new Italian IP Directorate. Flajban expressed strong interest in establishing new IPTO-USPTO collaboration. She indicated that the IPTO would like to revive and expand the scope of a 2002 agreement signed by the Ministry of Economic Development (under which the IPTO falls) and the USPTO. Some areas of interest include judicial exchange programs, legislative updates, joint outreach/sensitization programs to address IPR protection, as well as the following issues: — Intellectual property issues related to technology transfer: Flajban proposed a joint project or conference that would build on two previous events co-hosted by the Economic Development Ministry and the Embassy which were a 2004 conference on the Bayh-Dole act and a 2007 seminar on IP aspects of tech transfer and university-private sector collaboration. The GOI is planning to invest additional funds in tech transfer offices in Italian Universities, and as such would be interested in hearing from American university staff who work with technology licensing. Shapiro suggested that it might interest them to hear from some of the new voices in the debate who are promoting alternatives to Bayh-Dole that would focus on a more collaborative research model. — Geographical Indications: The Italians are interested in discussing geographical indications (GIs). Shapiro suggested that it might benefit the Italians to hear from some American experts of the U.S. system who are good at explaining how/why we feel that the U.S. system will adequately protect Italian GIs. (Note: GOI officials are likely interested in debating the issue as they do not agree with the USG position on these protections, which are provided to food and beverage products in Europe, but not in the U.S.) — IP and Cultural assets: Shapiro suggested the Italians might benefit from hearing how Intellectual Property relates to protecting cultural assets. This is a topic that could be useful in engaging the Ministry of Culture, which has competence over aspects of IPR but is not always concerned with protecting IPR.
¶3. (U) Flajban said the Italian IP Directorate is equally interested in moving ahead on collaboration with USTR, especially on the issue of USTR’s 301 Watch list. Italy is on the list because of inadequate protection of intellectual property rights. – – – – – – – – – – – – – – – Italy still on 301 Watch List – – – – – – – – – – – – – – –
¶4. (SBU) Italy has long been on the USTR’s 301 Watch list. The list has caused tension with Italian government officials and over the course of the past year the Embassy has made efforts to engage Italian officials on the issue. Recently GOI officials have indicated a new interest in collaborating with the USG, and in addressing some IPR protection deficiencies highlighted in the 301 report.
¶5. (U) The visit earlier this year by the USTR’s Director for European Affairs kick-started this process of collaboration and Post is working with the Italian IP Directorate, USTR, the USPTO and others on setting up a January digital video conference to discuss ROME 00001395 002 OF 002 potential collaborative projects and to address the issue of improved IPR protection in Italy. – – – – – – – – – – – – COMMENT – – – – – – – – – – – –
¶6. (SBU) Officials with Italy’s IP directorate seem genuinely interested in making progress on IPR protection, but it is still not clear to us that they will be able to bring about the policy changes that would justify taking Italy off the 301 Watch list. The IP Director General is energetic has been given the authority to coordinate domestic IPR protection efforts. Post has observed, however, that GOI officials are inclined to focus on trademark and patent protection and frequently put copyright issues on the back burner. Collaboration with the IP directorate on specific projects or IP issues will provide an opportunity to push the Italians to strengthen IPR protection and address USG concerns. For any ongoing collaboration to effectively deal with U.S. interests, however, copyright protection, particularly the issue of online piracy, will need to be included. End Comment. THORNE
?