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 SANTO DOMINGO 006413 
 
SIPDIS 
 
STATE FOR EB - WILSON 
WHITE HOUSE PASS USTR FOR MALITO, PECK, SOUDER, VARGO 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: ETRD KIPR EINV DR
SUBJECT: DOMINICAN REPUBLIC FAILS TO PRODUCE REPORT ON 
BROADCAST PIRACY 
 
 
¶1. The Dominican Republic missed an October 5 deadline 
established in a side letter to CAFTA obligating the 
government to report on actions it is taking to stop 
television broadcast piracy.  When the National Organization 
for Copyright Protection (ONDA) provided a preliminary copy 
of the late report to the Embassy in November, it failed to 
address the broadcast issue in any detail. 
 
¶2. Background:  Dominican trade negotiations with the United 
States on CAFTA included a side letter on IPR enforcement 
that focused specifically on television broadcast piracy. 
The side letter contains a requirement that the Dominican 
Republic "take all necessary steps to halt television 
broadcasting piracy by licensed broadcasting stations and to 
provide a deterrent to future infringements."  The Dominicans 
promised to provide the United States with a written report 
describing progress in stopping television broadcasting 
piracy, including criminal, administrative and civil 
investigations and actions.   The deadline for the first 
report was October 5, sixty days after CAFTA was signed. 
Despite the side letter commitments, we see no indications 
that he Dominicans are taking new actions to reduce 
television broadcast piracy. 
 
¶3.  Embassy contacted various Dominican Government agencies 
prior to the October 5 reporting deadline to determine 
whether the government would meet its obligation.  EcoPol 
Counselor and Economic Officer met with the Assistant 
Attorney General responsible for IPR issues Pedro Fliz 
Montes de Oca, Undersecretary for Industry and Commerce 
Marcello Puello, Ministry of Foreign Affairs Undersecretary 
for Economic Affairs Juan Giuliani Cury, and the new Director 
of the National Organization for Copyright Protection (ONDA) 
Marino Feliz Tererro.  At the beginning of October, Feliz 
told Econ Officer that ONDA accepted responsibility for 
preparing the report but expected not to meet the October 5 
deadline.  ONDA gave the Embassy an advance copy of the 
preliminary report on November 5, which touches only 
peripherally on broadcast issues and instead describes 
ONDA,s organizational structure and documents raids and 
confiscations of pirated music compact discs and cassette 
tapes.  As of November 5, Feliz had not met with any 
television broadcasting stations to address broadcast piracy. 
 
¶4.  On November 23, EcoPol Counselor and Economic Officer 
discussed illegal television transmissions with Jose Rafel 
Vargas, president of INDOTEL, the Dominican Institute of 
Telecommunications, and met later with his deputy, Jose 
Rizek.  Vargas expressed concern over the continuing problem 
of television broadcast piracy but confirmed that ONDA is the 
agency with the authority and the responsibility to go after 
illegal broadcasters. 
 
¶5. Broadcast piracy is nothing new in the Dominican Republic 
but the tough new Dominican copyright legislation, Law 65-00, 
introduced in 2000, was designed to help stop the problem. 
Legal actions taken against violators under the new law have 
been disappointing.  There are two cases that were brought 
before the Dominican courts in 2002 involving television 
channels accused of making illegal broadcasts:  Telemicro and 
Canal del Sol. The stations continue to broadcast.  In 
November of this year, Telemicro (channel 5) aired on late 
night television Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King. 
To our knowledge, this latest Lord of the Rings movie has not 
yet been released in the United States on cable television 
(HBO has first release rights) and Telemicro,s broadcast is 
illegal. 
 
¶6. The public here sees powerful local television stations as 
untouchable by the authorities, an assumption borne out by 
the fact that illegal broadcasts continue to be a problem.  A 
local attorney and businessmen told Economic Officer of 
several second-hand accounts of threats and other rough 
treatment of government officials and private individuals 
working to stop illegal broadcasts.  Telemicro, a Dominican 
station previously owned (and possibly still controlled) by 
Hatuey de Camps, former head of the Partido Revolucionario 
Dominicano (PRD), has reportedly used its political influence 
and threats to keep illegal programming on the air.  Local 
press reported that the station was a major supporter of 
President Fernandez in the last campaign, providing free 
airtime for campaign advertising (a credible allegation, 
since renegade Hatuey de Camps openly supported Leonel 
Fernandez against PRD candidate Hipolito Mejia). 
 
¶7. In addition to Telemicro and Canal del Sol, numerous 
smaller, less well-known stations probably are in violation 
of copyright laws.  VIRUS, a new station carried by the 
second largest cable television provider in Santo Domingo, 
Aster Cable, shows many recent, poorly-dubbed Hollywood 
releases.  The newness of the films, making them high cost, 
does not coincide with the fact that the station almost 
exclusively plays local, low-revenue advertising.  Economic 
Officer asked ONDA to determine whether the station is 
illegally broadcasting movies. 
 
¶8. Unless otherwise instructed, Embassy will prepare a 
diplomatic note referring to the August 5 agreement by 
exchange of notes for the Dominican authorities to provide 
the enforcement reports, noting the delay, and requesting 
prompt submission. 
 
¶9. Comment:  Even where resources are readily available that 
would help determine whether stations are making illegal 
broadcasts, neither ONDA nor other interested government 
agencies are using them. At least two services in Santo 
Domingo make complete, round the clock recordings of all 
broadcasts made by local stations.  While the legal status of 
these services is unclear, the listings of broadcasts are for 
sale and would offer agencies such as ONDA ready information 
to help determine if a station is breaking the law.  More 
than identification of violators is necessary.  The best way 
to present a winnable case against an offending station is to 
have the backing of a private plaintiff/attorney to see the 
case through the courts to completion.  Without an aggressive 
plaintiff with a vested interest (apart from the government 
agencies involved) we do not expect that cases against 
offenders will be brought to trial or pursued with the vigor 
necessary to win them. 
HERTELL