This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 MADRID 001461 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPT FOR EB/IPC (JURBAN;SWILSON) 
DEPT PASS USDOC (DCALVERT) 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: ETRD KIPR SP
SUBJECT: SPECIAL 301:PUSH FOR ADDITIONAL PROGRESS ON 
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS (IPR) ISSUES IN SPAIN 
 
REF: A. (A) STATE 54527 (B) APRIL 11 2005 CALVERT-WILSON 
        E-MAIL 
     ¶B. (C) MADRID 00752 (D) MADRID 00724 
 
¶1. Summary: The GOS has agreed to an IPR Roundtable with 
the U.S.  On 
April 8, the Council of Ministers approved and publicized 
the 
"Integrated Government Plan for the Reduction and 
Elimination of 
Activities Damaging Intellectual Property 
( 
http://www.mcu.es/gabipren/notas/2005/abril/c ul_08_piratas.p 
df).  The 
plan makes provision for media campaigns and the creation 
of a working 
group to discuss how to deal with internet piracy.  The GOS 
willingness 
to conduct an IPR Roundtable with the U.S., the 
government's ambitious 
anti-piracy plan, and the Supreme Court's recent 
vindication of Nike's 
trademark claims are favorable actions in the context of 
the Special 
301 review (Ref A). End Summary 
 
 
IPR ROUNDTABLE 
 
 
¶2. Following up on Commerce Assistant Secretary Lash's 
offer during his February 17 trip to Madrid (Ref C), the 
GOS has agreed to a one day U.S.-Spain IPR seminar. 
This will take place in September per the Commerce 
Department's concurrence (Ref B).  Trade Officer is 
working with the Minister of Culture on finalizing a 
September date. 
 
 
ANTI-PIRACY PLAN - GENERAL ASPECTS 
 
 
¶3. The anti-piracy plan contains five "blocks of 
measures".  They include preventive actions; public 
awareness measures; legal measures; educational 
measures; and cooperation/collaboration measures.  There 
are also four "urgent actions": 
1) Ministry of Justice to ensure there are specialized 
prosecutors to facilitate quick prosecutions and 
establish uniform criteria for dealing with IPR crimes; 
2) Ministry of Interior to establish a special police 
group to ensure coordination between law enforcement 
agencies; 
3) Ministry of Industry, Tourism and Trade and Ministry 
of Culture to create a working group with relevant 
industry represenativess to "establish mechanisms to 
detect and withdraw illicit content from the internet"; 
4) Signing an agreement between the Ministry of Culture 
and Spanish Federation of Municipalities and Provinces 
to create a "piracy map" in Spain with a view to 
determining where to concentrate IPR-related law 
enforcement efforts. 
 
ANTI-PIRACY PLAN - ELEMENTS RELATED TO SPECIAL 301 
DEMARCHE (REF A) 
 
¶4. The anti-piracy plan makes provision for Ministry of 
Culture, Ministry of Education, Ministry of Industry, 
Tourism and Trade, Ministry of Labor, Ministry of Health 
and Consumer Affairs media campaigns.  The campaigns are 
supposed to be executed 12 months from when the the 
"Intersectoral Commission" is created.  This Commission 
will be composed of relevant government representatives 
and IPR stakeholder representatives and will have a 
permanent Secretariat.  The Commission will be charged 
with monitoring and managing the implementation of the 
plan.  The plan envisages three months from April 8, 
2005 for approval of a Royal Decree establishing the 
Commission.  The media compaigns should, therefore, be 
executed during the July, 2005 - July, 2006 timeframe. 
 
¶5. With respect to the issue of managing content on the 
internet, the Ministries of Culture and Industry, 
Tourism and Trade will invite content providers, 
technology industry representatives, and internet 
service providers to participate in a working group to 
"detect and withdraw" non-authorized content from the 
internet.  The plan envisages self-regulation in this 
area.  There is no due date for the establishment of 
this working group. 
 
REACTIONS TO THE PLAN 
 
¶6. An unscientific press survey indicates that reactions 
to the plan vary from the positive to the skeptical. 
Predictably, the pro-government daily El Pais came out 
in favor.  Equally predictably, the opposition 
conservative party culture spokesperson said it was "it 
is better than nothing, but it is closer to nothing". 
The General Society of Authors (SGAE) said this project 
"puts Spain for the first time in the vanguard in Europe 
in the struggle against one of the most prolonged 
instances of aggression that the cultural and creative 
industries have suffered".  The Actors and Performers 
Association said the plan constitutes a "starting 
point".  The  Anti-Piracy Federation (FAP) said the plan 
"is ambitious and contains the necessary measures", 
although perhaps the government should appoint somebody 
to serve as a point of contact between government 
agencies and private sector stakeholders.  The Business 
Sofware Alliance (BSA) said the plan is very oriented to 
creators of cultural products and that it should develop 
a more software oriented posture because software 
related piracy losses in Spain amounted to 421 million 
Euros a year and the loss of 6,000 jobs.  The Spanish 
Association for Intellectual Property Rights (Aedpi) 
shares the BSA view and added that there must be 
compensation for private copying in all formats, 
including ADSL, not just CDs and DVDs.  The Music 
Producers Association (Promusicae) said it was favorably 
inclined towards the plan, but it wanted "more 
operational measures".  The Technology Companies 
Association (Aetic) said the plan establishes "the base 
to define" the struggle against piracy. 
 
NIKE CASE 
 
¶7. On March 28, 2005, the Civil Chamber of the Spanish 
Supreme Court ruled that Nike's former partner, 
Cidesport, could not use a trademark similar to Nike's. 
The court also dismissed Cidesport's invalidity actions 
against Nike's trademark.  What this means in practical 
terms is that Nike can now use its trademark name and 
swoosh on apparel in Spain.  Nike's law firm in Spain, 
Gomez-Acebo & Pombo, characterized this in an April 6 
letter to trade officer as a "total victory" for Nike. 
The firm also expressed gratitude for the U.S. Embassy's 
work on behalf of Nike, especially former Ambassador 
Argyros' and the Economic Section's efforts. 
 
COMMENT 
 
¶8. Skeptics have a point about the plan.  It is long on 
description, 
calls for more analysis, and lists actions generally 
without deadlines 
for accomplishment.  There are also no performance 
measures.  Clearly, 
the government does not want to take more punitive measures 
against 
consumers without having conducted public awareness 
campaigns. 
Moreover, given the different industry interests involved, 
it would 
prefer ISPs, technology companies and content providers to 
find a way 
to police the internet without having to make the necessary 
tradeoffs 
itself.  But the plan is also very clear that IPR piracy is 
a bad thing 
and that something needs to be done about it.  The GOS is 
seized with 
the issue because local artists have done a good advocacy 
job with the 
GOS.  Vice President (Deputy Prime Minister) Teresa 
Fernanda de la Vega 
told Charge when he met with her that she had the day 
before met with 
music industry representatives, and that she was conscious 
of the 
magnitude of the problem (Ref D).  Protecting artists - a 
goal 
repeatedly expressed in the plan - is an argument that 
resonates in 
Spain.  Also, this government may be especially sensitive 
to artists' 
concerns given that many prominent artists have Socialist 
sympathies. 
American interest in the issue has also had an impact. 
Assistant 
Secretary Lash's visit highlighted the importance we attach 
 
SIPDIS 
to the 
issue.  Our representations to the government have 
influenced the anti- 
piracy plan.  For instance, beyond the media campaigns and 
working 
group we stressed per the Ref A Special 301 demarche, the 
government 
acknowledges that it needs to clean up the restaurant and 
bar sector 
with respect to IPR violations - that is probably a first 
this has 
happened in Spain. Given the IPR stakeholders' generally 
cautious to 
positive embrace of the plan, Embassy believes this year 
old government 
should have the opportunity to work the piracy issue 
without Spain 
being on the watchlist.  Moreover, it would not be timely 
to put Spain 
on the list when the judiciary has finally resolved Nike's 
trademark 
dispute, a 14 year thorn in U.S.-Spanish economic 
relations.  The 
upcoming September U.S.-Spain IPR roundtable will be a good 
opportunity 
to work with the GOS with the anti-piracy plan as the basis 
upon which 
we can evaluate Spanish IPR performance. 
 
MANZANARES