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 PARIS 004566 
 
SIPDIS 
 
DEPT FOR EB/IPE - PACETO AND EUR/AGS 
DEPT PLS PASS USTR FOR VESPINEL 
COMMERCE FOR SJACOBS 
JUSTICE FOR MSTANSELL-GAMM 
DHS/CBP FOR MARICISH 
DEPT PLS PASS USPTO FOR WU 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: ETRD KIPR FR
SUBJECT:  VISIT OF STOP! DELEGATION TO PARIS JUNE 10 
 
¶1.  Summary:  The visit of the interagency STOP delegation 
to Paris June 9-10 helped raise the profile of IPR issues 
with the French government and by extension with local 
industry.  While we found fundamental interest in 
cooperation on the STOP initiatives, few concrete 
commitments were made during this initial exchange. 
Nevertheless, GOF officials pointed to common interests as 
demonstrated by work on the proposed G-8 paper on 
intellectual property.  Both sides agreed that joint efforts 
and increased transparency could potentially be keys to 
effectively combating IPR violations.  A general acceptance 
of the need for a multifaceted approach to IP issues was 
also noted.  Both sides agreed to compare public awareness 
efforts and further discuss best practices. End Summary. 
 
ACTION ITEMS FROM VISIT 
----------------------- 
 
¶2.  The following were the action items from the STOP 
delegation's discussions. 
 
-- Customs risk targeting.  French customs is interested; it 
already uses some simpler, more general methods. 
 
-- Exchange of information on customs audits. 
 
-- IPR hotline.  French side interested in establishment of 
a hotline; they are on the verge of creating a similar 
service and questioned US delegation on the specifics of the 
US hotline operation. 
 
-- Common website of enforcement success stories. French 
expressed interest in sharing information. 
 
-- Coordination on training efforts.  No substantive 
response from French side beyond informal field coordination 
of IP attaches. 
 
-- Education and assistance for SMEs in intellectual 
property and counterfeit issues is essential. 
 
-- Industry guidelines to keep fakes out of supply chains. 
French side expressed interest. 
 
-- Best practices in enforcement.  USTR asked the DGTPE for 
detailed reactions and suggestions for changes or additions. 
DGTPE agreed to provide this. 
 
STOP DELEGATION MEETS WITH FRENCH GOVERNMENT 
-------------------------------------------- 
 
¶3.  The STOP team led by acting A/USTR Victoria Espinel, met 
June 10 with a French interagency group led by Vincent 
Guitton, of the General Direction of the Treasury and 
Political Economy (DGTPE).These included Wilfrid Roge, of 
the Finance Ministry's Customs Service; Jean-Baptiste 
Mozziconacci, French National Institute for Industrial 
Property, bilateral affairs and international cooperation 
chair; Marion Guth, secretary-general of the CNAC (National 
Antipiracy Council); Police Commissioner Philippe Menard of 
the Judiciary Police, Ministry of the Interior; Anne 
Fauconnier, Consumer Fraud Enforcement at the Ministry of 
Economy;  Marie-Jose Semence, of the DGTPE; Eric Poulain, 
WTO office DGTPE, recently named trade attach at the French 
Embassy in Washington D.C. 
 
¶4.  The US STOP team included: 
  -    Shaun Donnelly, EB Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary 
     of State,  Department of State; 
-    Stephen Jacobs, Deputy Assistant Secretary of Commerce 
for Trade Agreements and Compliance, International Trade 
Administration, Department of Commerce; 
-    Martha Stamsell-Gamm, Chief, Computer Crime and 
Intellectual Property Section, Department of Justice; 
-    Anne Maricich, Director, Trade Management Division, 
U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Department of Homeland 
Security; 
-    Elaine Tung-Lin Wu, Attorney-Advisor, Office of 
International Relations, U.S. Patent and Trademark. 
- 
They were accompanied by Emboffs including Legal Attache and 
Customs Attache. 
 
COOPERATION ON G-8 PAPER 
------------------------ 
 
 
¶5.    Guitton laid out the importance of IPR for France and 
French business, citing the 30,000 jobs that had been lost 
because of this problem.  Guitton pointed to the almost 42 
Intellectual Property attaches covering 75 countries 
overseas that France has co-located with French Embassies 
and French state-sponsored chambers of commerce and 
industry.  The IP attaches provide information to the GOF 
and industry, promote IP rights in country, guide the GOF's 
aid program in country, and put on seminars and encourage 
dialogue.  Some of them, he noted, are already working 
informally with their USG counterparts, for example in 
China.  French efforts are also devoted to intra-European IP 
problems, for examples in Italy, Spain and Poland. Guitton 
pointed positively to U.S.-French cooperation on the 
proposed G-8 paper on intellectual property. 
 
 
CUSTOMS 
------- 
¶6. Wilfrid Roge noted that French Customs already use some 
indicators similar to those described by DHS/CBP to target 
seizure of counterfeit goods.  When faced with possible 
violations, the French system looks at value, destination 
and typical good exported by the enterprise.  The French 
system also uses visual clues such as color to quickly 
indicate the origin of a shipment.  He added that the French 
customs look at more than the twenty factors described by 
the CBP risk model.  Both countries agreed that post-entry 
audit techniques are an important complement to traditional 
examinations in stopping trade in counterfeit goods. 
 
¶7.  One issue of concern for the French is the increasing 
number of counterfeit goods that are purchased via the 
Internet. This has complicated enforcement because there are 
greater numbers of smaller shipments to be examined by 
customs.  Smaller shipment sizes means the gross number of 
seizures of counterfeits by customs increased in the past 
year, even though the total volume of counterfeit good 
seized is roughly stable. 
 
¶8.  French legal practice emphasizes civil over criminal 
remedies for trademark infringements.  The STOP team 
countered that U.S. does not advocate a shift from civil to 
criminal actions, but we also see a growth of large 
transnational criminal organizations being involved in 
counterfeit goods trade.  This is something that private 
rights holders cannot deal with only through civil actions. 
Moreover, criminal sanctions serve as a strong deterrent to 
IP violations. Overall the US would like to have a stronger 
ability to pursue perpetrators of IPR crimes. 
 
¶9.  DOJ stressed the importance of speed in working across 
borders to combat digital piracy and computer crime through 
operations like Operation Fastlink.  The US also stressed 
that the DOJ would also assist French authorities in 
stopping IPR crimes that occur on US soil or involve US 
citizens. The French side expressed a particular interest in 
cooperation in fighting cyber crime and digital piracy. 
 
¶10.  The French government's interagency anti-piracy effort 
is loosely organized around the National Antipiracy Council 
(CNAC or Conseil National Anti-Contrefacon).  It is headed 
by an elected member of the National Assembly.  It's 
taskings are provided by the CNAC's "action plans".  The 
Most recent action plan (2003-2004) is dubbed the Sarkozy 
plan, issued while Nicolas Sarkozy was Economy Minister. 
Guth cited the three elements of the plan: awareness, 
sanctions and cooperation.  The CNAC is directly involved in 
a series of public awareness campaigns.  The budget for the 
next campaign is five million Euros.  The CNAC is also 
coordinating efforts to set up a hotline that responds to 
consumers and business.  Guth noted she would appreciate 
knowing more about the USG experience. 
 
POLICE: SPECIAL BRIGADE 
---------------------- 
¶11.  Police Commissioner Menard explained the operations of 
a special French IPR brigade that combats IPR violations 
both domestically and abroad.  The focus of this brigade is 
on preventing trade in counterfeit items, corresponding to 
the US "No trade in fakes" effort.  This brigade also 
provides training to officers abroad, including a recent 
session with Vietnamese officers.  The French delegation 
highlighted the necessity of interagency domestic 
cooperation. 
 
¶12. State's Donnelly and Commerce's Jacobs noted our 
interest in possibly mobilizing embassies to cooperate in 
addressing IPR problems in key countries.  The US delegation 
expressed a desire to increase the number of personnel 
abroad (DOS and DOC) who are trained in IPR issues. They 
also encouraged U.S. and French embassy personnel to further 
cooperate in the field.  Jacobs mentioned the "tool kit" for 
business, which interested the French. 
EDUCATING THE PUBLIC AND COMPANIES 
---------------------------------- 
¶13.  Both French and US delegates agreed that SMEs and youth 
were two crucial target groups for IPR information.  SMEs in 
particular are in need of IPR guidance.  Both countries have 
training seminars and information available for SMEs.  The 
French customs representative, M. Boucard, questioned his 
United States counterpart on general costs of obtaining and 
protecting a patent.  He cited the low costs of such action 
in France as a way to help SMEs combat IPR violations. 
 
FRENCH CUSTOMS "IMAGE" SEARCH ENGINE 
------------------------------------ 
¶14.  The STOP delegation also met with representatives of 
the French National Institute for Industrial Property, 
headed by bilateral affairs and international cooperation 
chair Jean-Baptiste Mozziconacci to view a demonstration of 
France's image search engine.  The system, being tested in a 
number of European countries, relies on information provided 
by industries and the patent and trademark database.  USG 
officials expressed some concern about the danger of working 
with proprietary information in the database. 
 
¶15. This cable has been cleared by the delegation. 
WOLFF