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

281520Z Apr 06

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 PARIS 002824 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
 
DEPT FOR E, EB, EB/IPE, EUR/WE 
DEPT PLS PASS USTR FOR JSANFORD/VESPINEL/RMEYERS 
COMMERCE FOR SJACOBS, SWILSON 
DOJ FOR CHARROP, FMARSHALL, RHESSE 
COMMERCE PLEASE PASS USPTO 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: KIPR ETRD PGOV FR
SUBJECT:  FRANCE'S DIGITAL COPYRIGHT BILL: EMBASSY EXPRESSES 
CONCERNS, GOF HOPES FOR THE BEST, BUT... 
 
 
¶1. (SBU)  SUMMARY.  In response to our expressions of concern, the 
French government says it expects the Senate to improve some flawed 
elements of France's digital copyright legislation, but that it will 
probably not stiffen the decriminalized penalties for downloading 
and piracy. The bill, which the Senate will examine May 4-10, was 
passed by the National Assembly in February.   The Prime Minister's 
media and audiovisual advisers told DCM April 24 that the GOF hoped 
to "inspire" the Senate to modify articles that would authorize 
private copies of DVDs and force interoperability among portable 
music devices.  However, they noted that the bill was delicately 
balanced politically, and that the GOF hoped there would be a 
minimum amount of changes.  Over the last month, Ambassador, DCM and 
emboffs have consulted with U.S. industry representatives and 
members of the GOF, and encouraged them to continue to press key 
members of the government on this legislation. END SUMMARY. 
 
¶2. (SBU) In the latest of our conversations with GOF officials on 
this troublesome legislation, DCM and Econoff met April 24 with 
Herve Digne and Eric Gross, Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin's 
advisors on media and audiovisual subjects.  DCM noted U.S. 
industries' concerns over aspects of the bill, and expressed his 
hope that the GOF's door remains open to industry.  Ambassador, DCM 
and Emboffs had previously both consulted with U.S. industry 
representatives as well as relayed broad U.S. industry concerns over 
the bill in private discussions with the Culture Minister, advisors 
in the Presidency, interlocutors in the Culture Ministry as well as 
private lawyers. 
 
Timetable 
--------- 
 
¶3.  The legislation is to be debated in the Senate beginning on May 
4, and running through May 10.  Amendments are currently being 
accepted until May 2.  The GOF expects some form of informal 
"reconciliation" between the Senate and the National Assembly 
version following the vote in the Senate, but not a full-scale 
French equivalent of a House-Senate Conference, nor a second reading 
in the Assembly.  Implementing regulation will be needed following 
passage, but dates have not been determined for this yet. 
 
¶4.  (U) Digne and Gross told DCM they hoped to "inspire" the Senate 
to substantially modify two elements that present problems to U.S. 
(and French) industry: the right to a private copy of a DVD, and the 
concept of interoperability of portable music players. These changes 
would, Digne thought, satisfy industry concerns.  Digne indicated 
that Senate staffers were probably less inclined to be political on 
this technical matter. 
 
¶5. (SBU) However, Digne and Gross insisted that the proposed 
decriminalized penalties for downloading, currently an insignificant 
fine at 38 Euros, would not change for a number of reasons. DCM 
asked whether the GOF truly believed that fines like that could 
effectively be "dissuasive", as the EU directive requires.   Digne 
argued that all countries were struggling with how to balance 
Internet freedoms with effective antipiracy policies.  France had no 
resources or interest in pursuing one-time downloaders, which was 
expensive and counterproductive. Instead, it preferred to go after 
those who downloaded seriously and distributed; there, the basic 
fine was somewhat higher at 150 Euros (approximately USD 180). Digne 
denied that the French approach would be any less successful than 
that of other countries in Europe or elsewhere. 
 
Need to Have a Law on the Books 
---------------------------------- 
 
¶6. (SBU) Digne said France needed to move quickly in the absence of 
a legal framework  and therefore there was no question of spending 
more time drafting and considering the law.  France was already 
delinquent in its transposition of the 1997 EU directive, and needed 
to respond quickly or face difficulties with the European 
Commission.  Also, under France's statute law, which he 
differentiated from US and UK common law traditions, Digne said it 
was absolutely necessary to have a law on the books as soon as 
possible.  He admitted that it was difficult to come to terms 
legally with the rapid evolution of technology, and that no approach 
was perfect.  But he noted that the Government had built in a 
one-year evaluation period that required the administration to 
report to the Assembly after a year, with an evaluation of the law's 
functioning. 
 
¶7. (SBU) DCM told Digne that U.S. industries were very concerned 
about the potential impact of this legislation on their business 
models and their considerable investments in France.  France and the 
United States, he said, shared a common appreciation of the 
importance of creativity and artistic and cultural expression. 
Digne said that he and his colleagues had already exchanged views 
with a good number of U.S. industry representatives. The text 
constituted a "good balance" between the protection of authors' 
rights and the right of consumers to have access to creative works. 
 
 
¶8. (SBU) Private-sector lawyers have told Embassy that many 
companies view the legislation as so unclear and poorly drafted, 
that the only way to make it clearer and more effective is via legal 
challenges brought after its passage.  Others believe the European 
Commission is also likely to challenge the law, or should be 
encouraged to, when passed, in some form, as the legislation differs 
considerably from other EU member state transpositions of the 
Directive. 
COMMENT 
------- 
¶9. (SBU)  COMMENT.  As expected, our GOF interlocutors offered very 
little hope that the digital copyright legislation would be 
rewritten or even drastically rethought.  They indicated they 
remained open to drafting suggestions from U.S. industry that didn't 
upset the delicate political balancing act the government has 
engaged in since the controversial legislation was introduced in 
late 2005.  Culture Minister Donnedieu de Vabre - and perhaps even 
Prime Minister de Villepin -- is intent on moving this file off his 
desk as soon as possible, as it has been a political millstone for 
the government from the very beginning.  We have encouraged U.S. 
industry to be proactive with French government officials and 
Senators, as many have already done.  We have offered our good 
offices and suggestions to their representatives here and also urged 
them to make common cause with French industry in order to influence 
the Senate debate and the text. Embassy thanks Washington agencies' 
input and focus on this complex issue; Ambassador and Embassy will 
continue to press the issue privately at the highest level. 
Stapleton