Keep Us Strong WikiLeaks logo

Currently released so far... 64621 / 251,287

Articles

Browse latest releases

Browse by creation date

Browse by origin

A B C D F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W Y Z

Browse by tag

A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z

Browse by classification

Community resources

courage is contagious

Viewing cable 06OTTAWA1522, IPR TOOLKIT: A MODIFIED APPROACH FOR CANADA

If you are new to these pages, please read an introduction on the structure of a cable as well as how to discuss them with others. See also the FAQs

Understanding cables
Every cable message consists of three parts:
  • The top box shows each cables unique reference number, when and by whom it originally was sent, and what its initial classification was.
  • The middle box contains the header information that is associated with the cable. It includes information about the receiver(s) as well as a general subject.
  • The bottom box presents the body of the cable. The opening can contain a more specific subject, references to other cables (browse by origin to find them) or additional comment. This is followed by the main contents of the cable: a summary, a collection of specific topics and a comment section.
To understand the justification used for the classification of each cable, please use this WikiSource article as reference.

Discussing cables
If you find meaningful or important information in a cable, please link directly to its unique reference number. Linking to a specific paragraph in the body of a cable is also possible by copying the appropriate link (to be found at theparagraph symbol). Please mark messages for social networking services like Twitter with the hash tags #cablegate and a hash containing the reference ID e.g. #06OTTAWA1522.
Reference ID Created Released Classification Origin
06OTTAWA1522 2006-05-18 20:25 2011-04-28 00:00 UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Embassy Ottawa
VZCZCXRO9909
RR RUEHGA RUEHHA RUEHQU RUEHVC
DE RUEHOT #1522 1382025
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 182025Z MAY 06
FM AMEMBASSY OTTAWA
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 2531
INFO RUCNCAN/ALL CANADIAN POSTS COLLECTIVE
RUCPDOC/DEPT OF COMMERCE WASHDC
RUEAHLC/DEPT OF HOMELAND SECURITY WASHDC
UNCLAS OTTAWA 001522 
 
SIPDIS 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
COMMERCE PASS TO SUSAN WILSON AND KRISTINE SCHLEGELMILCH 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: KIPR ECON CA
SUBJECT: IPR TOOLKIT: A MODIFIED APPROACH FOR CANADA 
 
REF: SECSTATE 59250 
 
1.  (U)  Summary:  Embassy Ottawa's IPR Working Group (IPR 
WG) suggests a smaller, streamlined IPR toolkit to help U.S. 
companies facing IPR problems in Canada.  The main way the 
Embassy can improve the IPR climate for U.S. businesses in 
Canada is through encouraging the GOC to update its copyright 
act to implement the WIPO internet treaties, something that 
members of the IPR WG are raising at every appropriate level 
as often as possible.  End summary. 
 
2.  (U)  Reftel coincided with the first meeting of Embassy 
Ottawa's internal Intellectual Property Rights Working Group 
(IPR WG) comprised of officers from USCS, DHS, and the Econ 
section.  Embassy Ottawa is fortunate to have one of the 
original creators of Embassy Beijing's IPR toolkit, 
Commercial Counselor Lee Boam.  Drawing on his experience, 
the IPR Working Group concluded that Canada's IPR situation 
is profoundly different from China's and demands a different 
approach.  The China IPR Toolkit is intended to help 
individual businesses protect their intellectual property in 
the virtual absence of reliable enforcement. 
 
3.  (U)  In Canada, as pointed out in the Special 301 report, 
the statutory framework has some key weaknesses, and 
prosecutors and border enforcement agencies lack the 
resources to follow up every case of IPR piracy. 
Nevertheless, Canada, unlike China, has clear laws and a 
reliable judicial system that is relatively easy for U.S. 
businesses to navigate; with the availability of legal 
recourse, it is not necessary in most cases for companies to 
make major changes in their business models to avoid 
wholesale trademark or copyright theft by mainstream domestic 
producers.  Moreover, most major U.S. content providers have 
affiliates in Canada and work closely with Canadian 
counterparts to develop joint enforcement actions and push 
for stronger legislation.  For U.S. companies here, the 
highest priority is legislation to strengthen the statutory 
framework, including robust implementation of the WIPO 
internet treaties and better legal support for border 
enforcement. 
 
4.  (U)  In the Canadian context, therefore, we would suggest 
developing a toolkit that gives smaller businesses an 
introductory explanation of how to protect their rights in 
Canada.  Contents would include a basic list of statutes 
pertaining to IPR protection and Canadian government agencies 
(federal and provincial, e.g. the RCMP, Ontario provincial 
police and local prosecutors) that deal with IPR enforcement, 
with a list of primary points of contact in those agencies, 
together with a list of NGOs, copyright collectives, trade 
associations, specialized law firms, and other entities 
interested in IPR issues. We will also contact lawyers who 
work on IPR issues and see if we can develop case studies or 
other useful pointers for IPR rightsholders concerned about 
IPR theft. 
 
5.  (SBU)  As part of its IPR action plan, the Mission 
continues to raise IPR issues as often and at as high a level 
as possible.  The Ambassador has underscored the need for 
stronger IPR protections in his first meetings with Minister 
of Industry Bernier, Minister of Canadian Heritage Oda, and 
Trade Minister Emerson.  House Judiciary Committee Chairman 
Sensenbrenner raised IPR in his meetings with the RCMP and 
the Justice Minister in April.  Econ staff have met with the 
Parliamentary Secretaries for the Industry and Canadian 
Heritage Ministries and with officials from a number of 
Canadian agencies to make the case for a stronger WIPO 
QCanadian agencies to make the case for a stronger WIPO 
implementation bill.  DHS officers work closely with the RCMP 
on an IPR-related investigations.  The Mission IPR working 
group is planning a range of informational activities for 
fall 2006, when we hope that a new bill to implement the WIPO 
treaties will be submitted to Parliament.  Drawing on the 
expertise of our DHS officers, we have also suggested to 
Canadian officials the need to strengthen enforcement rules 
before the 2010 Vancouver Winter Olympics, noting the 
likelihood of a wave of counterfeit Olympic-logo goods, a 
point that seems to resonate with some members of the new 
government. 
 
Visit Canada's Classified Web Site at 
http://www.state.sgov.gov/p/wha/ottawa 
 
WILKINS