VZCZCXRO2021
RR RUEHFL RUEHNP
DE RUEHRO #1395/01 3551529
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 211529Z DEC 09
FM AMEMBASSY ROME
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 3029
INFO RUEHFL/AMCONSUL FLORENCE 3937
RUEHMIL/AMCONSUL MILAN 0375
RUEHNP/AMCONSUL NAPLES 4158
RUEAHLC/DEPT OF HOMELAND SECURITY WASHINGTON DC
RUCPDOC/DEPT OF COMMERCE WASHDC

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 ROME 001395 
 
SIPDIS 
SENSITIVE 
 
STATE PLEASE PASS TO USTR FOR ERIN MCCONAHA, JENNIFER CHOE GROVES, 
CHRISTOPHER WILSON 
STATE PLEASE PASS TO EEB/TPP/IPE FOR TOM O'KEEFE, JOELLEN URBAN, 
TIMOTHY MCGOWAN 
DEPT OF COMMERCE FOR SUSAN WILSON 
DHS PLEASE PASS TO ICE 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: IT KIPR ETRD ECON EINT
 
SUBJECT: IPR IN ITALY - USG COOPERATION WITH ITALIAN IP DIRECTORATE 
 
REF: (A) ROME 1047 (B) ROME 535 
 
 
- - - - - - - - - - 
Summary 
- - - - - - - - - - 
 
¶1. (U) Italian officials have expressed interest in closer 
collaboration with the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office  on 
intellectual property (IP) issues. They also seem eager to take 
steps that could lead to Italy being taken off the USG's 301 Watch 
List, but it is not clear that they will succeed in bringing about 
needed policy changes. End summary. 
 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
USPTO-IPTO MEETING 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
 
¶2. (U) Michael Shapiro of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office met 
with Isabella Flajban,chief  of international relations at the 
Italian Patent and Trademarks Office (IPTO) and one ofthe leaders of 
the new Italian IP Directorate.  Flajban expressed strong interest 
in establishing new IPTO-USPTO collaboration.  She indicated that 
the IPTO would like to revive and expand the scope of a 2002 
agreement signed by the Ministry of Economic Development (under 
which the IPTO falls) and the USPTO.  Some areas of interest include 
judicial exchange programs, legislative updates, joint 
outreach/sensitization programs to address IPR protection, as well 
as the following issues: 
 
-- Intellectual property issues related to technology transfer: 
Flajban proposed a joint project or conference that would build on 
two previous events co-hosted by the Economic Development Ministry 
and the Embassy which were a 2004 conference on the Bayh-Dole act 
and a 2007 seminar on IP aspects of tech transfer and 
university-private sector collaboration.  The GOI is planning to 
invest additional funds in tech transfer offices in Italian 
Universities, and as such would be interested in hearing from 
American university staff who work with technology licensing. 
Shapiro suggested that it might interest them to hear from some of 
the new voices in the debate who are promoting alternatives to 
Bayh-Dole that would focus on a more collaborative research model. 
 
 
-- Geographical Indications:  The Italians are interested in 
discussing geographical indications (GIs).  Shapiro suggested that 
it might benefit the Italians to hear from some American experts of 
the U.S. system who are good at explaining how/why we feel that the 
U.S. system will adequately protect Italian GIs. (Note: GOI 
officials are likely interested in debating the issue as they do not 
agree with the USG position on these protections, which are provided 
to food and beverage products in Europe, but not in the U.S.) 
 
-- IP and Cultural assets:  Shapiro suggested the Italians might 
benefit from hearing how Intellectual Property relates to protecting 
cultural assets.  This is a topic that could be useful in engaging 
the Ministry of Culture, which has competence over aspects of IPR 
but is not always concerned with protecting IPR. 
 
¶3. (U) Flajban said the Italian IP Directorate is equally interested 
in moving ahead on collaboration with USTR, especially on the issue 
of USTR's 301 Watch list.  Italy is on the list because of 
inadequate protection of intellectual property rights. 
 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
Italy still on 301 Watch List 
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 
 
¶4. (SBU) Italy has long been on the USTR's 301 Watch list.  The list 
has caused tension with Italian government officials and over the 
course of the past year the Embassy has made efforts to engage 
Italian officials on the issue.  Recently GOI officials have 
indicated a new interest in collaborating with the USG, and in 
addressing some IPR protection deficiencies highlighted in the 301 
report. 
 
¶5. (U) The visit earlier this year by the USTR's Director for 
European Affairs kick-started this process of collaboration and Post 
is working with the Italian IP Directorate, USTR, the USPTO and 
others on setting up a January digital video conference to discuss 
 
ROME 00001395  002 OF 002 
 
 
potential collaborative projects and to address the issue of 
improved IPR protection in Italy. 
 
- - - - - - - - - - - - 
COMMENT 
- - - - - - - - - - - - 
 
¶6. (SBU) Officials with Italy's IP directorate seem genuinely 
interested in making progress on IPR protection, but it is still not 
clear to us that they will be able to bring about the policy changes 
that would justify taking Italy off the 301 Watch list.  The IP 
Director General is energetic has been given the authority to 
coordinate domestic IPR protection efforts.  Post has observed, 
however, that GOI officials are inclined to focus on trademark and 
patent protection and frequently put copyright issues on the back 
burner.  Collaboration with the IP directorate on specific projects 
or IP issues will provide an opportunity to push the Italians to 
strengthen IPR protection and address USG concerns.  For any ongoing 
collaboration to effectively deal with U.S. interests, however, 
copyright protection, particularly the issue of online piracy, will 
need to be included. End Comment. 
THORNE