This page permanently redirects to gemini://gemini.techrights.org/2011/12/30/shame-list-for-venezuela/.
Posted in America, Cablegate, Free/Libre Software at 8:01 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz
Summary: Venezuela gets the “PRIORITY WATCH LIST” treatment, meaning that it gets sanctioned or at least warned for not kneeling to Western monopolies (‘IP’)
US resistance to the authorities in Venezuela may have been boosted by Microsoft's interests that are all about money and subjugation. If Venezuela accepts Microsoft’s software, then it accepts software which is controlled by US powers, making it simpler to topple those authorities. According to the following Cablegate cables, Free/open source software gets mentioned unfavourably 3 years in a row, in relation to so-called ‘IP’ (monopoly on knowledge). A cable from 2007 says: “The piracy rate for business software in 2006 is 84 percent, according to International Intellectual Property Alliance statistics — a 6 percent increase from 2005. U.S. software companies have repeatedly come under attack from the BRV as exemplars of what President Chavez referred to as the “neo-liberal” trap of IPR. In 2004, the BRV passed legislation that mandates the use of open source software throughout the public sector. While not necessarily a violation of IPR in and of itself, the software industry has concerns about a lack of transparency in its implementation and favoritism shown to certain vendors.”
=> Microsoft's interests | all about money and subjugation | ↺ Cablegate
The 2008 cable is similar. It states:”The piracy rate for business software in 2007 was 86 percent, according to the Business Software Alliance. U.S. software companies have repeatedly come under attack from the BRV as exemplars of what President Chavez referred to as the “neo-liberal” trap of IPR. In 2004, the BRV passed legislation that mandated the use of open source software throughout the public sector. While not a violation of IPR in and of itself, the software industry has concerns about a lack of transparency in its implementation and favoritism shown to certain vendors.”
In 2009 it says: “In 2004, the GBRV passed legislation that required the use of open source software throughout the public sector. While not a violation of IPR in and of itself, the software industry has concerns about a lack of transparency in its implementation and favoritism shown to certain vendors. The piracy rate for business software in 2008 was 87 percent, according to the Business Software Alliance. The market for legitimate CDs and DVDs continues to decline. As Venezuela imports a high number of virgin discs, the country may be a distribution source and a production center for counterfeit products. The National Film Law, passed in August 2005, requires distributors to locally copy a percentage of the movies they distribute and to register all films, leading to unauthorized release of confidential information and piracy.”
Once again they lump software in with counterfeits to bloster their case for so-called ‘IP’ and make the government of Chavez weaker. Here is the 2007 cable:
VZCZCXRO3434
RR RUEHCD RUEHGD RUEHHO RUEHMC RUEHNG RUEHTM
DE RUEHCV #0366/01 0521438
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 211438Z FEB 07
FM AMEMBASSY CARACAS
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 7899
INFO RUEHZI/WHA IM POSTS COLLECTIVE
RUCPDOC/DEPT OF COMMERCE
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 CARACAS 000366
SIPDIS
SENSITIVE
SIPDIS
STATE FOR EB/IPE CLACROSSE, DEPT PLS PASS TO USTR
JCHOE-GROVES, DOC JBOGER, DOC PLS PASS TO USPTO JURBAN AND
LOC STEPP
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: KIPR [Intellectual Property Rights], VE [Venezuela]
SUBJECT: 2007 SPECIAL 301 RECOMMENDATION: KEEP VENEZUELA
ON PRIORITY WATCH LIST
REF: A. STATE 7944
B. 06 CARACAS 486
C. 05 CARACAS 596
¶1. Summary: (SBU) The BRV's protection and enforcement of
IPR continues to deteriorate. The market for legitimate
music CDs is eclipsed by piracy, with piracy rates for CDs,
DVDs, and business software hovering around 80 percent.
SAPI, the agency that oversees IPR enforcement and issues
patents, has not issued a single patent since 2004.
Venezuela's customs and tax agency, SENIAT, has achieved some
success in its anti-piracy campaigns and seizure of
contraband, but overall enforcement of IPR legislation
remains ineffective. The implementation of proposed legal
changes would further weaken IPR protection. Based on the
BRV's antipathy to IPR, weak enforcement and possible legal
changes to further strip away IPR protection, Post recommends
that Venezuela remain on the Special 301 Priority Watch List
for 2007. End Summary.
The Pharmaceutical Industry
¶2. (SBU) The international pharmaceutical industry continues
to see a weakening of IPR protection in Venezuela. Despite
Venezuela having the highest per-capita pharmaceutical
consumption in Latin America, and being the third largest
market in the region, SAPI, the Autonomous Intellectual
Property Service (the country's primary IPR authority), has
not issued a patent to an imported pharmaceutical product
since 2003, and has not issued a patent in any sector since
patent application submissions per year. Since 2002, the BRV
has failed to protect pharmaceutical testing and other
confidential data for product submissions that have not yet
SIPDIS
received patent protection. The BRV does not provide linkage
between patent and sanitary registration. Counterfeiters can
receive sanitary registration approval in the absence of a
patent -- equivalent to marketing approval for a counterfeit
product.
¶3. (SBU) The legal framework in Venezuela for pharmaceutical
protection is ambiguous after the BRV withdrew from the CAN
(Andean Community) in April 2006. Venezuelan law had
incorporated over 650 legal decisions from the Andean
Community into domestic law, including Decision 486, a
pronouncement on protection of intellectual property rights.
The most recent domestic intellectual property legislation in
Venezuela dates from 1955 and does not provide for patent
protection. Venezuelan courts have, de facto, continued to
apply Decision 486, though they have offered no assurances
that they will continue to do so.
Recorded Media and Software
¶4. (SBU) The market for legitimate CDs and DVDs continues to
decline. According to a Post IPR source, there are
approximately 1.8 million music CDs sold annually in
Venezuela and 80 million virgin discs imported. This would
indicate that Venezuela is not solely a distribution source,
but a mass production center for counterfeit products.
Industry estimates the piracy rate for music CDs at 85
percent, a two percent increase from 2005. The National Film
Law, passed in August 2005, requires mandatory registration
of all films, which could lead to unauthorized releases of
confidential information and contribute to piracy.
SIPDIS
¶5. (SBU) The piracy rate for business software in 2006 is 84
percent, according to International Intellectual Property
Alliance statistics -- a 6 percent increase from 2005. U.S.
software companies have repeatedly come under attack from the
BRV as exemplars of what President Chavez referred to as the
"neo-liberal" trap of IPR. In 2004, the BRV passed
legislation that mandates the use of open source software
throughout the public sector. While not necessarily a
violation of IPR in and of itself, the software industry has
concerns about a lack of transparency in its implementation
and favoritism shown to certain vendors.
IPR Enforcement
¶6. (SBU) IPR enforcement in Venezuela continues to be weak.
Enforcement problems derive for the most part from a lengthy
legal process, unprepared judges, as well as lack of
CARACAS 00000366 002 OF 002
resources for investigation and prosecution. A single
special prosecutor is responsible for IPR issues.
Consequently, investigations are severely backlogged. Under
current Venezuelan law, most IPR enforcement actions can only
take place as a result of a complaint by the rights holder.
In addition, the complainant is responsible for the cost of
storage of allegedly illicit goods during the investigation
and trial. A loophole in the law only permits actions
against copyright violators operating at a fixed location,
effectively barring prosecution of street vendors.
¶7. (SBU) SENIAT remains the one bright spot in a dismal
landscape of respect for IPR with noteworthy efforts to fight
piracy in conjunction with its "zero tax evasion" mission.
SENIAT proposed an Anti-Piracy Law in 2006. We do not expect
this proposal to be signed into law. In February 2007,
SENIAT reportedly destroyed 450,000 pirated CDs and 280,000
pirated DVDs. SENIAT superintendent Jose Gregorio Vielma
Mora has called on the BRV to provide the legislative
framework to protect author's rights, adding that enforcement
efforts to stamp out counterfeiting requires enhanced
cooperation of SENIAT, local police, and the national guard.
Coordinated efforts, to date, have been minimal.
Legal Changes on the Horizon
¶8. (SBU) Proposed legal changes, if implemented, would
result in further weakening of the IPR regime in Venezuela.
The National Assembly has delegated to President Chavez, for
a period of 18 months, the power to issue decrees carrying
the force of law. Both the pharmaceutical and recording
industries expressed their concern to us over potential abuse
of this power to push through legislation that would further
weaken the IPR regime. In particular, there is concern that
Chavez may sign into law a controversial copyright bill
dating from 2004, which apparently was no longer on the
legislative agenda. The bill would violate a reported 31 of
Venezuela's bilateral and multilateral IPR treaty obligations
including the Bern Convention and TRIPs. It would reduce the
protection period for copyrights from 60 to 50 years and
would allow the BRV to expropriate artistic rights for the
public sector. Venezuela has not yet ratified the WIPO
Copyright Treaty or the WIPO Performances and Phonograms
Treaty.
Comment
¶9. (SBU) Venezuela continues to be an unfriendly environment
for intellectual property rights. Pirated and counterfeit
products abound, and piracy rates are climbing. Despite
SENIAT's efforts, overall enforcement remains weak. The BRV
has dedicated few resources to investigating and prosecuting
IPR crimes. The legal regime for IPR protection is in a
state of uncertainty after Venezuela's withdrawal from the
CAN. IPR protection will likely deteriorate in the upcoming
year as Chavez may push through controversial copyright
legislation that would further undermine IPR protection and
violate Venezuela's treaty obligations. Post recommends
keeping Venezuela on the Special 301 Priority Watch List for
BROWNFIELD
Here is the 2008 cable:
VZCZCXYZ0007
RR RUEHWEB
DE RUEHCV #0232/01 0532127
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 222127Z FEB 08
FM AMEMBASSY CARACAS
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 0650
INFO RUEHBO/AMEMBASSY BOGOTA 7695
RUEHLP/AMEMBASSY LA PAZ FEB LIMA 0959
RUEHQT/AMEMBASSY QUITO 2774
RUCPDOC/DEPT OF COMMERCE
UNCLAS CARACAS 000232
SIPDIS
SENSITIVE
SIPDIS
STATE FOR EB/IPE JBOGER
DEPT PLS PASS TO USTR JCHOE-GROVES
DOC PLS PASS TO USPTO CPETERS
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: KIPR [Intellectual Property Rights], VE [Venezuela]
SUBJECT: 2008 SPECIAL 301 RECOMMENDATION: KEEP VENEZUELA
ON PRIORITY WATCH LIST
REF: A. STATE 9475
B. 07 CARACAS 366
C. 06 CARACAS 486
¶1. (SBU) Summary: The BRV's protection and enforcement of IPR
continues to deteriorate. The market for legitimate music CDs is
eclipsed by piracy, with piracy rates for CDs, DVDs, and business
software hovering above 80 percent. SAPI, the agency that oversees
IPR enforcement and issues patents, has not issued a single patent
since 2004. Based on the BRV's antipathy to IPR, weak enforcement,
and possible legal changes to further strip away IPR protections,
Post recommends that Venezuela remain on the Special 301 Priority
Watch List for 2008. End Summary.
The Pharmaceutical Industry
¶2. (SBU) The international pharmaceutical industry continues to see
a weakening of IPR protection in Venezuela. Despite Venezuela
having the highest per-capita pharmaceutical consumption in Latin
America, and being the third largest market in the region, SAPI, the
Autonomous Intellectual Property Service (the country's primary IPR
authority) has not issued a patent to an imported pharmaceutical
product since 2003, and has not issued a patent in any sector since
applications in 2007 (over 50 percent of these were from the
pharmaceutical industry), of which zero were approved. (Note: SAPI
approved 26 designs. End Note.) Since 2002, the BRV has failed to
protect pharmaceutical testing and other confidential data for
product submissions that have not yet received patent protection.
The BRV also does not provide a linkage between patent and sanitary
registrations. As a result, counterfeiters can receive sanitary
registration approval in the absence of a patent -- equivalent to
marketing approval for a counterfeit product. Eduardo Saman, the
Director of SAPI and the newly appointed Director of the National
Institute for the Defense of the Consumer (INDECU), has argued that
trademarks and patents impeding the fabrication of generic medicines
or the reproduction of technology should be considered monopolies.
Monopolies are prohibited under the Venezuelan constitution.
Recorded Media and Software
¶3. (SBU) The market for legitimate CDs and DVDs continues to
decline. According to a Post IPR contact, in 2007 there were
approximately 1.9 million music CDs sold in Venezuela and 90 million
"virgin" discs imported, ten million more disks than in 2006. This
would indicate that Venezuela is not solely a distribution source,
but may be a production center for counterfeit products. Industry
experts estimated the piracy rate for music CDs at 88 percent in
the highway during rush hour has also visibly increased over the
last year. One local report estimated losses due to pirated CDs at
USD 50.6 million. The
¶4. (U) National Film Law, passed in August 2005, requires
distributors to copy in Venezuela a percentage of the movies they
plan on distributing locally and to register all films. Industry
sources fear that this could lead to unauthorized releases of
confidential information and contribute to piracy. They estimate
SIPDIS
that 92 percent of movies purchased in Venezuela were produced
illegally, and estimate losses of approximately USD 41.3 million.
¶5. (SBU) The piracy rate for business software in 2007 was 86
percent, according to the Business Software Alliance. U.S. software
companies have repeatedly come under attack from the BRV as
exemplars of what President Chavez referred to as the "neo-liberal"
trap of IPR. In 2004, the BRV passed legislation that mandated the
use of open source software throughout the public sector. While not
a violation of IPR in and of itself, the software industry has
concerns about a lack of transparency in its implementation and
favoritism shown to certain vendors.
Tenuous Legal Protection of IPR in Venezuela
¶6. (SBU) The legal framework in Venezuela for Intellectual Property
Rights has become more ambiguous since the BRV withdrew from the CAN
(Andean Community) in April 2006. Venezuelan law had incorporated
over 650 legal decisions from the Andean Community into domestic
law, including Decision 486, a pronouncement on protection of
intellectual property rights. The most recent domestic intellectual
property legislation in Venezuela dates from 1955 and does not
provide for patent protection. Venezuelan courts have, de facto,
continued to apply Decision 486, though they have offered no
assurances that they will continue to do so.
¶7. (SBU) Numerous Post contacts have said that a new copyright law
is expected to be decreed via the "enabling law." In January 2007,
the National Assembly delegated to President Chavez, for a period of
18 months, the power to issue decrees carrying the force of law.
Both the pharmaceutical and recording industries expressed their
concern to us over potential abuse of this power to push through
legislation that would further weaken the IPR regime. In
particular, there is concern that Chavez may sign into law a
controversial copyright bill dating from 2004. The bill would
violate many of Venezuela's bilateral and multilateral IPR treaty
obligations including the Bern Convention and TRIPs. It would
reduce the protection period for copyrights from 60 to 50 years and
would allow the BRV to appropriate artistic rights for the public
sector. In 2007 the second-Vice President of National Assembly
presented a different but similar version of this bill to the Andean
Parliament. Venezuela has also not deposited the instruments of
ratification for the WIPO Copyright Treaty or the WIPO Performances
and Phonograms Treaty, and we are told has not sent an official
delegation to WIPO committee meetings since 2004.
Government of Venezuela's Open Hostility to IPR
¶8. (SBU) In 2007, the BRV attempted to remove significant IPR
protections from the Venezuelan constitution as part of President
Chavez failed December 2 constitutional reform package. Eduardo
Saman, the director of SAPI and INDECU, drafted the proposed changes
to article 98 that would have notably deleted any mention of abiding
by established IPR law and international treaties and also would
have removed the term intellectual property rights from the
constitution, referring only to copyrights. This measure was
co-sponsored by cooperatives representing distributors of pirated CD
and DVDs. Despite the rejection of President Chavez' reform
package, Saman has continued to issue anti-IPR statements and has
said that he was trying to decriminalize the pirating of all works.
Other IPR BARRIERS
¶9. (SBU) The BRV's foreign currency controls have been another
barrier to IPR in Venezuela. The Currency Exchange Administration
(CADIVI) has been blocking access to foreign exchange for companies
attempting to pay royalties, patent license fees, and franchise
fees. As indicated in a June 2007 CADIVI resolution, 100 foreign
currency requests to pay licensing fees from 2005 were allowed to
expire due to improper paperwork, something IPR contacts deny.
While CADIVI does not deny these currency requests, not acting on
them prevents businesses from complying with IPR laws.
IPR Enforcement
¶10. (SBU) IPR enforcement in Venezuela continues to be weak.
Enforcement problems derive for the most part from a lack of
political will, lengthy legal processes, unprepared judges, and a
lack of resources for investigation and prosecution. A single
special prosecutor who has one assistant is responsible for IPR
issues in Venezuela. Consequently, investigations are severely
backlogged. Under current Venezuelan law, IPR enforcement actions
can only take place as a result of a complaint by the rights holder.
In addition, the complainant is responsible for the cost of storage
of allegedly illicit goods during the investigation and trial.
Trials can go on for years and storage costs are very high, making
it unfeasible that someone will complete the legal process. A
loophole in the law only permits actions against copyright violators
operating at a fixed location, effectively barring prosecution of
street vendors.
¶11. (SBU) SENIAT, the customs and tax enforcement agency, has been
the one bright spot for IPR enforcement with noteworthy efforts to
fight piracy in conjunction with its "zero tax evasion" and "zero
contraband" missions. In February 2007, SENIAT reportedly destroyed
450,000 pirated CDs and 280,000 pirated DVDs. Vielma Mora, the
former superintendent of SENIAT, claimed to have invested USD
32.5-37.2 million to fight piracy in 2007. To avoid possible
political fallout, SENIAT has sent employees outside Venezuela to
receive IPR enforcement training. However, on February 1, Vielma
Mora, the BRV's lone IPR advocate, was fired. Two weeks after this
announcement, Post's contact at SENIAT declined to speak with us on
SENIAT's IPR enforcement plans, saying she had to wait for new
guidelines before sharing any information. The Venezuelan copyright
and trademark enforcement branch of the police (COMANPI) also
attempts to provide copyright enforcement support with a small staff
of permanent investigators. Local IPR contacts have said that
COMANPI, an agency known for its lack of personnel, limited budget,
and inadequate storage facilities for seized goods, no longer has a
functioning headquarters.
Comment
¶12. (SBU) Venezuela continues to have an unfriendly environment for
protecting intellectual property rights. Pirated and counterfeit
products abound, and piracy rates are climbing. Overall enforcement
remains weak and high ranking officials publicly express their
disdain for IPR protection. The BRV has dedicated few resources to
investigating and prosecuting IPR crimes. The legal regime for IPR
protection is in a state of uncertainty after Venezuela's withdrawal
from the CAN, and IPR protection will likely deteriorate in the
upcoming year if Chavez pushes through controversial copyright
legislation that would further undermine IPR protection and violate
Venezuela's treaty obligations. Post recommends keeping Venezuela
on the Special 301 Priority Watch List for 2008.
Duddy
Here is the 2009 cable:
VZCZCXRO8270
PP RUEHAO RUEHCD RUEHGA RUEHGD RUEHGR RUEHHA RUEHHO RUEHMC RUEHMT
RUEHNG RUEHNL RUEHQU RUEHRD RUEHRG RUEHRS RUEHTM RUEHVC
DE RUEHCV #0271/01 0621828
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 031828Z MAR 09
FM AMEMBASSY CARACAS
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 2678
INFO RUEHWH/WESTERN HEMISPHERIC AFFAIRS DIPL POSTS
RUCPDOC/DEPT OF COMMERCE
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 CARACAS 000271
SENSITIVE
SIPDIS
STATE FOR EEB/IPE
DEPT PLS PASS TO USTR
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: ECON [Economic Conditions], ETRD [Foreign Trade], KIPR [Intellectual Property Rights]
SUBJECT: 2009 SPECIAL 301 RECOMMENDATION: KEEP VENEZUELA
ON PRIORITY WATCH LIST
REF: A. STATE 8410
B. 08 CARACAS 1427
C. 07 CARACAS 366
D. 06 CARACAS 486
¶1. (SBU) Summary: The Government of the Bolivarian Republic
of Venezuela (GBRV) continues to chip away at protection of
intellectual property rights. In 2008, the GBRV resurrected
a 50 year old law disallowing the patenting of medicines and
food. Enforcement remains a problem as the police agency
primarily responsible for IPR is defunct. SAPI, the agency
that oversees IPR and issues patents, has not issued a single
patent since 2004. Based on the GBRV's aversion to IPR, weak
enforcement, and possible legal changes to further weaken IPR
protections, Post recommends that Venezuela remain on the
Special 301 Priority Watch List for 2009. End Summary.
Weakened Legal Protection of IPR
¶2. (SBU) Until Venezuela's April 2006 withdrawal from the
Andean Community, Venezuela had incorporated over 650 legal
decisions from the Andean Community into domestic law,
including Decision 486, which provided the legal framework
for patent and trademark protections. In September 2008,
SAPI, the Autonomous Intellectual Property Service (the
country's primary IPR authority), announced in a press
release that it had resurrected the Ley de Propriedad
Industrial de 1955 (the 1955 law). The 1955 law states that
drinks, foodstuffs, drugs of any kind and other chemical
reactions and combinations may not be patented.
¶3. (SBU) Creative works are protected pursuant to the
Copyright Law of 1993, Decision 351 of the Cartagena
Agreement, the Bern Convention and the Universal Copyright
Convention. Venezuelan law protects the rights of authors of
creative intellectual works. Currently, copyright protection
is valid for the life of the author, plus 60 years. However,
the pharmaceutical and recording industries continue to be
concerned that Chavez may sign into law a copyright bill
drafted in 2004. The draft legislation would violate many of
Venezuela's bilateral and multilateral IPR treaty
obligations, reduce the protection period for copyrights from
60 to 50 years and would allow the GBRV to appropriate
artistic rights for the public sector. Venezuela has also
not deposited the instruments of ratification for the WIPO
Copyright Treaty or the WIPO Performances and Phonograms
Treaty, and has not sent an official delegation to WIPO
committee meetings since 2004.
¶4. (SBU) Trademarks are registered with SAPI, granted for ten
years and may be renewed for successive ten-year periods.
Trademark rights can be enforced through civil,
administrative and criminal actions. As a result of civil
action, a registered trademark owner may be entitled to
relief, which is at the discretion of the judge. However,
the registered trademark owner cannot prohibit a third party
from using a trademark in connection with products that are
provided by the trademark owner. A trademark may be canceled
at the request of any interested third party if it has not
been used in Venezuela for three years.
The Pharmaceutical Industry
¶5. (SBU) Eduardo Saman, the former Director of SAPI and
current Director of the Venezuelan consumer protection
agency, the Institute for the Defense of People's Access to
Goods and Services (INDEPABIS), has argued that trademarks
and patents hindering the fabrication of generic medicines or
the reproduction of technology should be considered
monopolies, which are prohibited under the Venezuelan
constitution. Despite his move to INDEPABIS, Saman continues
to carry weight on IPR issues. SAPI has not issued a patent
for an imported pharmaceutical product since 2003, and has
not issued a patent in any sector since 2004. Since 2002,
the GBRV has failed to protect pharmaceutical testing and
other confidential data for product submissions that have not
yet received patent protection. As the GBRV does not link
patents and sanitary registrations, counterfeiters can
receive sanitary registration approval in the absence of a
patent -- equivalent to marketing approval for a counterfeit
product.
CARACAS 00000271 002 OF 002
Recorded Media and Software
¶6. (SBU) In 2004, the GBRV passed legislation that required
the use of open source software throughout the public sector.
While not a violation of IPR in and of itself, the software
industry has concerns about a lack of transparency in its
implementation and favoritism shown to certain vendors. The
piracy rate for business software in 2008 was 87 percent,
according to the Business Software Alliance. The market for
legitimate CDs and DVDs continues to decline. As Venezuela
imports a high number of virgin discs, the country may be a
distribution source and a production center for counterfeit
products. The National Film Law, passed in August 2005,
requires distributors to locally copy a percentage of the
movies they distribute and to register all films, leading to
unauthorized release of confidential information and piracy.
Other IPR BARRIERS
¶7. (SBU) Another barrier to IPR in Venezuela is foreign
currency controls. The Currency Exchange Administration
(CADIVI), the agency that administers the GBRV's currency
controls, may block access to foreign exchange for companies
attempting to pay royalties, patent license fees, and
franchise fees. (To receive US dollars at the official
exchange rate for transactions such as dividend repatriation
and operating costs, a company must obtain CADIVI approval.
There are no reliable figures for how much money US companies
as a whole have requested from CADIVI.) Post has received
reports of CADIVI not acting on foreign currency exchange
requests due to "improper paperwork". While denial of
currency requests may not be related to IPR enforcement, not
acting on them prevents businesses from complying with IPR
laws.
IPR Enforcement
¶8. (SBU) The enforcement situation in Venezuela remains the
same as last year. An ongoing lack of political will,
lengthy legal processes, unprepared judges, and a lack of
resources for investigation and prosecution create effective
barriers to IPR enforcement. A special prosecutor with one
assistant is responsible for IPR issues in Venezuela and
investigations are severely backlogged. Under current
Venezuelan law, IPR enforcement actions can only take place
as a result of a complaint by the rights holder and the
complainant is responsible for the storage cost of the
illicit goods. Furthermore, only violators operating at a
fixed location are prosecutable, effectively barring
prosecution of street vendors.
¶9. (SBU) With its "zero tax evasion" and "zero contraband"
programs, SENIAT, the customs and tax enforcement agency, has
undertaken IPR enforcement. Despite these efforts, SENIAT
fired its lone IPR advocate in 2007. Throughout 2008,
however, SENIAT published reports that it had destroyed
pirated goods. COMANPI, the Venezuelan copyright and
trademark enforcement branch of the police, is also charged
with IPR enforcement and maintains a small staff of permanent
investigators. Local IPR contacts have said that COMANPI, an
agency known for its lack of personnel, limited budget, and
inadequate storage facilities for seized goods, no longer has
a functioning headquarters.
Comment
¶10. (SBU) The protection of intellectual property rights in
Venezuela continues to deteriorate. The legal regime is
increasingly tenuous, with a reversion to a 1955 law covering
medicinal and food patents in 2008. Enforcement continues to
remain weak and high ranking officials continue to express
their disdain for IPR protection. Few resources are
dedicated to investigating and prosecuting IPR crimes. Post
recommends keeping Venezuela on the Special 301 Priority
Watch List for 2009.
GENNATIEMPO
The next post is likely to be out last of Cablegate, at least for now. █
Share in other sites/networks: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
Permalink Send this to a friend
=> Permalink | ↺ Send this to a friend
=> Techrights
➮ Sharing is caring. Content is available under CC-BY-SA.
text/gemini;lang=en-GBThis content has been proxied by September (3851b).