U.S. - Turkey Workshop Focuses Judges and

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 ANKARA 005497

SIPDIS

DEPT FOR EB, EB/TPP/MTA/IPC AND EUR/SE
DEPT PLEASE PASS USTR FOR BPECK/LERRION
USDOC FOR ITA/MAC/DDEFALCO
DEPT PASS LIBRARY OF CONGRESS
DEPT PASS USPTO FOR ATTORNEY-ADVISOR MICHAEL SMITH
DOJ FOR TRIAL ATTORNEY ANDREA SHARRIN

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: ETRD KIPR TU
SUBJECT: U.S. - Turkey Workshop Focuses Judges and
Prosecutors on Intellectual Property Rights Enforcement


Not for Internet Distribution.

Ref: Ankara 2335


1. Summary: The September 9 and 10 "Workshop on
Effective Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights in
the U.S. and Turkey" exposed Turkish judges and
prosecutors to the U.S. IPR enforcement system,
highlighted the concerns of U.S. and Turkish
rightholders, and raised public awareness by generating
favorable media coverage. The European Union Affairs
General Directorate of the Justice Ministry has prepared
an action plan for improved IPR enforcement as a result
of the conference. End Summary.


2. The Turkish Justice Ministry, the U.S. Patent and
Trademark Office and the Embassy collaborated on a
workshop on effective enforcement of intellectual
property rights (IPR) on September 9 and 10. The
principal audience, 37 Turkish judges drawn from
Turkey's seven specialized IPR courts and 6 prosecutors
with experience in IPR cases, participated actively in
the sessions.


3. Key participants in the conference included: the
Ambassador and Justice Minister Cicek, who delivered
opening remarks; Michael Smith, Attorney-Advisor, United
States Patent and Trademark Office; Marvin Garbis,
United States District Judge; Andrea Sharrin, Trial
Attorney, United States Department of Justice; and Dr.
Ayse Saadet Arikan, Director General for EU Affairs,
Ministry of Justice.


4. In the opening session, the Ambassador highlighted
recent positive steps on copyright and trademark
enforcement in Turkey (reftel),stressing that this was
a key element of Turkey's effort to attract foreign
investment. The Justice Minister emphasized that IPR
protection is necessary to encourage creativity and
would support technology transfer and greater FDI in
Turkey. Both speeches were picked up by local print
media, and these themes were further elaborated in a
media interview given by Smith and Garbis on September

10.


5. The workshop included panels on Turkey's specialized
courts; comparison of U.S. and Turkish methods of
prosecution and of the roles of the judiciary in each
country; a mock hearing on a request for interim relief;
a fact pattern on civil, criminal and judicial issues;
and an IPR industry panel. This last panel included
speakers from: AMPEC (representing certain motion
picture rightholders); the Brand Protection Group
(selected trademark holders); the Business Software
Alliance; Mu-YAP (music producers affiliated with IFPI);
and EDISAM (publishers). We believe this panel, along
with a reception hosted by the Ambassador during the
conference, gave industry useful opportunities to
educate judges and prosecutors as to their enforcement
concerns. There was a particularly useful discussion
during this panel on difficulties in securing search
warrants and injunctions against pirates and
counterfeiters.


6. We have received positive feedback from the Justice
Ministry, and based on discussions that took place
during this workshop, the Ministry has developed a plan
of action for strengthening IPR enforcement. Dr. Arikan
told Econ Specialist that the Ministry has shared this
action plan with the Turkish Patent Institute, the
Finance Ministry Revenue Department, the Customs
Undersecretariat, and the Police and Justice Academies.
Dr. Arikan said the most important action item was a
Justice Ministry decree which would require the
prosecutors to notify Tax Crime Information Directorates
about court decisions in IPR cases. The Ministry's plan
of action also includes the following measures:

-- Expanding the specialized IPR courts' scope to cover
unfair competition, commercial secrecy and know-how;

-- Reviewing industrial property legislation to make
individuals as well as organizations liable to
penalties;

-- Continuing training of judges and prosecutors, as
well as law enforcement officers on IPR issues;
-- Including more IPR information in the Justice
Ministry's web page;

-- Budgeting funds to rent warehouses for seized
products, which would minimize the risk of a custodian
concealing evidence;

-- Opening the lines of communication to associations
representing the right owners in IPR seminars, on
condition that the judicial independence is maintained;

-- Issuing a decree requiring prosecutors to notify Tax
Crime Information Directorates about court decisions in
IPR cases. This would trigger an inspection into tax
evasion by convicted pirates and counterfeiters.

Edelman