Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
05WELLINGTON154
2005-02-22 05:00:00
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Embassy Wellington
Cable title:  

YEAR 2005 SPECIAL 301 REVIEW -- NEW ZEALAND

Tags:  KIPR ETRD ECON PREL NZ 
pdf how-to read a cable
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 WELLINGTON 000154 

SIPDIS

SENSITIVE

STATE FOR EB/IPE-SWILSON AND EAP/ANP-TRAMSEY
STATE PLEASE PASS TO USTR FOR JCHOE-GROVES AND DKATZ
STATE PLEASE PASS TO USPTO FOR JURBAN
STATE PLEASE PASS TO LOC FOR STEPP
COMMERCE FOR JBOGER AND GPAINE/4530/ITA/MAC/AP/OSAO

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: KIPR ETRD ECON PREL NZ
SUBJECT: YEAR 2005 SPECIAL 301 REVIEW -- NEW ZEALAND

REF: A. STATE 23950


B. 04 WELLINGTON 1037

C. 04 WELLINGTON 900

D. 04 WELLINGTON 516

Sensitive but Unclassified -- for U.S. government channels
only.

Summary
-------
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 WELLINGTON 000154

SIPDIS

SENSITIVE

STATE FOR EB/IPE-SWILSON AND EAP/ANP-TRAMSEY
STATE PLEASE PASS TO USTR FOR JCHOE-GROVES AND DKATZ
STATE PLEASE PASS TO USPTO FOR JURBAN
STATE PLEASE PASS TO LOC FOR STEPP
COMMERCE FOR JBOGER AND GPAINE/4530/ITA/MAC/AP/OSAO

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: KIPR ETRD ECON PREL NZ
SUBJECT: YEAR 2005 SPECIAL 301 REVIEW -- NEW ZEALAND

REF: A. STATE 23950


B. 04 WELLINGTON 1037

C. 04 WELLINGTON 900

D. 04 WELLINGTON 516

Sensitive but Unclassified -- for U.S. government channels
only.

Summary
--------------

1. (SBU) Although both the pharmaceutical and music-recording
industries urge that New Zealand be placed on the Special 301
List, the Embassy recommends that New Zealand not be listed.
The country's overall record is well above that of countries
typically on the 301 list. As in past years, the Embassy
continues to believe that the pharmaceutical industry's
restricted access to New Zealand's market stems more from the
government's anti-competitive drug-purchasing policy than a
failure to protect intellectual property. While the music
industry has legitimate concerns about New Zealand's proposed
exceptions to copyright protection, the government is
discussing those exceptions with industry and will likely
change them.

IPR in general
--------------

2. (SBU) The New Zealand government in general provides
adequate and effective protection of intellectual property
rights (IPR). While no IPR-related legislation was
introduced in 2004, the government's actions in 2003 showed
it to be strengthening its IP regime: banning the parallel
importation of films, videos and DVDs; making trademark
infringements a criminal offense; and increasing the
penalties for copyright infringements. With few exceptions,
the government has not rolled back its advances in IP
protection.

The pharmaceutical issue
--------------

3. (SBU) The pharmaceutical industry has a number of
legitimate complaints about its treatment in the New Zealand
market, and we are continuing to press for an improvement in
this situation. However, the barriers to pharmaceuticals are
primarily caused by the process in which the Pharmaceutical
Management Agency (PHARMAC),a stand-alone Crown entity,
decides which medicines will be subsidized by the New Zealand
government and what their prices will be. The issue also is

one of funding, since a larger budget would allow PHARMAC --
which has operated for the last 10 years with minimal
increases in its annual budget -- to put more medicines, and
perhaps more cutting-edge medicines, on its pharmaceutical
list. (ref B)


4. (SBU) The Embassy believes this market-access barrier
should be dealt with as such and not treated as a failure to
protect intellectual property. Even the Researched Medicines
Industry Association of New Zealand concedes that PHARMAC's
practices do not violate the government's TRIPS commitments.
The government also has mostly defined the issue as a matter
of ensuring affordable pharmaceutical prices for all New
Zealanders. Listing the country on the Watch List would only
enable the government to claim to the New Zealand public that
its policies protect the population against a greedy
pharmaceutical industry.


5. (U) Curiously, the pharmaceutical industry in its Special
301 submission did not mention concern over the government's
proposed revision of the Patents Act. The draft bill fails
to meet two of the industry's objectives in New Zealand: (1)
It does not allow patent protection for diagnostic,
therapeutic and surgical methods for the treatment of humans,
as allowed under the TRIPS agreement, and (2) it fails to
extend the effective patent life of drugs. The effective
patent life (the period after marketing approval is obtained
during which companies are earning a return on their patented
product) stands at seven years on average in New Zealand.
Moreover, the revision leaves in place an amendment that
provides an exception to Patents Act protection, allowing
generic competitors to begin the process required for
regulatory approval of a product while a proprietary drug is
still under patent. (ref C) While we may in the future want
to place New Zealand on the Watch List because of this
legislation, we believe the precedent of listing a country
because of its draft legislation would not be a good one for
the United States and could minimize our negotiating effort
on the bill. We continue to press New Zealand government
officials about the draft bill and recommend that U.S.
government officials raise this issue with their New Zealand
government counterparts.

Format- and time-shifting
--------------

6. (U) The New Zealand government has proposed amendments to
the Copyright Act 1994 that would allow format-shifting, or
the duplication of sound recordings to another format for a
purchaser's private use without the copyright owner's
permission. The amendments also would extend to all
communication works a provision in the Copyright Act that
permits time-shifting, or the recording of a broadcast or
cable program for private use solely for the purpose of
viewing or listening to the recording at a more convenient
time or for making a complaint. The amendments were proposed
and released as a cabinet paper in June 2003, after a review
of how digital technology had affected the country's
copyright law (see Paragraph 13). Legislation incorporating
the amendments is being drafted and is expected to be
introduced in Parliament in April. (ref D)


7. (SBU) As the International Intellectual Property Alliance
noted in its Special 301 submission, these exceptions to
copyright protection would send the wrong message to
consumers and undermine efforts to curb unauthorized copying
of CDs in New Zealand. They would cost the industry in
revenue and profits and discourage innovation. However,
Associate Minister of Commerce Judith Tizard still is
discussing the issue with the music industry and has
expressed a desire for a solution that satisfies all parties,
although the format-shifting and time-shifting exceptions
remain for now as proposed in the cabinet paper. We will
continue to work with the government and industry on this
issue. In the meantime, with discussions ongoing, we believe
a Special 301 listing over this issue would not be helpful.

Optical media piracy
--------------

8. (U) While New Zealand does not have any regulations
specifically addressing optical media manufacturing, the
Copyright Act 1994 -- including protections and sanctions for
copyright infringement -- applies to optical media. We are
not aware of significant problems with optical media piracy
in New Zealand.

Procurement/use of government software
--------------

9. (U) New Zealand has no specific guidelines relating to
government use or procurement of software, but it does have
general rules pertaining to protection of intellectual
property in the public sector.

TRIPS compliance
--------------

10. (U) Following a government review of the Patents Act 1953
that began in August 2000, the Ministry of Economic
Development has drafted legislation intended to bring the act
into closer conformity with international standards. The
draft would keep the maximum patent term at 20 years, but
would tighten the criteria for granting a patent, from a
patentable invention being new in New Zealand, to being new
anywhere in the world, involving an inventive step and being
useful. The bill is expected to be introduced in Parliament
by mid-2005.


11. (U) No new IPR-related legislation was introduced or went
into force in 2004.


12. (U) We are unaware of any new legislation related
specifically to domestic protection of traditional knowledge
or expressions of folklore. However, the proposed changes to
the Patents Act 1953 include a provision to set up a Maori
consultative committee that would advise the patents
commissioner on whether a patent application pertains to an
invention that is derived from Maori traditional knowledge,
indigenous plants or animals and whether the commercial
exploitation of such an invention would be contrary to Maori
values.

WCT/WPPT
--------------

13. (U) The government in June 2003 proposed amendments to
the Copyright Act 1994 to make it more consistent with the
World Intellectual Property Organization Copyright Treaty
(WCT) and Performances and Phonograms Treaty (WPPT). The
amendments are intended to ensure that the act reflects
developments in digital technologies and international
developments in copyright. Legislation containing these
amendments is expected to be introduced in April 2005. If it
is passed, the government would decide whether to accede to
the WCT and WPPT.

Enforcement
--------------

14. (U) The New Zealand government is committed to adequately
and effectively enforcing its IPR-related laws, as reflected
by the creation of new criminal offenses for trademark
infringements and the increases in penalties for copyright
infringements.
Swindells