MISS WORLD EXPOSES SIGNAL PIRACY IN VIETNAM

UNCLAS HANOI 002602 SIPDIS SENSITIVE SIPDIS DEPT FOR E, EAP/MLS AND EB/CIP RICH O'BRIEN DEPT PASS TO USTR DAVID BISBEE AND JONATHAN MCHALE E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: ECON ETRD ECPS KPRV WTRO VM SUBJECT: MISS WORLD EXPOSES SIGNAL PIRACY IN VIETNAM SENSITIVE BUT UNCLASSIFIED. DO NOT POST ON THE INTERNET. REF: A) Hanoi 2477 ¶1. (SBU) Summary: Vietnamese press has widely reported on accusations by national television broadcaster Vietnam Television (VTV) that its competitor Vietnam Television Technology Investment and Development Company (VTC) violated VTV's copyright as the sole authorized broadcaster of the Miss World Pageant. According to the reports, VTV has accused VTC of broadcasting the pageant on October 1 without a proper license. Government of Vietnam (GVN) officials and VTV representatives have informed the Embassy that they are now determining the proper response, though indications are that the GVN may let another opportunity to demonstrate its commitment to protecting IPR slip by. Resolving the issue of cable and signal piracy is a major objective of this Mission. This story is the most public evidence to date of the extent of the problem in Vietnam. End summary. ¶2. (SBU) Newspapers and national television stations have widely reported in the past week on national television broadcaster VTV's accusations that its competitor VTC committed a serious copyright violation when it broadcast the Miss World Pageant on October 1 without a proper license. TV Plus, the joint-stock company exclusively licensed by the pageant's copyright owner Zeal TV (Great Britain) to distribute the Miss World Pageant in Vietnam, planned together with VTV to air the broadcast on the evening of October 1. Using an illegally-obtained satellite signal from a foreign content provider, however, VTC broadcast the program on its digital cable network eight hours before VTV had scheduled the broadcast. After discovering what VTC had done, VTV and TV Plus called on VTC to cease its unauthorized broadcast, but their requests were ignored. ¶3. (SBU) An Embassy contact at TV Plus described VTC's violation as "very serious" noting the likely adverse effects on the program's sponsors, advertisers, and Vietnam's credibility as a guarantor of fair competition and copyright protection. Our contact also informed the Embassy that TV Plus has contacted Zeal Television and the Star Group, whose signal VTC used to illicitly broadcast the pageant. Zeal and Star Group both confirmed that VTC did not have authorization for its broadcast. The representative of Zeal Television made clear that it is ready to join its Vietnamese partners' efforts in prosecuting VTC. For its part, VTV has voiced on its own website that it is now time to resolve the issue of television copyright in Vietnam and called for public support. ¶4. (SBU) Contacts at the Ministry of Posts and Telematics (MPT) explained that the Ministry has not yet taken any action in response to VTV's accusations. It intends to meet with VTC to ascertain the facts of the case before deciding how to respond. The contact noted that MPT will publicly comment on the findings of its inquiry, though it is unclear whether it will take any official action. The Copyright Office of Vietnam (COV),under the Ministry of Culture and Information (MOCI),pointed to the recently passed IPR Law as grounds upon which copyright violations could be handled, though our contact said that COV would not take action unless a formal complaint is filed by TV Plus and VTV. ¶5. (SBU) VTV revealed to Econ Assistant that it may choose to settle the issue through negotiations with VTC rather than pursue legal or official resolution. The contact noted that VTV was pleased that this issue has been brought to the public's attention, but is wary of jeopardizing its relations with VTC by pursuing legal recourse. Note: VTC was formerly a subsidiary of VTV. End Note. ¶6. (SBU) Comment: Copyright violations are a particularly common occurrence in the cable TV sector in Vietnam. The Embassy has repeatedly urged the industry regulators, MPT and MOCI, to force VTC to discontinue its illicit activities (reftel). Because MPT owns and operates VTC, it is in the best position to take decisive action to halt VTC's illicit activities. MPT's actions to date, however, have been insufficient. As this case demonstrates, VTC continues to broadcast unauthorized content unabated. The Embassy will closely monitor any measures taken by the GVN to address the Miss World Pageant piracy case. This is an opportunity for the GVN to demonstrate its commitment to protecting IPR in an instance where it can assert direct control, though comments from VTV, MPT and MOCI officials hint that the GVN may let yet another opportunity slip by. End Comment. ALOISI