MALAYSIA LAUNCHES INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY COURT

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 KUALA LUMPUR 001238 SIPDIS SENSITIVE SIPDIS STATE FOR EB/TPP/MTA/IPC STATE ALSO FOR EAP/MTS - J. KEITH, M. TAYLOR STATE PASS USTR FOR B. WEISEL, D. BELL, J. GROVES USDOC FOR JENNIFER BAKER COMMERCE PASS USPTO FOR P. FOWLER E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: ETRD KIPR MY SUBJECT: MALAYSIA LAUNCHES INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY COURT ¶1. (SBU) Summary. After several years of anticipation, Malaysia finally launched its new intellectual property court on July 17. The new court system will include branches throughout Malaysia, though the Kuala Lumpur branch will likely be the only significant IP court in the near term. IP lawyers welcomed the new court's launch, but worry that it could initially exacerbate delays in the adjudication of existing IP cases, and they worry that judges and prosecutors assigned to the new court will have limited IP expertise for the foreseeable future. Although it will take time for the court to build such expertise and to demonstrate that it will issue rulings with strong deterrents, Malaysian officials are hopeful that creation of the courts will help convince the U.S. to remove Malaysia from the Special 301 watch list. End summary. ¶2. (U) Minister of Domestic Trade and Consumer Affairs Shafie pal formally launched the Intellectual Property Court of Malaysia in a ceremony on July 17 at Malaysia's new High Court Complex. The launch followed Cabinet approval in June for the new court, which has been a long-standing goal of Minister Shafie. ¶3. (SBU) The new IP court will consist of 15 sessions courts with criminal jurisdiction, to be located in each of Malaysia's 14 states plus the administrative capital of Putrajaya. Six high courts, holding both civil and appellate jurisdiction, will be established in Kuala Lumpur, Selangor (the state which surrounds KL),Johor, Perak, Sabah and Sarawak. According to MDTCA Deputy Secretary General Mohamedsha Mislam, the Ministry expects about 80 percent of the new IP court system to be established by the end of 2007, after a core group of Malaysian prosecutors and judges has finished specialized training on IPR prosecution. Mohamedsha confirmed that both judges and prosecutors will be dedicated solely to the various IP courts, and will not be assigned non-IP cases. ¶4. (SBU) Several prominent Malaysian lawyers specializing in intellectual property prosecution, while welcoming the establishment of the new courts, have significant reservations about their potential effectiveness, at least in the near to medium term. One ;lawyer told econoff she doubts strongly the government's logistical ability to set up such a large number of courts in so short a time. Using the example that KL's new High Court Complex was built without any space allotted for archiving of case files, she wondered whether Malaysia's judicial bureaucracy could realistically design an entirely new system capable of handling an anticipated heavy workload. She added that that the new court is not expected to take jurisdiction of pending IP cases in existing courts; while that could ease the new court's burden, at least initially, it could also cause further delays in the adjudication of the many existing cases, if the few judges or prosecutors with relevant IP expertise are transferred to the new court. Our contacts and MDTCA officials have told us that there are over 1000 IP cases currently pending in Malaysia's judicial system. ¶5. (SBU) Embassy contacts in the legal profession have told us they expect the KL IP court to stand alone for at least a few months, with other courts coming into existence over the next few years. To a certain extent this may not impede the ability of the court to influence prosecution throughout the country, however; like the regular KL high courts, the new IP high court in KL could technically accept jurisdiction for IP cases from any part of peninsular west Malaysia. According to one lawyer, many Malaysian lawyers seek KL high court jurisdiction for cases located elsewhere, since they believe the KL court is less subject to corruption and/or outside influence than some other high courts (the Johor high court in southern peninsular Malaysia has a particularly negative reputation among IP lawyers). ¶6. (SBU) One contact in charge of the local office of a major U.S. recording company called the establishment of the IP court a major step forward, and his counterparts from the film and software industries have expressed similar positive views to us. Our contact further noted that, in his view, Malaysia seemed to be turning a corner in combating IP piracy, with the music industry in particular experiencing a noticeable decline in piracy. He expressed appreciation for the Embassy's efforts over the years to push the importance of IPR protection both with the government and with the public. ¶7. (SBU) Comment: Establishment of a separate court system focused solely on IP cases is a major step towards alleviating the foremost (but by no means the only) obstacle to creating a fully functioning judicial system in Malaysia, capable of significantly impeding the widespread piracy of intellectual property. Only after judges and prosecutors have built a core level of expertise, and the new courts KUALA LUMP 00001238 002 OF 002 have issued rulings with strong deterrents, will it be possible to judge the new court's effectiveness in changing the parameters of IP piracy in Malaysia. Nevertheless, MDTCA officials at various levels have expressed hope that establishment of the IP court will convince U.S. officials to remove Malaysia from the Special 301 watch list. End comment. LAFLEUR