New York, NY
~ Tuesday, August 29, 2017
Thank you, Bill, for that kind introduction. It is a
tremendous honor to be here with more than 600 of the people most directly
responsible for the global protection of intellectual property. By gathering
together today, we highlight our shared commitment to address this challenge.
This is the 11th annual intellectual property conference. I
understand that it is the first time the conference has been held in the United
States. I am pleased to welcome you to New York. I hope you enjoy your visit to
this great American city.
As a child, I learned a fable about a hen that finds some
wheat grains and asks other animals for help in planting them. Nobody is
willing to help, so the hen does the work itself. At every stage of the process
– harvesting the wheat, threshing it, milling it into flour, and baking the
flour into bread – nobody wants to help. But when the work is finished,
everyone wants to eat the bread.
Modern intellectual property is more complicated than baking
bread, but the same fundamental principle applies. If we let some people steal
things without compensating the people who produce things, the incentive to
create new things will be lost.
Intellectual property enforcement assures innovators and
investors that when they devote time and money to develop new concepts and
products, they will reap the financial rewards. If governments fail to protect
intellectual property rights, the immediate consequence will be monetary losses
to individual property owners. But the long-term impact will be less investment
of time and resources, and fewer innovations for society at large.
This conference represents an ongoing commitment by law
enforcement, industry partners, and other stakeholders from all over the world
to come together and identify ways to protect intellectual property and the
industries that fuel the modern global economy. These protections are critical
to almost every sector of the economy, from new, life-saving drugs and medical
techniques that allow us to live longer and healthier lives; to computers and
software that run the devices we use to navigate the airplanes and trains and
taxi cabs that brought us here today; to applications on the smartphones we use
to purchase coffee.
One of our challenges is that intellectual property crime
does not look like traditional crime, where the perpetrator takes a physical
item directly from the victim. Everybody understands that it is wrong to walk
into a business and take property without permission. In contrast, the
individual act of downloading a movie from a file-sharing site, or buying a
cheap knockoff of a name brand item, may seem harmless. But the accumulated
economic loss from thousands or millions of those illegal transactions can
destroy legitimate businesses, eliminate the incentive to invest in innovation,
and undermine the rule of law.
Some consumers knowingly buy knock-off items to gain the
cachet of owning brand-name merchandise without paying the price for the real
thing. But many consumers are victimized by unscrupulous sellers who market
counterfeit products without disclosing that they are not authentic.
Products carry brand names because brand owners have worked
and invested to make those names valuable to consumers, who trust them.
Counterfeit products often look identical to legitimate merchandise, complete
with packaging and labels. Purchasers may learn they have been cheated only
when knock-off batteries do not power devices, sham prescription drugs fail to
improve health, phony cosmetics cause infections, counterfeit clothing
disintegrates, or pirated automobile parts break down.
I learned about the scale of the problem firsthand a few
years ago, when my office prosecuted a case in Maryland. Over the course of 20
months, criminals imported 500,000 counterfeit handbags manufactured in Asia
with fraudulent logos.
Intellectual property enforcement does not prevent retailers
from selling inexpensive products, or stop customers from getting bargains.
Entrepreneurs are free to manufacture discount items and sell them using novel
brand names. Innovators can create and market new songs, movies, books and
computer programs. They just cannot sell anything that belongs to someone else.
If we want to promote innovation, we need to understand the
patterns of intellectual property crime. We can disrupt counterfeit
manufacturing sources, cut off international supply chains, remove the ability
of intellectual property thieves to process payments, and educate the public
about the harms caused by illicit products.
In the United States, our Department of Justice has
undertaken a range of responses to the problem. I want to discuss some of the
significant cases we have prosecuted in recent years.
The protection of public health and safety is a top priority
for my government. Many counterfeit products fall in this category. Some are
obviously dangerous. Fake automobile brake pads and counterfeit pharmaceutical
drugs are two examples. Sometimes, even seemingly innocuous items put the
public at risk. Earlier this year, we prosecuted the owner of an international
operation that imported counterfeit and misbranded contact lenses from
suppliers in Asia. He sold the lenses over the internet to tens of thousands of
customers without any prescription. Many of the contact lenses carried labels
with counterfeit trademarks of legitimate companies. Some of the lenses
contained bacteria that could cause extensive eye damage and blindness. The
defendant was sentenced to serve 46 months in prison and ordered to forfeit
$1.2 million in proceeds.
The most valuable intellectual property of a company often
is the technical information that it keeps secret. The United States government
is committed to vigorously enforcing the law that criminalizes the theft of
corporate trade secrets. Earlier this year, our Department of Justice brought
criminal charges against an engineer who worked for a large government
contractor on commercial and military satellites sold to the United States Air
Force, the Navy, and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
The defendant’s employer gave him access to proprietary
trade secrets, including anti-jamming technology, encryption plans for
communication with satellites, and related technical data — all of which are
controlled technology. The defendant saw his access to critical technical data
as an opportunity to make a profit. He attempted to sell the information to
people he believed were foreign agents interested in military technology. In
fact, the contacts were undercover federal law enforcement officers. The
defendant pleaded guilty in federal court to the crime of economic espionage.
He is scheduled to be sentenced next month.
In July 2016, the alleged owner of one of the world’s most
visited illegal file-sharing websites was arrested in Poland. He is now
awaiting extradition to the United States. The site received more than 50
million unique visitors each month and it was ranked among the top 100
most-visited websites. The website enabled users to illegally reproduce and
distribute hundreds of millions of copyrighted motion pictures, video games,
television programs, musical recordings, and other electronic media. The actual
owners of the products received no profit. The copyrighted material transferred
illegally may be worth more than $1 billion.
Pursuing the investigation and prosecution of such an
international website is labor intensive and time consuming. The process of
working with our international counterparts on extradition proceedings adds an
extra layer of challenge. However, the task is well worth the effort, due to
the tremendous deterrent effect that one case can have on other individuals
around the world who may consider engaging in the same type of illegal business.
These are just a few recent examples of cases prosecuted by
the United States Department of Justice. Each of our law enforcement colleagues
can tell similar stories about criminals who seek to profit from the hard work
of inventors and creators, and who put citizens at risk by selling counterfeit
goods.
Those of you who work in the private sector well understand
why we need to work tirelessly to prevent thieves from stealing intellectual
property and marketing fake products. Criminals are always looking for
vulnerabilities. When we disrupt an existing illegal market, they show
flexibility and even ingenuity in devising new fraudulent schemes.
We must continue to look for ways that we can improve our
effectiveness in combatting this global criminal problem. We need to be
creative, we need to be cooperative, and we need to use all of our available
tools.
We must take our understanding of international organized
crime, and apply that knowledge to eliminate global smuggling networks.
We need to use our insight about the gatekeeper financial
institutions that clear domestic and international monetary transactions, so we
can disrupt the payment methods and profit streams from intellectual property
theft.
And we should develop expertise in the technology used by
criminals to steal, reproduce, distribute, and profit from counterfeiting and
copyright piracy.
The United States government’s commitment is reflected in
the National Intellectual Property Rights Coordination Center, a fusion center
that brings together our key American partner agencies along with foreign
governments and international police agencies.
At the United States Department of Justice, we are taking
concrete steps to root out intellectual property crime.
We plan to direct every component of our Department that
plays a role in intellectual property enforcement to join in a national
Intellectual Property Task Force to explore new approaches to combat the theft
of intellectual property. We will rely on both criminal and civil enforcement.
We will promote international cooperation. We will build expertise in
understanding the technological aspects of the problem. And we will increase
our public outreach to promote awareness of the harms caused by intellectual
property violations.
Recognizing that intellectual property crime can arise
anywhere, we are strengthening our ability to pursue charges against criminals
through the more than 260 Computer Hacking and Intellectual Property
Coordinators placed throughout the nation, in our 93 U.S. Attorneys’ Offices.
Those highly-trained prosecutors are equipped to communicate with industry
about possible cases, to support our partner agencies in thoroughly
investigating criminal infringements of property rights, and to bring strong
cases to court for prosecution. In addition to our nationwide prosecutors’
network, our Department also has a Computer Crime and Intellectual Property
Section in Washington, D.C., with more than 45 attorneys who are responsible
for prosecuting intellectual property and cybercrime matters.
We need to remain up to date about the technological
challenges of intellectual property and cybercrime, so our Department has
established a Cybercrime Lab staffed by expert technologists. They assist with
investigations and monitor developments in the ways criminals use technology.
I cannot emphasize enough our commitment to international
cooperation. The global nature of intellectual property crime is the reason why
all of us are gathered here today. We can confront this issue effectively only
by taking a transnational approach. Building on the success of the prosecutors’
network within the United States, our Department of Justice and Department of
State have worked together to deploy Intellectual Property Law Enforcement
Coordinators in key areas around the world.
In the coming weeks, the United States will post
intellectual property experts to offices in Bangkok, Hong Kong, Sao Paulo,
Bucharest, and Abuja.
Our coordinators will be a resource for regional
cooperation, and an important point of contact for industry and for our law
enforcement colleagues. I encourage each of you to contact the nearest
coordinator. They are eager to work with you. As they expand our network, they
will play an increasing role in developing our knowledge of the patterns and techniques
of intellectual property criminals.
Finally, in a demonstration of our commitment to
international coordination, the Attorney General instructed our Department of
Justice to respond more quickly to requests for mutual legal assistance. We
must support each other in our efforts to combat criminals who perpetrate
crimes in foreign countries while concealing the evidence in our own country.
Let me conclude by acknowledging that there is no easy
solution to the problem of intellectual property crime. Our greatest strength
comes from our commitment to work together, and our collective ability to
confront this global challenge to economic and technological progress.
This conference provides a superb opportunity to share
experiences and to strengthen the foundation for future cooperation. We must
continue to promote the rule of law and enhance respect for intellectual
property rights.
Thank you for your commitment to protecting intellectual
property. I hope you enjoy the remainder of the conference, and I look forward
to continuing our important work in the years ahead.
No comments:
Post a Comment