Ambassador Alfredo Suescum (Panama)

Chile

13 WORK PROGRAMME ON ELECTRONIC COMMERCE

335. We welcome the proposals in documents JOB/IP/19, 20, 21 and 22, which were circulated by various Members. These proposals contain ideas on how to move forward in the discussions on electronic commerce, and, in our view, many of these ideas are similar. One of the documents we would like to highlight is JOB/IP/21, "Trade policy, the WTO, and the digital economy", which is co sponsored by Chile. This document, like those indicated by the European Union and other Members, is a useful tool, as it provides a starting point for discussion in the form of a tentative, extensive and open ended list of trade policy elements that are important to electronic commerce. 336. At the request of one group of Members, the document has been submitted at the level of the Councils and the Committee on Trade and Development, where we hope it will generate substantive and productive discussion on this issue, one that is vital to all WTO Members, regardless of their level of development. 337. As we stated at the last meeting, Chile notes with interest the proposal on exchanging views on different experiences in the area of intellectual property and electronic commerce. 338. There are a number of intellectual property issues relating to electronic commerce, and we realize that they are important for discussions on the digital economy. We therefore feel that the questions set out therein are relevant, in particular those concerning the elements Members feel should be included in an exercise of this type in the area of intellectual property. 339. Furthermore, within the framework of this Council, Chile is interested not only in engaging Members in a substantive discussion on relevant issues in respect of the elements common to intellectual property and electronic commerce, but in exploring avenues to continue this discussion in the TRIPS Council. 340. To this end, Chile believes that a starting point for the discussions in this Council could be requesting the Secretariat to update document IP/C/W/128 – the factual background note examining the provisions of the TRIPS Agreement relevant to paragraph 4.1 of the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce. Since many of these issues are being examined in other intergovernmental organizations, the Secretariat should include in its update information on the relevant activities of these organizations. 341. We hope to work with the other delegations concerned to find the best way to resume productive and substantive dialogue on this important matter.

JOB/IP/19; JOB/IP/202; JOB/IP/21; JOB/IP/22; IP/C/W/128

The Council took note of the statements made.

69. The Chairman informed the Council that, to prepare the discussion under this item, Brazil had submitted a communication on Electronic Commerce and Copyright (document JOB/IP/19) which had been co-sponsored by Argentina. He suggested that Brazil introduce the agenda item and discuss the issues that it was proposing for consideration, and that the Council then turn to three other submissions related to the Work Programme on E-Commerce which the respective co-sponsors might wish to introduce.

70. He recalled the most recent mandate in the field of e-commerce and the state of play of the work. At MC10 in December 2015, Ministers had decided to "continue the work under the Work Programme based on the existing mandate and guidelines and on the basis of proposals submitted by Members in the relevant WTO bodies". They had also instructed the General Council to hold periodic reviews "based on the reports that may be submitted by the WTO bodies entrusted with the implementation of the Work Programme and report to the next session of the Ministerial Conference" (document WT/MIN(15)/42 – WT/L/977).

71. In June 2017, the TRIPS Council had resumed discussions on e-commerce. This discussion had been based on Canada's written submission circulated in document IP/C/W/613. Canada had shared its national experience to fight the selling of counterfeit products over the internet. At the Council's meeting in November 2016, Canada had called for a continuation of the sharing of national experiences and practices as this would support the Council to respond to the Ministerial mandate. In line with the addendum to its earlier communication (document IP/C/W/613/Add.1) Canada had also said that it wished to consult with other delegations on how to advance the Work Programme on E-Commerce in this Council. It had been joined by a number of other delegations.

72. The Chairman also referred to three other communications under this item: a communication on Electronic Signatures that had been co-sponsored by the delegations of Argentina, Brazil and Paraguay (document JOB/IP/20); a communication on Trade Policy, the WTO and the Digital Economy that had been circulated at the request of the delegations of Canada; Chile; Colombia; Côte d'Ivoire; the European Union; the Republic of Korea; Mexico; Montenegro; Paraguay; Singapore and Turkey (JOB/IP/21 of 13 January 2017); and a communication on Electronic Commerce and Development, recently circulated in document JOB/IP/22 at the request of the delegations of Brunei Darussalam; Colombia; Costa Rica; Hong Kong, China; Israel; Malaysia; Mexico; Nigeria; Pakistan; Panama; Qatar; Seychelles; Singapore and Turkey.

73. The representatives of Brazil, Argentina, Paraguay, Bangladesh on behalf of the LDC Group, Switzerland, the United States, Norway, the European Union, Singapore, Chinese Taipei, Canada, the Republic of Moldova, Mexico, Australia, Turkey, Colombia, the Russian Federation, Chile, the Republic of Korea, India and New Zealand took the floor.

74. The Chairman said that, in light of the discussions and the earlier exchange of views at the Council's meetings in June and November 2016, there seemed to be a continuing interest of delegations in discussing issues related to intellectual property and e-commerce. He therefore encouraged Members to consider how to carry forward issues related to e-commerce in the TRIPS Council. An in-depth debate would, indeed, constitute a sound basis for the Council to contribute to the periodic review that the General Council had been requested to hold, as well as to provide input for the General Council report to the next Ministerial Conference. Such a discussion would be an opportunity to create a clear and inclusive factual picture of the current state of affairs as the foundation for informed dialogue between Members.

75. The Council took note of the statements made.

IP/C/M/85, IP/C/M/85/Add.1