111. The representative of the European Communities said that his delegation believed that the Secretariat background note would be useful to conduct the examination of the issues as requested in the work programme of the General Council on this subject. His delegation believed that the traditional objectives of the TRIPS Agreement remained valid also for the on-line environment. In its view, TRIPS language was sufficiently technology-neutral to cover on-line as well as off-line issues. However, technological developments might require certain adjustments to existing rights and the creation of new rights and in this respect he wished to make three observations. First, there appeared to be a need to examine the impact of the global character of communication systems on national differences in standards of protection and on the territorially based protection and registration systems for certain rights. Closely related to this were questions concerning the applicable law and choice of law, notably in the enforcement area. The main question that remained was whether the TRIPS Agreement could and should address these questions. It had to be borne in mind that the TRIPS Agreement was built on existing international conventions and it could be difficult to address these fundamental questions in the short term. Some items, like liability of service providers, appeared to be of such a horizontal nature that they might have to be addressed in a more general context. Second, on certain issues, progress had already been made, such as through the adoption of the two WIPO treaties in the copyright area. It was important that these treaties were ratified and implemented. WIPO was currently also examining further issues in the copyright area, such as on audiovisual performances, the sui generis protection of databases and additional rights for broadcasting organizations, as well as in the trademark area. The Council could reflect on the impact of the work of WIPO for the TRIPS Agreement and avoid duplication of work. Third, there remained issues which were currently not addressed in the TRIPS Agreement or in WIPO and which appeared to be important for the provision of adequate protection to creators and inventors in the on-line world. These related to adaptations of basic concepts, notably in the copyright sector, such as the definition of "publication", of "the country of origin" and of "the right holder". He suggested that Members reflect on whether, how and where to address these items. He reiterated that the TRIPS Agreement already provided for a sound basis for intellectual property right protection in the off-line world which could be built upon. The Council should look ahead and examine in detail whether certain provisions might need to be clarified or even have to be adapted to take the new developments into account so as to provide the necessary legal environment for electronic commerce to develop to the benefit of all participants.
