66. The representative of the United States said that her delegation felt very strongly that adequate and effective protection and enforcement of intellectual property rights were key elements of certainty in the legal environment necessary to foster the continued growth of electronic commerce. Electronic commerce promoted growth of cultural goods and services. That growth was important for economic development of enterprises, including small- and medium-sized enterprises. The Internet gave those same enterprises access to a wealth of technology available from the websites of national patent offices. The Internet would soon make acquisition of rights easier as more national patent and trademark offices would adopt electronic filing. She believed that work in the WTO and WIPO had already made an extensive contribution to the development and expansion of electronic commerce. The Secretariat's paper had identified relevant provisions of the TRIPS Agreement and had greatly aided the work of the TRIPS Council on electronic commerce. She expressed surprise about some of the reactions, during the informal consultations, to the Chair's list of possible points for the TRIPS Council's report on electronic commerce. Her delegation believed that the list faithfully reflected the discussions that had taken place at the Council's meetings. Particularly puzzling were the interventions concerning the point that referenced the TRIPS Agreement's general neutrality in relation to technology. That point reflected comments made by a number of Members, including Australia; the European Communities; Hong Kong, China; and the United States. These delegations had supported the observations in the Secretariat's paper (IP/C/W/128) that basic notions, principles and objectives of intellectual property had continued to apply throughout a century of rapid economic, social and technological change. In addition, her delegation and others had noted in the TRIPS Council that the traditional objectives of intellectual property systems, as reflected in current international norms, including in the TRIPS Agreement, continued to be valid in the digital environment. Given the numerous instances in which the neutrality of intellectual property in relation to technology had been commented upon in the TRIPS Council, she rejected the notion that this concept was being imported from contexts other than intellectual property. In her delegation's view, the reference to neutrality merely represented a recognition that basic notions of intellectual property continued to apply equally as technologies changed. Just because the concept might exist as a "principle" in a plurilateral agreement elsewhere, that did not mean that the general application of other agreements could not be recognized when another medium was involved. Given this reality, she believed that proper and timely implementation of the TRIPS Agreement, including the enforcement provisions, was important to ensuring that the potential benefits of electronic commerce were realized. The paper that her delegation would submit would highlight additional factors essential for the growth of electronic commerce. Her delegation considered it important for the TRIPS Council to continue monitoring developments on the matter in other fora, including WIPO, and to discuss relevant issues.
