88. The representative of Chile congratulated the Chairman on his election. He said that Chile attached great importance to discussions at a technical level, as they were helpful in identifying the effects, the benefits and the achievements of the various proposals for a multilateral system of notification and registration of GIs for wines and spirits. Discussions should be based on Article 23.4 of the TRIPS Agreement and paragraph 18 of the Doha Declaration and should not be mixed with extraneous points that made it difficult to establish such a register.
89. With respect to questions one and two of Ambassador Clarke, Chile was in agreement with the statement by New Zealand that a legal presumption as provided for in TN/C/W/52 would not facilitate but increase the protection of GIs, and therefore would go beyond Article 23.4 of the TRIPS Agreement. The proposed legal presumption would impose costs on producers in WTO Members. Very often the terms in question had been used generically or otherwise did not comply with the legislation established for the protection of geographical indications. Given that the number of GIs that would enjoy prima facie evidence status would be in the order of thousands, this would create an avalanche of disputes, leading to further administrative costs for Members, producers and consumers. As dispute settlement was a lengthy process for most Members, this would lead to uncertainty regarding the possibility of using these terms in various markets.
90. He said that the joint proposal, in contrast, would not involve any change for Members wishing to participate in such a system. Members would consult a public database when registering trademarks and GIs. This proposal was in keeping with the negotiating mandate of TRIPS Article 23.4: it would facilitate the protection of GIs, and would be fully consistent with the guiding principles, such as the principle of territoriality. In short, it provided for the establishment of a multilateral system that was voluntary and simple, that did not have legal effects for Members that decided not to participate, and that caused only limited costs and administrative burdens, particularly for developing countries.
