53. The representative of Chinese Taipei welcomed the Chairman's sub-questions and said that it would be helpful for Members to have a better understanding of how Members operate their system at the domestic level.
54. She gave preliminary responses to the first sub-question regarding domestic practices. Firstly, when making decisions regarding the protection of geographical indications and trademarks, the intellectual property examiner consulted the database containing prior registered trademarks and other relevant information, including a special folder of names and representations that were not allowed to be registered as trademarks. The special folder contained the notifications received from WIPO under Article 6ter of the Paris Convention, names and logos of government authorities and names of agricultural products. The intellectual property examiners would consult the database when making a decision on whether an application violated the Trademark Act, for example if the sign was identical or similar to a geographical indication for a wine or a spirit of a country or region that protected trademarks and that was designated for the protection of a wine or a spirit.
55. Second, if examiners failed to consult sources of information and that had a substantive effect, the decision would be regarded by the higher level competent authority as violating the Trademark Act and the decision would be revoked. If additional sources of information were available, for example a multilateral system of notification and registration of geographical indications for wines and spirits, newly established on the basis of the joint proposal, those additional sources of information would become available for examiners to consult and thus facilitate the GI protection of wines and spirits. This was how the system operated at the domestic level.
