81. The representative of Hungary associated his delegation with the comments made by Switzerland that the reversal of the burden of proof would not create any new substantive obligations for Member governments, unless a government owned the enterprises that were using geographical indications registered by others in the multilateral registry. In response to the comment by Chile, he said that the legal effect flowing from the register would be a rebuttable presumption of eligibility for protection, which would not take away the right of governments or national authorities to make the final determination of whether or not a term or sign fulfilled the requirements under Section 3 of Part II of the TRIPS Agreement. Finally, in order to avoid repeating views, he recalled that his delegation's position had been reflected in paragraphs 26, 45 to 47 of TN/IP/M/4.
