Actas - Consejo de los ADPIC - Ver detalles de la intervención/declaración

Ambassador Carmen Luz Guarda (Chile)
Estados Unidos de América
G.ii Review of legislation on enforcement
45. The representative of the United States said that Article 41.1 required Members to ensure that enforcement procedures sufficient to permit effective action against acts of infringement were available. Such procedures must include expeditious remedies which constituted a deterrent to further infringement. His delegation believed that it was impossible to get a complete picture of the enforcement situation in a Member without understanding how its enforcement remedies were applied in practice. If the procedures provided in legislative texts were not available in practice, they could not be effective or have the deterrent effect required by the Agreement. He said that enforcement statistics were the most useful guide to the practical application of a Member's enforcement procedures and that his delegation's requests for such statistics were fully consistent with the TRIPS Agreement. Under Article 68, the Council was obliged to monitor the operation of the TRIPS Agreement and to afford Members the opportunity to consult on matters relating to intellectual property rights. The operation of the Agreement could not be understood if Members did not understand how the procedures it mandated operated in practice. Data regarding the practical operation of Members' laws had been presented in previous reviews and the enforcement checklist itself requested such data. His delegation understood that some Members might not compile data in the manner requested but he believed that they should make an effort to collect the data from their various government agencies. Where no official data were available, data from the private sector would be helpful, although not optimal, provided that full disclosure of the source was given. This was the approach his delegation had adopted in responding to requests for data from the European Communities. His delegation had made a good faith effort to provide as clear a picture as possible of the enforcement of intellectual property rights in the United States and he hoped that other Members would make the same effort.
IP/D/30; WT/DS434/2; IP/D/31; WT/DS435/2
IP/C/M/16