64. The representative of Morocco, while noting that the French version of the US/Japanese proposal was not yet available, sought clarification on two points. First, he recalled that, at the previous meeting, the representative of the United States had stated that the proposed system could include products other than wines and spirits and that his delegation was ready to discuss a possible list of products. Had the United States' delegation made a final decision on the extension of the system to other products, and was it in favour of a closed list of products or a system open to all products likely to be identified by their geographical origin? These questions were important for his delegation, which would not be in favour of a system which excluded its extension to other products which could be identified by their geographical origin. Second, his delegation wondered whether there would be a difference in the level of protection between a geographical indication notified/registered under the system proposed by Japan and the United States and another not so notified/registered and, if so, what would be that difference. If there was no difference, what would be the added value of the proposed system that might encourage Members to participate in the system.
