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

Ambassador Eui-yong Chung (Korea, Republic of)
C.i Definition of the term "geographical indication" and eligibility of geographical indications for inclusion in the system
32. The representative of Malaysia, speaking on behalf of the ASEAN Members, said that many Members at the March session had stressed a need for further discussion towards achieving a better understanding of the issues regarding the negotiation of a multilateral system. She said that the list represented a good starting-point for discussion and clarification of issues related to the multilateral system for wines and spirits as mandated under paragraph 18 of the Ministerial Declaration. She would be interested to hear more from Argentina on that issue. 33. On the definition of "geographical indications", she said that it would be useful for the Special Session to have a common understanding of this term. Such an understanding should stem from the definition given in Article 22.1. Thus, Members would be in a better position to discuss the purpose and the system of notification. It would also avoid costly and time consuming arguments on the eligibility of geographical indications for wines and spirits for inclusion in the multilateral system. Article 22.1 defined geographical indications as indications which identified a good as originating in the territory or region or locality of a country, and that some form of quality, reputation or other characteristic was associated with its origin. Therefore, there seemed to be several aspects regarding this definition. Firstly, geographical indications in the TRIPS context for the purposes of wines and spirits would refer to a good. Hence, reference should not be made to services, concepts or symbols. Secondly, geographical indications would most likely be the names of places since it was stated that they were indications which identified goods as originating in geographical areas. Thirdly, indications should also be linked with some form of quality, reputation or other characteristic associated with its origin. The definition in the TRIPS Agreement seemed to differ from the use of other definitions like "appellations of origin" defined in other multilateral agreements such as the Lisbon Agreement. While the appellation of origin designated or named a product, for example "Champagne" or "Bordeaux", the TRIPS definition used the term "identifying"; in other words, it associated a good with the place of origin. Some clarity as to the differences between the two concepts and with regard to the terms "quality", "reputation" and "other characteristics of the good … attributable to its geographical origin" would also be useful.
TN/IP/M/2