Compte rendu ‒ Conseil des ADPIC ‒ Afficher les détails de l'intervention/la déclaration

Ambassador Carmen Luz Guarda (Chile)
États-Unis d'Amérique
D Implementation of Articles 70.8 and 70.9
25. The representative of the United States said that Pakistan and the United States had notified to the Dispute Settlement Body a mutually agreed solution to the matter concerning Articles 70.8 and 70.9 on which the United States had initiated consultations with Pakistan in April 1996.1 Through that notification, Pakistan had made it clear that, since obligations under Article 70.8 had arisen for it on 1 January 1995 but an official mailbox filing system had not been established until early 1997, it had had to establish a system whereby persons who would have filed, had such a system been in place on time, could in fact file and receive the filing dates they would have received under such a system. He underlined the importance of this point, as well as of the fact that the mailbox system was meant to preserve future benefits under the TRIPS Agreement. Those countries which had not yet established a mailbox system should establish, as Pakistan had done, a system which would permit also those persons who would have filed had the system been put in place earlier to receive their proper filing dates. Secondly, Pakistan had made quite clear in its notification to the Dispute Settlement Body that Article 70.9 obliged it to provide exclusive marketing rights which were truly exclusive, without any qualification or limitation, i.e. would allow the owner of those rights to prevent other persons from marketing the particular product in question until the end of the period during which exclusive marketing rights would be available. He commended the approach that Pakistan had taken with respect to its obligations under Article 70.8 and 70.9 which was exactly in line with the obligations under the Agreement. Turning to other Members that his delegation believed, based on its informal research, would seem to be obliged to establish mailbox systems but had not notified such systems to the TRIPS Council, he informed the Council that his delegation had approached those countries with the request to take the necessary action as soon as possible. He also wished to reiterate that, with respect to the notifications that had been received regarding the mailbox system, there had been very little specificity as to Members' compliance with Article 70.9. Right holders needed to know how they were to apply for exclusive marketing rights in countries that had established a system for their grant. He stressed the urgency of this matter by indicating that his delegation knew that there was at least one company which had at least two products for which it was ready to submit requests for exclusive marketing rights under Article 70.9 but did not know the procedures for doing so in many WTO Members. If procedures were in place, they were unknown to potential applicants. He asked all those Members which had already notified under Article 70.8 to enhance and clarify their notifications with respect to the procedures for requesting exclusive marketing rights and those Members which had not yet notified under Article 70.8 and 70.9 to also include in their notification some information on the procedures for requesting exclusive marketing rights under Article 70.9.
WTO/AIR/3956; IP/C/W/580; IP/C/W/558; IP/C/W/561

IP/C/M/13

1 See also under agenda item F below.