104. The representative of Argentina said the terms "notify" and "register" were to be understood within the framework of all the provisions of the TRIPS Agreement. A register should not impose the application of the criteria of eligibility used by the country that had applied for the registration of a geographical indication in the multilateral register. Otherwise, Members would have to automatically protect in their territories the geographical indications included in the system, thereby denying or at least nullifying the right of each Member to define at the national level the exceptions provided under Article 24. These could not be a priori defined in a general manner but only on a case-by-case basis in accordance with the national law. The examination of the characteristics, procedures and legal effects referred to in the Chair's note should be made in the context of the purpose of Article 23.4 and the rights and obligations of Section 3 of Part II of the TRIPS Agreement. The terms "notify" and "register" should be interpreted as elements of a single act: Members which voluntarily participated in the system would notify their geographical indications, which would be recorded in a register. In other words, the system should consist of a "register of notifications", the purpose of which would be to "facilitate" the protection of geographical indications for wines and spirits according to the provisions of Article 23.4 and no further.
105. Regarding costs, she said that this issue was of particular interest to Argentina and to developing countries in general. It should be taken up not only from the point of view of economic costs for keeping up a system within the WTO, but also from the angle of the costs involved at the national level, both economic and in terms of human resources. The more complex the system was, the greater the economic and human resource costs that would need to be involved, both at the national and at the WTO level. Her delegation did not agree that the Special Session take up costs and benefits of different possible systems in a collective manner. Only economic costs and costs in terms of human resources of different national systems or of the WTO system could be collectively examined. The cost-benefit ratio was something which ought to be analysed at the national level in each different country because those variables depended on each country's specific interests. Bearing in mind that it was difficult to evaluate costs on the basis of other systems or possible systems, the evaluation of those systems should be based on the two systems proposed to date. Only an evaluation of costs would allow each country to analyse the "cost-benefit" ratio of the system it was negotiating.
