Comptes rendus ‒ Session extraordinaire du Conseil des ADPIC ‒ Afficher les détails de l'intervention /la déclaration

Ambassador Eui-yong Chung (Korea, Republic of)
C.ii.iv.b The purpose of the notification and registration system
134. The representative of Hungary fully agreed with the American delegation that the purpose of the register was the facilitation of the protection of geographical indications. Where his delegation differed was that it believed that the registration system should have a legal effect and it should create the rebuttable presumption of eligibility for protection. Referring to the remark made by the US delegation that the proposal supported by Hungary would make protection for registered geographical indications mandatory in participating Members, he said that was either a misunderstanding or a misrepresentation of the proposal. The rebuttable presumption of eligibility for protection would be the facilitating effect. That would mean that owners of GIs would still have to go through the national processes but would have to use the legal means that WTO Members had to provide under Article 23 of the TRIPS Agreement. However, the burden of proof in front of the local courts would be reversed. The effect would not be that protection was mandatory for all participating Members. 135. He recalled two questions that his delegation had asked earlier to countries using a certification trademark system, and which had not been replied to (see supra, paragraph 65).
TN/IP/M/3