RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONIP/C/W/144
6 July 1999
(99-2790)
Council for Trade-Related Aspects
of Intellectual Property RightsOriginal:  English
WORK PROGRAMME ON ELECTRONIC COMMERCE
Communication from Australia
The following communication has been received by the Secretariat from the Permanent
Mission of Australia on 2 July 1999.
_______________
I. INTRODUCTION
1. Based on the intervention made by Australia at the TRIPS Council meeting on
21-22 April 1999, recorded in IP/C/M/23, this paper comments on the range of intellectual property
issues raised by the electronic commerce Work Programme, to facilitate further discussion of these
issues at the Council meeting on 7 July.  The aim is to ensure that the Chair’s report is ascomprehensive and well developed as possible, so as to give substantial guidance to the General
Council in its formulation of a report on the Work Programme
2. Australia welcomes the informal note circulated by the Chairman on 14 June 1999 ("List of
Possible Points for the TRIPS Council's Report on Electronic Commerce"), and can endorse the
general considerations it sets out.  The following proposals are intended to be consistent with, and to
support, the proposed approach, while building further on that foundation in some respects.
II. OVERVIEW OF INTELLECTUAL PPROPERTY AND THE ELECTRONIC
COMMERCE WORK PROGRAMME
3. The most striking development in the field of intellectual property since the conclusion of the
TRIPS Agreement has been the rapid increase in the use of digital technology and digital-basedtelecommunications technology in the commercial domain.  The harmonized international intellectual
property system fostered by the advent of TRIPS, and the general trend towards coordinated
protection of IPRs, have themselves contributed significantly to the growth of electronic commerce,
and the fresh trade opportunities that electronic commerce now offers to small and medium
enterprises in all economies.  The WTO Work Programme on electronic commerce should recognizethe value of existing TRIPS-based intellectual property system in supporting the widespread growth
and sharing of benefits of electronic commerce, and the value of clarifying that TRIPS standards
apply in the digital environment.
4. The Secretariat's factual background paper on TRIPS-related electronic commerce issues
1
serves as an excellent basis on which to advance substantive discussions in the remaining timeframe
of the Work Programme.  It provides a thorough, practical analysis of the application of current
                                                     
1 IP/C/W/128IP/C/W/144
Page 2
commitments, and facilitates a clear assessment by Members of exactly how and where the current
rules apply, and where the gaps and limits to those rules arise.
5. The Work Programme provides, at the least, an opportunity for Members to articulate a
general common position on the operation of certain TRIPS provisions in the digital environment.  Afirst practical step would simply be to confirm the applicability of the existing rules to the digital
environment, recognizing their technology-neutral basis.  The Work Programme is also an
opportunity to consider what clarification of specific TRIPS provisions may be necessary in order to
encourage their consistent application in the digital environment.  It may also consider what
adaptations of or extensions to existing provisions may be desirable, consistent with the objectives of
TRIPS and other international standards, and the possible procedures for progressing the development
of TRIPS standards.
6. The following comments draw on and follow the general format of the Secretariat's paper,
highlighting some possible outcomes for the Work Programme which should strengthen the
application of TRIPS provisions in the digital environment.  To provide a focus for discussions, we
have included a number of indicative proposals for specific Work Programme outcomes.
III. GENERAL APPLICABILITY TO ELECTRONIC COMMERCE OF
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY PRINCIPLES AND TRIPS OBJECTIVES AND
PROVISIONS
7. Australia supports the Secretariat's comments regarding the applicability to electronic
commerce of the traditional objectives of the intellectual property system, and the relevance of TRIPS
provisions in the digital network environment (see, for example, paragraphs 12 and 14).  This is in
line with the Work Programme's general premise that electronic commerce is simply another means of
transacting commerce: at the level of principle, it is no different from other forms of international
commerce.  The corollary to this general principl e is that all WTO commitments relating to trade,
including rights and obligations under the TRIPS Agreement, apply regardless of whether trade is
conducted electronically or otherwise.  In particular, Australia emphasizes the fundamental
importance of the WTO principle of non-discrimination, in its particular application in preserving the
technology neutrality of rules, and its role as a ready-made facilitator of electronic commerce.
Similarly, the established principles of national treatment and most-favoured nation facilitate the
development of commerce in a digital environment.
8. From the perspective of both IP and other WTO disciplines, non-discrimination establishes
the basic framework by which to ensure that borderless commercial exchanges are conducted fairly
and freely.  For example, copyright in a literary work may be infringed when it is reproduced in its
entirety and sold in commercial quantities, whether it was reproduced by traditional typesetting or by
digital scanning, and whether the reproductions are so ld on vellum or as CD-ROMs.  It is no defense
to trademark infringement if a connection in the course of trade is asserted through digital
communications rather than by a physi cal manifestation of the trademark.
Proposal :  That the TRIPS Council consider including in the final report to the General
Council an agreed statement regarding the appl icability to electronic commerce of the
traditional objectives of the intellectual property system, the generally technology-
neutral nature of TRIPS provisions, and the relevance of TRIPS provisions in the digital
network environment.IP/C/W/144
Page 3
IV. DISTINCTIVE FEATURES OF INTELLECTUAL PPROPERTY IN THE DIGITAL
ENVIRONMENT
9. As a general principle, IP objectives and TRIPS provisions apply equally in the digital
environment as to conventional commerce: indee d, no practical distinction can be drawn between
digital or electronic IP and "other" IP.  However, there are two distinctive features of IP in the digitalenvironment that should be acknowledged.
• First, trade conducted electronically generally has a relatively high intellectual
property content.  TRIPS provisions are therefore not only relevant in principle toelectronic commerce, but in fact highly significant from a practical perspective.
Electronic commerce is greatly affected by intellectual property rules -
proportionately more so than general commerce.  The rapid growth of
electronically-conducted trade will therefore increase emphasis on ensuring theeffective implementation and enforcement of existing TRIPS provisions.
• Second, the administration and enforcement of national IP laws in the digital
environment are confronted with significant challenges as regards the definition andenforcement of copyright and related rights, and the delineation and enforcement of
trademark rights, as well as the trademark/domain name overlap.  The practicalnecessity of territorially-based jurisdiction can also be problematic in the enforcement
of IPRs in relation to electronic commerce.  These challenges are not always confined
to electronic commerce - to some extent they are apparent in the general trend
towards more geographically distributed or borderless trade patterns.  At the same
time, electronic commerce offers a new generation of practical solutions to long-standing problems of enforcement and widespread benefit sharing.
V. ENFORCEMENT:  BORDER MEASURES
10. Hence, while posing new enforcement challenges, advances in digital technology also create
practical mechanisms for facilitating enforcement.  One of the significant advances in the TRIPSAgreement was its detailed arrangements for border control measures, reflecting the high practical
value of such measures in dealing with internatio nal trade in counterfeit and pirated goods.  One of
the broader benefits of the electronic commerce Work Programme will be to promote understanding
of the trade facilitation potential of electronic commerce technology.  Hence it may be valuable to
consider possible practical linkages between border control measures for IPR enforcement, and tradefacilitation.  TRIPS does not and should not prescribe specific technological approaches to the
implementation of border control measures, properly leaving this to national authorities to determine.
11. Nonetheless, it may be useful to draw atte ntion to the concrete benefits from practical
coordination between the implementation of IP border control measures and trade facilitation through
electronic commerce technologies.  Suitable information systems could serve the combined function
of easing the administrative burden of customs procedures, and targeting and focussing borderenforcement efforts.  It should be emphasized that this would remain at a practical level as a means of
optimizing the use of resources in implementing TR IPS, rather than a mandatory norm or expected
practice.  Even so, harnessing the potential of electronic commerce in this way could benefit all
Members.  By facilitating the effective implementation of TRIPS provisions related to border
controls, it could lead to increased compliance with national laws implementing the substantiveprovisions of the Agreement.
Proposal :  That Members consider the ways in which electronic commerce technologies
could be used to enhance customs procedures at the border, as a means of facilitating
compliance with TRIPS provisions.IP/C/W/144
Page 4
VI. ENFORCEMENT:  INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION (TRIPS ARTICLE 69)
12. Some of the challenges for effective enforcement of copyright posed by the growth of
electronic commerce are essentially practical in nature.  There will be a continuing need for Members
to explore options for addressing enforcement issues, with as much practical coordination andcooperation as possible, and sharing of the fruits of national experience.  We therefore suggest that the
terms of TRIPS Article 69, under which Members have agreed to cooperate with each other with a
view to eliminating international trade in goods infringing intellectual property rights, should be
interpreted to include infringements occurring in th e electronic environment.  This could be used to
promote a valuable exchange of information on electronic trade in infringing goods or the use of
electronic commerce to facilitate trade in infringing goods.  The Secretariat could coordinate the
exchange of national experiences in this regard.  The collation of information on the practicalproblems experienced by Members would be a useful  basis for ongoing discussions on how best to
tackle the issues, and would itself serve a useful role in training and awareness-raising activities.
Proposal :  that TRIPS Article 69 be interpreted to include intellectual property
infringements occurring in the digital environment, and that a statement to this effect beincluded in the TRIPS Council's final report to the General Council; and that the
Secretariat facilitate the exchange of in formation about national experiences with
regard to enforcement of IPRs in the digital environment.
VII. JURISDICTION ISSUES
13. TRIPS, and the earlier international agreements it incorporates (notably the Paris and Berne
Conventions), respond to the distinctive nature of  intellectual property as a component of trade:
international cooperation in this domain has been considered essential for more than a century
because of the particular vulnerability of intellectu al property to differing, conflicting or nationally-
oriented forms of protection.  The earlier focus was on the grant and availability of intellectualproperty rights.  The long-established national treatment principle in Berne and Paris, and the no-
formality protection afforded under Berne, are practical responses to the challenges of seeking and
maintaining rights in the international marketplace.  They remain of direct significance and practical
value in relation to IPRs associated with electronic commerce.
14. However, the development of a digital domain of commercial activities, characterized by
increasingly borderless or "virtual" trading patter ns and the growth of trade in IP-rich products,
creates new enforcement challenges which have raised questions about the continuing efficacy of
territorially-based jurisdiction.  Conflict between jurisdictions is not, in itself, a new problem, and the
general principles that have applied in the past will continue to apply to IPR infringement.  However,
the potential scope and geographic spread of IPR infringement will continue to grow.  To some
extent, the greater spread of TRIPS-consistent intellectual property systems and the movementtowards convergence of national systems should ease these problems.  Nonetheless, should widely
divergent approaches to jurisdictional issues in rela tion to intellectual property rights emerge in the
digital environment, this could lead to the kind of trade-distorting effects that TRIPS was developed
in response to.  At the least, the TRIPS Council should follow any relevant developments in the
question of determining the scope of national jurisd iction in relation to intellectual property rights in
the digital environment.  Any further, more substa ntive work on this issue would be premature at this
stage.
Proposal:  That the Work Programme note the value of monitoring developments in the
application of national jurisdiction in relat ion to intellectual property rights in the
digital environment.IP/C/W/144
Page 5
VIII.  NEW TECHNOLOGIES, ACCESS TO TECHNOLOGY AND INTELLECTUAL
PROPERTY RIGHT ADMINISTRATION
15. Electronic commerce technologies have vastly improved global access to technological
information in patent documentation.  The entire cost structure with regard to accessing patent
documentation has been revolutionized by its availability on the internet:  researchers and otherinterested parties in any part of the world are now able to access large quantities of state of the art
patent documentation effectively free of charge, provided they have basic internet access.  TRIPS
requires, under Article 29, that patent applicants disclose the invention in a manner sufficiently clear
and complete for it to be carried out by a skilled person skilled in the art.  Most patent systems give
effect to the further TRIPS standard that the appli cant also indicate the best mode for carrying out the
invention.  The TRIPS norm requiring disclosure of technological information therefore combines
with the revolution in the availability of inform ation and telecommunications technology, with the
effect of greatly facilitating the flow of technological information and reducing its cost in line with the
fundamental objectives of TRIPS.
16. Further, the fact that the patent system may, under TRIPS, extend to new technologies, for
example computer software, has led to increased accessibility to state-of-the-art technologies inrapidly advancing areas.  This quality of the patent system represents a very considerable
improvement over the trade secrets model, as it has shifted the balance between the protection of
rights and disclosure of information in favour of the user.
17. As noted in the Secretariat's paper (at paragraph 24), electronic commerce technologies are
also being used to practical advantage to improve the communication of information between
national, regional and international intellectual property offices, and increase access to that
information by people external to such organizations.  The use of electronic commerce in this way is
enhancing the quality and speed of the IP administration services provided by IP offices around the
world, and increasing the access to mechanisms which offer intellectual property right protection.
18. The improvements brought by electronic commerce in increasing access to technologies and
facilitating the effective administration of intellectual property rights are an important aspect of the
interface between electronic commerce and intellectual property rights.  In light of the already evident
benefits in this area, and the emphasis given to this topic in the TRIPS Council's mandate under the
Work Programme, Australia suggests that appropriate recognition of the advantages of electronic
commerce in this area should be made in the final report to the General Council.  Further, Australiaconsiders that a useful outcome from the Work Programme would be to encourage Members to
maximize, wherever possible, the opportunities presented by electronic commerce to facilitate access
to technology and IPR administration.
Proposal :  that the final report to the General Council include an acknowledgment of the
existing and potential advantages brought by electronic commerce technologies to
accessing new technology and administering intellectual property rights.
Proposal :  that Members be encouraged wherever possible to maximize the
opportunities presented by electronic commerce in the areas of access to technology andthe administration of intellectual property rights, and that this be given due emphasis in
technical cooperation activities.
IX. COPYRIGHT:  WIPO COPYRIGHT TREATY: LINKAGE TO TRIPS AGREEMENT
19. Electronic commerce reached its current significance on the international trading scene almost
entirely since the conclusion of TRIPS.  Hence the substantive TRIPS provisions on copyright do not
fully address issues arising in the digital environment.  The negotiation by WIPO Member States ofIP/C/W/144
Page 6
the WIPO Copyright Treaty (WCT) and the WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty (WPPT)
was in part prompted by this lacuna in TRIPS and the Berne and Rome Conventions.  The WCT
responds also to some copyright provisions of TRIPS itself.  The WIPO Diplomatic Conference of
December 1996 also adopted a number of Agreed Statements concerning certain provisions of the
WCT, which clarify how the provisions are to be interpreted, and thereby facilitate their practicaloperation.  A good example of this is the Agreed Statement concerning Article 1(4) of the WCT,
which clarifies that storage of a protected work in digital form in an electronic medium constitutes a
reproduction within the meaning of Article 9 of the Berne Convention.  Also noteworthy are the
agreed statements on Article 10 of the WCT and Article 16 of the WPPT concerning the applicability
of existing exceptions to the digital environment and the devising of appropriate new exceptions for
that environment.
20. Support for the WCT and WPPT, as measured by signature and ratification/accession, is not
confined to any one economic or geographic group, suggesting that the new norms it establishes
attract broad international support.  This breadth of acceptance, and the requirement under the Work
Programme to avoid duplication of work that is or has been done in other bodies, are compelling
reasons for Members to consider how the provisions of the WCT and WPPT relate to TRIPS and howthey might be used further to enhance the relevance of TRIPS in the digital environment.
21. A significant proportion of the norms embodied in the TRIPS Agreement are provided by the
incorporation, by reference, of key WIPO treaties - the Paris, Berne, Rome and Washington
Conventions.  Because of this close linkage in their substance, consistency and coordination betweenTRIPS norms and WIPO treaties is of vital importance to the efficacy of international cooperation in
the IP domain.  For instance, since the conclusion of TRIPS, the drafters of the WCT took account of
the contributions of TRIPS to copyright norms (e.g.  in relation to protection of software).  In light of
the work already done in WIPO towards creating appropriate amendments to copyright protection that
assists its efficacy in the on-line environment, Members could consider making one outcome of theWork Programme an encouragement of a continued mutually supporting linkage between TRIPS and
the provisions of the WCT and WPPT and their agreed statements.  Australia does not at this stage
advocate any specific linkage between these instrume nts, but suggests that it would be appropriate to
consider the possibilities.  In theory, the WCT and WPPT could be given recognition in the context of
TRIPS in one of at least three different ways, depending on the degree of consensus reached by
Members on the appropriateness of the WCT provisions.  One option is a statement on the part of the
TRIPS Council that recognizes the value of the WCT and WPPT in giving effect to the objectives of
TRIPS, and specifically acknowledges the relevance of its provisions to copyright law in the digital
environment.  Alternatively, relevant parts of th e WCT and WPPT could be incorporated into TRIPS
by reference.  A third option is that Members could use existing WCT provisions as a starting point
for the negotiation of new TRIPS provisions.  Any new provisions should not, however, impose more
onerous standards than those already contained in the WCT and WPPT.
22. Which of the above options is the most appropriate will depend on the extent to which
Members can agree on the content of the WCT and WPPT provisions, and the nature of the future
TRIPS review process.  The three options cited above are suggestions only, and Australia would
encourage other Members to think of other alternatives.  At this stage, Australia does not seek tosuggest which level of WCT/TRIPS linkage is the most desirable.  However, we would strongly
encourage other Members to consider agreeing to make a recommendation that one of the outcomes
of the Work Programme should be an explicit statement acknowledging the beneficial relationship
between these instruments.
Proposal : that Members consider means by which the WIPO Copyright Treaty and
WIPO Performances and Phonograms Treaty might be recognized in the context of
TRIPS, and that the TRIPS Council make a statement which explicitly recognizes the
relevance of the WCT and WPPT to regulat ing copyright and related rights in theIP/C/W/144
Page 7
online environment in a manner that supports the existing provisions and general
objectives of TRIPS.
X. COPYRIGHT:  WIPO COPYRIGHT TREATY: HARMONIZATION OF NATIONAL
LAWS
23. In addition to articulating the relationship between TRIPS and the WCT and WPPT, countries
could in the meantime make a practical contribution to copyright protection in the digital environment
by bringing their laws into line with relevant provisions of the WCT and WPPT.
24. Australia is well-advanced in the development of legislation to implement certain provisions
of the WCT and WPPT.  As an example of the manner in which national legislation can be amended
to take account of the WCT, and to address copyright issues in the digital environment moregenerally, following are details of some of the draft features of the Australian Copyright Digital
Agenda Bill:
• a new, broad-based technology-neutral right of communication to the public, which
will apply to works made available on the internet and other on-line services, as well
as works transmitted (including broadcast) to the public;
• reasonable access for libraries and educational institutions to copyright material
available on-line;
• exemption from liability for copyright infringements for carriers and ISP on the mere
basis that the infringement occurs on the facilities of the carrier or ISP;
• two new enforcement measures providing criminal sanctions and civil remedies
against the dealing in, and manufacture of, devices for the circumvention oftechnological protection measures, and the intentional removal or tampering with
electronic rights management information.
25. The overall objectives of TRIPS would clearly be served if Members were encouraged to
revise national laws to bring them in line with the provisions of the WCT.
Proposal :  that Members be encouraged to consider revising their national laws to bring
them in line with the WIPO Copyright Treaty and WIPO Performances and
Phonograms Treaty.
XI. MANAGEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS:  APPLICATION OF
ELECTRONIC COMMERCE TECHNOLOGIES
26. The collection of revenue from the licensing of various copyright and related rights is one
area where electronic commerce technologies may help bring the benefits of intellectual propertyprotection to a wider range of beneficiaries.  Electronic commerce may provide a cost-effective and
technically feasible means of collecting and distributing revenue from international markets for right
holders who have not, due to infrastructure, cost or logistical reasons, had the capacity to pursue their
commercial interests.  This applies for instance to performers, composers and artists in developing
countries, whose works are attracting increasing interest in international markets.  The coming year
will see the completion of TRIPS implementation in  many WTO Members, thus increasing the legal
scope for administration of copyright and related rights.  It is therefore timely to consider how thestrengthened legal framework can be complemented by enhanced practical mechanisms for copyright
administration.  The electronic commerce Work Programme could reflect the special needs ofIP/C/W/144
Page 8
developing countries in this regard, and encourage technical cooperation with the aim of extending the
benefit of collective mechanisms for rights administration.
Proposal :  that Members be encouraged to enhance cooperation, including in
conjunction with relevant international organizations such as WIPO, with the aim ofusing digital and telecommunications technologies to extend the effective benefits of
IPRs to right holders in developing countries.
XII. TRADEMARKS:  GENERAL
27. Judicial authorities in a number of countries have had to consider what constitutes relevant
use of a trademark on the internet.  This applies in the context of defining trademark infringement in
the digital environment, and determining what will qualify as "use" in connection with goods orservices for the purposes of establishing a registration or defending a registration from a removal
action.  Given the overall benefits of harmonized law in this area, and the fact that in electronic
commerce, use of a trademark will tend to take place concurrently in multiple jurisdictions, it would
be beneficial for greater information exchange and coordination of legal developments.  Ultimately,
practical experience and legal analysis may lead to a strong consensus that the trademark standardsarticulated by TRIPS could be clarified or supplemented for the general benefit of enterprises in all
Members.
28. It would, however, be premature to consider developing specific recommendations in the
framework of the current electronic commerce work program.  In addition, valuable work is underway in WIPO on this issue, under the Standing  Committee on the Law of Trademarks, Industrial
Designs and Geographical Indications (SCT).  Any outcome of this program may help facilitate
greater coordination of law in this field, and may form the basis for any future work by the TRIPS
Council.
Proposal : that the Work Programme take note of the value of greater exchange of
information on this issue, and continue to monitor developments, including the work
currently in progress in WIPO, with a view to possible further substantive consideration
of the issue.
XIII.  TRADEMARKS:  WELL-KNOWN MARKS
29. The TRIPS provisions on well-known marks, Articles 16.2 and 16.3, expand on Article 6 bis
of the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property (1967).  TRIPS extends the scope of
Article 6 bis to cover services, and goods and services which are not similar to those in respect of
which a trademark is registered, and also builds directly on the terms of that Article to clarify
the method for determining whether a trademark is well-known.
30. WIPO has since 1995 been examining the issue of the protection of well-known marks,
including in the context of their use on the internet.  A set of draft provisions dealing with this issue
has been developed by the WIPO SCT.  It appears that the aim is to have these draft provisions
adopted as a joint resolution of the WIPO General Assembly and the Assembly of the Paris Union, in
September this year.  However, this would not exclude the possibility of including the provisions in aWIPO treaty at some future date.
31. Given the importance of this issue, and the existing interrelationship between the TRIPS and
Paris Convention provisions on well-known marks, in considering the issue of well-known marks in
the context of electronic commerce, the TRIPS Council should take account of WIPO's work in thisarea.  The TRIPS Council could consider any outcomes of that process, once complete, and discuss
the possible implications of those outcomes for the TRIPS Agreement.IP/C/W/144
Page 9
Proposal :  that the TRIPS Council take account of the work being done in WIPO on the
issue of the protection of well-known marks in the digital environment, and consider its
possible implications for the provisions on well-known marks in the TRIPS Agreement.
32. Further, any consideration by the TRIPS Council of the protection of well-known marks in
the online environment should be based on the principle that the obligation to protect well-known
marks in the digital environment should not be applied in a way that extends the effective scope of
protection available in the conventional commercial sphere.  An appropriate balance must be struck
between the interests of the trademark owner and those of other traders.
XIV. TRADEMARKS:  INTERNET DOMAIN NAMES
33. The issue of trademarks and internet domain names has been the subject of an extensive
international consultation process by WIPO, the final report of which was published on 30 April 1999.
That report was then submitted to the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers
(ICANN) (the corporation established to manage the domain name system).  At a meeting in May,
ICANN considered the report's recommendations on a range of issues arising out of the interfacebetween domain names and intellectual property rights.  Outcomes from that meeting included
ICANN’s endorsement of the principle that a uniform dispute settlement procedure be adopted by
domain name registrars, and referral of the report’s detailed recommendations on dispute settlement to
the ICANN Domain Name Supporting Organization (DNSO).  Several of the other issues dealt with
by the report, including those on well-known marks, were also referred to the DNSO.  The DNSO isto report back to ICANN with its own reco mmendations, which ICANN will then consider.
34. In the event that ICANN does eventually decide to adopt some or all of these
recommendations, they will assume the status of a de facto  international standard.  In light of this, and
if they attract widespread support, Australia submits that the TRIPS Council should take account ofthe WIPO work in its consideration of trademark/domain name issues.  As in the case of well-known
marks, Australia proposes that consideration should be given to whether and how it might be
appropriate to take account in the TRIPS Agreement of the outcomes from the WIPO process.
Proposal :  that the TRIPS Council take note of the outcomes of the WIPO Internet
Domain Name Process, monitor further develo pments on this issue, and consider their
implications for TRIPS provisions on trademark rights.
35. In considering the domain name/intellectual property interface, apart from general trademark
rights, two further issues that arise are:
• the registration as domain names of abbreviations of international intergovernmental
organizations, in light of TRIPS' incorporation by reference of Article 6 ter of the
Paris Convention;
• the registration as domain names of geographical indications, in the light of TRIPS
Articles 22-24.
__________