RESTRICTED  
  
IP/C/M/74/Add.1  
 
28 November 2013  
(13-6507)  Page: 1/61  
Council for Trade-Related Aspects of 
Intellectual Property Rights    
 
 MINUTES OF MEETING 
HELD IN THE CENTRE WILLIAM RAPPARD ON 10-11 OCTOBER 2013 
CHAIRPERSON: AMBASSADOR ALFREDO SUESCUM (PANAMA) 
Addendum 
 
The present document contains the statements made during the Council for TRIPS meeting held on 10-11 October 2013.  
_______________ 
  
Subjects discussed 
INDEX OF THE STATEMENTS MADE AT THE MEETING OF THE COUNCIL FOR 
TRIPS  10-11 OC TOBER 2013 ........................................................................................... 2  
AGENDA ITEM 1: NOTIFICATIONS UNDE R PROVISIONS OF THE AGREEMENT .................. 4  
AGENDA ITEM 3: REVIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 27.3(B) ............................... 5  
AGENDA ITEM 4: RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE TRIPS AGREEMENT AND THE 
CONVENTION ON BIOLOG ICAL DIVE RSITY ...................................................................... 5  
AGENDA ITEM 5: PROTECTION OF TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND FOLKLORE ............... 5  
AGENDA ITEM 6: REVIEW UNDER PARAGRAPH 8 OF THE DECISION ON THE 
IMPLEMENTATION OF PARAGRAPH 6 OF THE DOHA DECLARATION ON THE 
TRIPS AGREEMENT AND PUBLIC HE ALTH ....................................................................... 12  
AGENDA ITEM 9: REVIEW OF THE APPLICATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE 
SECTION ON GEOGRAPHICAL IN DICATIONS UNDER ARTICLE 24.2 ................................ 21  
AGENDA ITEM 10: ELEVENTH ANNUAL REVIEW UNDER PARAGRAPH 2 OF THE 
DECISION ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE 66.2 OF THE TRIPS AGREEMENT ................................................................................................................... 2 1
 
AGENDA ITEM 11: TECHNICAL COOPER ATION AND CAPACI TY-BUILDING ..................... 24  
AGENDA ITEM 12: CONTRIBUTION OF IN TELLECTUAL PROPERTY TO FACILITATE 
THE TRANSFER OF ENVIRONMENTALLY  RATIONAL TECHNOLOGY .................................. 28  
AGENDA ITEM 13: INTELLECTUA L PROPERTY AN D SPORTS  ........................................... 42  
AGENDA ITEM 17: OTHER BUSINESS .............................................................................. 59  
Agenda Item 17.3: Announcement of 18 September by the Government of Ireland 
regarding the Legislative Programme for the Autumn Session 2013 which includes generic 
packaging of tobacco prod ucts under Section C .................................................................... 59 
 IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 2 - 
 
   
INDEX OF THE STATEMENTS MADE AT THE MEETING OF THE COUNCIL FOR TRIPS  
10-11 OCTOBER 20131 
 
Angola 
Article 66.2, 23 
Australia 
Article 66.2, 21 
Biotech, Biodiversity, TK, 12 IP and sport, 53 
Other Business, 60 
Review of Para. 6, 14 Technical cooperation, 24 Transfer of environmental technology, 40 
Bangladesh 
Biotech, Biodiversity, TK, 7 
Brazil 
Biotech, Biodiversity, TK, 7 
IP and sport, 55 Transfer of environmental technology, 41 
Canada 
Biotech, Biodiversity, TK, 11 IP and sport, 54 Other Business, 60 
Review of Para. 6, 14 
Transfer of environmental technology, 38 
Chairman 
Transfer of environmental technology, 42 
Chile 
Review of Para. 6, 16 Transfer of environmental technology, 39 
China 
Biotech, Biodiversity, TK, 6 IP and sport, 56 
Other Business, 61 
Review of Para. 6, 14, 17, 18 Transfer of environmental technology, 30 
Colombia 
Biotech, Biodiversity, TK, 8 
Cuba 
Biotech, Biodiversity, TK, 9 
IP and sport, 58 
Other Business, 59 Review of Para. 6, 15 
Transfer of environmental technology, 30 
Dominican Republic 
Other Business, 59 
Ecuador 
Biotech, Biodiversity, TK, 9 IP and sport, 58 Transfer of environmental technology, 28, 
41, 42 
Egypt 
Biotech, Biodiversity, TK, 5 
El Salvador 
Review of Para. 6, 21 
 
 
   European Union 
Article 66.2, 24 Biotech, Biodiversity, TK, 10 
IP and sport, 42, 58 
Other Business, 60 Review of Para. 6, 15, 18 
Transfer of environmental technology, 34 
Honduras 
Other Business, 59 
India 
Article 66.2, 23 
Biotech, Biodiversity,TK, 8 IP and sport, 57 
Review of Para. 6, 13, 17, 18 
Transfer of environmental technology, 37 
Indonesia 
Biotech, Biodiversity, TK, 5 
Transfer of environmental technology, 30 
Jamaica 
IP and sport, 46 
Japan 
Biotech, Biodiversity, TK, 11 IP and sport, 54 
Review of Para. 6, 14 
Transfer of environmental technology, 37 
Korea 
Biotech, Biodiversity, TK, 10 
IP and sport, 56 
Mexico 
Geographical indications, 21 
IP and sport, 44 
Nepal 
IP and sport, 58 
New Zealand 
Other Business, 60 Transfer of environmental technology, 39 
Nicaragua 
Other Business, 60 
Norway 
Other Business, 61 
Paraguay 
IP and sport, 58 
Plurinational State of Bolivia 
Biotech, Biodiversity, TK, 6 
IP and sport, 57 Transfer of environmental technology, 29 
Sri Lanka 
Biotech, Biodiversity, TK, 12 
 Switzerland 
Biotech, Biodiversity, TK, 9 
Geographical indications, 21 IP and sport, 52 
Review of Para. 6, 16, 17 
Transfer of environmental technology, 40 
Trinidad and Tobago 
IP and sports, 47 IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 3 - 
 
  United States 
Article 66.2, 24 Biotech, Biodiversity, TK, 11 IP and sports, 48 
Review of Para. 6, 12, 17 
Transfer of environmental technology, 31, 
41, 42 
Uruguay 
Other Business, 61 
  
 
 Venezuela 
Biotech, Biodiversity, TK, 9 IP and sport, 56 Transfer of environmental technology, 42 
WHO Secretariat 
Technical cooperation, 26 
WIPO Secretariat 
Review of Para. 6, 19 
WTO Secretariat 
Article 66.2, 22 Notifications, 4 
Review of Para. 6, 18 
Technical cooperation, 25 
 
 
  
 
   
 
  
 
  
 
   
 
  
 
  
 
   
 
  
 
  
 
   
 
  
 
  
 
 __________________________ 
1 A record of statements as delivered. Some statements have been lightly edited as appropriate to ensure the 
consistency of presentation.  IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 4 - 
 
  AGENDA ITEM 1: NOTIFICATIONS UNDER PROVISIONS OF THE AGREEMENT 
1.1 WTO Secretariat   
 1.  From March 2009 to November 2012, the Council had on its agenda a specific item on "Letter 
from the Chair of the General Council Concerning Ways to Improve the Timeliness and 
Completeness of Notifications and Other Information Flows". At the Council's request, the Secretariat prepared document IP/C/W/543, dated 22/10/2009, to guide us through this process. 
In particular, it provided a brief audit of state-of -play of notifications at that stage and provided 
suggestions on how to improve the timeliness and completeness of the notification system. At its meeting in November 2012, the Council requested the Secretariat to inform it at its future meetings on any further enhancements to its se rvices improving the transparency, timeliness, 
completeness and user-friendliness of the notifica tion system under the Council's regular item 1 
relating to notifications under TRIPS in general.  
2.  The work addresses the three aspects of ha ndling notifications, improving data capture, 
improving the management of the information provided, and improving its presentation and 
dissemination so that it is more user-friendly. The immediate focus had been to move towards full 
digitization of all notified material. Currently,  roughly half of the 4,500 lengthy legal documents 
that have been notified are not directly accessible as full text searchable documents. The 
immediate focus of work remains to ensure that all notified materials would be readily available in text searchable form.  
3.  The launch in 2010 of the WIPO-WTO Common Portal for submission of notifications has 
improved the flow of notification materials. To su pplement that portal, we are working on an online 
notification tool that would facilitate notification s by Members, including those that are unique to 
the TRIPS Agreement. 
4.  In addition, we can identify ideas for best practice that Members may wish to pursue. These 
include the simple step of notifying in a digital format a text document with minimal formatting, as well as an optional brief description of the content of the law which some Members have chosen to 
provide. This step is all the more important as we move towards a steady state notification 
stream, rather than a focus on an initial notification of the primary intellectual property laws of a Member, towards reviews and updates, and revisions of those laws where a brief description of the 
key elements of that law can be very helpful in navigating and making use of this material. 
However, that work is very much a prototype and as with other elements of this programme, we 
would be consulting closely with Members as the ideas are developed. The second step is more an internal consideration, improving data management and the flow of information so that we can 
process notifications more rapidly and smoothly while expending fewer resources. The final step is 
looking at ways of presenting notified materials in a more user-friendly way on the WTO website.  
5.  I would conclude with an outline of a current state-of-play with notifications. This supplements 
that baseline document from 2009 which reported on our review or audit of the current state of 
play of notifications. Since 2009, the number of notifications from Members updating their laws, 
moving beyond the initial round of notifications has noticeably picked up. In terms of overall numbers, we now have nearly 4,700 separate legal notifications of laws and regulations 
implemented by Members. This amounts to an av erage of 34 per Member, but the range is from 
one single notification to 221 notifications from  the one Member. The number of Members updating 
their laws has picked up noticeably: there have been 81 updates from Members in the last 
10 years, including 6 from least developed country Members, and since the last update in 2009, 
37 Members have updated their laws in some way, so we can record a significant increase in the flow of material. 
6.  Turning to the other notification concerning laws and regulations under Article 63.2, delegates 
will recall that the Council established a Checklist on Enforcement to notify enforcement mechanisms under the Agreement. It is notable that 102 Members have provided responses to the 
checklist; however, 93 of these were filed over 10 years ago, and updates of those checklists are, 
by contrast with the laws and regulations, comparatively rare, occurring approximately once every 
three years.  IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 5 - 
 
  7.  Finally, the contact point lists concerning cooperation on enforcement under Article 69 and 
concerning technical cooperation have been update d more frequently, and have been presented on 
the website as a more useable format to facilitate contact between Members and we would encourage delegates to review those and of course update them as appropriate. 
AGENDA ITEM 3: REVIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 27.3(B) 
AGENDA ITEM 4: RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE TRIPS AGREEMENT AND THE 
CONVENTION ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY 
AGENDA ITEM 5: PROTECTION OF TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND FOLKLORE 
5.1 Indonesia  
 8.  Indonesia reiterates its well-known position on the relationship between the TRIPS Agreement 
and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) under this agenda item. All State Parties should 
prompt actions to address the mandate stipulated under Article 16 paragraph 5 of the CBD, which require them to ensure that the objectives of these two international legal instruments can be 
implemented in a manner which is mutually supportive and does not run counter to their 
respective objectives. 
9.  In this regard, my delegation emphasizes the need to include a mandatory disclosure 
requirement into TRIPS Agreement. Such requir ement will be essential to prevent erroneous 
patents grants and to enhance transparency in the utilization of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge. The requirement may also thwart misappropriation and misuse of genetic resources.  
10.  A mandatory disclosure requirement can provide a greater legal certainty for the IP system 
itself as it will render a balance of rights and obligations between the providers and users of genetic resources as well as local communities. In this form, the IP system will be consistent with 
its core objectives, which are to contribute to the mutual advantage of producers and users of 
technological knowledge in a manner conducive to social and economic welfare and to a balance of rights and obligations.  
5.2 Egypt  
 11.  Egypt fully supports the Indonesian request and we would like to take this opportunity to highlight the importance of the protection of biological resources, traditional knowledge and 
folklore which presents an important developmental issue for Egypt, which enjoys many natural 
resources and cultural heritage. In view of the importance of this issue, we continue to support engagement in full negotiations on the relati onship between the TRIPS Agreement and the CBD, 
which is a critical part of the implementation-related issues and concerns as contained in the Doha 
Work Programme. We remain steadfast in urging other Members to engage in this issue of prime importance to developing countries, as part of the hoped-for developmental gains of the Doha 
Development Agenda. 
12.  Technical discussions on this issue have been on-going for almost a decade so far. During this 
period, several submissions have been made with the aim of clarifying the issues so that an effective and consistent framework could be established to enable WTO Members to meet their 
obligations under both the TRIPS and the CBD. The essence of our efforts is that the TRIPS 
Agreement should be amended in order to provid e that Members shall require an applicant for a 
patent relating to biological materials or associated traditional knowledge to disclose the source 
and country of origin of the biological resource and the associated traditional knowledge used in 
the invention. Furthermore, the applicant shall also  provide evidence of prior informed consent and 
evidence of fair and equitable benefit sharing under the relevant national regime. As was stated 
previously, we wish to reaffirm the position that there is a solid case supported by a majority of 
the membership for commencing text-based negotiations as presented in the proposal of the Disclosure Group (IP/C/W/474). 
13.   Egypt continues to encourage the engagement of the Director-General in his mandated 
consultative process on the relationship between the TRIPS Agreement and the CBD. We look IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 6 - 
 
  forward to his continuing this consultation towards a possible outcome, and we specifically request 
that all Members engage constructively therein,  and stress once again the important development 
concerns on some of the issues discussed. 
14.  We continue to urge that the outcome of the negotiations on TRIPS/CBD should lead to the 
mandatory requirement for patent applicants to disclose the origin of biological material and 
traditional knowledge used in their inventions, evidence of prior informed consent and benefit sharing arrangements with the country of origin and the relevant communities. 
5.3 China   
 15.  China would like to associate itself with the delegations of Indonesia and Egypt. This meeting will be probably the last plenary TRIPS Council meeting before the 9
th Ministerial Meeting in Bali, 
and provides us an opportunity for stocktaking of the TRIPS issues at the Council level. Among all 
the TRIPS issues, the TRIPS-CBD is one of great importance and has drawn a lot of attention from the majority of Members. As has been illustrated at previous TRIPS Council meetings, China 
welcomes the opportunity to discuss new topics that have been incorporated into the agenda items 
of the Council, yet we also would like to illustrate that any discussion on new topic shall cause any diversion or dilution of the incumbent issues, espe cially one as important as TRIPS/CBD. We wish 
that intensified discussions over this issue will be initiated shortly after the Bali MC9 meeting as we 
already agreed to hold intensified consultations on the scope and modalities of non-violation at our informal session before we started the TRIPS Council meeting today.  
16.  We would like to remind the Council that the majority of Members has submitted disclosure 
proposals in the past years, including documents TN/C/W/52 and TN/C/W/59. These documents 
could improve the transparency and help preven t misappropriation and erroneous patents granted 
due to the lack of information by patent examin ers. In accordance with the mandate given by 
Ministers, which had instructed the Council to examine, inter alia, the relationship between the 
TRIPS Agreement and the CBD, Members could work in the Council effectively in order to resolve the matter. We would like to encourage the Director-General and Members to continue to engage 
in consultations on this matter at appropriate time after MC9. We welcome ongoing discussions 
and developments in the negotiations in WIPO IGC; however, it does not prevent Members from seeking solutions in the WTO. 
17.  Once again, China would also like to support inviting the CBD Secretariat to make 
presentations on the Nagoya Protocol at the TRIPS Council, from a perspective different from WTO 
Members. Such a presentation will help to impr ove Members' understanding of the protection of 
genetic resources, and contribute to the cooperation between WTO and other international 
organizations.  
5.4 Plurinational State of Bolivia  
 
18.  I am going to refer specifically to the review of Article 27.3(b). As you are aware, 
in February 2010 and March 2011, the Plurinational State of Bolivia submitted two communications 
relating to the review of Article 27.3(b) - a review that forms part of the Doha Work Programme and is still pending. The communications identified the negative effects and consequences of 
the adoption of Article 27.3(b), most notably the proliferation of patents on life forms, including 
genes, gene sequences, cells, seeds, animals,  plants, and even the fundamental components 
of human life itself, such as the human genome. 
19.  The adoption of Article 27.3(b) has allowed for an increase in private monopolies on life and 
its fundamental components and has resulted in a worrying concentration of the control of these elements in the hands of a small number of transnational corporations, with negative 
consequences for scientific innovation and research and access to the results obtained. 
The adoption of this provision surrendered the mo st precious elements of our world and the most 
vital resources for the future of mankind to commercial interests and the thirst for unlimited earnings. 
20.  Given the moral and ethical implications and the negative effects identified and described, 
we propose that Article 27.3(b) be amended so as to prohibit, at the international level, the patenting of life forms and parts thereof. The ab ove-mentioned communications were endorsed by IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 7 - 
 
  a number of Members and yet the review of Article 27.3(b) and its implications and effects was 
never conducted in depth and with the necessary seriousness, and no outcome was reached. 
2 1 .   I t  s h o u l d  a l s o  b e  n o t e d  t h a t  i n  t h e  l a s t  f e w  m o n t h s  t h e r e  h a v e  b e e n  s o m e  i n t e r e s t i n g  
developments in other parts of the world in relation to the patentability of life forms. 
Such developments highlight the relevanc e of our discussions within the framework 
of the Article 27.3(b) review and have the potential to revitalize them. 
22.  Note, in particular, the recent US Supreme Court Decision in the case regarding Myriad 
and patents for certain genes relating to female breast cancer, which established that "genes and 
the information they encode are not patent eligible […] simply because they have been isolated from the surrounding genetic material". 
23.  More specifically, the US Supreme Court unanimously ruled that DNA which has simply been 
isolated is not patentable, as it is a product of nature. While isolating a gene may constitute 
a very important discovery, it is clearly not a patentable invention, and this is what the US Supreme Court finally established to the benefit of all breast cancer sufferers. 
24.  This decision should be considered a step in the right direction towards redressing a situation 
distorted by purely commercial interests that has damaged the very foundations of the patent system. 
25.  The WTO cannot remain on the sidelines of th is debate on the patentability of life and, 
in particular, the ethical and moral implications, costs and negative effects thereof. It is time for the review of Article 27.3(b) to finally take place and give rise to an international moratorium on 
the patenting of life forms and all parts thereof, beginning with cases involving an already existing 
element that is simply isolated from nature, wh en it is a fundamental component of human life, 
as in the case of the human genome, or when the costs and negative effects clearly exceed the benefits for society. 
5.5 Brazil  
 26.  At the outset, Brazil would like to associate itself with the proposals contained in documents 
TN/C/W/59 and TN/C/W/52. We would like also to recall that the approval of the "Nagoya Protocol 
on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization to the convention on Biological Divers ity", in October 2010, increased the importance of 
the discussion by this Council on the relation ship between the TRIPS Agreement and the CBD. 
There are now clear international parameters on prior informed consent (PIC) and access and 
benefit sharing (ABS) that will guide countries  in designing their national legislations. 
27.  By linking patent processing with the observan ce of national laws on PIC and ABS, the patent 
system is a central tool to expand the compliance with such laws. If patent applicants know that 
they will be asked to disclose the source or orig in of genetic resources or associated traditional 
knowledge anywhere in the world and that the processing and validity of this patent depend on the 
veracity of this information, they will have a strong incentive to comply with national laws. If, in 
addition to the disclosure requirement, they are also asked whether they have complied with the 
national law on PIC and ABS, the incentive will be even stronger. 
5.6 Bangladesh  
 
28.  The position of Bangladesh remains unchanged regarding the issues under these agenda items. We do not support patenting of life forms such as plants and animals as per our domestic 
laws, and also on moral and ethical grounds. We believe that states have the absolute rights to 
protect their traditional knowledge and genetic resources belonging either to indigenous peoples or to the state as the case may be. Safeguarding th e genetic resources and traditional knowledge is 
imperative to protect them from being misappropriated in the form of patents on non-regional 
innovations, which has been a matter of great concern for developing countries for long. We think this right could be protected by an effective disc losure mechanism and by obtaining prior informed 
consent from the beneficiaries.  IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 8 - 
 
  29.  The TRIPS-CBD issue has been a critical impl ementation issue for all the developing countries 
and especially for LDCs and we consider these two elements as complementary to each other. Both Article 15.5 of the CBD and Article 4 of the subsequent Nagoya Protocol broadly uphold the 
use of innovation for the development in a mutu ally supportive manner with the TRIPS Agreement. 
The CBD had provided for the establishment of legi timate rights over genetic resources and it is 
only normal that patent applicants would disclose their sources of invention if the access and use of a particular genetic resource or associated traditional knowledge of which they are not the 
rightful owners.  
30.  The disclosure requirement is also consistent  with the transparency principle established in 
the multilateral trading system and will help to reduce the number of erroneous patents and 
biopiracy. This will also reduce the burden of pa tent examiners. The disclosure mechanism will also 
ensure access to benefit sharing to the rightful  owners of the resources. We hope that the 
mandate provided for in Article 19 of the Doha De claration and further reinforced in subsequent 
Ministerial Declarations will be implemented in an early and constructive manner. 
5.7 India  
 31.  We have been extensively discussing these ag enda items. The majority of the membership of 
this Council has not only highlighted the misappropriation of genetic resources and traditional 
knowledge but have proved beyond doubt that that such misappropriation is possible because of the inadequacy of the TRIPS Agreement to address these issues. In fact several studies in India 
have estimated that hundreds of wrongful patents concerning Indian systems of medicine alone 
were being granted every year at the international level. India has been a major victim of 
biopiracy. While India has taken few steps like creating the Traditional Knowledge Digital Library (TKDL), results are limited. The TRIPS Agreement continues to ignore the numerous IPR-related 
obligations in the CBD which are of interest to developing countries. This contradiction not only 
obstructs the proper implementation of the CBD but also causes an imbalance in the TRIPS Agreement.  
32.  The disclosure proposal (IP/C/W/474) which was submitted in 2006 was followed up by the 
submission TN/C/W/52 in June 2008 with the supp ort of 108 countries. The latest submission on 
this issue TN/C/W/59 "Enhancing mutual supp ortiveness between TRIPS and CBD" has been 
proposed by a vast majority of WTO Membership. The submission captures the developments in 
the past including the Nagoya Protocol signed by 192 countries and which contains a significant 
implementing legislation for the CBD issues regard ing PIC and ABS. We feel that the submission 
could be a good basis when we could restart our work on this issue after the Bali Ministerial 
Conference. We therefore endorse the suggestion of Ch ina on restarting negotiations in this regard 
as well as the DG-led consultations.  
33.  There have been substantial discussions over the issue of formally inviting the CBD 
Secretariat for a briefing on the Nagoya Protocol. It is unfortunate that while the CBD has made 
presentations in WIPO and WHO, the WTO has been deprived of its briefing on account of objections by a Member for unknown reason. There is now an urgency in discussing the Nagoya Protocol under this agenda item, especially after 25 Members have already ratified the instrument 
of accession and it is a matter of time when the Pr otocol will soon enter into force. We therefore 
reiterate our demand for a formal briefing by th e CBD Secretariat in the interest of the large 
majority of developing countries and urge the Member blocking consensus to revise its position at 
the earliest. 
34.  Let me therefore conclude by saying that co nstructive engagement of all the Members on this 
critical issue would not only reaffirm the faith of the developing countries in multilateralism but 
would also prove that the Organisation has the willingness and capacity to take care of the 
interests of the developing countries.  
5.8 Colombia  
 
35.  As other Members know, Colombia is in favour of negotiating rules to establish legality of 
access as a prerequisite for engaging in research for and the development of any invention in the biotechnology field and the use of biolog ical and/or genetic resources or associated 
traditional knowledge, and the demonstration of such legality of access in a patent application 
for the product or process involved. IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 9 - 
 
  36.  We accordingly urge Council members to mo ve forward next year wi th the work aimed at 
ensuring that the TRIPS Agreement and the CBD ar e implemented in a manner which is mutually 
supportive and does not run counter to their respective objectives. We also consider that the proposed invitation for the CDB Secretariat to attend this Council remains standing. 
5.9 Cuba  
 37.  Examination of the relationship between  the TRIPS Agreement and the CBD, and the 
protection of traditional knowledge and folklore are negotiating issues expressly mandated under 
paragraph 19 of the Doha Declaration. These are,  moreover, among the implementation issues or 
concerns for which we undertook to find a suitable solution. 
38.  The introduction of a mandatory requirement on disclosure of origin can make a significant 
contribution to protecting resources against misuse and misappropriation and can help attain 
the objectives of the CBD, particularly those relating to requirements on biological resources and traditional knowledge. Furthermore, the proposed disclosure requirement would make 
the patent system more efficient and our hope is th at it will also further the achievement of social 
objectives, which include disclosing inventions in a sufficiently clear and complete manner. 
39.  As pointed out by the delegation of China, it  is important to find a solution to this matter 
in the WTO. Although we keep a close watch on developments in other forums such as WIPO 
and recognize their importance, any results achieved will be in addition to, and not instead of, an amendment to the TRIPS Agreement. 
40.  The delegation of Cuba is in favour of invi ting the CDB Secretariat to the Council for TRIPS in 
order to provide details on all matters relating to the Nagoya Protocol. 
41.  Lastly, we recognize the importance of the issues raised by the delegation of Bolivia on the 
review of Article 27.3(b) and the need to discuss them in greater depth within this Council. 
5.10 Ecuador  
 42.  My delegation would like to support the statements made by the delegations who have spoken 
before me this morning. Ecuador is in favour of appropriate protection of biodiversity and related 
traditional knowledge and the disclosure of origin as well as the fair distribution of the results deriving from these products and prior informed consent. We must stress the need for consultations to take place, such that the Secretariat of the CBD can report to the Council on the 
outcome of the Nagoya negotiations on the establishment of a protocol for the access to genetic 
resources. Similarly, we consider that the consultations undertaken by you concerning the request that the Secretariat update information on discussions on this matter should continue and we 
would urge delegations to please join the consen sus in this regard. I should point out that the 
most recent update was prepared in 2006. Lastly, Ecuador would once again like to support the statement made by Bolivia as to the need to prohibit patenting of life in all forms for moral and 
ethical reasons. 
5.12 Venezuela  
 43.  Venezuela supports Brazil's proposal on the need to fulfil the Ministerial mandate to conduct 
a review of Article 27.3(b) of the TRIPS Agreemen t, and confirms that its domestic legislation, 
specifically Articles 124 and 127 of the Constituti on, prohibits the registration of patents for 
such resources. 
5.13 Switzerland  
 44.  Switzerland is a member of the so-called W/52-Coalition of WTO Members – 108 in number, 
which in document TN/C/W/52 has proposed modalities language for the three TRIPS issues under 
discussion in the Doha Round, i.e. the multilateral register, GI-extension and the disclosure of source requirement for patent applications for inventions based on genetic resources and traditional knowledge. Continuation of intensive work in the WTO on these three TRIPS issues in 
parallel and under their respective mandates after MC9 is very important. We are looking forward 
to continuing the discussion here and in other fora in the WTO.  IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 10 - 
 
  5.14  European Union  
 45.  Like that of others, the position of the EU in this discussion is well-known and I have been 
reluctant to repeat it at each TRIPS Council. But today it is timely to take stock of the situation and 
to acknowledge that this discussion has been show ing a high degree of repetition with no genuine 
steps forward, no steps closer to a common view on how we can deal with what we all agree can be a real problem, that of the misappropriation of genetic resources. We regret this and for these 
reasons the EU is ready to work with other Members and to support ways to advance this 
discussion, as well as other debates in areas such as non-violation complaints or geographical indications - where there is a broad range of in terested members, under the W52-proposal. We 
look forward to such progress in particular after Bali, including with the involvement of the DG.  
5.15 Korea  
 46.  Korea would like to state that the review of Article 27.3(b) should not lead to a revision of the 
TRIPS Agreement. The reasons for this are: firs t, researchers should be rewarded for their 
discoveries and could make use of the revenues to further their research; second, the investment of resources is encouraged by providing an exclusive right to the inventors and prohibiting 
competitors from making, using or selling the invention without a licence from the original 
inventor; and, lastly, the protection of biotechnology promotes innovations in the areas of agriculture and health and ultimately contributes to the welfare of human beings. Therefore, inventions in all fields of technology, including biotechnology, deserve to be incentivized through 
adequate patent protection.  
47.  The TRIPS Agreement and the CBD should be implemented in a mutually supportive manner. 
The aim of the TRIPS Agreement is to reduce obstacles in order to boost international trade and 
protect IPRs effectively whereas the CBD exists to preserve biological diversity and sustainable 
use. Fair and equitable sharing of benefits and sustainable use of genetic resources is important 
for all and to do that, there must be appropriate measures, such as a private contract by the 
parties to address issues of misappropriated genetic resources and erroneously granted patents -
this way we could address concerns on CBD-relate d issues. We therefore believe that there is no 
need to amend the TRIPS Agreement, and we cannot emphasize enough the significance of 
protecting TK and we recognize our obligation to transfer what we have to future generations 
safely.  
48.  However, we would like to highlight that an effective and direct solution for the protection of 
TK is to establish a database system in allowing patent examiners to utilize them as prior art for 
the purpose of preventing erroneously grante d patents. Patent examiners at the Korean 
Intellectual Property Office are obliged to search the database as prior art and it has been used 
successfully and efficiently in the protection of TK. We believe that this is a very practical and 
feasible method to reduce the number of erroneously granted patents in Member states. In 
addition to that, currently WIPO is in the process of finalizing the discussions on the protection of TK, in particular the scope of protection beneficiaries' method of protection and so on. We believe that the IGC is the most appropriate forum to discuss this item.  
49.  Lastly, regarding protecting genetic resources, as Korea signed the Nagoya Protocol, we 
recognized that the authority of the providing countries has been acknowledged and their prior 
informed consent is necessary for access of genetic resources. Providing parties and user parties 
have to enter into mutual and symbiotic relationships. However, we would like to share our 
concerns on this issue. Disclosure requirements fo r the original genetic resources add an additional 
unexpected obstacle to the patent system and we think that securing rights for providing parties 
and user parties can be achieved through various mechanisms outside of the patent system.  
50.  Therefore, we should not impose any undue burden on the users of the patent system and 
taking this opportunity I would like to deliver the concerns expressed by stakeholders such as 
industry during a meeting with our business community on the impact of mandatory disclosure 
requirements. We are worried that the users of patent systems avoid utilizing patent systems and 
bypass IP regimes due to the legal uncertainties caused by the obligations of disclosure based on the concerns made by Korean stakeholders. Korea is a dominant player in the patent system 
according to WIPO statistics and ranked fifth in the area of patent applications and PCT 
applications in the world in 2012. In this regard, stakeholders' opinions and views are very important to us. Moreover, the WIPO IGC is constantly undertaking a detailed consideration of the IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 11 - 
 
  relationship between IP and genetic resources as well as TK and traditional culture expressions, 
and we think the IGC is an appropriate forum to discuss traditional knowledge and resources. 
5.16 United States  
 
51.  We want to begin by recalling the point of commonality from which we commence the 
discussion on the CBD. We share the strong interest of Members in addressing misappropriation. Where we part company with some Members is on the means to achieve that objective. On patent 
disclosure our position is well known and we continue to oppose such a requirement. 
52.  On a related note, as other Members have indicated, there is a clear link to ongoing 
negotiations in the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) which we should not prejudice here. In early October, the WIPO General Assembly (GA) renewed the mandate of its 
Intergovernmental Committee (IGC) working on the protection of genetic resources, traditional 
knowledge and traditional cultural expressions. WIPO Members agreed to renewal of the mandate of the IGC and to "continue to expedite its work …on text-based negotiations with the objective of 
reaching agreement on a text of an international legal instrument (or instruments) which will 
ensure the effective protection of GRs, TK and TC Es." The United States, like many WTO Members, 
has been actively participating in the negotiations of the WIPO IGC, and we look forward to 
working to advance the WIPO IGC's discussions. 
53.  Regarding the update of the three information documents, as we understand Ecuador's 
request, it would be to update the three documents with information from recent TRIPS Council meetings. As we have previously explained, we  do not support updating the three information 
documents at this time. 
54.  As to the request for a CBD intervention to the TRIPS Council, we do not support such an 
intervention at this time, as we have previously explained. 
5.17 Japan  
 55.  At the outset, this delegation would like to recall that active discussions on the same issues 
a r e  o n - g o i n g  a t  t h e  W I P O  I G C ,  w h i c h ,  w e  b e l i e ve, is the most appropriate venue for technical 
discussions on these issues. In this regard, we appreciate that the renewed mandate of the IGC 
was agreed at the WIPO General Assembly last week. 
56.  The TRIPS Council has also been engaged in exchanging views on these issues in a 
constructive and mutually beneficial manner. This delegation believes that discussion at this 
council will allow the Members to find a common understanding of the fundamental issues.  
57.  This delegation would like to reiterate that, in order to achieve sustainable economic growth, 
it is crucial to seek appropriate ways to deal with matters concerning genetic resources, traditional 
knowledge, and folklore, bearing in mind that any initiatives addressing these matters must never result in adverse effects on innovation and creation. 
58.  Based on this point of view, this delegation is not in a position to support amending the TRIPS 
Agreement to address these issues, because this delegation does not believe that doing so would be the most effective way to address the concerns raised by other Members. 
59.  Japan's position on the mandatory disclosure requirement for patents to be granted is well-
known. This delegation still does not see any need  to introduce such a requirement into a patent 
system, and as a result, will not repeat its explan ation about this in the current session of this 
Council. 
60.  Japan would like to reiterate its continuous willingness to contribute to productive discussions 
on these issues. 
5.18 Canada   
 
61.  Canada's position is well-known by now: the TRIPS Agreement and the CBD are mutually supportive and no amendment to the former is necessary.  IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 12 - 
 
  62.  We wish to highlight that Canada participated  actively in the recent sessions of the WIPO IGC. 
We welcome the more detailed, legal- and policy-oriented discussions held at those meetings, as well as the progress achieved in more clearly identifying the core options for the promotion of 
genetic resources, traditional knowledge and traditional cultural expressions. 
63.  As others have mentioned, Canada welcom es the renewal of the WIPO IGC's mandate and 
reaffirms its strong commitment to the IGC; Canada will continue to play an active, constructive role in the WIPO IGC under this renewed mandate and work with other WIPO Member States 
towards reaching consensus on the many outstanding issues in order to arrive at a successful 
outcome.  
5.19 Australia  
 
64.  Australia is an island continent with diverse biological resources and a unique and vibrant 
indigenous culture. Australia seeks to protect genetic resources and the traditional knowledge of our indigenous people while retaining legal certainty in the IP system.  
65.  Australia considers WIPO is best placed to consider the complex IP issues relating to genetic 
resources and traditional knowledge. We strongly support the ongoing negotiations in the WIPO IGC, and will continue our active engagement in that forum with a view to reaching agreement on 
an instrument or instruments on genetic resources, traditional knowledge and traditional cultural 
expressions. We welcomed the recent renewal of the IGC's mandate and we look forward to work on these issues. 
5.20 Sri Lanka  
 
66.  Sri Lanka wishes to voice its firm support for the delegations who spoke prior to me on the 
need to ensure mutual supportiveness between  the TRIPS and the CBD, and highlight the 
importance of initiating negotiations to address the current gaps and loopholes in the TRIPS 
Agreement, which allow unfair exploitation of biological resources and associated traditional knowledge without sharing any benefits with the rightful owners of such resources. 
AGENDA ITEM 6: REVIEW UNDER PARAGRAPH 8 OF THE DECISION ON THE 
IMPLEMENTATION OF PARAGRAPH 6 OF THE DOHA DECLARATION ON THE TRIPS AGREEMENT AND PUBLIC HEALTH 
6.1 United States   
 
67.  The United States strongly supports the Paragraph 6 System as established under the 2003 waiver decision and the 2005 Protocol. 
68.  We encourage other Members to notify thei r acceptance of the amendment so that it can 
enter into force. I congratulate Montenegro, Chile, Chinese Taipei, Saudi Arabia, and Togo as the most recent Members to accept the amendment. 
69.  We want to take this opportunity as part  of today's review of the implementation of 
paragraph 6 of the Doha Declaration on the TRIP S Agreement and Public Health to provide some 
context. As we have noted previously, the Paragraph 6 System is one of many tools to address the issue of access to medicines. There are other tools to address this important issue, which also 
merit discussion. As we will describe in greater detail under a separate agenda item, there are 
numerous barriers to access that deserve greater attention in this Council. These include both financial and non-financial barriers such as: insufficient legal and regulatory frameworks; 
insufficient enforcement; financial disincentives; high cost of capital and red tape. Today we would 
like to focus on tariffs. 
70.  Tariffs are applied to medicines, to the co mponents of those medicines, such as active 
ingredients, and medical products. Tariffs imposed by governments are, however, borne by 
consumers, and more specifically, by patients. As we explained in November 2012, in recognition of this reality, during the Uruguay Round, the United States joined several other Members in eliminating tariffs on medicines and active ingredients in order to liberalize trade, lower costs, and 
increase access to these essential products. Since then, the participants in the pharmaceutical IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 13 - 
 
  zero-for-zero agreement have updated it four ti mes in order to include additional inputs for 
medicines, thereby reducing costs of production for medicines. However, some countries continue 
to impose relatively high tariffs on medicines, inputs to medicines and medical products. As we have previously noted, according to an October 18, 2012 staff working paper, published by the 
WTO Economic Research and Statistics Division, entitled "More Trade for Better Health, 
International Trade and Tariffs on Health Produc ts" (ERSD-2012-17), several countries continue to 
maintain relatively high tariff rates on these products, despite a general trend toward tariff 
reduction on these goods. 
71.  The report concludes by asking "why countries even maintain tariffs on health products. 
Imposing tariffs typically translates into higher product prices, especially in the presence of long supply changes. Maintaining tariffs ultimately means taxing the sick and creating additional costs 
for the health system." Today, we would welcome more insight from those countries identified in 
the WTO report who continue to maintain the highest tariffs on medicines about the consistency of such policies with their commitment to greater access to medicines. 
6.2 India  
 72.  India attaches high importance to the Doha  Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public 
Health, the Paragraph 6 System and the Protocol  Amending the TRIPS Agreement of December 
2005. We see from JOB/IP/9 that although 47 Members have accepted the Protocol, we are still far away way from the two thirds mark required for its entry into force, i.e. 106 Members.  
73.  India has always been of the view that the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and 
Public Health constituted a major landmark in th e short history of the WTO because it recognized 
the primacy of public health needs and the sensitivity of this organization to the problems faced by the poor in the less developed countries.  
74.  Along with several other Members, India worked relentlessly for the Decision of 30/08/2003 
with the hope that it would genuinely and completely address the problems faced by WTO Members with insufficient or no manufacturing capacities in the pharmaceutical sector to address 
their public health problems. It may have sound ed prophetic at that time when India voiced 
certain apprehensions in the General Council meeting of August 2003. India sounded a word of caution and expressed hope that "the results accruing from this mechanism should not be negated by the creation of cumbersome systems that would lead to huge delays in getting medicines across 
at reasonable cost to those that needed them or discourage Members from using the System for 
the benefit of the people. In order to make this System successful, a sincere collective effort was required on the part of all Members and the entire pharmaceutical industry." Regrettably, we have 
been proven right.  
75.  During the recently held negotiations to ex tend the TRIPS transition period for the LDCs, we 
found strong resistance from the developed country  Members to provide an indefinite extension till 
the LDCs graduated to become developing countries. Since the ability of the LDCs to gain access to 
generic medicines would be directly and severely impaired with the implementation of the TRIPS 
Agreement, we cannot take seriously any prior or current rhetoric by these Members in the context of the Paragraph 6 mechanism that these Members are committed to ensuring access to 
medicines. In fact the permanent exemption from  the provisions of the TRIPS Agreement to all 
countries while they are classified as LDCs continues to be the most significant exception to ensure access to low-cost generic medicines in LDCs, though patent barriers in countries with capacity to 
manufacture generic medicines presents and will present a critical barrier that the Paragraph 6 
mechanism was meant to help resolve. 
76.   Let me also recall that our delegation during the last two annual reviews in 2011 and 2012, 
had asked a few questions to some developed country members around the Paragraph 6 
mechanism. Regrettably these questions have still remained unanswered. Since the mechanism has been used only once for a single product, in favour of a single country and by a single country during the last several years and since the Memb ers, especially those who would require this 
mechanism in future, have several questions, it is necessary that the Council reviews the 
mechanism comprehensively by taking into account the views of not only the Members but also all stakeholders, including patients, legal experts an d civil society organisations. It is therefore 
pertinent that the Council organizes a dedicated workshop on the question of making effective use 
of compulsory licensing for export under the TR IPS Agreement, including alternatives to the IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 14 - 
 
  Paragraph 6 System involving all relevant stakeholders at the earliest. We are sure that an 
inclusive approach would help in a better review of the mechanism. We also understand that a few Members have blocked the consensus required for holding such a workshop. In fact my delegation would urge them to reconsider their position on such a trivial issue to save the lives of thousands 
of people in the countries lacking manufacturing facilities and also lacking resources to import 
patented products. 
6.3 Canada   
 
77.  Canada would be interested in hearing more from Members based on questions we have previously raised, including at our November 2012 meeting, as to whether potential importing Members have availed themselves of pooled procurement schemes; and whether Members have 
increased their domestic manufacturing capacities since 2003. We are also concerned that 
potential importing Members still impose tariffs or duties on the products concerned by the 2003 Decision and on other products such as antimalarial commodities. 
78.  Canada also calls on all Members that have not already done so to deposit their instruments 
of acceptance of the Protocol Amending the TRIPS Agreement.  
6.4 China  
 
79.  The adoption of the 2003 Decision by the Ge neral Council had been a historical event for the 
World Trade Organization, as from our understanding, this is the first amendment that has been ever made to any of the covered agreements. This has been achieved by the WTO Members 
through consensus and the Doha mandate, by waiv ing Members' obligation under Article 31(f) of 
the TRIPS Agreement. The system allows the p oorer countries to make full use of TRIPS 
flexibilities in order to deal with diseases that ravage peoples. Thus, China fully supports this 
Decision. According to the trilateral study on "Promoting Access to Medical Technologies and 
Innovation: Intersections between Public Health, Intellectual Property and Trade" that was prepared by the WTO together with the WHO an d WIPO, TB and HIV/AIDS are among the leading 
causes of death in middle-income countries and people in low-income countries predominantly die 
of infectious diseases and more than a third of all deaths are under the age of 15. This indicates that public health and access to medicine is still a huge challenge for many Members, yet it is not easy to assess whether the System has completely achieved its objectives as it has been used only 
once so far. The review is therefore necessary in  order to understand and try to improve it. During 
the past annual reviews, Members had also discussed the broader issues related to innovation and access to medicines, including those on the list of topics and issues that had been circulated by the 
Chair in 2011. However, the difficulties in usin g the System and the possible improvements had 
not been clearly identified. Once again, we strongly support that an open-ended workshop for all stakeholders be held soon. It would help ac hieve greater transparency, promote a holistic 
understanding and perhaps a solution to the current situation. We take note that this kind of 
workshop has taken place from time-to-time in other WTO bodies, and we do not see the reason 
to oppose such a workshop. We really wish that we could conduct our work for the review in a constructive manner. 
6.5 Australia  
 80.  Australia supports international measures to improve access to medicines, including the WHO 
Pandemic Influenza Preparedness Framework fo r sharing of influenza viruses and access to 
vaccines and other benefits (PIP Framework). Australia accepted the TRIPS Protocol in 2007. Australia congratulates Chile and Montenegro on their acceptance and encourages others that have 
not yet done so to follow suit. 
81.  Legislation to implement the TRIPS Protocol was introduced to the Australian Parliament in 
May 2013; however it was not passed prior to the recent election. Ministers will consider this issue in due course. 
6.6 Japan  
 82.  This delegation would like to reiterate th e importance to discuss and consider access to 
medicines in a manner so as to take into account not only the Paragraph 6 System but also 
various other elements such as procurement and tariffs. The very objective of the System is to IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 15 - 
 
  support WTO Members in obtaining greater access to medicines, specifically Members who have 
insufficient or no pharmaceutical manufacturing capacity. Compulsory licenses are just one of the measures available to promote this objective. Th erefore, the Paragraph 6 System should not be 
considered as the only solution in an isolated manner, but as just an optional measure we could 
consider when looking at the whole range of e fforts being proposed to address this critical 
problem. 
83.  We should understand and analyze the specif ic concerns of potential importing Members who 
might use the Paragraph 6 System. We hope that such Members would share their experiences 
with us. We believe that it would be beneficial for this Council to hear specific comments by potential importing Members.  
84.  Therefore, this delegation is of the view that what we should do first and foremost is to take 
full advantage of this annual review to collect concrete examples of practices, particularly based on 
the list of topics for discussion prepared by the WTO Secretariat in 2011. To put it another way, this delegation has to say that it is premature to hold any workshop at this moment, as proposed 
by some Members.  
85.  IP protection is conducive to developing medical technology. Thus, our sincere expectation is, 
once again, to be able to have Members, who have considered using but who have not yet used 
the System, share their experiences and specific concerns. 
6.7 European Union  
 86.  On previous occasions the European Union has expressed its disappointment with the fact that 
the amendments introduced to the TRIPS Agreemen t have not yet been ratified by the entire 
membership. Today I would simply like to thank the United States for raising a very important point. It is very difficult to understand how countries who have problems of access to medicines 
and who clearly point to intellectual property as the main culprit for this, can keep very high 
import tariffs on pharmaceuticals. I assume that this can only be explained for reasons of protection of a domestic industry, but the fact is that this is an obstacle to access to medicines by 
the poorest layers of society.  
6.8 Cuba  
 87.  For years now, we have been discussing in th e Council the desirability of holding a workshop 
to address the discrepancies in the implementation  of the TRIPS and Public Health decision, which 
was intended to provide the developing countries with guaranteed access to medicines. Unfortunately, because a handful of Members are opposed to it, the workshop, which Cuba also 
wishes to support, has not been able to take place. 
88.  We are concerned at the way in which the subject of access to medicines is being approached 
when we hear the United States saying that a simple reduction in the tariffs applied to medicines 
would be the solution. 
89.  It is important to note that for more than 50 years, the United States has blocked Cuba's 
access to medicines as well as to any projects or resources vital to our health sector. This is being done on the basis of the criminal economic, financial and commercial blockade it has imposed on 
Cuba. 
90.  Let me mention a few concrete cases of US hostility designed to deprive the Cuban 
Government of its right of access to medicines th at are vital to the Cuban people: most recently, 
we have seen the decision of the Cantonal Bank of Zurich, under pressure from the United States, 
to suspend all transfers to Cuba. As a result, cooperation between the non-governmental organization MediCuba-Suisse and the Cuban public health authorities in such important areas as 
the fight against cancer, paediatrics and the prevention of HIV/AIDS, has been undermined. 
Recently, as well, under the usual United States pressure, a Canadian bank held back funding for 
the purchase of flu vaccines for the "Immunization  Programme for the Elderly". We believe that 
violations of this type and their impact on access to medicines are issues that could also be 
addressed in the framework of the Council. IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 16 - 
 
  91.  Finally, in spite of the blockade, Cuba is a model to be followed in the health area: its success 
does not rely on free trade, but rather on the po litical will of the Cuban Government to establish 
an accessible, universal and free national health system for all Cubans. 
6.9 Switzerland  
 
92.  Switzerland would first like to congratulate Chile and Montenegro for depositing their instruments of acceptance of the Protocol, adding to the list of Members, however, which has not 
yet reached the necessary number for the Protocol to enter into force. My delegation wishes to 
express disappointment that we are looking into the fourth extension of the deadline for the acceptance of the Protocol for it to enter into force. It is even more difficult to understand considering the importance that was attached by so many Members in the course of the 
negotiations of this Paragraph 6 mechanism, particularly by those WTO Members without 
manufacturing capacity in the pharmaceutical sector. I recall that this was at the very origin of the Paragraph 6 mechanism: to put those WTO Members at a level playing field with other WTO 
Members as concerns Article 31 of the TRIPS Agreemen t. This all stands in the context of access to 
medicines, but it was never the purpose of th e Paragraph 6 mechanism to actually solve the 
access to medicines problem on its own. As other delegations have pointed out this morning, a 
whole range of measures and factors are needed in order to improve the situation in a specific 
country. Referring again to the Protocol, I reme mber well, after the agreement on the waiver 
solution in 2003, it was pointed out that the waiver is of course a first step, but that the Paragraph 6 mechanism should be introduced into the TRIPS Agreement, and this for the sake of 
transparency, legal certainty, permanency and al so legitimacy of this Paragraph 6 mechanism. 
Such legitimacy is important for those Members beneficiaries of this mechanism who want to use it. It is also necessary for those WTO Members who are intending to undertake, or have already 
undertaken to put into place national implementing legislation, whether as exporting countries or 
as potential beneficial countries. Accordingly, my delegation urges all those WTO Members who 
have not yet done so to proceed as fast as possible with the acceptance of the Protocol. There is 
very helpful information provided by the WTO Secretariat on the WTO website about how this 
ratification and the deposit of instrument of ac ceptance of the Protocol can be undertaken, and 
that it is independent from national implementing legislation. With regard to the proposal by India 
for a dedicated workshop, I can refer to the statement that Switzerland made at the last review 
in 2012 according to which "we are of the opinion th at before we go into an exclusive workshop 
with many other stakeholders outside of this room, we should have first a very thorough discussion among WTO Members, if there are actu ally concerns or problems that beneficiary 
countries do meet when trying to make use of the Paragraph 6 mechanism, and before we have 
clarity of this we do think it is, indeed, premature to enlarge the circle of stakeholders for this discussion". 
6.10  Chile   
 93.  We take acceptance of the Protocol merely as a matter of assuming responsibility and a signal of my country's commitment to the multilateral system and the proper functioning of the 
international intellectual property system. It is also a way of bearing testament to the importance 
my country attaches to flexibilities in general, but notably those flexibilities relating to public health. 
94.  With regard to the analysis that we are en gaged in and the functioning of the System, we are 
concerned that in the course of today's session we have repeated the same ideas, the same concerns as were voiced in previous reviews in previous years. We have heard various delegations 
making appeals for questions to be answered, but as yet we have not heard any delegation 
interested in providing responses to these concerns, providing input to the discussion. We believe that if we genuinely want to make inroads with an  understanding on this matter, we need to adopt 
a fairly pragmatic stance, pragmatism that allowed us in 2005 to come up with this Decision. We 
know that this is a complex issue, that has various factors to be considered and various points of 
view, and for that reason we need to take into account all of the aspects that could serve to improve our understanding of the issues at stake wi thout excluding a priori any elements from this 
analysis. IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 17 - 
 
  6.11 United States  
 95.  The United States wanted to associate itself with the comments made by Switzerland, particularly with respect to the questions that remain outstanding and the need to have further 
insight into answers to those questions with respect to the workshop that has been proposed. To 
put a finer point on some of those questions, I wanted to refer Members back to the report we 
cited earlier in our first intervention, i.e. th e Staff Working Paper ERSD-2012-17. One Member 
identified some concerns about the commitment of other delegations to the Paragraph 6 System, 
and also with respect to the LDC waiver that was agreed unanimously earlier this year, to much acclaim by all Members in this Organization beyond just the Council. We may have some differences of views about levels of commitmen t of Members who have been engaged in that 
process. According to the aforementioned report (see page 24, penultimate paragraph), the 
Member who raised such questions is the country with the highest tariffs, both MFN and preferential on health products in their sample. Let me identify some of the basket of medicines 
that were sampled in the survey: basket A1 deals with dosified medicines; basket A2 deals with 
bulk medicines and basket C1, for which that Member also maintains relatively high tariffs are hospital and lab inputs. With a little more precision in terms of our request, I think we would be 
grateful for those Members who are identified in this report to explain the consistency of their 
policies with the commitment to greater access to medicines.  
6.12 India  
 
96.  I would like to thank the delegation of the United States for highlighting this working paper 
which has been prepared by a WTO staff member. We  have not gone through this report, but since 
you mention the high tariffs by India on some medical products in this regard I would like to say 
that the link between access to medicines and tariffs is quite low. We hardly see any linkage 
between tariffs and access, rather we feel that high tariffs could support developing the local 
pharmaceutical industry which could help in supplying medicines at a lower cost. We therefore do 
not see any core relation between those issues. If the United States would like to say that by 
lowering the tariffs one can get access, I think they are trying to promote access to patented 
products which would lead to closure of the local pharmaceutical industry, and this will affect access to medicines.  
6.13 China  
 97.  China is not among the top of those Members whose tariff is very high on pharmaceutical 
products. However, it is unclear what kind of role  tariffs may play in terms of access to medicines, 
and especially in terms of the impact on building the domestic capacity for producing pharmaceutical products. That is why China is encouraging Members to consider a proposal that 
has been long pending within this Council - that is to have a workshop to thoroughly discuss all 
these relevant effects, and to try to find a solution. We are very encouraged to hear from Switzerland and the United States, both indicating that, if we could identify possible stakeholders 
to be invited, we may further consider how the wo rkshop could be conducted. We look forward to 
work closely with you on identifying possible candidates that can speak from different perspectives 
on these complicated matters and to have a successful workshop. 
6.14 Switzerland  
 
98.  I would like to briefly react to the intervention of the distinguished delegate of China. I seem to not have expressed myself clearly on the point of the dedicated workshop. I have not so much 
referred to a choice of stakeholders which should be  looked into further. In our view, we first need 
a thorough discussion of the Paragraph 6 mechanisms in this Council and possible problems or concerns that particularly beneficiary countries that wish to make use of the Paragraph 6 mechanisms have actually met when doing so, or a ttempting to do so. We have not really heard or 
discussed this during the many past reviews. We have heard no clear arguments or evidence why 
the Paragraph 6 mechanism is actually posing obst acles to being used. This is first and foremost 
the task of the Council and the Members in this room. Once we have this done, that would be the 
moment to look into further follow up action. IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 18 - 
 
  6.15 China  
 99.  I would like to thank our distinguished delegate from Switzerland, in clarifying his position. China also agrees that we need to identify wh y the Paragraph 6 System has not been used to 
address this issue. The only fact before us is that it has been used only once. This is why we 
propose to have this workshop. I would like to remind the Members of this Council that the way the WTO Members conducted this work is to have informal consultations before the Council, before 
we have an emerging consensus, in having solutions to resolve a matter. In assisting the 
consultation we may have workshops, to invite expe rtise, even from international organizations, so 
that we can all sit down to talk about the issue in a detailed manner. It is unlikely that we can resolve a matter by just expressing our positions at the TRIPS Council. We therefore encourage to 
continue to have informal consultations held by the Chair, as the Chair has always done so, but in 
order to have really effective informal consulta tions, we still strongly suggest that we have a 
workshop so that we can have all the stakeholders and the expertise needed in order to try to 
provide some solutions to the issues pending before us. 
6.16 European Union  
 
100.  I would like to come back to the statement made by India that the link between tariffs and 
access to medicines is not clear. If I may quote fr om one of my favourite studies, the very good 
trilateral study made by WIPO, WTO and WHO says on page 77 that "tariffs make imported goods, including medicines, more expensive for consumers. Nevertheless, many countries apply tariffs to 
bolster the competitive position of locally based companies in the domestic market in an attempt 
to preserve employment or promote the developm ent of the industry (e.g. the local production 
capacities of the pharmaceutical sector), or to maintain a certain level of independence from 
international markets. For consumers, tariff protection can result in costly outcomes. Tariffs also 
raise revenue for governments, although in the ca se of medicines, the revenue amounts raised are 
generally not significant." I would add that we have received complaints by non-governmental 
organizations that these tariffs are applied even on pharmaceuticals that are intended for free 
distribution as part of assistance programmes. When we raise this concern, we are not finding another way to promote the consumption of patented pharmaceuticals, we are just identifying another very important obstacle to access to medicines. 
6.17 India  
 101.  In responding to the questions raised by the delegate from the EU, I would like to point out 
that the trilateral study had mentioned about the tariffs, but I would like to state that it is up to 
every country to decide the kind of tariffs, and on which medicines they should be applied. For example, if some medicines are manufactured locally it is better for any country to decide the level 
of tariffs depending on the level of production. National governments are in a better position to 
understand their access to medicines, if the people in those countries are getting access and how tariffs affect access. 
6.18 WTO Secretariat  
 
102.  This update to previous reports to the TRIPS Council will focus on activities to support acceptance of the Protocol Amending the TRIPS Agreement, and related technical assistance.  
103.  At the request of the Members concerned, we are providing technical assistance concerning 
both the process for entry into force of the am endment, and the implemen tation and use of the 
Paragraph 6 System which enables the grant of special compulsory licenses for export of 
pharmaceuticals. This theme also forms part of almost all of our TRIPS related technical 
assistance, at the national, regional and international levels, including annual flagship activities such as the advanced course for government officials, the WIPO-WTO colloquium, and the workshop on IP and public health. 
104.  We have had feedback from a number of Members that acceptance of the Protocol is 
awaiting domestic procedures, in particular concerning national legislation to implement the System. As you have noted, Mr Chair, these two processes have been considered by many 
Members to be distinct – acceptance of the Protocol is a confirmation that other Members are 
legally entitled to make use of this additional flexibility if they so wish; and the optional act of separately introducing this System into national legislation is a distinct choice to be taken. Actual IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 19 - 
 
  practice bears this out. On the basis of information available to us (including some Members that 
are yet to notify implementing legislation), an informal review of acceptances of the Protocol indicate that a significant proportion of Members, across a wide spectrum, have accepted the TRIPS amendment without having introduced domest ic implementing legislation. Some then went 
on subsequently to develop domestic implementing legislation, while others have not taken any 
steps to implement it domestically. In at least one instance, a Member initially planned to notify acceptance only after introducing domestic implem enting legislation, and then later decided to 
accept the protocol without any domestic legislation, on the understanding that such legislation 
was not a prerequisite for accepting the amendment. At the request of the Council, the Secretariat has developed and made available on a dedicated webpage a simple model for acceptance, with associated information, and we stand ready to work with any delegation wishing to advance this 
process. 
105.  Since the last annual review of the System, and as reported to previous sessions of the 
Council, the Secretariat has launched a study, prepared with counterparts in WHO and WIPO and 
intended essentially as a resource for technical assistance, entitled "Promoting Access to Medical 
Technologies and Innovation: Intersections between public health, intellectual property and trade". This report consolidates and makes available the technical assistance resources provided by the 
three Organizations in the course of their technical cooperation relating to health, IP and trade. 
106.  The study notes how access to essential medicines and the lack of research to address 
neglected diseases have been a major policy concern for many years. The publication responds to 
the needs expressed by health policy ‑makers for a systematic understanding both of the 
innovation processes that lead to new technologies and of the ways in which these technologies 
are disseminated in health systems. The study capt ures a broad range of experience and data in 
dealing with the interplay between IP, trade rule s and the dynamics of access to, and innovation 
in, medical technologies. 
107.  The study informs ongoing technical cooperation activities undertaken by the three 
organizations concerning the interplay between health, IP and trade, including activities that 
specifically address the Paragraph 6 System. Based on many years of field experience in technical 
cooperation, the study has been prepared to serve the needs of policy ‑makers who seek a 
comprehensive presentation of the full range of i ssues, as well as lawmakers, government officials, 
delegates to international organizations, non ‑governmental organizations and researchers. 
108.  The study provides information to support technical assistance relating to TRIPS and public 
health, describing how the Paragraph 6 System was designed as an additional flexibility to 
enhance access to medicines by removing a potential barrier for countries that need to import medicines. In particular, the study outlines th e background, context, and scope of use of the 
System (pages 177ff), giving an overview of the ongoing policy discussions. It notes that while the 
reasons for the limited use of the Paragraph 6 System are still under consideration, it could be more widely used in the future, for example, in the case of a pandemic or some other health 
security event where effective treatments may be patented in all major supplier countries following 
the introduction of the product patent regime since 2005. 
109.  The study describes the particular procurement scenario that the System is designed to 
address, and reviews some of the issues that have been discussed here and in other fora regarding 
whether the System has been used as expected, noting that its operational context is still being 
mapped.  
110.  Finally, Annex II provides specific practical information on the operation of the System, its 
context and scope and use, and domestic implementation, as a means of technical assistance to 
Members considering the possible use of the System. It provides references to the model forms for notifications under the System that have been made available on the WTO website, again as a 
technical assistance resource for the benefit of Members considering making use of the System. 
6.19 WIPO Secretariat  
 111.  During the period November 2012 – September 2013, legislative and policy advice on 
patents that referred or included considerations regarding the Paragraph 6 System has been 
provided by the WIPO as follows: IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 20 - 
 
   At the request of four Member States, WIPO Secretariat drafted laws and/or prepared 
comments on draft laws which included reference to, or implemented, the Paragraph 6 System. 
 In the framework of legislative assistance on patents, matters related to health policies, 
including the Paragraph 6 System, were also addressed in the context of six missions that 
were undertaken in Member States and eight consultations that took place in WIPO headquarters in Geneva. 
 Legislative implementation of patent law matters related to health policies, including the 
implementation of the Paragraph 6 System, we re addressed in the following seminars or 
meetings: 
 
a. WIPO Regional Seminar for Certain African Countries on the Implementation and Use of 
several Patent-Related Flexibilities, Durban, South Africa, 29 to 31/01/2013;  
b. WIPO Sub-Regional Workshop on Patent Policy and its Legislative Implementation, 
Basseterre, Saint Kitts and Nevis, 10 and 11/04/2013; 
c. WIPO-Organisation Internationale de la Francophonie (OIF) Sub-Regional Workshop on 
Trade of Services for the Economic Comm unity of Central African States (ECCAS), 
Douala, Cameroon, 6 to 9/08/2013. 
112.  During the period under consideration, th e World Intellectual Property Organization also 
participated at the following WTO Seminars where the topic of patent-related flexibilities, with a reference to the Paragraph 6 System, has been dealt with: 
a. WTO Regional Workshop for Latin American Countries on TRIPS and Public Policies, 
Bogotá, Colombia, 16 to 18/04/2013; 
b. WTO National Seminar on TRIPS and Public Health, Luanda, Angola, 10 and 11/07/2013; 
c. WTO Regional Workshop on IP and Public Health, Arusha, Tanzania, 29 to 31/05/2013; 
and 
d. WTO National Workshop on TRIPS Flexibilities , Pretoria, South Africa, August 6 to 8, 
2013. 
113.  WIPO's assistance is consistently based on the multilateral legal framework. More recently, a 
n u m b e r  o f  n a t i o n a l  a u t h o r i t i e s  i n  c h a r g e  o f  d r a f t i n g  l a w s  h a v e  b e e n  s e e k i n g  a d v i c e  f r o m  W I P O  regarding how to use the available multilateral flexibilities so as to accommodate particular 
national interests that are specific to their countri es. Since the Paragraph 6 System is part of those 
flexibilities which are considered by several countries as part of their access-to-medicine policies, this issue is regularly covered by WIPO legislative and policy assistance. 
114.  The following is an update on WIPO Re:Search. One of the world's great global health 
challenges is to overcome the impact of neglected tropical diseases (NTDs), malaria and tuberculosis. These diseases negatively affect the lives of more than one billion people, many of 
whom live in the world's least developed countries . To generate more investment in innovation 
directed at these diseases, the World Intellectual Property Organization in cooperation with public and private sector partners launched WIPO Re:Search in 2011. As reported to the TRIPS Council in October 2011 and November 2012, WIPO Re:Search is a platform addressed to catalyze more 
research in NTDs, malaria, and tuberculosis by facilitating the sharing of IP assets and resources 
among public and private sector partners and rese archers in this important field. By providing a 
searchable, public database of available IP assets  (for example, pharmaceutical compounds, know-
how and data available for research and development), WIPO Re:Search facilitates new 
partnerships to support organizations that conduct research on treatments for those diseases. 
115.  WIPO Re:Search was launched on 26/10/2011, with about 30 members, including 
pharmaceutical companies, research institutions and a range of public and private entities. To 
date, WIPO Re:Search has more than double d its membership, with 76 members currently, 
including more than ten African members from th e academia and the public and private sectors. 
Since our report in 2012 to the TRIPS Council, thanks to WIPO Re:search over 30 collaborations 
have been initiated, and more are in development.  
116.  Also, thanks to a Funds-in-Trust provided to WIPO by the Government of Australia, five 
scientists from five African countries – Cameroon, Egypt, Ghana, Nigeria, and South Africa – are IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 21 - 
 
  working in research labs of WIPO Re:Search members in India, Switzerland and the USA, where 
they are upgrading their R&D management skills and furthering their research work.  
117.  WIPO Re:Search is founded on the belief that intellectual property and knowledge can be 
used creatively to stimulate more investment in research and development for new health 
solutions. Intellectually property should be used to make a positive contribution. WIPO Re:Search 
works entirely on a voluntary basis of all participating parties and has no impact on any legal instrument. The WIPO Re:Search website http://www.wipo.int/research  provides further 
information. 
6.20 El Salvador  
 118.  With regard to the reports that were discusse d, we don't have any concrete points to make. 
We are delighted to hear the report by WIPO with regard to the initiatives mentioned. Our country 
had a field visit in order to make known these initiatives and in order to make known that project. We believe these projects are particularly relevant for developing country Members. 
AGENDA ITEM 9: REVIEW OF THE APPLICATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE SECTION 
ON GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS UNDER ARTICLE 24.2 
9.1  Switzerland  
 
119.  It is with the consent of the Russian delegation that I would like to inform the Council on behalf of the Russian Federation and Switzerland that the two countries have concluded a bilateral 
agreement on the protection of their geographical indications. That agreement came into force on 
1 September 2011.  
9.2 Mexico  
 
120.  Mexico's replies to the review of the application of the provisions on geographical indications 
under Article 24.2 of the TRIPS Agreement appear  in document IP/C/W/117/Add.14 of 9 February 
1999. Given that over 14 years have passed since our replies were published, we are now re-
examining this notification and are considering updating it. Mexico will submit an update of the 
geographical indications protected under its bilateral trade agreements. 
AGENDA ITEM 10: ELEVENTH ANNUAL REVIEW UNDER PARAGRAPH 2 OF THE DECISION 
ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTI CLE 66.2 OF THE TRIPS AGREEMENT 
10.1  Australia  
 121.  Australia is committed to assisting least developed countries (LDCs) in the area of 
technology transfer, pursuant to the Council's de cision on the implementation of Article 66.2 
TRIPS. 
122.  Australia thanks the Secretariat for organizing the annual workshop which was held 
yesterday on this issue. Australia has attended these workshops since their inception in 2008. We 
find them a very useful forum fo r exchanging views, which have positively influenced how Australia 
prepares our reports, leading to better information sharing. 
123.  This year, Australia has submitted an updated report on the implementation of Article 66.2 
of the TRIPS Agreement. The report updates our 2 012 report to include incentives and support to 
Australian institutions and enterprises to promot e and encourage technology transfer to LDCs to 
cover activities since October 2012. In many cases, we are pleased to report follow-on initiatives 
that are building on those reported in 2012. In 20 13, education of LDC nationals and their training 
in the use and management of technological equipment continues to be a large part of Australia's focus. For example, in 2013 the Australia Awards provided around $A100 million to enable 1,575 
students from LDCs to undertake study at Australian tertiary institutions. Forty-five of the 49 LDCs 
have students in the 2013 intake undertaking scholarship programmes. 
124.  The report also contains some specific 2013 initiatives which are encouraging technology 
transfer, for example: IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 22 - 
 
   A $A3.9 million research programme, which will identify appropriate small-scale 
machines (e.g. two-wheel tractors) to improve farming practices in LDCs, including Ethiopia and Tanzania; and 
 a $A3 million research project on incentives and barriers to adoption of agricultural 
innovations by smallholder farmers in Eastern and Southern Africa, including Ethiopia, 
Malawi, Tanzania, and Mozambique. 
Further details on particular initiatives and the relevant Australian Government agency with 
responsibility for their implementation can be found in the report.  
10.2 WTO Secretariat  
 125.  Yesterday saw the sixth in a series of info rmal workshops convened by the Secretariat with 
the goal of facilitating the understanding and exchange of information between LDC Members and 
the Members reporting on their implementation of Article 66.2. Accordingly, the workshop, as in 
the past, brought together the three active parties in the monitoring process:  
 Firstly, the developed country Members who put considerable effort into collecting, 
assembling and formatting the information about incentives provided under Article 66.2; 
  Most importantly, the LDC Members to whom this information was most directly 
addressed and intended for their consideration and review; and  
 Lastly, the Secretariat which is responsible for processing and managing the flow of this 
information for the benefit of Members.  
126.  The workshop once again underscored that there is a great deal of useful information 
circulated through this reporting process, but that some delegations do face challenges in 
absorbing and reviewing this information in a timely fashion, both because of the reporting cycle and the pressures of other work, making it difficult to devote attention to the detail. 
127.   The main focus of the workshop was on the substantive content of the reports filed by 
developed country Members. An active dialogue  was facilitated between Members concerning 
details of specific programmes or measures. Discussion also turned to broader issues such as the 
approach taken to defining transfer of technology, the kind of technology concerned, the impact of 
particular incentives, and the interrelation between measures reported under this provision and technical cooperation activities as such. A number of detailed questions were posed that could not be covered within the compass of the workshop itself, with participants therefore undertaking to 
provide follow-up information, and we are working on ways to facilitate the continuing flow of this 
information. 
128.  One aspect of the discussion at the workshop concerned how effectively to manage this rich 
body of information supplied by developed count ry members and reviewed and analysed by LDC 
Members. Several delegates commented on the difficulty of absorbing the detailed documentation submitted in the short time available. This raises the practical question of how to improve the flow 
and accessibility of information collated and submitted in this area. 
129.  Especially since the enhanced reporting process on implementation of Article 66.2 was 
established by this Council in line with the request by Ministers at Doha, a large body of documentation has accumulated: the total of reports now amounting to over 2000 pages, with up 
to 200 further pages of information added each year – a measure both of the quantity of 
information available, but also of the challenges for tracking and analysing this information especially for delegations with limited practical capacity for detailed analysis of such complex 
documentation. The Council has in previous sessions considered the continuing cost and 
management issues in handling this kind of notification, given the considerable resources Members invest in the formatting, processing and translation of documentation.  
130.  At the practical level of the Secretariat, we have attempted to consider what logistical and 
administrative steps could be taken to improve the collection, management and dissemination of this information. It is noteworthy that many reports under this item do have common elements, and often lend themselves to a similar tabular or spreadsheet format. This kind of format certainly 
facilitates the handling of and access to such info rmation, and suggests the possibility of using an 
online reporting tool, similar to the prototype that was informally demonstrated on the margins of the previous session of the Council. IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 23 - 
 
  131.  Following the informal consultations with Members subsequently held on 12 September, we 
are working on an elaboration of this prototype for further consultation, recognizing the current practices of Members, and with an eye to the ongoing discussions in this Council, so as to facilitate and speed up reporting under this item. To the exte nt that there are some common elements in all 
reported information, it may be possible to enable online submission of updates as an optional 
pathway for Members reporting under this item, again strictly respecting the bounds of formal reporting requirements, and without prejudice to the ongoing discussions between Members in the 
Council concerning the LDC Group's prop osal for a standard reporting format. 
132.  Use of such a reporting tool would facilitate  the capture of data and speed up its circulation 
and accessibility for review by its intended readers, including in other working languages. This step would save resources, but more importantly should better serve the information needs of the 
Members concerned more effectively and more efficiently. The evolving format of the approach 
taken by Members in their most recent submissi ons, and the discussions and practical guidance 
received in the course of the workshop earlier this week, do seem to suggest that we can move 
usefully in this direction, but we shall of course  take care to consult with Members as improved 
tools are developed and elaborated. 
10.3  Angola  
 
133.  I would like to thank the Secretariat for the information that they have provided and also for convening and organizing the workshop, which saw presentations of the annual report from developed countries on the implementation of Ar ticle 66.2 of the TRIPS Agreement. Allow me to 
thank at this juncture our partners on behalf of the LDC Group. We are very grateful to them for 
their efforts for the gathering of data for the preparation of this report since we note that certain partners have made an effort/gone the extra mile to present the data in the format that we were 
seeking. And that is something which we should very much commend those partners for.  
134.  In addition I would like to say that the LD C Group has been seeking formal adoption by the 
TRIPS Council of the standardized format for the presentation of future reports. This is a very 
important because it enables us to assess programmes quickly. For example, if you look at the 
reports that were submitted last time round, of th e 145 programmes, projects or activities that are 
presented therein only 10-15% are genuinely intended for technical transfer to developing county LDCs. The others relate to technical assistance programmes or development aid under that 
Article 67. With the standardized formats, we re ally can see which projects are focused on LDCs, 
which projects fall outside of that and are not ac tually part and parcel of the implementation of 
Article 66.2. So this is the first request we have had to look at whether the partners would be 
willing to call for the formal adoption of th is standard format by the TRIPS Council.  
135.  A further point is that the LDCs within the Group have begun reflection as to the possibility 
of engaging in the revision of the 2003 Decision itself. As you know, in that Decision in 
paragraph 4 it is provided that every three years it  should be possible to re-examine or review the 
Decision of the content thereof and so our Group is  engaging in reflection in that direction. The 
aim of this is first of all to improve the presentati on of the reports; the second is to fix parameters 
as to what it is that we understand by technology transfer; and thirdly, to seek with our partners 
to try and come up with a framework that takes into account the situation on the ground. The 
Decision was taken in 2003 and the economic cris is had not yet happened. Things have changed 
since then. We therefore feel it would be appropri ate for the Decision to be reviewed. It has been 
in place for ten years or so and a review is long overdue. So perh aps at the next Council, we might 
be in a position to table a specific proposal as we have done in the past, such that we can discuss the parameters relating to this Article. 
10.4 India  
 136.  India attaches great importance to the issue of technological transfer by the developed countries to the LDCs and believes that unless we make such positive efforts to ensure that the 
developing countries, and especially the LDCs among them, secure a share in the growth in 
international trade commensurate with the needs of  their economic development, the goals set by 
the framers of the WTO agreements would remain  unfulfilled. Further, the objective set by 
Article 7 of the TRIPS Agreement also highlights the importance of technological innovation and 
the promotion and dissemination of technology for socio-economic welfare.  IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 24 - 
 
  137.  With the lofty goals set by the framers of th is Agreement, it is unfortunate that the LDCs 
have to demand monitoring and full implementation of the TRIPS Council decision IP/C/28 taken in 2003. The provisions of Article 66.2 are clear and unambiguous and they put an obligation on the 
developed countries to provide incentives to their enterprises and institutions. Despite the 
flexibility provided to the developed countries by not specifying the nature of incentives, the end 
product of the provision - i.e. to create a sound and viable technological base in the LDCs - seems to be a pipe dream. When the LDCs submitted a simple format for reporting by the developed 
countries in 2011, we hear opposition from some Members saying that one size fits all solution is 
not an appropriate one. We therefore wonder how come a single Agreement on IP, with uniform laws to all Members at different levels of development could be appropriate.  
138.  We appreciate the reports submitted by the developed countries for consideration under this 
agenda item. But we feel that the approach of thes e countries is mostly ritualistic and non serious, 
far from meeting the desired objective. We would therefore urge all the developed countries to find an amicable solution in consultation with the LDC Members so that the goal of technology transfer 
is fulfilled.  
10.5 United States 
 
139.  We do not agree with the previous intervention. We have produced a significant report, 
outlining our copious programs. We worked very hard  on the report and to meet the objectives of 
TRIPS Article 66.2. We thank our LDC partners and others for their constructive engagement at the workshop, which we found to be very productive. I would encourage the Indian delegate to 
read the US report. The US would welcome the opportunity to discuss that report with you in 
detail. We would also welcome hearing from India regarding its technology transfer programs for 
LDCs. 
10.6 European Union   
 140.  I would also like to make a quick remark on this last intervention from India to assure you 
that we do not see anything ritualistic in the several hundreds of millions of euros that we dedicate 
to this important goal, in addition to all the work done by the people who manage these programmes. We have this kind of cooperation with LDCs but also with countries like India and we find it extremely unfair and unpleasant to hear this kind of reference to the efforts we make. 
AGENDA ITEM 11: TECHNICAL COOPERATION AND CAPACITY-BUILDING 
11.1 Australia  
 
141.  Australia is pleased to present our 2013 updated report on technical cooperation activities 
for IP capacity building. Australia fulfils its obligations under Article 67 TRIPS through multilateral, regional and bilateral programmes and activities mainly in the Asia-Pacific region, but increasingly 
in Africa. 
142.  The programmes and activities are detailed in  the report. I will provide a couple of examples 
from our 2013 report. We are very proud of our in augural regional patent examination training 
programme which started in April 2013 under the framework of the ASEAN-Australia-New Zealand 
Free Trade Agreement and aims to enhance patent examination standards. We welcomed 
participants from Malaysia, Indonesia, the Philippines, Kenya and ARIPO.  
143.  A hallmark of Australia's contribution is the $A2 million Australia-WIPO Funds in Trust, which 
is specifically designed for IP cooperation and capacity building. Since we last reported this 
initiative in 2012, I'd like to provide a taste of what has been delivered through the Funds in Trust. We have delivered assistance to: 
 Vanuatu and the Solomon Islands to undertake IP needs assessments;  
 Tonga to develop a national IP strategy;  
 research scientists from Mali, South Africa, Cameroon, Egypt and Ghana to undertake 
placements with some of the world's top pharmaceutical research laboratories and 
universities to undertake research on neglected tropical diseases, malaria and 
tuberculosis; and  IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 25 - 
 
   Bangladesh and Namibia with fact finding missions to assess the needs of organizations 
serving visually impaired persons. 
11.2 WTO Secretariat  
 
144.  The updated report on technical cooperation activities relating to TRIPS (IP/C/W/590) 
continues to build on trends reported over the past several years.  
 increasing emphasis on partnerships with other intergovernmental organizations and 
other partners. Such enhanced coordination, programme design and delivery, supporting 
logistics, enhanced programme delivery and resource mobilization, leverages the impact of the resources invested in technical assistance at a time when resources have been under some pressure, and improves the releva nce and impact of our activities for the 
recipient country partners.  
 An increasing demand to situate TRIPS and IP  law and policy in the context of broader 
social and economic development and in its connection with specific policy areas such as 
environmental technology, or public health. 
 Increasing interest in supplementing the information traditionally provided about TRIPS 
itself and its provisions and jurisprudence, with more detailed information about the 
specific legal and policy choices taken by WTO Members within the framework of TRIPS. 
And here the notification materials assembled in this Council are a direct practical tool for technical assistance. We see increasing interest in learning directly how the broad provisions of TRIPS are applied in different ways in accordance with national needs, 
priorities and social and economic contexts – to borrow a concept from mainstream 
trade policy, a focus on what might be termed the 'applied IP regime' implemented within the framework of the rules of TRIPS as the 'bound regime'.  
145.  These trends were manifest in two flagship activities that continued to be a major focus of 
the technical cooperation programme: the Advanced Course on IP and the Colloquium for teachers 
and researchers in IP. Both programmes deploy a wide range of expertise and policy perspectives 
from intergovernmental officials, national delega tes, NGOs and industry experts to situate TRIPS 
and IP issues in a broader context, but also draw on a wider range of practical experience and perspectives. In each case, the focus was on strengthening developing countries' capacity in a sustainable way so that the beneficiaries of technical cooperation had greater capacity to analyse 
and work through available legal and policy op tions and synchronize the implementation of 
international standards with their own social and economic development priorities.  
146.  The provision of technical assistance conti nues to be driven by the evolving demand and 
requirements of developing country Members who are its primary recipients. Based on the 
feedback we continue to receive from these partners, these trends appear set to continue, but we shall continue to be guided by the technical cooperation needs and requirements put to us by 
Members, in line with the broader settings of the WTO Technical Assistance Plan. 
147.  Considering the management of documentation relating to technical cooperation, we note 
once again that formatting, translating and distributing this information does indeed entail a heavy workload and consumes considerable resources. We have heard from some informal discussions 
concerning technical cooperation that it can be difficult to track and monitor this information, and 
to correlate it against, for instance, the needs a ssessments filed by LDC Members, or to identify 
suitable programmes and resources to respon d to other technical assistance needs.  
148.  At the same time, there is an increasing trend to use databases and similar tools to report on 
technical cooperation activities; the WIPO Intellectual Property Technical Assistance Database (IP-TAD) is one useful example. This trend opens up the possibility in considering reporting under 
Article 67 of a more systematic means of managing this information flow, without prejudice to 
Members' rights and obligations and existing practices for reporting. 
149.  Some possibilities of improving the capt ure, management and presentation of this 
information were discussed at an informal briefing  held by the Secretariat on 12 September, and 
we will continue to consult informally with Members on the possibilities of streamlining and 
improving the information flow for the practical benefit of all Members, including through optional online reporting tools and a web-based platform for consulting this information. IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 26 - 
 
  150.  The Council for TRIPS has in the past already taken note of steps taken to improve the 
accessibility and utility of reports on technical assistance provided to the council and to streamline this documentation process. An initial step would be to work towards some convergence of reporting formats. No specific format has been  established for Members' reports on technical 
cooperation and there is plainly a continuing need for diversity in line with the diversity of 
programmes reported upon.  
151.  One suggested, strictly optional format to facilitate this process would be for reports to 
comprise (i) an introductory narrative briefly outlining in general terms highlights or trends in 
technical cooperation over the reporting year; and (ii) a factual annex providing brief details of specific activities in tabular or spreadsheet format (for ease of preparation, this could be an extract 
from an existing technical assistance reporting da tabase so as to avoid duplication of work). The 
report on technical assistance prepared by the WTO Secretariat for this period (document 
IP/C/W/590) was prepared to illustrate this sugg ested approach. The benefit of such an approach 
would be to provide a readable summary that would set out the broad trends, of interest from a 
general policy perspective, while also facilitating access to specific details of individual 
programmes.  
152.  We note that some other reports prepared and submitted under this provision have adopted 
comparable formats, and would value the continui ng feedback from Members on the benefits or 
drawbacks of managing this information in this way, either at the Council session itself or in more informal consultations as we work towards possible prototypes of online reporting tools and web-based information platforms to make this important information more accessible and more usable. 
11.3 WHO Secretariat  
 153.  We are grateful for this opportunity to br iefly introduce the World Health Organization's 
technical cooperation activities in the area of public health, intellectual property and trade. 
154.  Our overall objective is to strengthen the ca pacity of developing countries in the areas of 
health innovation and management of intellectual property. Public health interests should be 
adequately taken into account in the formulation of national policies and legislation on trade and 
intellectual property. This includes the implementa tion and use of the flexibilities provided by the 
WTO TRIPS Agreement and the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health.  
155.  In the past years, WHO, WIPO and WTO have closely collaborated to foster a better 
understanding of the linkage between public heal th and intellectual property policies and to 
enhance a mutually supportive implementation of  those policies. The joint study by the WHO, 
WIPO and the WTO, "Promoting Access to Medica l Technologies and Innovation - Intersections 
between Public Health, Intellectual Property an d Trade" is the fruit of this new trilateral 
collaboration. The study was launched on 5 February 2013, by the heads of the three organizations. The study is intended to inform ongoing technical cooperation activities undertaken 
by the three organizations and to support policy discussions. 
156.  The study provides a holistic picture of trade, IP and health-related determinants of 
innovation in and access to medical products. Among the health-related determinants of access covered are regulatory questions, including th e need for further convergence of regulatory 
standards, the importance of more transparency in clinical trials and the challenge of creating safe 
regulatory pathways for biosimilars. It also addresses rational selection of essential medicines, pricing policies, adequate financing and procur ement, as well as supply chain management, 
including the control of taxes and mark ups.  
157.  The study also covers the main trade determinants for access, including procurement and 
competition policy and how it can support access to medical products. It goes on to discuss tariffs 
on pharmaceutical products and their impact on pr ices. With respect to intellectual property, the 
study covers, inter alia , the flexibilities contained in the WTO TRIPS Agreement that WTO Members 
can use to facilitate access to medicines, including compulsory licences. It also explains the development of socially responsible licensing policies as well as the interface between sub-
standard, spurious, false, falsified, counterfeit medicines and the counterfeiting of trademarks. It 
discusses the different options to protect clinical test data, contains a comprehensive chapter on bilateral and regional trade agreements and de scribes the relevant IP elements of these IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 27 - 
 
  agreements and their likely impact on public he alth. In the area of patent policies, the study 
explains the problem of "evergreening" of patents as part of the life cycle management of pharmaceutical products and related legislative developments in different developing countries. In this respect the study also highlights the need for incremental innovation and the fact that small 
changes such as new routes of delivery or new dosage forms can have a huge impact on the life of 
patients and, for example, may increase patient compliance.  
158.  The chapter on innovation discusses the cost of R&D of new medical products as well as 
recent changes in the R&D landscape, particularly in the area of biotechnology. In relation to 
neglected diseases the study describes models on how to encourage R&D. This is where innovative financing and new ways of working for ensuring needed R&D are discussed, including models that separate the costs of the R&D from the price of the end product in order to make medicines more 
affordable, a concept referred to as de-linkage. This section also highlights related efforts of the 
industry, including the renewed commitment in the "London Declaration on Neglected Tropical Diseases" and other positive examples such as the dedicated research institutes for neglected 
diseases that have been created by a number of pharmaceutical companies. 
159.  Together with UNAIDS, UNITAID, the Brazilian Government and in collaboration with the 
Medicines Patent Pool, WIPO and WTO, WHO organized a consultation on access to HIV medicines 
in middle-income countries (MICs) in Brasilia, Brazil, from 10 to 12/06/2013. The meeting focused 
on how to increase access to antiretroviral treatment in these countries. In recent years, the global community has seen great progress in access to HIV treatment. Nevertheless, MICs in all regions face significant challenges in sustaining their treatment programmes. In order to frame the 
debate, WHO in collaboration with the Medicines Patent Pool, drafted a background paper that 
provides data on the prices paid by MICs for the WHO-recommended first, second and third line HIV treatments. The paper links these prices with data on the patent status of the respective 
products, voluntary and compulsory licences as well as tariff and regulatory data. The paper 
identifies the products for which certain countries still pay high prices and aims to identify the underlying reasons and thus provide the facts that will allow local policy makers to take 
appropriate actions. The meeting highlighted the need for pursuing collaboration among 
organizations on providing information and strengthening information exchange between the countries on regulatory approvals, IP status and prices of HIV medicines.  
160.  To implement the 2006 Global Pandemic Influenza Action Plan (GAP), the WHO has 
facilitated the transfer of influenza vaccine production technology to 14 vaccine manufacturers in 
developing countries, through a central technology transfer hub. WHO grants to local manufacturers led to a significant increase in local investments in the manufacturing facilities. As a 
result of the technical and financial assistance, so  far five developing countries have established 
local production of approved influenza vaccines. To date this has resulted in a combined capacity of 330 million pandemic vaccine doses, with the goal to exceed the 500 million dose capacity from 
these manufacturers by 2016. 
161.  In addition to influenza vaccine technology, WHO has facilitated access for manufacturers in 
developing countries to technology for human papillomavirus, other vaccines and delivery devices, and to rabies technology.  
162.  Within the context of the implementation of th e Global strategy and plan of action on public 
health, innovation and intellectual property, WHO is leading a European Commission supported project on local production, to increase access to medical products in developing countries. The 
second phase of this project will include a country-b ased policy analysis to identify the existence of 
policy coherence across industrial and health policies, the degree of promotion of local production, the development of a price comparison methodolog y to compare locally produced medicines with 
imported medicines, and training and capacity-bu ilding work to support quality production across a 
range of medical products for manufacturers and na tional regulatory authorities. Targeted actions 
will include the identification of essential medicines that are most suitable for local production, determination of the feasibility of local production of blood products, as well as analysing the 
patent landscape for a number of medicines in order to assess the possibilities for local and 
regional production in developing countries. Part of this work is carried out in collaboration with UNCTAD. 
163.  Training and capacity building are among the co re activities of WHO, with regard to public 
health and intellectual property. WHO regularly contributes to training and capacity building IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 28 - 
 
  activities organized by WTO and WIPO which leads to a more coherent approach of the three 
agencies. I would like to highlight the  
 Regional Seminar for certain African Countries on the Implementation and Use of Several 
Patent-Related Flexibilities that was organized by WIPO in cooperation with the 
Department of Trade and Industry of South Africa in Durban, South Africa in 
January 2013.  
 WTO in close collaboration with WHO, WIPO and the Secretariat of the East-African 
Community organized a joint training progra mme on intellectual property and public 
health for English-speaking African countries in Arusha, Tanzania, from 29-31 May 2013. 
 National workshop in South Africa on IP and public health in August 2013 again 
organized by WTO in close collaboration with WHO, WIPO and the South African 
Department of Trade and Industry. 
164.  In the recent past, a number of WHO Member States have been subject to lawsuits and 
arbitration procedures under bilateral investment agreements with respect to tobacco control 
measures, including the introduction of plain packaging requirements. This resulted in the need for 
specific training and capacity building on questi ons related to international trade rules and tobacco 
control measures. WHO has organized a number of such regional consultations involving Ministries 
of Trade and Ministries of Health of ab out 70 countries throughout 2012 and 2013.  
165.  More ample information on technical cooperation activities under the WHO programme on 
public health and intellectual property can be found in document IP/C/W/591/Add.2. We would be 
glad to answer any questions delegations might have regarding these activities. 
A G E N D A  I T E M  1 2 :  C O N T R I B U T I O N  O F  I N T E LLECTUAL PROPERTY TO FACILITATE THE 
TRANSFER OF ENVIRONMENTALLY  RATIONAL TECHNOLOGY 
12.1 Ecuador   
 
166.  Ecuador would like to reiterate to the Council the importance it attaches to the transfer of environmentally rational technology, which is why we requested that this item be included 
on the agenda. We are very grateful to the Secretariat for this. 
167.  At the TRIPS Council meeting held on 11 June 2013, Ecuador introduced document 
IP/C/W/585/Rev.1 entitled "Contribution of Intellectual Property to Facilitating the Transfer of Environmentally Rational Technology", based on  the preamble to the TRIPS Agreement, which 
refers to the promotion of technology transfer to developing countries. This is furthermore 
underpinned by the provisions of Articles 7 ("Object ives") and 8 ("Principles"), the ultimate aim of 
which is to prevent the abuse of intellectual prop erty rights by right holders or the resort to 
practices which unreasonably restrain trade or adversely affect the transfer of technology. 
168.  Ecuador's proposal was also based on the first paragraph of the preamble to the 
Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization, in which the principles 
and objectives governing the multilateral trading system specifically refer to sustainable 
development and the protection and preservation of the environment. These provisions form the 
basis for paragraphs 6, 31 and 33 of the 2001 Doha Ministerial Declaration, which set out commitments to ensure proper coordination between trade agreements covered by the WTO 
and multilateral environmental agreements, and which also recognize the importance of technical 
assistance and capacity building in the field of trade and the environment for developing countries. 
169.  My delegation wishes to thank the delegati ons of Cuba, China (which has reserved its right 
to respond to Ecuador's specific proposals), Bangla desh, Bolivia, Brazil, India, Indonesia, Nepal, 
Rwanda and the Dominican Republic for endorsing the paper submitted. 
170.  I would add that an "early and timely" technology transfer programme for the developing 
countries is an essential element in the fight against climate change and adaptation to and 
mitigation of its harmful effects. These countries will find their own efforts constrained and will have little chance of joining the efforts undertaken by the international community to combat these problems, if they do not have the appropriate tools which can only be obtained through 
the international transfer of technology. IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 29 - 
 
  171.  The aforementioned information shows that th e issue of IPRs and the debate on cooperation 
in the transfer of technology are becoming essential to finding the best way to combat the harmful effects of climate change, above all for the deve loping countries. Factors such as lack of 
information and excessive protection, inappr opriate enforcement and abuse of IPRs, and 
particularly patents, will undoubtedly jeopardize social and economic well-being and the balance of 
rights and obligations between producers and user s, which will be detrimental to the developing 
countries and their access to cutting-edge technology. 
172.  In view of the foregoing, Ecuador considers th at it is appropriate to include the issue of IPRs 
and mechanisms for the transfer of environmentally sound technology in the discussions held by this Council, in order to combat the harmful effects of climate change in the context of the multilateral trading system. 
173.  The paper submitted by Ecuador presents some ideas on options that could be considered 
with regard to IPRs and climate change in the context of the multilateral trading system, such as the automatic granting of rights through voluntar y licensing, use of the TRIPS flexibilities, and 
regulation of licensing costs, inter alia . The main aim of the paper is to prevent IPRs from 
becoming a barrier for the transfer of technology to the developing countries. 
174.  Lastly, Ecuador's paper proposed that Members consider adopting, at the Bali Ministerial 
Conference, a "declaration" in which they  would enshrine the principle that " nothing in the 
TRIPS Agreement can minimize or impair the flexibilities provided for in that Agreement, nor prevent or limit Members taking measures they  consider necessary to protect their population 
from the effects of climate change and to ma ke use of environmentally sound technologies ". 
175.  In conclusion, my delegation would also like to suggest that this item on the TRIPS Council 
agenda be addressed next year, as we consider that the issue has not been exhausted and that it deserves to be discussed. 
12.2 Plurinational State of Bolivia  
 176.  Firstly, I would like to thank Ecuador for the introduction to its proposal. Bolivia shares the 
concerns and ideas expressed by the delegation  of Ecuador in communication IP/C/W/585. As 
many of you already know, in 2011, Bolivia, together with Venezuela, presented a similar proposal in the Trade and Environment Committee in special session. 
177.  Patents limit the possibility for developing countries to adopt environmentally sound 
technologies, since patent holders, mainly concentrated in developed countries, are able to raise 
the costs of access or deny it altogether. Given the unprecedented mobilization of environmental technologies required to address the environmental cr isis, existing flexibilities in relation to patents 
and other intellectual property rights must be reinforced and further expanded in order to ensure 
that the environmental technology needs of deve loping countries are met, enabling sustainable 
development while helping to curb the environmental crisis. As the IPCC warned in its most recent 
assessment report, we cannot continue business as usual in the face of an environmental and 
climate crisis of such magnitude that it endanger s the very future of mankind. We need to adapt 
the rules of the game to this special situation. By amending the TRIPS Agreement to facilitate the transfer of environmental technologies to developing countries, the WTO would be making 
a decisive contribution to resolving climate and environmental crises. 
178.  Such a contribution by the WTO would also be in line with the sustainable development 
principles adopted multilaterally in the Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, which 
has just been reaffirmed by our Heads of State at Rio+20, in particular Principle 7, which affirms 
that "in view of the different contributions to environmental degradation, States have common but differentiated responsibilities. The developed countries acknowledge the responsibility that they 
bear in the international pursuit of sustainable de velopment in view of the pressures their societies 
place on the global environment and of the technologies and financial resources they command". This is a critical principle which guides international community action in the field of sustainable development and which should also guide WTO negotiations in this area. It is important to 
remember that the Rio Declaration forms part of the treaty context which served as the basis for 
formulating the reference to the objective of sustainable development in the first paragraph of the IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 30 - 
 
  preamble of the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing  the World Trade Organization, and is therefore 
more than relevant in our context. 
179.  In this light, we welcome the proposal made by Ecuador in document IP/C/W/585, which 
suggests that environmental technologies be decl ared public goods and that the world community 
be urged to take full advantage of the flexibili ties envisaged in the TRIPS Agreement so that 
countries can adopt the measures needed to address the current environmental crisis. This should be part of the WTO's contribution to countering the effects of climate change. 
12.3 Indonesia  
 180.  Indonesia welcomes the inclusion of this agenda item and is open for more discussions to explore further feasible elements of the proposal submitted by Ecuador. Indonesia is of the view 
that flexibilities which potentially can be obtained by developing Members from this proposal would 
help them mitigate and adapt to the effects of climate change.  
181.  Intellectual property rights must not become a barrier for transfer of technology to 
developing countries in this area. We hope that discussions in the Council for TRIPS on this matter 
will be able to identify the most appropriate me chanisms for effectively promoting and facilitating 
access by developing countries to technologies applicable for combating climate change and 
environmental harm. 
12.4 Cuba  
 182.  Cuba thanks Ecuador for bringing this matter before the Council once again. It is important 
to continue the debate on the transfer of envi ronmentally sound technologies (ESTs) from the 
perspective of intellectual property, with a view  to proposing solutions, based on the WTO rules 
and without interfering in the mandates on climate change of other international agencies, 
that can help provide access to ESTs. 
183.  It should be recalled that, since 1992, the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate 
Change has undertaken, on behalf of the developed countries, to take all practicable steps 
to promote, facilitate and finance the tran sfer of environmentally sound technologies 
and know-how. 
184.  As regards patented ESTs, the developing and least developed countries need to make use 
of all the flexibilities available in the TRIPS Ag reement, without restrictions. One particularly 
advisable option would be to use compulsory licensing. Compulsory licensing cannot be an 
exceptional policy in the event of a country facing a health emergency. 
185.  Other flexibilities related to access to ESTs might be the exhaustion regime which allows for 
parallel imports, exclusions from patentability, exceptions to rights conferred and measures 
to counteract anti-competitive practices. However, we recognize that in many circumstances, Members are prevented from making full use of th ese flexibilities, even for issues as sensitive 
as access to medicines. 
186.  In conclusion, we would like to point out that Cuba is in favour of discussing the matter in 
more depth at upcoming formal Council meetings. 
12.5 China   
 
187.  China welcomes Ecuador's proposal to discuss this issue at this Council. Climate change has a profound impact on the existence and developmen t of mankind, and is a major challenge that all 
Members face now. It is the common interests of all to fight against climate change. The principle 
of common but differentiated responsibilities has been established as the basis for closer international cooperation in this regard. Due to their low development level and shortage of capital 
and technology, developing countries face more challenges in combating climate change.  
188.  Technology plays an important role in comb ating climate change and should better serve the 
common interest of human beings. In order to enable the developing countries to have access to climate-friendly technologies, a better environment and policy space for the transfer and IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 31 - 
 
  dissemination of environmentally rational technologies from developed countries to developing 
countries should be fostered. 
189.  IPR is an important element concerning the development and utilization of the 
environmentally rational technologies as provided  in Article 7 and other provisions of the TRIPS 
Agreement. In our view, nothing in the TRIPS Agre ement prevents its existing general flexibilities 
from application to environmentally rational technologies.  
190.  With respect to the new flexibilities proposed in the communication, without prejudice to 
China's final position on the points in the communication, China would like to engage in the further 
evaluation and discussion on these topics among Members of the TRIPS Council. 
12.6 United States   
 
191.  The United States again welcomes this agenda item. As we explained in our intervention in 
the June 2013 TRIPS Council meeting, IPR is an indispensable catalyst for driving innovation addressing greenhouse gas emissions and climate ch ange adaptation and mitigation efforts. In 
support of our position, we presented a significan t body of research, economic analysis and other 
data, which demonstrates that green technology innovation is happening – including in developing countries – that voluntary technology transfer is occurring, and that IPR plays a significant and 
positive role in promoting both activities, without substantially raising costs. 
192.  For this reason, among many others, we continue to have serious concerns regarding the 
premise of the discussion paper submitted in ad vance of our June meeting, and the lack of 
research supporting that paper. We maintain our view that the recommendations included in that 
paper would undermine rather than advance the intended objectives of promoting green 
technology innovation and technology transfer. We have heard no concrete data to the contrary. 
UNFCCC Technology Needs Assessments 
 
193.  In our intervention today, we want to focus on a different body of data – and that is what developing and least developed countries have themselves identified as barriers to – and enabling 
environments for – green technology innovation and transfer. 
194.  As part of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), many 
developing and LDC parties have prepared Techno logy Needs Assessments. In its TNA, an UNFCCC 
party identifies its priority climate change technologies for mitigation and adaptation. TNAs are 
developed through consultations with stakeholders to identify the barriers to technology transfer 
and measures to address these barriers through sectoral analyses. In the process, the TNA may also identify regulatory structures and policy options, coupled with financial incentives and 
required capacity building that could facilitate access to these priority technologies for mitigation 
and adaptation. 
195.  Succinctly put, the purpose of a TNA is to assist in identifying and analysing priority 
technology needs, which can be the basis for a portfolio of environmentally sustainable technology 
projects and programmes, which can facilitate the transfer of, and access to, such technologies and know-how in the implementation of progra mmatic responses to the challenge of climate 
change. Under the current global TNA project supported by the Global Environment Facility, 36 
developing countries were provided targeted fina ncial and technical assistance for developing or 
updating their TNAs and in preparing their Technology Action Plans. 
196.  According to the most recent report of the UNFCCC Technology Executive Committee or TEC, 
by 31/07/2013, 31 of these countries had submitte d their TNA reports. These countries included 
11 African countries, nine Asian countries, three Eastern European countries and eight countries 
from Latin America and the Caribbean.
1 These recently completed TNAs contain a wealth of 
contemporary information that is particularly relevant to this discussion. 
                                               
1 UNFCCC Technology Execut ive Committee, "Executive Summary of the Third Synthesis Report on 
Technology Needs Identified by Pa rties not Included in Annex I of the Convention", TEC/2013/7/15, 
30 August 2013. IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 32 - 
 
  197.  In broad terms, these TNAs reflect two important conclusions. First, the developing and LDC 
countries that submitted these reports identified a long and wide-ranging list of green technology 
innovation and transfer barriers and enabling envi ronments. Second, very few of those TNAs even 
mentioned intellectual property rights. And when IPR was mentioned in a few select cases, IPR 
was not identified among the priority issues to be addressed.  
198.  Rather than raising IPR, the TNAs focus on critical barriers that hinder climate change 
mitigation and adaptation responses. For the most prioritized mitigation sector – the energy 
sector  – economic and financial barriers were identified by all Parties.  
199.  Within this barrier classification, the most commonly identified barriers were: (1) the 
existence of inappropriate financial incentives and disincentives; and (2) a lack of or inadequate access to financial resources. Both of these financ ial barriers were identified by more than 80% of 
Parties.  
200.  The main non-financial barrier, also identified by all Parties, was an insufficient legal and 
regulatory framework within the barrier classification of policy, legal and regulatory framework 
barriers.  
201.  The most commonly identified enablers to address these barriers – which were identified by 
80% of respondents – were to provide or expand financial incentives, and to strengthen the 
regulatory framework for the technology, both to attract investors to the market. I will turn to the 
role of IPR in attracting  investment momentarily. 
202.  For the most prioritized adaptation sector to climate change – the agriculture sector  – the 
most commonly identified barriers were similar to those in the energy sector: (1) the lack or 
inadequate access to financial resources; and (2) an insufficient legal and regulatory framework. 
Both were identified by 96% of Parties.  
203.  Within the classification of financial and ec onomic barriers, the barrier of lack of adequate 
access to financial resources was the most commonly identified barrier, at 89%. The most 
commonly identified enablers to address these barriers in the agricultural sector were the creation of national financial mechanisms or policies – at 65% – and the creation of an allowance in the 
national budget for this technology, including promotion of R&D, which was at 50% of all 
respondents. I will also return to the positive role of IPR in promoting R & D shortly. 
204.  Yet, despite this extensive self-analysis by a diverse array of countries regarding their green 
technology needs and the barriers they face to meeting those needs, IPR is virtually absent. 
205.  In fact, in its own TNAs on mitigation and adaptation, Ecuador did not mention IPR as a barrier to technology transfer. Instead it recognized  the role IP plays to enable technology transfer 
by noting the importance of the Ecuadorian Intellectual Property Institute
 having the capacity to 
facilitate technology transfer.  
206.  It is also important to note that the UNFCCC Technology Executive Committee Report 
synthesizing all of the TNAs was silent on IPR as well. In contrast, the top 12 non-financial barriers 
raised in the TEC synthesis report are:  
 Insufficient legal and regulatory frameworks; 
 insufficient enforcement; 
 policy intermittency and uncertainty; 
 institutional and administrative barriers; 
 clash of interests; 
 highly-controlled energy sector; 
 red tape (bureaucracy); 
 rent-seeking behaviour and fraud; 
 market barriers; IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 33 - 
 
   infrastructure barriers; 
 lack of awareness and skilled personnel; and 
 public acceptance and environmental barriers. 
207.  Nor is IPR included on the list of financial barriers, which includes the following seven 
obstacles to technology innovation and transfer: 
 The existence of inappropriate financial incentives and disincentives; 
 lack of or inadequate access to financial resources; 
 high cost of capital; 
 financial non viability; 
 high transaction costs; 
 uncertain macro-economic environment, and 
 uncertain financial environment. 
So, of the nearly 20 barriers identified in the TEC synthesis report, IPR did not make the list. 
 
Why is that? Was this simply an oversight? We don't believe so. 
 208.  In fact, we have done further research in addi tion to what we identified in our intervention in 
June to support the conclusion drawn by more than 30 Technology Needs Assessments submitted 
to the UNFCCC. 
209.  We have identified three key areas where the economic and other literature elaborates on 
the areas we discussed in our last meeting in term s of the positive contributions of IPR to the 
global climate change challenge. These are: 
 The high degree of correlation between developing country innovation and IPR; 
 that IPR helps to promote green technology transfer through foreign direct investment 
and R&D; and 
 that licensing is a catalyst for such transfers. 
High Degree of Correlation between Developing Country Innovation and IPR  
 
210.  The data shows that in recent years, the world has witnessed a rapid growth in renewable energy investments (REIs) made by developing nati ons. In 2011, for example, 35% of global REIs 
were made by emerging economies.
2 In 2012, investments in these economies topped 
$112 billion, versus $132 billion in developed countries.3 This increase has been met with a 
concurrent increase in global patenting of environmental technology. In 2012, 2623 Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) applications were filed for environmental technologies, a six per cent 
increase from 2011.
4  
211.  And the gap between patent prosecution in developed and developing nations is rapidly 
closing. In 1998, one in 20 patents for environment technologies were protected in developing 
countries; in 2008, the numbers were one in five.5  
212.  These numbers are more than just a coincidence. According to the International Renewable 
Energy Agency (IRENA), the high patent growth ra tes have resulted in a very significant increase 
in the deployment of renewable energy technologies6  
                                               
2 UN Environment Programme Frankfurt School, "Glo bal Trends in Renewable Energy Investment 2012," 
Bloomberg New Energy Finance, 2012.  
3 UN Environment Programme Frankfurt School, "Glo bal Trends in Renewable Energy Investment 2012," 
Bloomberg New Energy Finance, 2012. 
4 Copenhagen Economics, "Are IPR a Barrier to the Transfer of Climate Change Technology?" 
January 2009, p. 4.  
5 Copenhagen Economics, "Are IP R a Barrier to the Transfer of  Climate Change Technology?" 
January 2009, p. 4. IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 34 - 
 
  Promotes Technology Transfer through FDI in R&D 
 213.  Part of the reason why IPR protection is one of the many factors promoting innovation in 
developing countries is that it helps to advance technology transfer. Such protection makes a 
country more attractive for cross-border investments, incentivizing multinationals to invest in R&D, 
which thereby raises demand for skilled domestic labour and strengthens the wages of the domestic work force.
7 
214.  For instance, as Branstetter, Fisman and Fo ley have found, US multin ationals specifically 
respond to changes in IPR regimes abroad by si gnificantly increasing technology transfer to 
countries which improve their IPR environments.8  
IPR, Licensing and Technology Transfer  
 
215.  One key aspect of technology transfer is licensing. 
216.  Protection of IP in the recipient country is  of high importance to potential investors when 
considering whether to enter into licensing agreements. Data on US multinationals show that the 
likelihood of entering into licensing agreements increases as countries increase their protection of IPR.
9  
217.  In a survey study conducted in 2005, IPR protection is considered an important factor by 
82% of the organizations surveyed, with 54% reportin g that it was either a "significantly attractive 
condition or a compelling reason for an agreement."10  
Conclusion  
 
218.  In conclusion, the economic literature su pports, what the Technology Needs Assessments 
make abundantly clear, which is that IPR is not a barrier to green technology innovation and 
transfer. In fact, the literature is abundant, convincing, and as yet, un-refuted in this Council. IPR 
is one among many critical keys to unlocking the global climate change imperative.  
219.  For these reasons, we continue to have serious reservations regarding the paper's proposals, 
and are not in a position to support its recommendations, including any TRIPS Council or other 
decisions or Declarations.  
220.  We continue to view strong IPR protection as an environmental as well as an economic 
imperative, providing critical developmental benefits for developing and least developed countries 
in particular. Such protection is essential to facilitate access to, and transfer of, today's 
technologies and to promote tomorrow's innovation. 
12.7 European Union   
 
221.  The European Union fosters transfer of tec hnology in many sectors, including a large number 
that can be considered "environmentally rational". All of this technology is protected by IP rights 
and is shared or transferred in various ways, in accordance with the development level of the 
destination country. I would like to quote a few examples of ongoing projects and programmes: 
222.  I would like to inform you about some proj ects financed (and sometimes administered) by 
the European Commission, such as: 
                                                                                                                                               
6 International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA),  "The Role of Patents in Renewable Energy 
Technology Innovation," June 2013, p. 16. 
7 Branstetter, Lee and Kamal, Sa ggi, "Intellectual Property Rights, Foreign Direct Investment, and 
Industrial Development", Working Paper 15393, National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper Series, 
October 2009, p. 4-5. 
8 Branstetter, L. G., Fisman, R., Foley, C. F., (2006). "Do Stronger Intellectual Property Rights Increase 
International Technology Transfer? Empirical Evidence from U.S. Firm-Level Panel Data". Quarterly Journal of Economics 121(1): 321–349 (abstract). 
9 Fritz Foley with Pol Antràs and Mihir Desai. "Mul tinational Firms, FDI Fl ows and Imperfect Capital 
Markets." Quarterly Journal of Economics, 124 no. 3 (August 2009): 1171-1219. 
10 "Patents and clean energy: bridging the gap between evidence and policy," Final report, UNEP, 2010, 
p. 58. IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 35 - 
 
  Water Infrastructure and Management Support in Puntland, Somalia This project promotes the 
economic development and good governance of wa ter utilities to improve the sustainability of 
water resources in the area. The type of technology transferred includes:   
 
 ICT technology: Administrative, managerial and financial knowledge;  
 technical engineering knowledge for the maintenance and operations of an urban water 
supply network; and  
 Hydrogeological knowledge for groundwater resource management.  
Somalia benefits from another project entitled "W ater and Land Information Management" with the 
objective of improved preparedness for, and effect ive response to, food and agricultural threats 
and emergencies. The type of technology transferred is:  
 
 ICT training in GIS, remote sensing, data management;  
 Provision of equipment including manual and automatic weather stations and borehole 
monitoring equipment including data loggers and piezometers:  
This project will increase Somalia's authorities' capacity to monitor surface and ground water 
resources and land degradation. 
 
223.  The EU Development Cooperation Instrume nt financed between 2011-2012 (with 30m€) the 
Asia investment facility to promote additional investments and key infrastructure with a priority 
focus on climate change relevant and "green" tech nology in the environment and energy sectors. 
224.  The EU 7th Framework Programme funded the research project, AFRICAB, (4.11m€) is a 
framework for enhancing the Earth Observation capacity for agriculture and forest management in Africa. AGRICAB aims to build on open data sharing, connecting the available satellite and other 
data with predictive models in order to facilitate integration in agriculture and forestry planning 
and management processes.  
225.  In this context I would also like to mention some activities carried out by some EU member 
States: 
FRANCE 
 A programme, sponsored by the French Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Forests (MAAF) 
which carries out actions that transfer know-how and technology in the following sectors: 
irrigation, certification and/or normalization of crops, veterinary services, geographical indications, 
product quality, sustainable agriculture and fo restry management. The types of technology 
transferred are varied and include:   
- Training of veterinary inspectors; 
- technical training (crop growing, milk transformation, etc.); 
- assistance in the setting up of control laboratories (sanitary, phyto-sanitary, fraud, etc.); 
- standardization /certification of fruit, vegetables and seeds; 
- sustainable forestry management, and  
- development of geographical indications 
 
226.  The MAAF (Education and Research Department) also helps in the setting up rural trainings 
in agronomy (in the wide sense): rearing of cows , sheep, goats, aquaculture, crops, farming water 
management, etc.).  
A wide range of technology is transferred such as: 
 
 - water management for agriculture;  
 - development of aquaculture; 
 - training the trainers;  IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 36 - 
 
   - establishing technical agricultural trainings; 
 - local development carried out by  professional organizations; 
 - environmental protection; 
 - diversification techniques for agricultural products; 
 - development of rural tourism; 
 - transformation and conservation of food products; and 
 - veterinary sciences and tropical zoology (par asitology, optimization of fodder, species 
 selection and adaptation to local environment):  
 
SLOVAKIA  
Title of project/programme : St. Peter Claver Training Centre in Rumbek II, South Sudan. 
Technology is transferred to facilitate practical training in the area of electric and solar technologies, safe water resources and ecological water management.  
 
Type of technology transferred : Irrigation scheme, water tanks, pumps, rainwater harvesting 
system, solar panels 
 
SWEDEN  Name of the programme: Wind Power Development and Use, Energy Efficiency, and ICT for 
Pedagogical Development International Training Programmes. Its aim is to  improve access to 
available techniques and industrial processes, training in the state of the art, technology 
management and production methods. 
  
Type of technology transferred: Knowledge of various methods of central importance in 
developing wind power plants such as wind meas urement, localization and design, demands on the 
infrastructure and the electric grid, environmental impact analysis, management, organization and 
economy of wind power plants, etc.  Knowledge of energy efficiency and its benefits for sustainable development and poverty reduction, as well as increased knowledge of methods and tools for energy efficiency. 
250 participants have completed a full programme  while 225 are currently taking the programmes. 
65 to 80% of the participants come from least developed countries.  
Name of the programme: DemoEnvironment: The programme is run by the Swedish Agency 
for Economic and Regional Growth commissioned  by the Swedish International Development 
Cooperation Agency. The objective is to support environmental technology efforts to achieve 
sustainable urban development and renewable energy in developing countries. 
 Type of technology transferred: modern, environment-friendly technology and technology 
solutions never used in the host country before. Some of the countries which are part of this 
programme are China, India, Viet Nam, South African, Namibia, Botswana and Indonesia. 
 UNITED KINGDOM 
 
Name of programme: Africa Enterprise Challenge Fund: A $180m fund which supports 
businesses operating in the agri-business sector in sub-Saharan Africa with a focus on renewable 
energy and climate adaptation for small farmers.  
 Type of technology transferred: 
 Agricultural technology; 
 financial services; 
 media and other information services directly related to agribusiness and rural financial 
services; and  
 renewable energy and climate adaptation technology. 
 IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 37 - 
 
  227.  The AECF is in its fourth year of operation. Since June 2008, 88 business initiatives in 
18 countries have been approved for funding with a total investment of $66m. A further $160m has been committed to these 88 initiatives.  
228.  Without IP, there would be little new technology to improve our lives. IP is not a barrier to 
the protection or adaptation to the environment, rather it helps man's positive reaction to 
providing the best environment possible for future generations. The private sector in the EU is very instrumental in assisting other countries to benefit from state of the art technology, as you can see 
from the examples above and in the EU's a nnual reporting to the WTO in the context of 
Article 66.2 TRIPS. 
229.  On a more general note, however, I would like to reiterate that IP in itself is not a barrier to 
new technology nor to technology transfer. There are many other parts of the puzzle that need to 
be in place before industry (or research institutions) are willing or able to transfer or develop 
technology in a certain country.  
230.  Some of these other potential problems are the general investment climate in the destination 
country – a stable governance, working public authorities, a fair tax system, efficient protection 
and enforcement of IPR. In this context, one can al so refer to the cost to business to register and 
protect its technology – where the tariffs are too high or the procedures slow and unpredictable, 
then industry and investors will be less inclined to invest. 
231.  Since Ecuador is instrumental in the subjec t of transfer of technology being discussed here 
on the TRIPS Council agenda, it may be useful to remind WTO Members of the new, extremely high tariffs Ecuador has installed for the registration and maintenance of patents and plant variety 
rights. Not only are the tariffs, in our understanding, the highest in the world, but a system of 
allowing up to 90% discounts for companies to produce locally, would appear to be discriminatory against foreign businesses and investors.  
232.  This kind of attitude which enormously impact s on the price of protecting IP is an example of 
how counterproductive this can be in the long term and will remove incentives from abroad for assistance and investment between countries. 
12.8 India  
 233.  India thanks Ecuador for the proposal and we support the proposal. In fact we have already spelt out our views in the last TRIPS Council meeting and I do not intend to repeat that statement 
in this meeting. But we do believe that IP does create monopolies, which result in high prices for 
green technologies and they act as a barrier to their diffusion in developing countries. 
12.9 Japan  
 
234.  This delegation welcomes the opportunity to discuss again at this Council the topic of intellectual property in terms of how it facilitates the transfer of environmentally rational 
technology.  
235.  As intervened at the last Council, this delegation does not think that the existing intellectual 
property protection system constitutes a barrier to  technology transfer. Rather, we firmly believe 
that adequate intellectual property protection forms a solid and stable foundation that induces 
direct investment and technology transfer. This is, in turn, expected to lead to the development 
and dissemination of environmentally sound technology. 
236.  Some developing countries have expressed their concerns that environmentally sound or 
rational technologies are not sufficiently being transferred to them. However, we believe that 
careful consideration should be given in seekin g ways and means for implementing the transfer 
thereof.  
237.  Ecuador's proposal document (IP/C/W/585) includes initiatives and assertions that would 
undermine the current intellectual property protection system, as we pointed out at the last meeting. Therefore, we cannot support such initiatives and assertions that might deter the IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 38 - 
 
  development, dissemination and transfer of technology, including environmentally sound 
technology, because these initiatives would end up lowering any incentives for innovation. 
238.  This delegation is also not in a position to support adopting the proposed declaration at the 
Bali Ministerial Conference, as mentioned in paragraph 23 in the proposal made by Ecuador. 
239.  Taking this opportunity, this delegation would like to briefly touch upon an industry-driven 
initiative, namely "WIPO Green" in which Japanese industry is actively involved. This is an initiative designed to offer opportunities both for "technology providers" and for "technology seekers" to find 
partners through a free, online database that enables them to transfer ESTs. The online database 
includes information not only on patented technologies but also on the knowledge and technical expertise that the technology providers might want to transfer. On the other hand, technology seekers can register their specific EST needs in the WIPO Green Database. Based on this, WIPO 
aims to achieve effective technology transfers. 
240.  This delegation considers it important to create an environment that encourages industry to 
contribute to addressing the global environmental issues on a voluntary basis. From this 
perspective, Japan has been supporting this initiative. 
12.10 Canada  
 
241.  Canada thanks Ecuador for its recent communication on the contribution of intellectual 
property to facilitating the transfer of environmental technology. 
242.  It is important to note from the outset two points with respect to intellectual property: 
(1) certain intellectual property rights are necessary in order to support continuing innovation and 
development of new technologies critical to ensuring a sustainable environment; and (2) the 
patent regime is effective in sharing information and contributes to the dissemination of technology. 
243.  In discussing climate change matters, it is important to recognize that there are many 
factors affecting climate change that are outside the purview of IPRs. IPRs should not be cast as a barrier to promoting clean and efficient technology; but, rather form an important incentive for 
innovation and to promote environmental techno logy. The commercialization of environmental 
technology not only rewards the inventors and those who bring the technology to market, but it also delivers associated benefits to our economies through innovation, employment, and investment gains. We must maintain an effective incentive regime with a long-term view that 
enables environmental technologies to be deve loped to support ongoing innovation and the 
deployment of these technologies into the future.  
244.  We must acknowledge the important role that the private sector has on the development and 
deployment of climate change technology. The private sector continues to develop innovative 
solutions to deal with climate change-associated problems while still respecting IPRs. For example, Hydrostor, a new Canadian clean-tech company, has developed a low-cost underwater compressed 
air energy storage technology that offers the capa city of large-centralized systems, while providing 
the flexibility and scalability of small decentraliz ed systems. Clean technology businesses utilize 
existing intellectual property regimes. They  conduct their businesses based upon licensing 
agreements and rely on intellectual property protec tions in order to help finance their investments 
in research and development.  
245.   We note that patents also have an important role to play in the dissemination of technology. 
Apart from financial gains for businesses, patent disclosures help contribute to the wider 
knowledge base surrounding environmental technology, leading to further innovations in this area. 
In return for patent protection, Canada publishes the details of patent applications so they are 
freely available to the public. In doing so, othe r researchers and inventors are able to further 
analyse the patents with a view to improving and further developing environmental technologies. 
246.  We point to ongoing initiatives outside of the TRIPS Council that more appropriately address 
climate change without limiting intellectual proper ty rights. For example, Parties to the United 
Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change  are taking action to reduce greenhouse gas 
emissions and to adapt to the effects of climate change. Within this framework is the Climate IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 39 - 
 
  Technology Centre and Network, an implementati on body that will provide tailored advice and 
technical assistance to developing countries to support the implementation of technology actions for mitigation or adaptation objectives. 
247.  Furthermore, we point to other available means to encourage the development of 
environmental technologies and stimulate investment. For example, climate investment funds, in 
particular ones relating to clean technology funds, can help developing countries pilot low-emissions and climate-resilient development. In addition, Canada has developed frameworks for 
international collaboration via science and technology agreements with a number of our 
international partners, including China, India and Brazil. These treaty-level agreements serve as 
the guidelines for Canadians to effectively work with partner countries to increase international science and technology capacity, including the research and development of clean energy 
technologies. All of these activities contribute to building knowledge, know-how, skills, and climate 
change technology while still maximizing the incentives found within the intellectual property regime.  
248.  IPRs, as they affect climate change and promote environmental technology, do not operate 
in isolation as a single contributing factor here and that is why it is inappropriate to impair IPRs without a greater understanding of the impediments to climate change and the implications of 
reducing the incentives behind intellectual property policy. We can help to provide solutions for 
climate change by creating an enabling environment that fosters the development of innovative environmental technology in the first place. It must be recognized that access to technology is also heavily dependent on other external factors outside of the IP realm, including but not limited to a 
skilled workforce, adequate infrastructu re, and favourable market conditions. 
249.   Canada looks forward to hearing from other Members on this issue and more discussion on 
this issue should take place before a formal work progra mme is agreed to. 
12.11 New Zealand  
 250.  New Zealand joins others in welcoming the opportunity to engage in a robust policy 
discussion on this important issue. 
251.  We note the concerns raised previously by Ecuador that the current IP framework as 
established by TRIPS can hinder the ability of vulnerable and least developed countries to access certain environmentally sound technologies (EST) for purposes of climate change mitigation and 
adaptation. 
252.  However, in the area of ESTs, most patents do not provide their owners with exclusive 
market power due to the presence in the market of close substitutes, many of which may be off-
patent. Even where an EST is a "breakthrough" invent ion with no close substitutes, there will likely 
still be alternative technologies available.  
253.  New Zealand considers that intellectual property rights can play an important role in 
fostering innovation, including in relation to incentivising the development of new environmentally 
sound technologies. Likewise, however, the TR IPS Agreement already contains a number of 
important flexibilities that can be used by Members in appropriate circumstances to address potential abuses of IP rights. 
254.  Existing mechanisms consistent with the TRIPS Agreement are likely to be sufficient to deal 
with any problems arising from the abuse of patent rights. For example, a failure to supply an invention on reasonable terms and conditions within a reasonable time period, or outright abuses 
of patent rights, could be remedied by the i ssue of a compulsory licence, as permitted by 
Article 31 of TRIPS. 
12.12 Chile   
 
255.  I would like to extend my thanks to Ecuador for the proposal made. We believe that it is very 
important to promote access to technologies to mitigate climate change, particularly in developing countries. We also agree with the need to use the flexibility contained within TRIPS with the aim of 
incentivizing access to this type of technology.  IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 40 - 
 
  256.  As was mentioned by New Zealand, we believe that the TRIPS Agreement already contains 
the appropriate flexibility in order to alleviate the problems for access to clean technologies, which might bear on intellectual property. Furthermore, the TRIPS Agreement has the ability to alleviate this in a very neutral way, which means it can avoid differentiated treatment, which might lead to 
a discriminatory regime between various areas or between various technologies or industries. 
Although we think that access to clean technology is extremely relevant, we believe that as it stands the proposal could also diminish the incentives to use environmentally sound technologies.  
257.  We agree with Ecuador that this is an important issue without prejudice to our reservation on 
what is contained in the proposal. We believe that there is still room to discuss this within the Council. 
12.13 Australia  
 
258.  We welcome the opportunity to talk about IP and green technology and we thank Ecuador for its paper. 
259.  We are encouraged that Ecuador has utilized the TRIPS Council to express its views on the 
nexus between climate change and intellectual prop erty as an appropriate forum, alongside WIPO, 
to discuss these issues. Nevertheless we question some of the assumptions underlying the paper. 
We think TRIPS has got the balance right. We do not think that weakening IP rights will result in 
an increased transfer of green technology to th e world's poorest nations; and we are concerned 
that diminishing the prospect of reward from research and development initiatives, could discourage investment in green technology development in the first place. 
260.  We do not consider that the issues of climate change and access to medicines under the 
TRIPS Protocol are analogous, or that compulsory licence and export of green technologies is necessarily the solution to improving dissemination of green technologies.  
261.  In contrast to a defined list of pharmaceutical products which can be compulsorily licensed 
and exported under the TRIPS Protocol, it is difficult to define green technologies which describe the function rather than the technological subject matter.  
262.  Sufficient access to patented technologies for technology transfer can currently be achieved 
through existing TRIPS flexibilities. 
263.  Technology transfer requires more than access to patented technologies and associated 
information, affected countries require the services and infrastructure capacity associated with 
implementing and using the technology. 
264.  These sorts of measures might deter the entry of international firms that would otherwise 
transfer technology to local partners. 
265.  However, we acknowledge that, under the cu rrent global framework, intellectual property 
can play a role in encouraging technology transfer: 
 for example we have seen very significant transfers of climate change positive technology 
to developing countries for use in projects financed under the Clean Development 
Mechanism (under the Kyoto Protocol); and 
 as I said at our meeting in June, we would be  willing to work with Members in this forum 
or WIPO, on concrete, practical suggestions, which could contribute to the dissemination of 
green technologies without distorting the IP system, 
 for example, Australia would be open to further discussions on the role of IP in voluntary 
licencing of technologies associated with adaptation to and mitigation of climate change, 
with a particular focus on the needs of the most vulnerable developing countries. 
12.14 Switzerland   
 
266.  Switzerland, at the TRIPS Council meeting in June 2013 set out its view on the key role of 
innovation and the importance of intellectual proper ty in general, and patents in particular, for the IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 41 - 
 
  development of and access to environmentally safe technology to more effectively address the 
many challenges that climate change poses. My delegation fully associates itself with the statement made earlier by the US delegation under this agenda item.  
267.  At the last TRIPS Council meeting, my delegation posed a number of questions to Ecuador on 
some of the premises in its proposal in IP/C/W /585. We look forward to receiving responses to 
these questions by Ecuador at the next TRIPS Council meeting. 
12.15 Brazil  
 
268.  I would like to thank Ecuador for raising once again the important issue of climate change and technology transfer. Brazil welcomes the debate and would like to present some considerations on the relationship between climate change and the TRIPS Agreement.  
269.  The TRIPS Agreement is the result of nego tiations that have struck a delicate balance 
between the stimulus of innovation and the promotion of public interest in sectors of vital importance to socio-economic and technological development of Members. One principle of the 
Agreement is that intellectual property contributes not only to technological innovation but also to 
technology transfer and technology dissemination to the mutual advantage of producers and users 
of knowledge in a way conducive to social and economic welfare. In this sense, the use of TRIPS 
flexibilities ensures that these objectives, socio- economic and technological development, will be 
reached. This flexibility must be applied bearing in mind the simultaneous objective of providing the necessary stimulus to innovation while at the same time providing adequate access to goods.  
270.  The issue of quality designation of patents is  also relevant to this matter since low quality 
examination hinders innovation and generates unnecessary costs to users of the patent system. 
Low quality patents are especially burdensome in the case of environmentally sound technologies since low quality patents can stop the dissemination of technology in environmentally sound 
practice. The strengthening of policies of mitigation  adaptation could also be fostered by the wide 
use of financial mechanisms in technology me chanisms of the UNFCCC, specially the Green 
Climate Fund (GCF) and the Adaptation Fund of the Kyoto Protocol. 
271.  In a nutshell, Brazil understands Member States are entitled to make full use of TRIPS 
flexibilities in order to cope with the possible impact of climate change. 
12.16 Ecuador   
 
272.  My delegation is pleased because we have achieved one of our objectives of stimulating 
debate on this topic. We would like therefore to thank all of the Members that have taken the floor, both those who supported the proposal and those who had different points of view, such as 
the United States and the European Union, and others that have voiced opinions that run counter 
to Ecuador's proposal. Desiring to improve the proposal, I would invite the United States and all those other Members to join forces to help to improve Ecuador's proposal. We have heard 
reference to studies on technology transfer of environmentally sound technology and we would be 
very grateful if on the basis of their experien ce they could help us to improve the proposal. 
273.  What my country feels and the reason for which it is tabling this proposal is that efficient 
tools do exist to combat climate change through transfer of this type of technology. I invite all 
countries to become involved in this. This is something of interest to all and therefore I am very 
grateful to all concerned for their comments and I trust that the debate can continue in future 
meetings. My delegation also takes note of the fact that this is not the right time to make a formal 
presentation on this topic and I would follow on from what was said by various delegations earlier 
on and would request that this topic be put on the agenda for the work programme for this Council for the next year. 
12.17 United States 
 274.  If Ecuador would wish to add this item on the agenda of the next Council meeting, I think we would not oppose that. However, we are not in a position to support a permanent agenda item at 
this time. IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 42 - 
 
  12.18 Chairman 
275.  I have taken note of Ecuador's request for this matter to be included on the agenda for the 
next Council meeting. The United States has just clarified its position that they do not want to see this becoming a standing agenda item. Nonetheless, Ecuador and other delegations could request 
the inclusion of this item on th e agenda of the next meeting. 
12.19 Ecuador 276.  It seems that there is no opposition to the topic being dealt with at the next Council 
meeting. I agree with the US that this cannot be a standing item but I think it ought to be made 
clear that this should be an item for the next Council meeting.  
12.20 United States 277.  We would be happy to have a conversation at our next TRIPS Council meeting on this issue. 
12.21 Venezuela 
278.  I simply wanted by way of clarification to say that in previous discussions I recall a 
discussion where there was opposition between the United States and China and it was made clear 
by the Secretariat and it is in the rules of this Council that any issue proposed for discussion by a 
Member must be discussed. Therefore there is no pr ior factor or rule preventing the matter from 
being discussed in due time. So I think that a priori we cannot say whether this item is going to be 
standing or otherwise. I think Ecuador has brought this topic to the fore for discussion and I think 
it ought to be discussed on that basis. This should not spark off a discussion at this stage but I simply wanted to make clear that given that we have Members seeking to discuss things, however odd they may seem, for example, IP and Sport, we  have discussed it. This should be the case for 
Ecuador also. If Ecuador feels that the discussion  has not been exhausted, then it could be 
included again on the future agenda for the Council after. Ecuador is fully within its rights as a sovereign delegation to table matters for discussion in this forum as it deems appropriate. 
AGENDA ITEM 13: INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND SPORTS 
13.1 European Union  
 
279.  IP and sport are intricately linked, and increasingly so in the media and interconnected world 
we share. There are many positive aspects to this relationship: personal, social, cultural, economic, technical…. 
280.  Most IP rights are involved in the sports sector:  
 trademarks on sports equipment and clothing;  
 patents on the technology developed for training apparatus, specialised apparel, competition 
accessories and equipment, etc;  
 designs for the external appearance of the above;  
 copyright on artwork and audio-visual creations either on the products or around the 
services and  
 broadcasting rights on the transmitting of sporting events and documentaries to the ever 
increasing audiences. 
281.  Sport attracts a lot of interest from most parts of populations in the world and provides a 
huge amount of entertainment either through participation, spectatorship at live events or 
watching sport on the television or mobile devices.  Sports reporting also provides content to most 
newspapers and many specialised magazines. This size of audience has boosted sponsorship from businesses that want to publicise their trademarks and brands but without these businesses with 
trademarks to advertise, a lot of the sport mentioned above would not exist. IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 43 - 
 
  282.  As the International Olympic Committee President, Jacques Rogge stated, "We have to 
protect the sponsors because … without sponsorship there are no Games."11 Sponsorship 
represents up to 45% of the total revenue generated from the programmes managed by the International Olympic Committee and the Organising Committee of the Olympic Games within the 
four-year Olympic cycle. 
283.  Innovation is at the heart of the sports content industry. Sports rights owners actively 
innovate to ensure that market demand is met by allowing their licensees to use new and 
emerging technologies. Sport content has been a stimulus to new audio-visual and broadcasting 
technology for some time. The London Olympics saw Super HD and 3D television events and live streaming of over 5000 hours of sport on the inte rnet and digital broadcast channels. This is the 
equivalent to over 200 days of live sport content.  
284.  In the European Union, sport accounts fo r 3.7 of EU GDP and employs around 15 million 
people.
12 Gross value added of sport in the EU economy is 1.76% and the share of sport in 
employment amounts to 2.12% (comparable to agriculture, forestry and fishing combined)13.  
285.  The European Union has recognised the increa sing importance of sport by providing the EU 
with new competence aimed at developing the European dimension in sport including it in Article 165 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (the Lisbon Treaty) which 
entered into force on 1/12/2009. The Treaty text calls on the EU to promote European sporting 
issues, notably by taking account of sport's specific nature, its structures based on voluntary activity and its social and educational functions. The Treaty allows for the adoption of incentive 
measures and of Council recommendations. In order to prepare future action in this domain, the 
Commission has outsourced a study on the contribution of sport to the European economy. The 
study should be finished by the beginning of 2014. 
286.  The European Commission Communication from 2011, entitled "Developing the European 
Dimension in Sport" recognises the close link between sport and IPR: 
"Exploitation of intellectual property rights in  the area of sport, such as licensing of 
re-transmission of sport events or mercha ndising, represents important sources of 
income for professional sports. Revenue derived from these sources is often 
partly redistributed to lower levels of the sports chain. 
 287.  The Expert Group on Sustainable Financing of Sport
14 recognises that the discussion around 
sports rights at the EU and national levels is very much "underdeveloped". The expert group goes 
on to say that more needs to be  done to understand what assets sport organisations have and how 
they can best be used and protected. They list a set of examples of the property rights concerns: 
sponsorship, advertising, trademarks, copyright (including recorded sport, images of events and 
players, rules books, fixtures, logos and bran dings, etc…), branding and event management, 
licensing and franchising, selling of TV rights, se lling of internet rights, selling of audio rights, 
designs and visual appearance and personality rights.  
288.  Moreover, in order to have a comprehensive overview, the Commission has launched a study 
entitled "IPR in sport" which will be available by  the end of 2013. The Expert Group on Sustainable 
Financing of Sport made a Recommendation (n° 27) to ensure that any recommendations to 
protect sport's commercial property rights following the EU study on IPR are taken forwards: 
 "The collective selling of media rights is  a good example of financial solidarity 
and redistribution mechanisms within sports."15 
 
289.  This quote, from the 2011 Commission Communication mentioned above, emphasises also the social aspect of sport and IPR. Indeed, part of the revenues from sports events and media 
coverage are used to provide finance for grassroots initiatives, setting up of sports activities for 
                                               
11 "In the spirit of fair play: a primer on IP and th e Olympics", Daria Kim, for IP Watch, 2 August 2012. 
12 COM(2007) 391 final, 11 July 2007, p.10 
13 European Commission, Sport statistics. http://ec.europa.eu/sport/what-we-do/sport-statistics_en.htm  
14 http://ec.europa.eu/sport/library/documents/b24/xg-fin-201211-deliverable.pdf . 
15 Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European 
Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions: "Developing the European Dimension in Sport". 18.1.20111, COM'2011) 12 final. IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 44 - 
 
  children and the under privileged, funding of local sports clubs and helping with problems of 
societal integration as well as talent development. 
290.  Sporting events are largely self-financed and do not therefore use public funds that are very 
necessary for other worthy expenditures on infr astructure, health, education etc. Athletes who 
benefit from funding via IP often earn more in sp onsorship of brands than actual sporting prize 
money. 
291.  One major problem faced by trademark owners in the sports sphere is counterfeit products. 
Sporting goods, apparel and clothing are one of th e most copied sets of items and always figure 
very high up the ladder of statistics of customs seizures and are found massively in shops and markets.  
292.  Live sporting events have a specific problem in that the value lifespan is very short. One of 
their big problems is the interception of the broadcast signals which are then made available 
across the internet almost instantaneously. Major sporting events are very attractive to viewers making them particularly vulnerable to IPR infringements, especially online. All sports have seen 
an increase in the amount of pirate sites on line and the number of viewers illegally watching 
events. The most pirated sport globally is cricke t which is illegally shown by over 1,000 websites. 
Many of them are funded by advertisement an d over 200 of the websites even operate as 
subscription channels with the pirate being directly remunerated. This is not part of any "open 
access philosophy" and exploits sports content to create personal profit without contributing to 
sports development, job creation or tax revenues.  
293.  Because of the important role of IPR in sports, it is essential to protect the IP rights that 
provide such a solid basis for sport to take place and provide the benefit and entertainment we 
sometimes take for granted.  
13.2 Mexico  
 
294.  Intellectual property enables individuals to be recognized and rewarded for their creativity 
for a set amount of time, by granting them exclus ive rights. Sports are also affected by certain 
intellectual property rights, such as trademarks, patents, industrial designs, copyright (image of 
athletes) and related rights (broadcasting). 
295.  Trademarks are the main link between sport and industrial property as promoters 
of economic development. In order to understand this more clearly, it is worth referring to the 
International Classification of Goods and Services for the Purposes of the Registration of Marks, 
better known as the Nice Classification, which was established by an agreement concluded at the Nice Diplomatic Conference on 15 June 1957, reviewed in Stockholm in 1967 and in Geneva in 
1977, and amended in 1979. Currently over 80 co untries, including Mexico, are part of the 
Nice Agreement and use this classification to register trademarks in their countries. 
296.  Sports goods, including toys, fall under Cla ss 28 of the Nice Classification, while sports and 
training services are part of Class 41. Sports br ands are used to distinguish between products and 
services from different teams, leagues and asso ciations within the same sport and/or between 
different sports. This applies not only to banners and players' uniforms but also to collectable albums and stickers featuring world athletes, in addition to team-related toys and hats. 
297.  According to WIPO, innovation and creativity are key drivers in the world of sport. In all 
sports, teams of inventors and creators work to promote their teams, athletes, products and services in the best way possible. For this reason, protection of industrial property rights is not 
limited to just trademarks. It also covers pa tents and industrial designs, which protect new 
equipment and sports technology. Examples of sp orts-related industrial designs include skis, 
sailing boats and surf boards. These items need to  be designed in a particular way in order to 
better perform their function of enabling athletes to achieve victory in competitions. IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 45 - 
 
  298.  With regard to patents, we could mention the examples of "smart balls" containing 
microchips that send signals to the referee the moment they cross the goal line,16 and prostheses 
for disabled athletes.17 This latest technology is driving forwards the Paralympic Games. For 
example, Shruti Grover, Benedict Copping, Idrees Rassouli and Jason Cheah have invented a 
personal training device called " Ghost ", that is worn on the wrist and elbow and uses sounds and 
vibrations to tell swimmers when they are performing a particular movement correctly. 
299.  In terms of inventions, we can also mention the advances made in existing technology such 
as the Endura  prosthetic limbs developed by Millie Clive-Smith, Sebastiaan Wolzak and 
Seitaro Taniguchi, which provide users with improved ventilation and a more comfortable fit. 
300.  According to WIPO estimates, the global revenue of the sports industry, including 
sponsorship and merchandising, reached US$133 billi on this year. Only four years ago, it was 
estimated at US$114 billion, which means that an nual growth during this period amounted to 
almost US$5 billion per year. Soccer is one of the sports with the highest global revenue. According to Legal Counsel of the Union of European Football Associations (UEFA), 
François Gindrat, over one billion people tuned in to the UEFA European Football Championships in 
2008, with an average of 150 million viewers per match.
18 
301.  Intellectual property licensing can vary from  one country and from one sport to another. For 
example, in the National Football League (NFL) in the United States of America, the league or 
association owns the intellectual property assets rather than each team individually. However, in Mexico's soccer league, each team or institution holds the rights to its own intellectual property assets. Under the NFL, a central office negotiates and licenses the intellectual property assets of 
one or several teams, without needing their consent.  Yet, in Mexico's soccer league, each team is 
free to negotiate its own intellectual property assets without prior consent from the Mexican Football Federation.
19 
302.  The examples above demonstrate how important industrial property rights are for 
sports brands. However, although profits are high, unfortunately there are also risks and losses involved. As in other sectors, the greatest threat to intellectual property rights 
in the sporting world is piracy. According to Fran çois Gindrat, UEFA recently dealt with over 400 
cases of intellectual property infringement relating to the UEFA Euro 2012 Championship.
20 
303.  Similarly, Legal Counsel of Six Nati ons Rugby Limited (SNRL), Bird & Bird LLP,  Jonathan 
Taylor21, has warned of the growing risk of digital piracy, which allows for audio-visual content 
from matches and sporting competitions to be delivered online without authorization from the 
broadcasting rights holders. Non-authorized websites also attract audiences and can generate revenue from brand advertisements for other products, in the same way as the authorized licence 
holders. However, these sites do not pay the athletes. They do not comply with the authorization 
given by athletes to fix, reproduce or communicate their appearances and performances, and to use their image. Neither do they pay the organi zers of sporting events for the use of their 
trademarks, images and other intellectual property assets. With regard to copyright-related rights, 
it should be noted that they generate the reve nues needed for broadcasters to invest in the 
organizational and technical undertaking of broadcasting sports events to viewers all over the world. These intellectual property rights ar e the subject of merchandising and licensing 
agreements which in turn support the development of the sporting industry. 
                                               
16 WIPO Magazine. " FIFA 2006 World Cup – What was the IP Score? " 
http://www.wipo.int/wipo_magazine/en/2006/04/article_0005.html . 
17 JEWELL, Catherine, " A glimpse into the future of paralympic sports ". WIPO Magazine, August 2012, 
http://www.wipo.int/wipo_magazine/en/2012/04/article_0007.html . 
18 GINDRAT, François, " UEFA's Battle for its Brand ", WIPO Magazine. June 2012: 
http://www.wipo.int/wipo_magazine/en/2012/02/article_0008.html . 
19 BCB Becerril, Coca & Becerril, " La propiedad intelect ual en los deportes " (Intellectual property in 
sport) El Diario Judío . El Diario de la Vida Judía en México y el Mundo . (The Jewish daily. The daily newspaper 
on Jewish life in Mexico and the world) February 2012. " http://diariojudio.com/opinion/la-propiedad-
intelectual-en-los-deportes/21953 ". 
20 GINDRAT, François, " UEFA's Battle for its Brand ", WIPO Magazine. June 2012: 
http://www.wipo.int/wipo_magazine/en/2012/02/article_0008.html . 
21 TAYLOR, Jonathan, "Rugby, Rights and Re venues", WIPO Magazine. February 2012. IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 46 - 
 
  304.  Mexico considers that it is important for Members of this Organization to continue their 
efforts to strengthen not only their legal frameworks  on intellectual property but also the exercise 
and protection of these rights in practice. This primarily involves continuing to fight against both the most common and the new forms of piracy. 
13.3 Jamaica  
 305.  Jamaica is pleased to join the European Un ion, Mexico, the United States, and Trinidad and 
Tobago in sponsoring the agenda item on IP and sports. As a small developing country Jamaica is 
fortunate to be a significant player in international sports. Jamaica is seeking to advance its work in IP, which, along with sports, are vital pillars of the country's national development agenda. 
306.  In the last 30 years, sport has become one of the fastest growing global industries. The 
magnitude of the sports industry can be measur ed by the revenue generated by sports and the 
earning power of top international athletes. It is estimated that the global sporting industry is valued at over USD400 billion. At the individual le vel, international athletes such as Tiger Woods, 
Roger Federer, Kobe Bryant and our very own Usain Bolt, earn millions of dollars in endorsements. 
Sports is, therefore, no longer just an enjoyable activity, it is big business. 
Jamaica and Sports 
 
307.  Jamaica is now ranked among the top sporting nations of the world. From our sterling achievements at the 1948 Olympics Games to the hi storic and awe inspiring performances by our 
teams at the last two Olympic Games and World Championships, Jamaica has demonstrated its 
outstanding athletic prowess on the international arena. In the wake of Jamaica's dominance on 
the tracks, several books have been written and published about track and field and the country has also hosted several seminars on sport. Sport has therefore significantly enhanced "Brand 
Jamaica" in diverse spheres.  
JIPO and IP and Sports 
 
308.  The Jamaica Intellectual Property Office (JIPO) is the official agency that is responsible for 
legislation pertaining to the protection and administration of IPRs in Jamaica. It has seen the critical need for our sporting professionals to become aware of any potential IP opportunities from early in their careers. This is particularly important for those who evolve into elite athletes, 
achieving significant international recognition. 
309.  As the saying goes, "to be forewarned is to be forearmed". Therefore, having a good support 
team, knowing how best to protect one's interests and being able to seize various business 
opportunities during the short career lifespan of an athlete is not only a prudent aspect of 
retirement planning, but a vital defence against unfair exploitation of th eir celebrity appeal.  
310.  An illustration of not having this foreknowledge is the sad experience of Jamaica's first 
bobsled team. Many people around the world were enamoured with the movie "Cool Runnings" and 
were in awe at the feats of the Jamaican Winter Olympics team, given that one snowflake is yet to fall on our warm and beautiful island. Sadly, however, the members of the team received little benefit from the proceeds accruing to the movie. Various factors including insufficient knowledge 
of their IP and other rights, contributed to this unfortunate turn of events. Sports persons at every 
level of development are therefore strongly encouraged to arm themselves with information in order to protect their IPRs.  
311.  Jamaica's Usain Bolt is undoubtedly one of the most famous personalities in the world of 
sports. Regrettably, some entities have sought to cash in on his name without permission. Although Bolt's management team has trademarked his name, we've seen several trademark 
infringement cases. Recently we were asked to respond to a trademark application in a certain 
country seeking to register a silhouette of Usain doing his famous lightning pose. We have also received several reports of persons trying to register Usain's name or image on products for example the Bolt Energy Drink. IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 47 - 
 
  Seminars/Workshops/Outreach 
 312.  As part of its strategic operational plan, JIPO actively encourages all sports industry members, especially well-known national and international athletes, to register their names, 
pseudonyms, nicknames, images, brands, poses, or  other insignia for which they are well-known, 
as trademarks and domain names.  
313.   In April 2011, Jamaica took the lead in hosting the first ever Conference on IP and Sports, 
organised by WIPO and JIPO, in association with a local law firm. It was held over two days in 
Kingston. The aim of the seminar was to sensitise Jamaican sports practitioners, both upcoming and current athletes, as well as sports administra tors, media and other sports-related business, on 
how to benefit and earn from the proper protection and management of IP rights in the sports 
industry. In particular it sought to demonstrate how IP rights can assist athletes to earn more from 
their careers both before and after retirement. Sp eakers included WIPO Deputy Director General 
Mr. Geoffrey Onyeama as well as professionals in the sports industry both locally and 
internationally. 
Continuing Research 
 
314.  JIPO's activism in the area of IP & Sports includes conducting public education initiatives with 
various stakeholders on the importance of IP protection to the commercial viability of the sports industry. Jamaica is currently implementing a voluntary copyright registration system which will also facilitate the registration of images, photographs and other sports-related copyright works. 
JIPO has also been involved in raising awarenes s about the impropriety of businesses publishing 
congratulatory advertisements to athletes using the athletes' images without consent. 
315.  On a related subject, JIPO has also been doing research on personality rights and the 
desirability of personality rights legislation in Jamaica. In September 2013 JIPO hosted a forum on 
Image and Personality Rights, looking at the 2011 Image Rights legislation in Guernsey, United 
Kingdom, and the potential application of similar legislation in Jamaica. This was aimed at 
providing increased levels of protection for our sporting personalities, alongside the existing 
common law principles applicable to misappropriation of personality. Very recently also there have been discussions on the need for Policy Guidelines to regulate how the country engages with foreign interests who want to exploit the country's brand and reputation in sports.  
316.  Like most companies which are founded with a name and an idea, great athletes are 
developed by a combination of natural ability, effective training and competition and strong promotion in the form of compelling names or brands. The nexus between IP and sports is a 
dynamic and exciting enterprise and Jamaica fully intends to be at the forefront of initiatives in this 
area, in the years ahead. 
13.4 Trinidad and Tobago  
 
317.  It is indeed a pleasure for my delegation to cosponsor this agenda item on IP and sports alongside the delegations of the EU, Jamaica, Mexi co and the United States. In totally concurring 
with the cosponsors who spoke before us, my delega tion will just like to deliver a few remarks on 
our own experience with intellectual property an d sport and the importance of the subject matter 
to us. 
318.  Athletes from Trinidad and Tobago have shared in a number of successes in the past five 
years. We have seen the triumphs internationally in cricket, but it with our regional West Indies 
cricket team or in professional league cricket such as the Indian Premier league. We have seen successes at the 2008 Beijing Olympics along with other Caribbean countries and in regional 
games from track and field to swimming to team sports. We have also noted the relatively short 
commercial life spans of active athletes and th e commercial opportunities the more business-savvy 
have access to. In the midst of the business of sp ort is the inevitable trade and valuation of the 
intellectual property of individual athletes and their respective teams and team brands. However, 
many athletes, in dedication to their profession, are largely unaware of the business propelled by 
their success and fame. Not only were athletes unaware but many local businesses and state agencies were also unaware of the IP and commerc ial opportunities that could be afforded through 
strategic sponsorship of individuals and teams. IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 48 - 
 
  319.  In attempting to bridge that awareness commercial gap, the Minister of Legal Affairs 
established a Committee in 2010 to advise on the Commercialisation of sports-related IP. The potential of the initiative was further strengthened by the successes of our athletes again in the 2012 Summer Olympics in London which brought in even more medals and a long sought after 
gold medal by our Keshorn Walcott in the javelin event. 
320.  The Committee was established to make recommendations for the development and 
implementation of an intellectual property manage ment capacity within the sports industry to 
enable the industry to leverage its intellectual property, intangible assets and image assets for the 
benefit of the athletes themselves and for the grow th and development of this aspect of the sports 
industry.  
321.  The Committee, which was chaired by former West Indies cricketer Dinnanth Ramnarine, 
was mandated to make recommendations, present proposals and a budget to achieve, in 
particular, the following: 
1. To raise awareness of intellectual property  among stakeholders, athletes, managers and 
sporting bodies; to enable an understanding and appreciation of the ownership and 
commercial value of achievements, image and personal brands and the opportunities available to commercialize such intangible assets; 
2. To raise awareness of the processes involved in  obtaining intellectual property rights (IPRs), 
eligibility, conditions for grant and refusal and the scope and limitations of such rights; 
3. A proposal for undertaking an audit and review of existing contracts with a view to 
negotiating more optimal conditions regarding ownership and use of IP; 
4. A mechanism for developing best practices in successful IP licensing agreements and how to 
recognise breaches and abuse of agreements, infringement and piracy; 
5. Proposals for building capacity to manage IPRs  in the sporting industry, advocacy, licenses 
and product development incorporating PRs in the sporting industry; 
6. Recommendations for implementing an effective alternative dispute resolution mechanism 
for disputes involving IP usage in the sport industry. 
322.  It is anticipated that the findings will contribute to more IP and business-savvy athletes, 
teams with more commercial foresight and the inclusion of the sports industry in the wider knowledge economy. 
13.5 United States  
 
323.  We too join the European Union, Jamaica, Mexico and Trinidad and Tobago in co-sponsoring 
this agenda item. We are looking forward to addressing this new topic in the TRIPS Council, 
particularly in light of the numerous and diverse sp orting events we are all looking forward to in 
the near future.  
324.  Today, the United States will focus on three main topics: (1) the importance of IP to the 
sports industry; (2) the negative impact of infringement on that industry; and (3) responses to 
combating infringement in such industries. 
Importance of IP to Sports 
 
325.  Innovation and creativity are present in all areas of the global economy, but are especially 
present in the sport sector.  
326.  In recent years, for example, the fitness industry has remained relatively strong despite the 
global economic challenges. A recent study
22 of the industry projects that global sports market 
revenues will rise at the compound annual growth rate of 3.7% from US$121.4 billion in 2010 to US$145.3 billion in 2015.  
                                               
22 http://www.pwc.com/en_GX/gx/hospitality-leisure/pdf/changing-the-game-outlook-for-the-global-
sports-market-to-2015.pdf  IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 49 - 
 
  327.  The strength of the sports industry extends beyond sports, as Mexico said yesterday. The 
protection of sports by IPR helps to create many jobs in other sectors of the economy: jobs to build sports facilities, to make high-tech sports equipment, and for the tourism associated with sporting events.  
328.  Tickets are a significant portion of this re venue, but three components that rely upon IP: 
sponsorship, media rights and merchandising are also important contributors towards this revenue. According to a 2011 PWC report 
23 of the sports industry, North American gate revenues 
are currently the largest source of revenue. Ho wever, sponsorships, merchandising and media 
rights are all increasing as the second, third and fourth largest sources of revenue for this sector. Sponsorship, for example, appears to be on track to meet or exceed gate revenue by 2020. 
329.  Like in other sectors, IP is a critical asset that the industry can monetize to further promote 
the sport. In fact, part of the allure of sports is that they can be both local and global. Our favorite 
local player can score the winning goal or win the race for the national team in the Olympics or World Cup. We have all played sports and likely have dared to dream that we are that champion. 
What gold medal have you dreamed of? How about your kids?  
330.  And IP has a big role to play. For example,  rugby is played in over 100 countries, and the 
Rugby Union not only organizes international matche s, but also sells broadcasting and sponsorship 
rights to the events. What about soccer? What about cricket and other global sports? 
331.  Likewise, baseball which is often described as a quintessential American pastime is 
supported by each major area of intellectual property – especially copyright and trademark. 
332.  And of course, part of the revenue from licensing these IP rights is reinvested in the sport to 
provide facilities and coaching, both at the professional and amateur level. 
333.  Copyright is important to the sports industry in multiple ways. Indirectly, copyright serves as 
a key driver behind the popularity and public interest in sports by providing important incentives 
for authors to create a broad range of creative works celebrating sports, including books, music, 
films, photographs and other works of visual ar t. "Take Me Out to the Ball-Game," perhaps the 
most popular baseball song ever written, is an excellent example of sports-related creative 
expression that is eligible for copyright protection. 
334.  These copyrighted works engage public attention in sports and further support the vibrancy 
of the industry. 
335.  And the protection of broadcasts of sporting  events is among copyright's most economically 
significant contribution to supporting sports. From the first radio broadcast of a baseball game in 
the United States (1921), to the first television broadcast (1939), copyright, including the public performance/communication to the public right, has played an ever more important role in 
bringing sporting events to local and global audiences. 
336.  Today the programming produced by US professional and college sports associations, for 
example, generates billions of dollars of revenue each year for sports leagues, creates thousands 
jobs in the US media sector, and contributes significant tax revenues at the state and local level, 
not to mention contributing significantly to American public educational institutions. 
337.  More than half of this revenue is generated from exclusive licensing agreements between the 
sports leagues and broadcasters, retransmissions by cable operators and satellite carriers, pay per 
view sales, and licensed Internet distribution . But the economic foundation of all of these 
transactions is the value of the contemporaneous broadcasts of the live sports events.  
338.  Turning to trademarks, in the United States there are 3,505 live registration for baseball 
clothing, bats, gloves, and batting helmets; 729 live registrations for baseball game services; and 
112 live registrations for baseball camp services. 
                                               
23 http://www.pwc.com/en_GX/gx/hospitality-leisure/pdf/changing-the-game-outlook-for-the-global-
sports-market-to-2015.pdf  IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 50 - 
 
  339.  According to Forbes, sales of collegiate-related items, which rely upon these trademarks, 
were $4.62 billion in 2012, second only to Major League Baseball in revenue. Income from college sports supports the educational mission of the schools as well as their athletic programs.  
340.  The inclusion of community-based initiatives in a sports team's commercial strategy means 
that teams have international clubs and retail ou tlets. These clubs and outlets create awareness 
far from where matches are played. For example, there are now 15 million Chelsea fans in South 
Korea! When discussing trademarks and sports, sponsorship is also a critical dimension. When a 
company pays to advertise its goods or services in conjunction with an event or team, this allows 
greater revenue to be derived from the event. Overall, sponsorship is the second largest revenue source in the sporting industry.
24 For those events that do not have ticket sales or broadcasting 
rights, sponsorships can be a critical factor in whether the event is held. 
341.  In some countries, such as China, more re venue is derived from sponsorship than from sales 
of tickets to the game, thus further emphasizing the importance of IP to sports.25 
342.  Industrial designs and patents are a prominen t feature of the sports landscape. Industrial 
designs and patents support sports by providing an incentive to create new equipment, score 
boards, baseball plates. Since 1980, in the United States, the number of sports-related patents has tripled. Interestingly, sporting goods companie s with patents tend to do better financially than 
those which do not. 
343.  In the interventions yesterday, Mexico gave examples of "smart balls," swimming devices 
and prosthetic limbs. Patents play an important role  in sports safety – such as a system to aid in 
the prevention, detection and management of tr aumatic brain injury, and helmets to reduce 
injuries. 
344.  Just look at golf, which will make its return to the Olympics in Brazil, having last been a part 
of the Olympic program in 1904. At least 30 countries  are expected to be represented in both the 
men's and women's competitions, from all continents represented in the Olympic Games. Golf is 
intensively innovative. In fact, golf-related products are among the most IP-intensive sports products, with approximately 1,300 US patents granted. In the US, there are also significant 
numbers of baseball related patents (almost 3000), as well as patents related to surfing (800) and 
football (also about 800). 
345.  Finally, trade secrets also support sports. A tr ade secret could include the formula of a sports 
drink, the shape of a yacht or a race car, spor ts strategies, and the statistical method use to 
analyze players. 
346.  Without these forms of intellectual property, the incentive to innovate is reduced, resulting in 
less revenue derived from sports, which would result in less money to be invested in sports. 
Negative Impact of Infringement on Sp orts: The Challenge of Sports Piracy 
 347.  Moving from the importance of IP to sports to the negative impact of infringement, it is clear 
that infringement is a significant problem with major implications for the sports we love to play 
and watch. 
348.  The adoption of ultra-fast broadband technologies, the popularity of user-generated 
websites, the widespread availability of inexpensive devices to upload television signals, and the 
global nature of the Internet all present significan t challenges to the business model of live sports 
programming.  
349.  Using such technologies, individuals or piratical organizations are able to misappropriate 
legitimate streams of sports programming, repa ckage them on their own websites, and sell 
advertising space to ad placement services.  
                                               
24 http://www.pwc.com/en_GX/gx/hospitality-leisure/pdf/changing-the-game-outlook-for-the-global-
sports-market-to-2015.pdf  page 18 
25 http://www.pwc.com/en_GX/gx/hospitality-leisure/pdf/changing-the-game-outlook-for-the-global-
sports-market-to-2015.pdf , page 19 IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 51 - 
 
  350.  As a result, the entire live sports environment is under stress.  
351.  Sports leagues are required to invest significant amounts in combating sports piracy, 
diminishing revenues available for new investments. Broadcasters are harmed because they lose control over content and advertising. Sports consumers pay for piracy as well. 
International Sporting Events 
 352.  The negative impact of infringement can have particular relevance for major sporting events, 
their hosts and their sponsors. As events like the World Cup and Olympics rely on international 
sponsors, these companies in turn depend on the host country's ability to protect their IP. The gravitational pull of such events to attract partners, sponsors and other contributors increases when such protections are present, and the quality of the events invents increase, for athletes and 
spectators alike. 
353.  You only have to look at the global sports associations like the IOC, regional associations like 
the NHL, KHL and UEFA, national teams, and major international corporate brands like Budweiser 
and Nike to understand the critical need in sports to protect IP. 
354.  This is true in part because the sharp rise  in imports of trademark- and copyright-protected 
goods and services will also see a dramatic rise in counterfeit, pirated and other infringing 
products during such events.  
355.  Likewise, the significant increase in spectators also means a significant increase in 
consumers, who will be confronted by an array of knock-off products trying to seize on these 
games at the expense of both brand-owners and consumers. 
Responses to Combat Infringement, an d especially Piracy, in Sports  
 356.  Where, as we believe, IP is important to sports and infringement is detrimental, what should 
be the response. At the national level, the U.S. Congress has held hearings on sports piracy, for 
example.
26 At these hearings, sports rights holders and other copyright owners have stressed the 
need for appropriate criminal penalties for the unauthorized public performance of live and 
recorded content. Both the U.S. Patent and Tradem ark Office and the US Copyright Office are also 
closely monitoring the problem.27  
357.  At the international level, the United States, together with many other WIPO Members, has 
been actively engaged for more than a decade  in the deliberations of the WIPO Standing 
Committee on Copyright and Relate Rights (SCCR) on a draft treaty to protect broadcasting 
organizations in the global broadcast marketplace, including possible protection for live sports broadcasts.  
358.   Within these discussions, the United States expressed a particular concern about the 
growing problem of unauthorized retransmission of broadcast signals over the Internet and 
through other distribution systems. To address th is concern, the US recently proposed a simple 
approach based on establishing a right to prevent the unauthorized retransmission of the 
broadcast signal to the public over any medium.  
359.  We believe that the protection of broadcasting organizations will help sports organizations in 
the United States, as well as those in all countries. 
                                               
26 See Piracy of Live Sports Broadcasting over th e Internet.  Hearing before the Committee on the 
Judiciary, House of Representatives, 111th Cong., 1st Sess., December 16, 2009, Serial No. 111-94, http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CHRG-111hhrg54075/html/CHRG-111hhrg54075.htm  
27 See Statement of Maria A. Pallante Register of Co pyrights before the Subcommittee on Intellectual 
Property, Competition, and the Internet Committee on the Judiciary , Promoting Investment and Protecting 
Commerce Online: The ART Act, the NET Act and Il legal Streaming, 112th Cong., 1st Sess., June 1, 2011 
http://www.copyright.gov/docs/regstat060111.html  IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 52 - 
 
  Counterfeiting 
 360.  The availability of counterfeit sports and fitness equipment (including footwear) is also 
significant problem for intellectual property rights owners in the sports industry. 
361.   Counterfeit products, such as counterfeit golf balls, may not work as expected, and 
counterfeit helmets, bicycle components, and athletic shoes may result in injury. In addition to physical harm, such counterfeiting causes economic harm, and reduces the funds that the industry 
has to support athletes.  
362.  As we have mentioned in other TRIPS Council meetings, the US Customs Service works hard 
to curb shipments of counterfeit products. In addi tion, the US Intellectual Property Rights center 
investigates websites selling fakes and helps to seize domain names that are found to be selling 
counterfeits. 
Conclusion  
 
363.  Sports are not merely entertainment; they also promote exercise, competition, and 
teamwork and thereby can improve public health . Even beyond these be nefits, sports are a 
passion, for individuals, for nations and for the international community.  
364.  With intellectual property, sports teams and organizations can raise revenue to develop 
teams, improve, catalyze the creation of new sp orts equipment, and support and inspire the next 
generation of athletes. With improved sporting goods, sporting venues, training and nutrition, 
athletes can reach their full potential, inspiring new generations in the enjoyment of sports. 
13.6 Switzerland  
 365.  Switzerland thanks the delegations of EU, Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago and the US for 
having proposed this agenda item.  
366.  It has been said that necessity is the mother  of invention. This saying is also true in the 
sports arena. Athletes dedicate themselves to rigorous training over many years in order to be in 
top physical condition during competition. Due to their dedication, they demand the very best 
equipment and newest technologies in order to give them a competitive edge. The nature of sport therefore leads to, not only a physical but, an intellectual competition as well. Athletes, both professional and amateur, along with their coache s, are always on the lookout for better and more 
reliable equipment. 
367.  The nature of innovation is such that, what is developed for one purpose, can in many 
instances be applied to others. In that sense, sport has become one of the many catalysts that 
lead to new inventions and innovations. Many of these new products find uses outside of the 
sports arena and into our daily lives. The IP system, particularly patents, can play an important role in helping to make these inventions go from the athletic field and come into our daily lives. 
368.  Patents are available to inventions that are new, involve an inventive step and are capable of 
industrial application. In exchange for being gr anted exclusive rights over a patented item, the 
inventor must disclose the invention so that others can gain new technical knowledge and build upon it. In essence patents provide two advantages, one to the inventor and the other to the 
public. The inventor is incentivized by having exclusive rights to an invention which he or she can 
profit from by either selling the patent or granti ng licenses for its use. The public on the other 
hand, gains access to the new knowledge associated with the patent and benefits from the 
technological progress in everyday life. Individuals or companies can license out rights from the 
inventor for their own business or build upon the new technology and innovate new state of the art.  
369.  I would like to illustrate this by two exampl es. The first is an invention that was created for 
athletic equipment but with a wider application that is still relevant to this day: It is called the "Schrader valve". During early 1840's, Mr August Schrader emigrated from Germany to New York and by 1844 he had opened a machine shop in Manhattan. Following his interest in diving, Mr 
Schrader proceeded to design and manufacture air pumps and diving helmets. However, in 1890, IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 53 - 
 
  Schrader and his son George began to develop a new valve for use in the pneumatic tires that 
were being used by bicyclist at the time. The result of their efforts is the Schrader valve. By October 1892, George Schrader had been issued a patent for this invention (Patent No. 484,509). That invention turned out to be so successful that not only are Schrader valves still being used in 
many bicycles to this day, but their use has expa nded into the automobile industry. The tires of 
modern day cars use this same valve. Both car and bicycle tires can use the same pump in just about any gas refilling station because of this invention. 
370.  A more modern example of an athletic requirement coming into our daily lives with the 
assistance of the patent system is Gatorade. This beverage was developed due to a request from the University of Florida's football team in which they asked for assistance to stave off the effects of dehydration and heatstroke. Dr James Robert Ca de and his team then took on the challenge to 
find a solution to an athletes' dehydration. The solution turned out to be Gatorade. Not only does 
this invention continue to rehydrate athletes (b oth professional and amateur) today, but the IP 
system sees to it that the University of Florida continues to receive royalties that can be used in 
the creation of more inventions in their research departments. 
371.  The need for innovation, new inventions and different ways of thinking can be found in just 
about any discipline, sport is no exception. Switzerland looks forward to continuing this dialogue in 
the Council on IP and innovation. 
13.7 Australia  
 372.  Australia would like to thank the EU, US, Jamaica, Trinidad and Tobago, and Mexico for 
placing this item on the agenda. Australians are serious about sport (though not sure if we are as 
serious as Jamaicans). We love to play sport - Australia is one of only two nations to have competed in every modern Summer Olympic Games. We love to watch or listen to broadcasts of 
sporting events - every November the whole nation stops to watch a three minute horse race – the 
Melbourne Cup. 
373.  Others here today have already mentioned th e importance of IP in the world of sport:  
 patents and designs support the innovation of  products that improve performance by our 
athletes; and 
 trade marks provide an opportunity for our sporting clubs and personalities to generate 
income from their brand; and 
 copyright in broadcasts makes it commercially viable for broadcasters to record and 
disseminate sporting events for our enjoyment. 
374.  I'd like to give an Australian example of th e link between IP and sport – and how the patent 
system continues to support innovation 
 patent registration not only enables an innovator to monetise their invention, it also leads 
to information being captured and stored which can be later drawn on by other inventors 
375.  Swimming is a big part of the Australian way of life – in summer Australians spend long days 
outside at the beach or in the pool. Australia's professional swimmers are always on the lookout for innovations that could improve performance. Today many of our athletes wear swimwear made with patented hi-tech fabric designed to imitate the sleek skin of a shark. 
376.  But the road to this hi-tech innovation is paved with decades of innovative products. In the 
1920s when Speedo was a small Australian hosiery company it pioneered the controversial 'racerback' swimsuit for women - in the 'racerback' style, which is commonly worn today, the top-
back of the swimsuit is not covered in order to provide flexibility and movement of the arms during 
swimming. In 1932, 16-year old Australian Clare Dennis won the Women's 200 Meter Breaststroke at the Los Angeles Olympic Games. After nearly being disqualified for "showing too much shoulder" 
in her regulation silk Speedo brand swimsuit, she went on to set a world record time. 
377.  This is just one example of the innovation an d creativity that goes hand in hand with sports, 
as efforts by athletes all over the world to maximise the human potential continue. IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 54 - 
 
  13.8 Canada  
 378.  Canada welcomes this discussion in the TRIPS Council in order to highlight the linkages between IP and innovation relating to sport. 
379.  As part of the applications the Canadian Intellectual Property Office receives, there are many 
trademarks, industrial designs, and patents in relation to sports. The intellectual property rights being sought are often the start of a business venture, which in turn can spur many other benefits, 
especially when the idea is truly innovative.  
380.   Canadian trademark registrations have go ne on to become household names around the 
world in part to intellectual property protec tions in Canada and abroad. For example, Louis 
Garneau Sports, Lululemon Athletica, Bauer Hockey, and CCM have trademarks on the Canadian 
register and abroad. These trademarks serve to es tablish the reputation that these companies rely 
upon in developing their business and help inform consumers of the quality of their products. Also relevant here are linkages to industrial designs given the fact that many of these companies have 
also registered the innovative designs of their athletic equipment, such as hockey sticks and 
hockey helmets.  
381.  The registered trademarks of Canadian team names and logos help contribute to the identity 
of sporting teams fostering national pride and international recognition. For example, teams in the 
National Hockey League have numerous trademarks that are licensed for use in Canada and abroad. Such licenses provide the teams (or licensors) with a revenue stream to help facilitate their continued operation and promotion, while also creating new business opportunities for 
licensees and to promote the sport.  
382.  Patents have also had a positive effect on the development of innovative sporting equipment 
enabling a wider range of people to enjoy sports to a greater extent that before. The patent 
regime helps encourage innovation by providing incentives to inventors, and publishing the patent 
inventions also help promote the dissemination of information to others while encouraging subsequent inventions. One such example is snowmobiling, now considered a sport in many 
countries around the world. A Canadian company, Bombardier, played a pivotal role in bringing 
this to market. Snowmobiles have utilized many patents over the years and the technology is constantly evolving leading to increased enjoyment for snowmobilers.  
383.  The enjoyment of sport can also be seen through television, and one can look to the number 
of viewers around the world for any given sporting event, especially the Olympics. Copyright and 
related rights help enable these fans to enjoy sporting events that are taking place around the world. Broadcasting such events globally can be  a capital intensive industry and requires the 
revenue and benefits of protection under such copyright and related rights. Not only are sporting 
fans now able to enjoy more of their favorite spor ts locally, broadcasting global sporting events 
also unites fans from around the world, forging common bonds amongst us. 
384.  In conclusion, intellectual property plays a key role in fostering and promoting sport across a 
broad spectrum and helps to ensure that innovati ve ideas can be commercialized to the credit of 
the innovators. In turn, this helps bring value added goods and services to athletes and sporting fans around the globe. 
13.9 Japan  
 385.  This delegation would like to express its deep gratitude to the EU, Jamaica, Mexico, Trinidad 
and Tobago, and the US for their efforts in proposing "Intellectual Property and Sports" as an 
agenda item. Japan appreciates this opportunity an d wishes to share its view and experiences in 
this field with other Members. 
386.  This delegation is of the view that it is quite beneficial for all Members to deepen our 
understanding on how the IP system is actually linked to innovation in the field of sports. Therefore, this delegation is willing to make active contribution to this agenda item. 
387.  This delegation is fully aware of the crucial roles IP can play in promoting innovation in terms 
of sports. The linkage between IP and sports ca n be illustrated through the following example. IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 55 - 
 
  388.  A local socks manufacturer in Japan produced a new style of pairs of socks. These pairs of 
socks have a unique feature in that the right and left socks are asymmetrical. In other words, the manufacturer hit upon the simple idea that our f eet are asymmetric in shape and so turned this 
idea into a product reflecting this very idea. The manufacturer developed socks, one designed 
specifically for one's left foot and one designed for one's right foot. Since such perfectly fitting 
socks can reduce fatigue in the feet and improv e the legs' ability to exercise, the company won 
plaudits from top athletes. 
389.  Behind this success was the fact that this manufacturer focused on the development of their 
original products by taking full advantage of their technological capabilities, bearing in mind that they were at a disadvantage compared to established companies in price competition. While manufacturing socks for established companies, they  kept on listening to customers' feedback in 
order to improve their original socks. 
390.  In this story, special attention needs to be given to how successful this manufacturer was in 
making use of IP to expand its business and promote innovation, notwithstanding the small 
number of its employees. The company has been de veloping their asymmetric socks into various 
products that more closely fit the shape of each ar ea of a foot such as the heel and arch. In doing 
so, the company has been attaching great import ance to protecting these improvements by 
utilizing IP rights. The company worked to obtain patents, design rights, and trademarks for its 
products, which successfully gave them an edge over their competitors and allowed them to further innovate. 
391.  What is noteworthy in this case is that the company also has been seeking IP protection 
abroad, in anticipation of expanding their businesses in the future. As a matter of fact, they have 
obtained patents in Asia, Europe and the United States and already licensed their inventions outside Japan. Their IP-focused business is expected to help them gain a foothold in the global 
market. 
392.  As indicated in the aforementioned case, in the field of sports, even SMEs with insufficient 
capabilities are able to link their own technologies and designs to fantastic business opportunities 
and expand their businesses by properly protecti ng them with IP rights. We wish to emphasize 
that the IP system is, therefore, an important tool to support innovation, not only for developed countries but also, and especially nowadays, for deve loping countries. It would give this delegation 
great pleasure if Japan's views and experiences can bring about positive results for all Members in 
terms of the connection between IP and sports, and contribute to constructive discussions in the 
TRIPS Council. 
13.10 Brazil  
 
393.  Brazil would like to welcome the debate on IP and sports proposed by the delegations of European Union, Jamaica, Mexico, Trinidad and Tobago and the United States. We would like to 
contribute to this debate with some remarks on our experience in sport events. 
394.  Brazil will host, in 2014, one of the biggest sport events, the World Cup. Having this in mind, 
our country is putting in place tangible initiatives to ensure protection to intellectual property related to sports. Among them, I would like to highlight legislative measures as well as public 
policies directed towards building respect for intellectual property. 
395.  On legislative measures, the Brazilian Government approved in June 2012 the General Law 
of the World Cup. This event-specific law refers to  the protection and use of trade rights during the 
World Cup. Its norms provide enhanced protecti on to official symbols owned by FIFA when 
compared to the Industrial Property Law, recogn izing these symbols as highly reputed trademarks. 
396.  The general law also introduced in the Brazilian normative a new type of infringement to 
trademark rights known as "ambush marketing". This new provision is aimed at fighting the unfair 
use of products and services associated to FIFA  or World Cup sponsors trademarks during the 
event. 
397.  On copyright, the new normative ensures to FIFA exclusive rights over images and sounds 
related to the event.  IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 56 - 
 
  398.  Regarding public policies, the National Counc il to Fight Piracy and other infringements to 
Intellectual Property (CNCP) has set as an objective the strengthening of protection to IP rights during big sport events such as the World Cu p in 2014 and the Rio Olympics in 2016. The Third 
National Plan to Fight Piracy and other IP infringements, released last May, includes among the 
initiatives to reach this goal, the enhanced cooperation with local government authorities in host 
cities. Until today, CNCP has signed cooperation agreements with local authorities of São Paulo, Curitiba, Brasília, Belo Horizonte, Rio de Janeiro and Salvador.  
399.  In addition, in 2012, CNCP signed a cooperation agreement with FIFA to enhance effective 
mechanisms to fight IP rights violations related to the World Cup, as well as disseminate the respect for intellectual property in the Brazilian Society. 
400.  The fourth National Plan to Fight Piracy and other IP infringements, set to be released in the 
second semester of 2014 will include specific measures to enhance enforcement of IP rights during 
the Olympics in 2016. This initiative may be complemented by legislative measures that can also be put in place to reach this goal. 
13.11 Venezuela  
 401.  We consider that there are already international agreements that address the issues 
mentioned in the proposal: the Paris Convention to begin with, and the agreements on 
trademarks, patents, etc., so we think that behind this proposal is the protection of broadcasting. 
402.  My country believes that it is an error to place the rights of broadcasting companies, 
which are legal persons, on the same footing as th e rights of creators of works that are products 
of the intellect - a right which is recognized under  Article 27 of the Universal Declaration of Human 
Rights - since broadcasting entities only serve as a platform for broadcasting works that are products of the human intellect, and are not actually holders of the works. 
403.  We also believe that this Council should de vote itself to topics of greater interest to 
humanity, such as food security, climate change, health, and the protection of traditional knowledge. 
404.  Finally, it should be stressed that the WIPO  Committee on Copyright is tackling this subject, 
and in the latest series of meetings of the WIPO assemblies that recently came to an end, certain delegations raised the possibility of holding a diplom atic conference on the subject, so that in order 
to avoid duplication, we think that the discussions should take place in that forum. 
13.12 Korea  
 405.  I would like to thank the cosponsors for presenting your agenda item. As technology, the 
Internet and broadcasting have developed, the media market has also expanded. In sports, a 
variety of economic profits is being created by IP relating to sports. The protection of IP in the area of sports can help to expand investments in sports, and will lead to the development of a 
sports industry. In Korea, the copyright of broadc asting our sports events and publicity of sports 
stars are related to sports IP, so Korea already has in place the legal system. We hope that these discussions will bear good fruit. 
13.13 China  
 
406.  China thanks the proponents for proposin g this topic and presenting their views both 
yesterday and today. China understands this item is not a standing item on the agenda of the 
TRIPS Council meetings. Actually, we feel quite confused what the objective outcome to achieve 
under this item is. As sport is only one of the industries, we do not recognize the particular reason to discuss this issue at the TRIPS Council at this moment. In our view, the introduction and 
discussion of any new issue should in no way divert Members' attention and focus from 
longstanding issues on the Council's agenda. Although some of the proposals from our side, such as having seminars on certain important issu es, have been objected without convincing 
explanations, and despite not having received an y documentation other than a flyer for a side 
event during the lunch break, we still want to show a constructive gesture and briefly illustrate 
how IP protection is being applied to the sports-related sectors. IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 57 - 
 
  407.  China has established the legal system on IP protection and the enforcement mechanisms, 
and they apply to all the industries including sports. Thus, the IP rights, such as patents, trademarks and broadcasting rights, can be effectively protected under China law and enforcement system. In addition, China also promulgated partic ular regulations on IP protection relating to 
games. For example, the Regulations on the Protection of Olympic Symbols  was promulgated by 
the State Council in 2002, the Rules of Shenzhen on the Intellectual Property Protection for the 
26
th Summer Universiade  and the Regulations on the Protection of the Special Signs of Shenzhen 
26th Summer Universiade was promulgated by the Shenzhen Municipal People's Government 
in 2007, the Rules on the Protection of Asian Games Symbols  was promulgated by the State 
Administration for Commerce & Industry in 2010, and the Measures of Tianjin Municipality for the 
Protection of Intellectual Property Rights of the Sixth East Asian Games  was promulgated by the 
Tianjin Municipal People's Government in 2012. These are some of the examples that I have 
collected both at the central and sub-central level in legislation in the protection of sports-related sectors.  
13.14 India  
 408.  My delegation would like to thank the delega tions of the EU, the US, Jamaica and Mexico for 
tabling an agenda item on IP and sports, which we understand is a stand-alone item. We also 
thank the proponents for highlighting different innovations in sports and for organising the side event. While this agenda item may be of interest to a few IP holders in the field of sports, we do 
not comprehend the purpose of this agenda in th e discussions in this Council. We have observed 
that instead of discussing the long-pending agenda it ems which are of high priority to a majority of 
the Membership of this Organisation, the proponents seem to be focused on new issues. Sustained efforts on the part of few Members to overburden the already long agenda will not only affect the 
seriousness of the discussions on other agenda it ems but would affect the credibility of this 
Organization. 
409.  The TRIPS Agreement is a very comprehens ive IP treaty that has maintained a delicate 
balance between the interests of the right hold ers and the public interest. The Agreement has 
provided flexibilities so that the Members can fr ame their national IP policies according to their 
level of development. Thus the Agreement, based on minimum standards for the protection of all 
IPRs, recognises that "one size fits all' is not an appropriate IP policy. Further, over the last few 
years we have seen attempts being made by some interested parties to push the TRIPS plus 
agenda which would not only affect the developm ent priorities of the developing countries but 
would create barriers in accessing health, educatio n, technology transfer and other public goods. 
In this context we feel that the agenda item conne cting IP with sports may be an attempt to create 
higher international standards for IP protection  to favour interested  commercial entities.  
410.  We fail to understand the relevance of th is issue to the mandate of the TRIPS Council and, 
after listening to the interventions from the propon ents, we feel that there is no need to discuss 
the issue further. We are convinced that the discussions are more relevant in WIPO 
13.15 Plurinational State of Bolivia  
 
411.  I also want to offer my thanks to the proponen ts of this issue for having shared with us their 
experiences with regards to the relationship between IP and sport. Nevertheless, as other delegations, we do not fully understand the relevance or the objective of placing this on the 
agenda of this Council, because there are many other important pending issues, such as access to 
medicines, elimination of bio-piracy and work relating to the protection of genetic resources and traditional knowledge. We believe that many of the elements that have been mentioned in the 
statements made by colleagues who have spoken on this issue are already covered by current IP 
mechanisms, e.g., patents or trademarks, or ind eed protection of Olympic symbols. We already 
have trademarks for all of this and we ought to have frameworks for these too. I think all that remains in this context is perhaps the broadcasting  issue, and we, as expressed by Venezuela, do 
not believe that it falls under the remit of this Council, and we do not think that broadcasting 
necessarily is an appropriate issue here. That issue has been sufficiently discussed in WIPO for years now, and we think that it might be better for the this Council not to dedicate too much time 
to issues that are being dealt with in greater depth at WIPO and which clearly distract from the 
work of our house here, and we don't want to duplicate work.  IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 58 - 
 
  13.16 Cuba  
 412.  We thank the proponents for introducing this item. However, we do not see how the topics of intellectual property and sport are related. Ye t we are not surprised to see another enforcement 
issue on the table, which we believe should remain outside Council debates. We emphasize that 
the TRIPS Agreement contains sufficient civil an d criminal enforcement measures, which should 
have been implemented by Members. Matters such as preventing the registration of trademarks 
that infringe personality rights or that may mi slead the public are resolved by implementing 
prohibitions on registration that are laid out in most trademark laws, some of which date back to the Paris Convention of 1883. Cuban law provides  for such prohibitions and does not allow the 
registration of trademarks that infringe registration bans. WIPO has an Advisory Committee 
on Enforcement and some of the issues raised on  copyright and related rights are also discussed 
in another of this organization's committees, so duplication of efforts should be avoided. Enforcement issues such as these should always be examined in the light of Recommendation 45 
of the Development Agenda. Lastly, like the issue of access to technology, enforcement 
of intellectual property rights does not fall excl usively within the domain of intellectual property. 
It is a complex matter that cannot be approached from one angle alone. 
13.17 Ecuador  
 413.  Ecuador would like to support the statements made by the delegations of Venezuela, China, India, Bolivia and Cuba. 
13.18 Paraguay  
 414.  We would like to thank the cosponsors for the presentations on IP and sport. We would like 
to refer to an additional issue, namely dispute settlement mechanisms for sport, which have 
implications on intellectual property. For example, in the WIPO dispute settlement mechanism, there are issues related to the Cup of Americas, and in FIFA there is a famous decree which deals 
with what happened in 2002. Various delegations have mentioned national examples, which 
regulate patents, trademarks, copyright and which do have implications for intellectual property rights. We believe that these mechanisms can form very useful case studies, if this Council decides to continue with these discussions. 
13.19 European Union  
 415.  I would like to thank all the delegations for what we thought was a very interesting and 
factual debate. I would like to briefly mentio n the reasons why the European Union has co-
sponsored this proposal. We believe that this theme illustrates what is the real contribution of intellectual property in one area where its produces  positive social results, economic results, even 
cultural results. Sports are appreciated around  the world and as we have seen from this 
discussion, intellectual property helps the sports exist in big countries, small countries, rich countries and poor countries. That for us was the main achievement of this debate, and in that 
sense we believe that we did good work here. It is also for us a pleasure, and not a burden, to 
discuss these concrete issues of intellectual property in the TRIPS Council. It was not our intention 
to ask for extending rights or introducing new rights, rather our purpose was to show how the existing rights allow for very good work to be achieved for athletes to be sponsored, for young 
people to have access to sport, and for millions of  people to be entertained. To conclude, I would 
like to remind that this will be followed by the views of the civil society and by people who use these rights in their daily lives in the side event that will be organised here today. 
13.20 Nepal (for the LDC Group)   
 416.  My delegation would also like to thank the proponents of this proposal and, after listening to all of you, it seems that it is an interesting area. I think the proper discussion might be interesting, 
but as an LDC, my delegation is not clear how much economic and social benefit the LDCs can 
draw through endorsing this kind of proposal and th is kind of agenda. So my delegation associates 
itself with the statements made by India, China,  Bolivia and other developing countries that we 
need more intensive and further deliberations before finalising this proposal. IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 59 - 
 
  AGENDA ITEM 17: OTHER BUSINESS 
Agenda Item 17.3: Announcement of 18 Se ptember by the Government of Ireland 
regarding the Legislative Programme for the Autumn Session 2013 which includes 
generic packaging of tobacco products under Section C28 
17.1 Dominican Republic  
 417.  On 28 May 2013 Ireland announced its intention to introduce measures on the plain 
packaging of tobacco products.
29 Last month, Ireland included a bill on the proposed measures in 
its legislative programme for the 2013 autumn session.30 
418.  At today's meeting, the Dominican Republic does not wish to make a substantive statement 
explaining why it considers the proposed plain packaging measures to be inconsistent with 
Ireland's obligations under the TBT Agreement and the TRIPS Agreement. The Dominican Republic, 
together with other WTO Members31, expressed its concern over Ireland's plain packaging 
measures at the TBT Committee meeting on 2 July 2013.32 Likewise, in previous TRIPS Council and 
TBT Committee meetings, our country clearly stated it s opposition to similar measures notified by 
New Zealand and applied by Australia.33 
419.  Today, the Dominican Republic would like to recall that Australia's plain packaging measures 
are currently being examined by the WTO Dispute Settlement Body34 following complaints brought 
by five Members (Dominican Republic, Ukraine, Honduras, Cuba and recently, Indonesia). In two of the cases, involving Ukraine and Honduras, panels were established. This means that the Dispute Settlement Body will examine whether or not the measures on the plain packaging 
of tobacco products are consistent with WTO obligations. 
420.  For the above reasons, the Dominican Republic requests that Ireland delay the introduction 
of plain packaging until the DSB issues its ruling in the disputes concerning Australia's plain 
packaging measures.  
17.2 Cuba  
 
421.  Cuba fully supports the statement made by the Dominican Republic. While we have 
repeatedly said that we respect the right of governments to protect the health of their citizens, we consider the plain packaging measures for tobacco to be unnecessary barriers to trade which violate specific legal provisions of several WTO Agreements, in particular the TRIPS Agreement. 
Five Members of the WTO have expressed their concern regarding this issue and there are various 
proceedings under way in the DSB. We would therefore urge any Members that are thinking of introducing measures of this type to wait for the results of the dispute settlement proceedings 
before actually implementing them. 
17.3 Honduras  
 
422.  We wanted to support the declaration made by the Dominican Republic. 
                                               
28 P.M. "Anuncio del Gobierno de Irlanda del 18 de septiembre del 2013 en relación al Programa 
Legislativo para el otoño del 2013 en el cual se incluye en la lista el empaquetamiento genérico de los 
productos del tabaco bajo la sección c."  
29 "Ireland set to become second country in the world to introduce plain pack cigarettes" (28 May 2013) 
available at: http://www.dohc.ie/press/releases/2013/20130528.html . 
30 The announcement made by the Irish Government on Wednesday 18 September 2013 in the 
Government Legislative Programme fo r the Autumn Session, which includes the "Standardised Packaging of 
Tobacco Products Bill" under Section C ("Bills in re spect of which heads have yet to be approved by 
Government"). With regard to the deadli ne, it specifies "publication expected", although it is "not possible to 
indicate at this stage" the exact date. Available at: "http://www.taoiseach.gov.ie/eng/Taoiseach_and_Government/Government_Legislation_Programme/SECTION_C11.html". 
31 See, for example, the statement by Malawi, ava ilable in G/TBT/W/368; and the statement by Cuba, 
available in G/TBT/W/365. 
32 See the statement by the Dominican Republic, available in G/TBT/W/366. 
33 IP/C/M/66; IP/C/W/565; G/TBT/W/339; G/TBT/W/346. 
34 WT/DS434; WT/DS435; WT/DS441. IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 60 - 
 
  17.4 Nicaragua  
 423.  We wanted to offer our support to what was said by the Dominican Republic delegation, because of the economic interest this represents for our delegation. 
17.5 European Union  
 424.  We thank you for expressing your concerns, but there is not a lot that I can tell you 
concretely about this. We are talking about statements or announcements, we are not talking 
about legislation that is in place. The European Union is well aware of its commitments and obligations within the WTO, and will ensure that they are respected. 
17.6 Australia  
 
425.  Australia welcomes the decision by Ireland to join Australia in legislating for the mandatory plain packaging of tobacco products. Australia is of the firm view that Members have the right to 
implement measures necessary to protect pub lic health, while complying with relevant 
international treaty obligations, including the TRIPS Agreement. Tobacco plain packaging is a 
legitimate measure, designed to achieve a f undamental objective – the protection of human 
health. 
426.  We look forward to supporting Ireland as they undergo the development of their own plain 
packaging measures. The tobacco plain packaging me asure is endorsed by leading public health 
experts as well as the World Health Organization (WHO) and is supported by extensive research 
reports and studies. Tobacco plain packaging is recommended in the guidelines for the 
implementation of Articles 11 and 13 of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. 
Australia, Ireland, the EU and many of the countri es in this room are Parties to that Convention. 
17.7 New Zealand  
 427.  New Zealand would like to record its support for Ireland's decision to commence the process 
of introducing a plain packaging regime for all tobacco products. 
428.  The TRIPS Agreement recognises the fundam ental right of Members to implement measures 
necessary to protect public health and provides the necessary flexibilities for Members to do so. All of our Ministers agreed in the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health  that 
"the TRIPS Agreement does not and should not prevent Members from taking measures to protect 
public health" and affirmed that "the Agreemen t can and should be interpreted and implemented 
in a manner supportive of WTO Members' right to protect public health". 
429.  It is therefore clear that tobacco plain pack aging measures do not violate the provisions of 
the TRIPS Agreement nor undermine the protection afforded to trademarks and geographical indications under the TRIPS Agreement. 
17.8 Canada  
 430.  Canada follows with interest the ongoing international developments regarding the plain packaging of tobacco products, and how such measures interact with both international trade and 
public health.  
431.  In Canada's view, it is important to recall that the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement 
and Public Health states that "the TRIPS Agreement does not and should not prevent members 
from taking measures to protect public health," as well as Article 8 of the TRIPS Agreement itself.  
432.  Canada has been a pioneer in package labe lling requirements for tobacco products, and we 
consider these sorts of requirements a core compon ent of the right to regulate in the interests of 
the Canadian public.  
433.  Canada recognizes how challenging it is to introduce tobacco control measures that have 
never been implemented before. Canada was in a similar situation a decade ago when it introduced pictorial health warnings on tobacco packages. IP/C/M/74/Add.1 
 
- 61 - 
 
  434.  We have taken these regulatory and other steps because tobacco use is a significant 
problem, in Canada and around the world. In Canada alone, 37,000 people die annually from 
tobacco use – our leading cause of preventable death and disease. Tobacco products are also the only good that is the subject of a legally-binding health treaty, the World Health Organization 
Framework Convention on Tobacco Control.  
435.  As we move forward in our discussions, Members may want to consider the complete 
economic picture regarding tobacco control, including whether tobacco may actually be a net 
economic drain for many countries. 
436.  We are looking forward to further views from other Members on the appropriate balance 
amongst intellectual property, international trade and public health.  
17.9 Norway   
 
437.  As previously stressed, both in this Council and in other fora, public health and tobacco control are topics of particular interest to Norway. In our view, it is within the rights of each WTO 
Member to adopt measures which are necessary to protect public health, as long as the measures 
chosen are consistent with WTO agreements. 
438.  Plain packaging of tobacco products is  a recommended measure under the Framework 
Convention on Tobacco Control. It is Norway's firm opinion that the Framework Convention and 
the relevant WTO agreements are mutually suppo rtive, and that it is possible to implement 
measures intended to regulate the packaging of tobacco products in line with both sets of binding obligations.  
439.  Therefore, Norway wants to signal support to  Ireland concerning its right to introduce this 
kind of measure, in consistency with its WTO obligations, to fulfill its obligations under the Framework Convention in order to protect public health. 
17.10 Uruguay  
 440.  The delegation of Uruguay would like to support the statements made by Australia, New 
Zealand, Canada and Norway. As is well known by Members of this house, Uruguay has on a 
number of occasions taken the floor on this issue. We would like to make known our understanding as to the sovereign right of Members to protect the public health of their population 
in line with the WTO Agreement and other international instruments in this area. 
17.11 China   
 441.  China would refrain from making too many comments on the ongoing disputes, yet we would 
like to make a brief comment on what we believe to  be the general principles that we can consider 
under this matter. Article 8 of the TRIPS Agre ement authorized Members to adopt measures 
necessary to protect public health and nutrition and promote the public interest in sectors of vital 
importance to their socio-economic and technological development. At the same time, Article 8 
requires that such measures shall be consistent with the provisions of th e TRIPS Agreement. China 
believes that Members should have the right to take measures to protect public health and that such measures should not contravene it s obligations under the TRIPS Agreement. 
 
__________