WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  WT/GC/W/591 
TN/C/W/50 9 June 2008 
 
 
(08-2702) 
General Council Trade Negotiations Committee  
 
 
 
ISSUES RELATED TO THE EXTENSION OF  THE PROTECTION OF GEOGRAPHICAL 
INDICATIONS PROVIDED FOR IN ARTICLE 23 OF THE TRIPS AGREEMENT TO 
PRODUCTS OTHER THAN WINES AND SPIRITS AND THOSE RELATED TO  
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TH E TRIPS AGREEMENT AND  
THE CONVENTION ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY 
 
Report by the Director-General
 
 
 
1. As reported to various mee tings of the General Council1 and the TNC2, Deputy 
Director-General Rufus Yerxa has b een consulting on my behalf on issues related to the extension of 
the protection of geographical indications provide d for in Article 23 of the TRIPS Agreement to 
products other than wines and spirits ("GI extensi on") and those related to the relationship between 
the TRIPS Agreement and the Convention on Biologi cal Diversity (CBD), pursuant to the mandate 
relating to outstanding implementation issues in  paragraph 39 of the Hong Kong Ministerial 
Declaration (WT/MIN(05)/DEC).  The purpose of th is note is to report on the status of these 
discussions. 
GI extension 
2. The work continues to be characterized by diffe rent views on both the merits of GI extension 
and on whether it was agreed at Doha that this is part of the negotiations and of the Single 
Undertaking.  There are also different views on wh ether this matter should be addressed in the context 
of the modalities decision. 
3. On the one hand, we have a number of Me mbers who support GI extension and who want 
clear guidance on this question as part of the modalities decision.  In this connection, these Members have tabled the following proposal for action:  "Mem bers agree to the extension of the protection of 
Article 23 of the TRIPS Agreement to geographical i ndications of all products.  Negotiations shall be 
undertaken, in Special Sessions of the TRIPS Council and as part of the Single Undertaking, to amend 
the TRIPS Agreement in order to extend the prot ection of Article 23 of the TRIPS Agreement to 
geographical indications of all products as well as to  apply the exceptions provided in Article 24 of 
the TRIPS Agreement mutatis mutandis " (WT/GC/W/587 and Add.1 - TN/C/W/48 and Add.1). 
4. On the other hand, we have a number of Members who are opposed to negotiations on 
extension.  They believe that the case has not b een made for such extension and that even basic 
objectives are far apart.  In their view, the issue of GI extension should not be addressed in the context of the modalities decision and the suggested draft modalities text presented by the demandeurs  would 
prejudge an outcome.  Some of these Members are willing to continue fact-based discussions under the present process of work as agreed in paragraph 39 of the Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration but 
                                                     
 
1 See documents WT/GC/M/101-103, 112 and 114 (to be issued). 
2 See documents TN/C/M/23-25 and 27. WT/GC/W/591 
TN/C/W/50 Page 2 
 
 
  without prejudice to the outcome and the positions of  Members and provided that there is a readiness 
to engage meaningfully on technical matters. 
TRIPS/CBD 
5. There is important common ground on key underlying objectives, notably the importance of 
the TRIPS Agreement and the CBD being implemented in a mutually supportive way, the avoidance 
of erroneous patents for inventi ons that involve the use of gene tic resources and related traditional 
knowledge and securing compliance with national acces s and benefit-sharing regimes.  Moreover, 
there is wide acceptance of the need for patent o ffices to have available to them the information 
necessary to make proper decisions on the grant of pa tents and to avoid any undermining of the role 
of the patent system in providing incentives for innovation.  However, the work continues to be 
characterized by different approaches to mee ting these objectives, including whether the TRIPS 
Agreement needs to be amended and whether it was ag reed at Doha that this issue is part of the 
negotiations and of the Single Undertaking.  There are also different views on whether this matter 
should be addressed in the context of the modalities decision. 
6. On the one hand, we have a large group of developing country Members who have proposed 
an amendment of the TRIPS Agreement to introdu ce a mandatory disclosure requirement in patent 
applications and who want clear guidance on this ma tter as part of the modalities decision.  In this 
connection, these Members have tabled the followi ng proposal for action:  "Members agree to the 
inclusion in the TRIPS Agreement of a mandatory  requirement for the disclosure of origin of 
biological resources and/or associated traditional knowledge in patent applications.  Text-based 
negotiations shall be undertaken in Special Sessions of the TRIPS Counc il, and as an integral part of 
the Single Undertaking, on an amendment to th e TRIPS Agreement establishing an obligation for 
Members to require patent applicants to disclose the origin of biological resources and/or associated 
traditional knowledge, including prior inform ed consent and access and benefit sharing" 
(WT/GC/W/590 – TN/C/W/49). 
7. On the other hand, we have a number of Me mbers who are opposed to negotiations on this 
matter.  They believe that the case has not been ma de as to how disclosure requirements of the sort 
proposed would contribute towards meeting th e commonly accepted objectives, which these 
delegations believe can be met without amending the TRIPS Agreement, for example through the 
establishment under WIPO of improved databases on traditional knowledge available to patent 
examiners and through contractual arrangements under national access and benefit-sharing laws.  
These Members believe that these issues should not be addressed in the context of the modalities 
decision.  They are willing to continue fact-bas ed discussions under the present process of work as 
agreed in paragraph 39 of the Hong Kong Ministeria l Declaration on issues related to the relationship 
between the TRIPS Agreement and the CBD, but wit hout prejudice to the outcome and the positions 
of Members. 
8. In this area, we have three further approach es put forward by some other Members which lie 
in-between the two positions set out above.  Under all these proposals, there would be sanctions for 
non-compliance with a new disclosure requirement but these would not affect the validity of granted patents.  One Member has proposed modification of the WIPO Patent Cooperation Treaty's Regulations so as to explicitly enable countries to re quire patent applicants to disclose the source of 
genetic resources and related trad itional knowledge in patent app lications.  Another Member has 
referred to its proposals in WIPO for a mandatory requirement on patent applicants to disclose the 
source and, if readily known, the origin of gene tic resources and has indicated that the possible 
extension of the disclosure requirement to traditi onal knowledge associated with a genetic resource 
would be considered in the light of progress ma de in WIPO on the definition of this concept.  WT/GC/W/591 
 TN/C/W/50 
 Page 3 
 
 
  9. A further Member has submitted a proposal for the negotiation in the WTO of an amendment 
to the TRIPS Agreement to oblige Me mbers to require patent applicants to disclose the source and, if 
known, the origin of genetic resources and trad itional knowledge, both relate d and unrelated, as well 
as evidence of compliance with national re quirements on prior informed consent. 
_______________ 
 
10. Different views have been expressed about linka ges between the issues of GI extension and 
TRIPS/CBD and also between these issues and work elsewhere.  A large number of Members who are proponents of GI extension and a new TRIPS disclosure requirement have proposed that these issues, 
together with that of the GI register
3, should be part of the horizontal process in order to have 
modality texts that reflect Ministerial agreement on the key parameters for negotiating final draft legal 
texts with respect to each of these issues as part of the Single Undertaking.  They believe that an 
agreement on the parameters for negotiations is essen tial at the modalities stage in order to ensure a 
successful conclusion to the Round, in particular its development dimension.  A number of other 
Members have expressed their strong opposition to th is proposal and their conviction that it would 
substantially set back efforts to arrive at a viable  way forward for the Doha negotiations.  They reject 
what they consider to be an artificial parallelis m being made in the proposal between the TRIPS 
issues cited, saying that each has its own terms of reference and subject-matter, many technical issues 
remain, and the interest of Members in each varies considerably. 
__________ 
                                                      
3 GI register negotiations are not part of the manda te relating to outstanding implementation issues in 
paragraph 39 of the Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration and therefore not a subject of this report.