WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  WT/GC/W/540 
TN/C/W/21 
10 December 2004 
 (04-5472) 
General Council  
Trade Negotiations Committee Original:   English 
 
  
DOHA WORK PROGRAMME – THE EXTENSION OF THE ADDITIONAL 
PROTECTION FOR GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS TO PRODUCTS 
OTHER THAN WINES AND SPIRITS 
 
Communication from Bulgaria, Guinea, India, Kenya, Liechtenstein, Madagascar, 
Moldova, Romania, Switzerland, Thailand and Turkey 
 
 
 
 The following communication, dated 10 December 2004, is being circulated at the request of the Delegation of Switzerland. 
 
_______________ 
  
A. Introduction 
1. In the Doha Declaration of November 2001, Ministers declared that they attach the utmost 
importance to the issue of extension of the protec tion of geographical indications provided for in 
Article 23 of the TRIPS Agreement to products ot her than wines and spirits (referred to as "GI-
extension"). By confirming its nature as an outs tanding implementation issue, they declared that 
negotiations on the "GI-extension" shall be an integral part of the Doha Work Programme. Since the end of 2002, consultations were held at the level of the TNC to advance negotiations. In view of the 
Ministerial Conference in Cancún in 2003, the Dir ector-General himself engaged in consultations in 
order to help work progress. The General Council reaffirmed his mandate in its Decision on the Doha 
Work Programme adopted on 1 August 2004, instruc ting the Director-General to report to the TNC 
and the General Council no later than May 2005  for the Council to review progress and take 
appropriate action no later than July 2005. 
2. The purpose of this present communication is to  assist these consulta tions of the Director-
General on "GI-extension". Since the Doha Minister ial Conference in 2001, c onsiderable substantive 
work on the issues of "GI-extension" has been done  and questions and concerns raised in this context 
have been extensively examined
1. The consultations now to be continued by the Director-General 
must allow concluding this work in order for Members to decide appropriate action on this basis by July 2005.  
                                                     
 
1 IP/C/W/204/Rev.1, 2 October 2000; IP/C/W/247/Rev.1, 17 May 2001; IP/C/W/289, 29 June 2001; 
IP/C/W/308/Rev.1, 2 October 2001; JOB(02)/32, 11 April 2002; IP/C/W/353, 24 June 2002; JOB(02)/194, 26 
November 2002, IP/C/W/360, 26 July 2002; JOB(02)/95, 26 July 2002; IP/C/W/386, 8 November 2002;  
IP/C/W/395, 10 December 2002; JOB(03)/119, 23 June 2003; JOB(03)/137, 8 July 2003; TN/C/W/14/Add.2, 15 July 2003; TN/C/4, 13 July 2004. 
 
 WT/GC/W/540 
TN/C/W/21 Page 2 
 
 
 3. In the second part of the communication (Part B) , key points on the contents and benefits of 
"GI-extension" are once more set out, addressing again certain questions raised in the earlier 
discussions. Further (Part C), a pr oposal is made on how the consultations of the Director-General 
should be organized to make them productive and en able the General Council to make an informed 
decision on appropriate action for "GI-extension". 
B. Questions and answers on "GI-extension" 
What is the goal of "GI-extension"? 
4. The goal of "GI-extension" is to increase the le gal certainty of the protection that the TRIPS 
Agreement currently affords to geographical indicati ons for products other than wines and spirits. The 
extension of the GI wines and spirits regime to  other products advances the solution based on a 
mechanism that can be easily implemented by WTO Me mbers. In so doing, geographical indications 
will be a more suitable instrument for the benef it of all WTO Members and especially for developing 
countries, that are more likely to benefit from the TRIPS Agreement regime if the more effective 
protection is afforded not only to geographical indications for wines and spirits but also to all other products.
2 
What are the benefits of "GI-extension"? 
5. By increasing the level of legal certainty and transparency in the international regulatory 
framework for the protection of geographical indi cations, "GI-extension" will enhance and benefit 
international trade flows. Today, the applicable pr otection regime to geographical indications for non-
wine and non-spirit products is ba sed on unclear and ambiguous rules. Basing investment and export 
decisions on potentially contradictory and changing judicial interpretations of vague concepts such as 
"consumer deception" and "act of unfa ir competition" is a risk that GI producers, especially those of 
developing country Members, cannot afford. Uncerta inty about the conditions in which producers 
operate is bad for trade, bad for invest ment and therefore bad for development. 
6. Producers in developing countries who have little or no resources to allocate to costly and 
legally uncertain enforcement of their geographical  indications by complicated litigation requirements 
are the first to suffer from the lack of "GI-ex tension". Enforcing the protection of geographical 
indications for non-wines and non-spirits products ba sed on the standards of Article 22 of the TRIPS 
Agreement requires the establishment of the costly and burdensome proof of the misleading test or of 
a case of unfair competition. 
7. Through the more effective protection and fa cilitated enforcement under the additional 
protection of Article 23.1-3 of the TRIPS Agreem ent, "GI-extension" will prevent more geographical 
indications from becoming generic in the future a nd therewith from losing a ll their economic value. 
Use of expressions such as “kind”, “style”, “type”, or use of geographical indications in translation 
will not only be prohibited for geographical in dications for wines and spirits but without 
discrimination for all Members’ other products.  
8. Thereby, "GI-extension" will make geographical indications for quality products of all WTO 
Members a valuable marketing tool, providing them with new opportunities and in particular smaller 
and developing country Members with a valuable alternative to economies of scale.  
                                                      
2Such as, for illustrative purposes, rice, silk, coffee, tea, tobacco, apples, pineapples, cotton, vanilla, 
honey, beef, palm oil, cinnamon, carpets, ceramics, silver or wooden handicrafts, etc.  WT/GC/W/540 
 TN/C/W/21 
 Page 3 
 
 
 9. It is the collective responsibility of WTO me mbers to ensure that the TRIPS Agreement 
provides a framework which permits all WTO Members,  developed and developing countries alike, to 
protect their GI products efficien tly and effectively, embedding thei r local particularities, traditions 
and know how. Failure to do so will continue to tole rate free-riding, especially on developing country 
resources.  
Will "GI-extension" result in administ rative costs and burdens for Members? 
10. No. "GI-Extension" does not require Member s to introduce or establish a new legal or 
administrative protection regime at the nationa l level. Nor does Article 23.1-3 of the TRIPS 
Agreement require Members administrations and public authorities to enforce "ex officio" the 
protection of geographical indications against usurpa tion and free-riding. As for any other intellectual 
property right and as today for geographical indicatio ns for wines and spirits, this is the responsibility 
of the right holder and legitimate users of a geographical indication.  
11. Where a Member’s legislation on the prot ection of geographical indications today 
differentiates between wines and spirits on the one hand and other products on the other hand, it will 
be sufficient, in order to implement "GI-extension" , to remove this differentiation while using the 
same laws or administrative structures already ap plicable for geographical indications for wines and 
spirits for all geographical indications. Such an am endment is of technical nature and will not incur 
significant costs.  
How about costs to producers? 
12. "GI-extension" will save litigation costs to legitimate producers of GI products through an 
easier burden of proof in enforcement procedures  to end usurpation and illegitimate use of a 
geographical indication. 
13. Certain Members raised concerns about what would happen to past uses of geographical 
indications for products not having the origin indicated by the geographical indication used. Also, that 
"GI-extension" could result in costs for such producers being no longer allowed to use such 
indications for their products and having to re-l abel them. The TRIPS Agreement takes into account 
such concerns, both under the protection level of Article 22 and the additional protection of 23 of the 
TRIPS Agreement. Thus, indications having become generic terms in a Member and cases of good 
faith, long term use of geographical indications fo r products without this origin are excepted by 
Article 24 from the TRIPS protection for geographical  indications. "GI-extensio n" will not undo these 
exceptions and will therefore not results in costs by stopping such use of generic terms or good faith, 
long term use. However, "GI-extension", by prov iding a more effective protection for enforcement 
purposes, will help GI producers to prevent more geographical indications from becoming generic in 
the future and from being usurped, and this for ge ographical indications for all products and not just 
wines and spirits.  
14. The balance struck by the TRIPS Agreement is a careful one: no Member has made a 
complaint so far about excessive protection for geographical indications for wines and spirits under 
the additional protection of Article 23.1 to 3 of the TRIPS Agreement. No dispute settlement case on 
the basis of this protection has arisen, no producer of wine or spirits has had to stop existing business 
activities on the basis of the additiona l protection of the TRIPS Agreement. 
15. By contrast, complaints about usurpation of geog raphical indications and a lack of protection 
for products other than wines and spirits are consistently growing. This is unequivocal proof that a 
new balance must be found so that the interests of all producers of all WTO Members are adequately protected. The balance found in the Uruguay Round for geographical indications for wines and spirits, WT/GC/W/540 
TN/C/W/21 Page 4 
 
 
 including the specific exceptions in Article 24 of th e TRIPS Agreement, are the points of reference for 
"GI-extension". 
And consumers? 
16. "GI-extension" neither attempts to eliminate competition nor intends to erect barriers to trade. 
No product will be excluded from trade by "GI- extension". On the contrary, "GI-extension" seeks 
fairer international trade and competition by ensuring a better and more effective regulatory 
framework for the protection of geographical indications and therewith a use of geographical 
indications which will benefit both producers and consumers. "GI-ext ension" will increase 
consumers’ choice by providing, through a more reliable international protection, an incentive for 
producers, in particular SMEs, to invest in the production of more GI-products which owe their 
particular quality, reputation or other characteristic to their geographical origin. Furthermore, "GI-
extension" will benefit consumers by providing them with more reliable information about the origin 
of products using a geographical indication, assisting them thereby in their choice whether they want 
to pay a premium for the authentic GI-product or opt for a product without the added value of a specific "local flavour".  
C. The Consultations by the Director-General 
17. The result of the consultations on "GI-extensio n" by the Director-General must enable the 
General Council to decide on appropriate action by  July 2005. A mere procedural arrangement for 
further treatment of "GI-e xtension" will, at that stage of the Doha trade round, not be appropriate 
action. Members must engage in a constructive manner, and in a substantive discussion in these 
consultations before July 2005 on questions of concern to Members and avoid moving in circles.   
18. The consultations should focus on technical work aimed at ensuring that by July 2005, the 
TNC/GC has a clear vision of: 
(1)  What is necessary to incorporate "GI-extension" in the TRIPS Agreement? 
(2) The solutions and mechanisms available to  address the substantive concerns that WTO 
members have expressed with regard to costs and burdens (such as the application of the 
exceptions of Article 24 of the TRIPS Agreemen t, adjustment of transitional periods, etc.). 
19. As agreed in the Decision adopted by the General Council on the Doha Work Programme of 
1
st August 2004, this work should be done without prejudice to WTO Members final positions on the 
substance and the mandate of this matter. 
20. As agreed by the Director-General and WTO Members participating in the consultations held 
on 24th November 2004, such substantive work shall be carried out by a working group at technical 
level, supervised by the Director-General but guided by a Deputy Director-General (acting as a friend 
of the Director-General) and assisted by the WTO Secretariat, enabling thus the Director-General to report back to Members on the progress of work in his regular consultative meetings.  
 
__________