WORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONIP/C/22
6 December 2000
(00-5308)
ANNUAL REPORT (2000) OF THE COUNCIL FOR TRIPS
I. GENERAL
1. Since the period covered by its last report1, the Council for TRIPS has held four formal
meetings, on 21 March, 26-29 June, 21-22 September and 27-30 November 2000.  The minutes of
these meetings are to be found in documents IP/C/M/26-29.2
2. The first meeting referred to above was chaired by Ambassador Carlos Perez del Castillo
(Uruguay) and the other meetings by Ambassador Chak Mun See (Singapore).
3. The meetings of the Council were open to all WTO Members, other governments with
observer status in WTO bodies and international intergovernmental organizations with regular
observer status in the Council.  At its meeting in June, the Council granted ad hoc observer status to
the World Health Organization, subject to certain conditions.  Decisions on requests for observer
status from 15 Organizations are pending.3
II. NOTIFICATIONS AND NOTIFICATION PROCEDURES
(i) Article 63.24
4. The notification procedures, adopted by the Council at its meeting in November 1995, require
that, as of the time that a Member is obliged to start applying a provision of the TRIPS Agreement,
the corresponding laws and regulations shall be notified without delay (IP/C/2).  To date,
70 Members have made such notifications under Article 63.2 with respect to all or most of theirimplementing legislation relating to all provisions of the Agreement.  Twelve other Members have
made notifications relating specifically to the implementation of Articles 3, 4 and 5 of the
Agreement.
5  Notifications concerning the implementation of Article 70.8 and, in some cases,
Article 70.9 of the TRIPS Agreement have been rece ived from 23 Members;  some of them indicate
that product patent protection for pharmaceutical and/or agricultural chemical products is alreadyavailable in their territories.
5. At its November 1995 meeting, the Council also agreed that Members would provide
responses to a checklist of issues on enforcement (IP/C/5).  To date, 60 Members have notified
responses.
                                                     
1 Document IP/C/19.
2 Document IP/C/M/29 to be circulated.
3 The Organizations in question are listed in document IP/C/W/52/Rev.9.
4 Circulation of notifications referred to in pa ragraph 4 below takes place in the IP/N/1/COUNTRY/-
series of documents.  Those referred to in paragraph 5 below have been circulated in the IP/N/6/COUNTRY/-series of documents.
5 A practical aid to assist delegations making the required notification is available in document IP/C/9.IP/C/22
Page 2
(ii) Articles 1.3 and 3.16
6. Articles 1.3 and 3.1 of the TRIPS Agreement, relating to the definition of beneficiary persons
under the Agreement and to national treatment, allow certain exceptions to the normal rules on these
matters, provided that notifications are made to  the Council for TRIPS.  Under these provisions,
29 Members have submitted such notifications.
(iii) Article 4(d)7
7. Article 4(d) of the TRIPS Agreement requires a Member seeking to justify an exception to the
MFN rule on the basis of an international agreement relating to the protection of intellectual property
which had entered into force prior to the entry into force of the WTO Agreement to notify that
agreement to the Council for TRIPS.8  To date, 49 notifications have been received under this
provision from 34 Members.
(iv) Article 699
8. Article 69 of the TRIPS Agreement requires Members to establish and notify contact points
for the purposes of cooperating with each other with a view to eliminating international trade in goods
infringing intellectual property rights.  Procedures for such notifications were agreed by the Councilin September 1995.  To date, 99  Members have notified contact points.
(v) Notifications under other provisions of the Agreement
9. A number of notification provisions of the Berne and the Rome Conventions are incorporated
by reference into the TRIPS Agreement but without being explicitly referred to in it.10  To date, three
Members have made notifications under the provisions of Article 14 bis(2)(c) as applicable under the
TRIPS Agreement and two Members have made notifications under provisions of the Appendix to the
Berne Convention so applicable.11
III. REVIEW OF NATIONAL LAWS AND REGULATIONS
10. The Council completed work on outstanding que stions arising from the review of the
legislation of the two Members taken up in the autumn of 1999.12
11. On 1 January 2000, the transitional periods of Article 65.2 and 65.3 expired and obligations
entered into effect for a large number of Members who had been availing themselves of these general
transitional periods.  Following informal consultations  that the Chairperson held prior to this date with
the Members concerned, it was agreed that the reviews of these Members' national implementing
legislation would take place in 2000 and 2001 and would concern all areas of intellectual property at
                                                     
6 Circulation of these notifications takes place in the IP/N/2/COUNTRY/- series of documents.
7 Circulation of these notifications takes place in the IP/N/4/COUNTRY/- series of documents.
8 An informal guideline to assist individual Members in making or reviewing their notifications under
Article 4(d) is available in the Annex to document IP/C/M/12.
9 These contact points are contained in document IP/N/3/Rev.3 and addenda.
10 Circulation of  these notifications takes place in the IP/N/5/COUNTRY/- series of documents.
11 For the calculation of the renewable ten-year period for which notifications under the Appendix
remain valid, reference is made to document IP/C/14.
12The records of the introductory statements made by delegations, the questions put to them and the
responses given, including follow-up questions and res ponses thereto, are circulated in, respectively, the
IP/Q/COUNTRY/- (copyright and related rights), IP/Q2/COUNTRY/- (trademarks, geographical indicationsand industrial designs), IP/Q3/COUNTRY/- (patents, layout-designs of integrated circuits, undisclosedinformation and the control of anti-competitive practices in contractual licences) and IP/Q4/COUNTRY/-(enforcement) series of documents.IP/C/22
Page 3
the same time, but that otherwise the procedures as  employed in such reviews by the Council so far
would be used.  In the light of further informal consultations held by the Chairperson on the practical
arrangements to be put in place for these reviews, including which Member's legislation would be
reviewed at which of these meetings, the Council agreed to set aside time for such reviews at its
meetings in June and November 2000 as well as at three of its meetings to be scheduled for 2001.  Atits meeting in June, the Council took up the reviews of the legislation of 13 Members.  It completed
ten of these reviews at its meeting in September;  the other three reviews were completed at the
meeting in November.  At its meeting in November , the Council took up the reviews of the legislation
of a further eight Members.
IV. IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE 70.8 AND 70.9
12. During the reporting period, the Council received one new notification concerning this matter
and continued its consideration of the implementation of Article 70.8 and the related provisions ofArticle 70.9.
13
V. IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE 66.2
13. This Article requires developed country Members to provide incentives to enterprises and
institutions in their territories for the purpose of promoting and encouraging technology transfer to
least-developed country Members in order to enable them to create a sound and viable technologicalbase.  At its meeting in December 1998, the Council agreed that developed country Members be
invited to supply information on how Article 66.2 was being implemented.  To date, information has
been submitted by 20 Members.  The matter was addressed at each meeting of the Council during the
period covered by this report.  In the discussions on this matter, to date, additional information was
provided by some Members and comments made on the adequacy of the submissions received.  At its
meeting in June, the Council had before it a short note it had requested the Secretariat to prepare
setting out the types of incentive measures that had been notified, with cross-references to where
further details could be found.
14  A proposal received from Zambia relating to special and differential
treatment in respect of technology transfer15 has been under discussion in the Council since June.
14. The Council received a request from the Special Session of the General Council on
Implementation of 18 October 2000, to give consideration, with a view to facilitating full
implementation of Article 66.2, to drawing up an illustrative list of incentives of the sort envisaged by
Article 66.2 as well as to put on a regular and systematic basis its procedure for the notification and
monitoring of measures in accordance with the provisions of Article 66.2 and, in doing so, to give
consideration to avoiding unnecessary burdens in no tification procedures.  The Council held informal
consultations on this matter on 31 October and in the week of 27 November 2000.  At the informal
consultations on 31 October, some representatives of least developed countries indicated theirintention to come forward with proposals for an illustrative list and a systematic notification and
monitoring procedure.  The Council has not yet received these proposals.
15. The Council was also requested by the Special Session of the General Council on
Implementation of 18 October 2000 to invite other intergovernmental organizations to provide
information on their activities aimed at technology capacity-building.  In this connection, the Council
for TRIPS agreed at its meeting of 27-30 November to invite the secretariats of UNCTAD, WIPO,
UNIDO, the World Bank and the CBD to provide written information on their activities on
technology capacity building prior to the Council's meeting in April 2001.  It was agreed that the
                                                     
13 As regards notifications relating to Article 70.8 and 70.9, reference is made to paragraph 4 above.
14 Document IP/C/W/169.
15 Documents IP/C/W/199 and 200.IP/C/22
Page 4
Chairperson would report on these matters to the Special Session of the General Council on
Implementation, on his own responsibility.16
VI. OTHER IMPLEMENTATION ISSUES RAISED IN THE COUNCIL
16. The Council continued its discussion on the issue of whether United States law on the
protection of trademarks and trade names was in conformity with the Agreement, in the light ofSection 211 of the United States Omnibus Consol idated and Emergency Supplemental Appropriations
Act of 1998.  At its meeting in September, the Council agreed that, if a panel were to be established to
examine this matter, the item be deleted from the Council's agenda, it being understood that any
Member could revert to it at any time should it so wish.
VII. RELEVANT DEVELOPMENTS ELSEWHERE IN THE WTO
17. During the period under review, the Council was informed of four actions under the Dispute
Settlement Understanding relevant to the TRIPS Agreement, as reflected in documents IP/D/21-23
and document WT/DS170/4.  In two disputes, panel reports were adopted and in one other dispute a
panel and Appellate Body report.  The first two of these disputes mentioned concern a case relating to
provisions affecting patent protection of pharmaceutical products (IP/D/11) and one on Section 110(5)
of the United States Copyright Act (IP/D/16).  The third dispute concerns a case relating to the term of
patent protection (IP/D/17).  In one other case a panel was established and panel procedures areongoing.  This dispute concerns Section 211 of the United States Omnibus Appropriations Act of
1998 (IP/D/20).  Consultations are still pending on disp utes concerning certain measures affecting the
grant of copyright and related rights (IP/D/8 and 12);  measures affecting the enforcement of
intellectual property rights (IP/D/9);  measures affecting the enforcement of intellectual property
rights for motion pictures and television broadcasts (IP/D/13 and 14);  patent protection forpharmaceutical and agricultural chemical products (IP/D/15);  patent protection for pharmaceuticals
and test data protection for agricultural chemi cals (IP/D/18);  the protection of trademarks and
geographical indications for agricultural products a nd foodstuffs (IP/D/19);  Section 337 of the United
States Tariff Act of 1930 and Amendments thereto (IP/D/21);  certain measures on the protection of
patents and test data (IP/D/22);  and meas ures affecting patent protection (IP/D/23).
VIII.  TECHNICAL COOPERATION
18. The Council has continued its work in this area on the basis of the procedures agreed at its
meeting in February 1996.  During the period under review, several delegations informed the Council
of specific technical cooperation activities made available to them or by them, or which had taken
place in their territories.  The Council agreed that this year developed country Members would update
the information on their technical and financial cooperation activities pursuant to Article 67 of the
Agreement in time for the Council's meeting in September 2000, which had a special focus ontechnical cooperation.  As in previous years, intergovernmental organizations observers to the TRIPS
Council also presented, on the invitation of the Counci l, information on their activities, as well as the
WTO Secretariat on its technical cooperation in the TRIPS area.  This information can be found in
documents IP/C/W/201-203 and Addenda.
17
19. At its meeting in November, the Council received a non-paper concerning technical assistance
on TRIPS notification between WTO Members, jointly submitted by the delegations of Bangladesh;
the European Communities and their member Stat es;  Hong Kong, China;  and Norway.  These
delegations propose that a list be made available of Members who are willing to assist other Members
                                                     
16 Document IP/C/21.
17 Contact points in developed country Members' administrations which can be addressed by
developing countries seeking technical cooperation on TRIPS are contained in document IP/N/7/Rev.2 andaddenda.IP/C/22
Page 5
in notifying their intellectual property laws to the Council for TRIPS in a transparent fashion and
suggest some modalities in this regard.  While the sponsors indicated that they still wished to fine tune
their proposal, the Chairperson noted that there was no objection in the Council to this welcome
proposal for assistance on a voluntary basis and that the sponsors should feel free to proceed.
20. The Secretariat cooperates with a number of intergovernmental organizations, notably with
WIPO pursuant to the Agreement Between WIPO and the WTO which entered into force on
1 January 1996 and the joint initiative on technical cooperation of the Directors-General of the two
Organizations of July 1998.
IX. REVIEW OF THE APPLICATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE SECTION ON
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS UNDER ARTICLE 24.2
21. The Council continued its consideration of this matter in 2000.  In the reporting period, the
Council received responses to the Checklist of Questions adopted in 199818 from four Members and
has now received responses from the European Communities and their member States as well as from
20 other Members.19  At the meeting in March, the Council was informed of follow-up questions from
a Member to another Member with regard to that  Member's responses to the Checklist.  At the
meeting in September, the Council was informed th at the Secretariat had circulated a preliminary
version20 of the paper that the Council had requested it to prepare summarizing, on the basis of an
agreed outline21, the responses to the Checklist, in order to facilitate an understanding of the more
detailed information that had been provided in these responses.  At that meeting, communications
were also presented by Australia and New Zealand on the subject of geographical indications and the
Article 24.2 review.22  At its meeting in November, the Council had a further exchange of views as to
how the work under this built-in agenda item should be pursued and initiated a detailed review ofexperience and practice with the application of the provisions in the TRIPS Agreement on
geographical indications, with the aid of the paper from the Secretariat (JOB(00)/5619) summarizing
the replies from Members to the Checklist of Questions.
X. IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE 24.1
22. This matter was placed on the agenda of the Council's meeting in September, following a
request by Switzerland and the submission of a paper by Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Egypt,
Iceland, India, Kenya, Liechtenstein, Pakistan, Slovenia, Sri Lanka, Switzerland and Turkey
23,
outlining the views of these delegations on the implementation of Article 24.1, in particular in regard
to the extension of additional protection for geographical indications to products other than wines and
spirits, and making reference to paragraph 26 of the Council's report (1996)24.  Two papers circulated
prior to that meeting by India also address this matter.25
XI. IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE 23.4
23. The Council continued, throughout the period under review, its discussions on issues relevant
to the negotiations specified in Article 23.4 of the Agreement concerning the establishment of a
multilateral system of notification and registration of geographical indications for wines, and on
issues relevant to a notification and registration system for spirits, in accordance with paragraph 34 of
                                                     
18 Document IP/C/13 and addendum.
19 Document IP/C/W/117 and addenda.
20 JOB(00)/5619 of 19 September 2000.
21 Informal document No. 2104 of 13 April 1999.
22 Documents IP/C/W/205 and 211.
23 Document IP/C/W/204/Rev.1.
24 Document IP/C/8.
25 Documents IP/C/W/195 and 196.IP/C/22
Page 6
the Council’s report (1996)26, and the agreement reached in the General Council at its meeting of
7 and 8 February 2000.  These discussions took pl ace on the basis of a proposal from the European
Communities, of which the Council received a revision at its June meeting27, and a joint proposal
from Canada, Chile, Japan and the United States.28  The Council also received papers from Hungary
and New Zealand addressing specific aspects of these proposals.29  Information gathered by the
Council in the context of its work on this matter includes 12 submissions from Members on systems
for the registration of geographical indications which they operate30;  a background note prepared by
the Secretariat on existing notification and registration systems for geographical indications relating to
wines and spirits31;  a background note prepared by the Secretariat on international notification and
registration systems for geographical indications relating to products other than wines and spirits32;
and information provided orally by WIPO, at the meeting in September, on the work that had
commenced in July 2000 in that Organization in relation to the Lisbon Agreement.
XII. REVIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 27.3(b)
24. At its meeting in March, the Council reaffirmed the need to continue with a review of the
provisions of Article 27.3(b).  When initiating the review in December 1998, the Council had invited
Members that were already under an obligation to apply Article 27.3(b) to provide information on
how the matters addressed in this provision were presently treated in their national law.  OtherMembers had been invited to provide such information on a best endeavours basis.  The Secretariat
had been asked to contact the FAO, the Secretar iat of the Convention on Biological Diversity and
UPOV, to request factual information on their activiti es of relevance.  By the time of the meeting in
November, information had been received from 35 Members on how this provision was being
implemented by way of responses to the illustrative lists of questions
33 as well as from the three
intergovernmental organizations referred to.34  Throughout the period under review, Members
discussed extensively both a number of substantiv e issues and a number of procedural questions
relating to how the Council should handle its furthe r work on this matter.  The latter issues included
those of seeking additional information on how this provision was being implemented by Members, in
particular since little information was as yet available from developing country Members in thisregard;  requesting various intergovernmental organizations, including WIPO, the FAO, the
Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity and UPOV to provide updated information
35;
and considering ways of organizing the topics that had been raised in the discussions so far.  At its
meetings in September and November, the Council received nine communications addressing matters
under discussion from six Members, namely Brazil, India, Japan, Mauritius on behalf of the African
Group, Singapore and the United States.36
                                                     
26 Document IP/C/8.
27 Document IP/C/W/107/Rev.1.
28 Document IP/C/W/133/Rev.1.
29 Documents IP/C/W/189 and 234.
30 Document IP/C/W/76 and addenda.
31 Document IP/C/W/85.
32 Document IP/C/W/85/Add.1.
33 Following a request from the Council, the Secretariat prepared a note (Job No. 2689 of 7 May 1999)
containing a structured summary overview of the information presented by the 33 Members from whom theCouncil had received information by that time.
34 Documents IP/C/W/130 and addenda.
35 Information from these Organizations already circ ulated in the Council is contained in documents
IP/C/W/130 and addenda;  IP/C/W/213;  IP/C/W/217;  and IP/C/W/218.  Background notes prepared by the
Secretariat for the Committee on Trade and Environment an d also circulated in the TRIPS Council are contained
in documents IP/C/W/175 and IP/C/W/216.
36 Documents IP/C/W/195, IP/C/W/196, IP/C/W/198 and Corr.1, IP/C/W/206, IP/C/W/209,
IP/C/W/228, IP/C/W/236, JOB (00)/6091 and JOB(00)/7853.IP/C/22
Page 7
25. The Council was requested by the Special Session of the General Council on Implementation
of 18 October 2000 to continue its on-going work concerning the relationship between the TRIPS
Agreement and the Convention on Biological Divers ity (CBD), with a view to clarifying this
relationship.  At informal consultations on 28 November, building on the work that the Council had
previously done on the relationship between the TRIPS Agreement and the CBD, Members had adetailed exchange of views on this matter, which touched also on some other matters in connection
with the Council's work on the review of Article 27.3(b) of the TRIPS Agreement.  The Council will
continue its consideration of the relationship between the two instruments at its next meeting.
26. The Council was urged at the 18 October 2000 Special Session of the General Council to give
positive consideration to granting observer status to the CBD Secretariat on an ad hoc basis pending
the conclusion of the wider discussions on observer status for intergovernmental organizations in the
General Council.  The Council took up this matter in  both formal and informal session at its meetings
in the week of 27 November but was unable to reach  a consensus.  It was agreed that the Chairperson
would report on these matters to the Special Session of the General Council on Implementation, on his
own responsibility.
37
XIII.  REVIEW OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE AGREEMENT UNDER
ARTICLE 71.1
27. This Article requires the Council for TRIPS to review the implementation of the Agreement
after the end of the five-year transition period provided for in Article 65.2.  Throughout the period
under review, the Council discussed how it should appr oach this general review of the implementation
of the Agreement.  It received papers on the matter from Cuba, Honduras, Paraguay and Venezuela,
jointly, as well as from Australia and India.38  At its meeting in November, the Council agreed on a
target date prior to the Council's meeting in April 2001 for the submission of suggestions both on the
approach that it should take to the review and the specific issues that delegations would wish to see
taken up in the review, so as to allow the Council to work out, at its meeting in April 2001, a way of
initiating the actual review.  It was understood that the target date would not prevent subsequent
submissions.
XIV. NON-VIOLATION COMPLAINTS
28. Following a request of the European Communities, the issue of the examination of the scope
and modalities for non-violation complaints was placed on the agenda of the Council's meeting in
March.  As a result of the discussions at that meeting, the Council also addressed the issue of non-
violation complaints at the other meetings in the period under review.  It received communications on
the matter from Canada, the Czech Republic, the European Communities and their member States,
Hungary and Turkey, jointly, as well as from Australia, Korea and the United States.39
XV. ELECTRONIC COMMERCE
29. In July 2000, the General Council agreed to invite the TRIPS Council and three other
subsidiary bodies, namely the Council for Trade in Goods, the Council for Trade in Services and the
Committee on Trade and Development, to pick up where they had left off in their work on e-
commerce within their respective spheres of compet ence, to identify cross-sectoral issues, and to
report back to the General Council at its regular meeting in December 2000.40  The Council heard an
update from WIPO at its meeting in September on the work of that Organization in this area.  At its
meeting in November, it received papers on the matter from Australia and from the European
                                                     
37 Document IP/C/21.
38 Documents IP/C/W/166, 210 and 214.
39 Documents IP/C/W/191, 194 and 212 as well as JOB (00)/6166.
40 Paragraphs 94 and 131 of document WT/GC/M/57.IP/C/22
Page 8
Communities and their member States41 and, after a further exchange of views, agreed that the
Chairperson would submit a second Progress Report to the General Council on his own
responsibility.42
__________
                                                     
41 Documents IP/C/W/224 and 233.
42 Document IP/C/20.