```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 240 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 240

   Expressing the sense of the Congress with respect to intellectual 
                          property protection.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 18, 1994

   Mr. Gejdenson (for himself and Mr. Roth) submitted the following 
 concur- rent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Ways 
                               and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
   Expressing the sense of the Congress with respect to intellectual 
                          property protection.

Whereas industries that are dependent on the protection of intellectual property 
        rights, such as pharmaceutical, audiovisual, and software companies, are 
        major contributors to the growth of the United States economy;
Whereas these industries will need strong intellectual property protection if 
        they are to continue to grow, to create skilled and high paying jobs in 
        the United States, and to expand into new markets worldwide;
Whereas United States copyright-based companies estimate their losses due to 
        piracy at $15,000,000,000 to $17,000,000,000 per year, and the 
        pharmaceutical industry estimates its losses due to piracy at 
        $5,000,000,000 per year;
Whereas the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights 
        (the ``TRIPS Agreement'') concluded in the Uruguay Round of multilateral 
        trade negotiations under the auspices of the General Agreement on 
        Tariffs and Trade provides for the first time an international standard 
        accepted by more than 100 countries for the effective protection and 
        enforcement of intellectual property rights;
Whereas the TRIPS Agreement, on balance, contains high standards for protection 
        and enforcement of patents, copyright, trademarks, trade secrets, 
        industrial designs, and semiconductor designs, provides for a 
        multilateral dispute resolution mechanism, and limits many exceptions 
        and derogations, such as compulsory licenses, from the standards of 
        protection;
Whereas the TRIPS Agreement contains certain deficiencies in intellectual 
        property protection because of the need to bridge differences among the 
        more than 100 participants in the Uruguay Round negotiations;
Whereas newly industrializing countries, which already compete very effectively 
        with the United States among a broad range of technologically-advanced 
        products, may not be required to provide the level of intellectual 
        property protection contained in the TRIPS Agreement until July 1, 2000, 
        generally and, in the case of pharmaceutical and agrichemical products, 
        until July 1, 2005;
Whereas these and other deficiencies in the TRIPS Agreement will delay the 
        realization, by United States industries that are dependent on the 
        protection of intellectual property rights, of any commercial benefits 
        from the TRIPS Agreement in many of the major foreign markets of the 
        United States;
Whereas regional negotiations have resulted in higher levels of intellectual 
        property obligations; those contained in the North American Free Trade 
        Agreement (NAFTA) are stronger and more effective than those found in 
        the TRIPS Agreement, especially with respect to national treatment and 
        transition periods;
Whereas while both the TRIPS Agreement and NAFTA make significant strides in 
        providing, on a multilateral and regional basis, improved intellectual 
        property protection, certain gaps still remain, which must be filled 
        through the development and implementation of a strategy to increase the 
        protection of intellectual property rights abroad; and
Whereas the agreements concluded at the Uruguay Round of trade negotiations, in 
        particular the Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the 
        Settlement of Disputes, have created a new environment for the conduct 
        of United States trade policy on intellectual property: Now, therefore, 
        be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That it is the sense of the Congress that--
            (1) intellectual property protection should continue to be 
        among the principal trade policy objectives of the United 
        States;
            (2) the United States should pursue further strengthened 
        levels of intellectual property protection, even after the 
        TRIPS Agreement is implemented, through bilateral, regional, 
        and multilateral negotiations;
            (3) the level of intellectual property protection should be 
        a determinant of eligibility for participation in all future 
        free trade agreements, and the provisions of law relating to 
        existing preferential programs, such as the Caribbean Basin 
        Initiative, the Generalized System of Preferences, and the 
        Andean Trade Preferences, should be strengthened to encourage 
        accelerated implementation of the TRIPS Agreement; and
            (4) the authorities in statutes other than trade laws 
        should be clarified to ensure that these authorities may be 
        used in support of strong intellectual property protection 
        abroad.

                                 <all>
```