H.E. Ambassador Dr. Walter Werner
8 REVIEW OF THE APPLICATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE SECTION ON GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS UNDER ARTICLE 24.2
99. Norway has updated its review of the application of the provisions of the section on geographical indications under TRIPS Article 24.2, the so-called checklist of questions. Our answers to the checklist are contained in IP/C/W/117/Add.7/Rev.1. 100. The updated review takes account of the established sui generis-system for registration of geographical indications, designations of origin and traditional specialities for foodstuffs. The sui generis system offers protection at the same level as provided for wines and spirits under Article 23 of the TRIPS Agreement. 101. We invite Members to have a look at the mentioned document for detailed answers to the questions. We also encourage other WTO Members to provide their answers or updated answers to the checklist.
24. The Chair said Article 24.2 of the TRIPS Agreement required the Council to keep under review the application of the TRIPS provisions on geographical indications (GIs). The principal tool for the review was the Checklist of Questions (IP/C/13 and Add.1). At the Council's meeting in November 2018, Ukraine had introduced its responses to the GI checklist (IP/C/W/117/Add.35). Since then, Montenegro had submitted its responses to the Checklist (IP/C/W/117/Add.36) and Norway had updated its earlier responses (IP/C/W/177/Add.7/Rev.1).
25. The Chair said that fewer than 50, out of 164 Members, had responded to the Checklist. Many of the earlier responses were also likely to be outdated and did not adequately reflect the fact that GI protection was an active area of legal and policy development at the domestic level and in free trade agreements (FTAs). He encouraged delegations to provide responses to the Checklist or to update earlier responses. He also recalled the Council's recommendation, made in March 2010, inviting Members to share information on bilateral agreements related to the protection of GIs. Such information could greatly facilitate the Council's conduct of this review.
26. The representatives Montenegro, Norway and Switzerland took the floor.
27. The Council took note of the statements made and agreed to revert to the matter at its next meeting.
IP/C/M/91, IP/C/M/91/Add.1, IP/C/M/91/Corr.1