WORLD INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ORGANIZATION

Transcription

1 AO/VII/ 5 ORIGINAL : French DATE: September 29, 1972 WORLD INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ORGANIZATION UNITED INTERNATIONAL BUREAUX FOR THE PROTECTION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY GENEVA SPECIAL UNION FOR THE PROTECTION OF APPELLATIONS OF ORIGIN AND THEIR INTERNATIONAL REGISTRATION (LISBON UNION) COUNCIL Seventh session Geneva, September 28 to 30, 1972 DRAFT REPORT prepared by the Secretariat Composition of the Council and Opening of the Session 1. The Council set up under the Lisbon Agreement (hereinafter referred to as "the Council") held its seventh ordinary session in Geneva on September 28 and 29, Of the ten countries which, at the opening of the session, were party to the Lisbon Agreement, nine were represented, namely: Algeria, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, France, Hungary, Israel, Italy, Mexico, Portugal. 3. Haiti was not represented. 4. The following countries, party to the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property but not to the Lisbon Agreement, were represented by obser vers: Austria, Canada, Finland, Germany (Federal Republic), Iran, Norway, Senegal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey (11). 5. The list of participants is annexed to this report. 6. The session was declared open by the Chairman of the previous session, Mr. Jorge Fraymann Castro (Mexico). Adoption of the Agenda 7. The Council adopted the agenda of the session as appearing in document A0/VII/1. 8. The outgoing Chairman pointed out that he had not formally approved, pursuant to Article 6(1) of the statutes and rules of procedure of the Council, item 5 of the draft agenda, where it concerned the drafting of a new treaty. It transpired from the discussion that there had been a misunderstanding on this point. Election of the New Officers of the Council 9. The Council unanimously elected Mr. JosS M. Rodriguez Padilla (Cuba) Chairman and Mr. Jose' Luis Esteves de Fonseca (Portugal) Vice-chairman.

2 AO/VII/5 page Mr. Leon Egger, Head of the International Registrations Division of WIPO, acted as Secretary to the Council. Activities of the Union and Financial Questions 11. The Council noted with unanimous approval the report of the Director General on the activities of the Union and financial questions. In particular, it ap proved the 1971 accounts and the budget for 1973 (document AO/VII/3). Revision of the Lisbon Agreement or Drafting of a New Treaty 12. The discussions were based on documents P/EC/VIII/6 and 7, to which docu ment AO/VII/4 refers. 13. On an intervention by the Delegation of Mexico, a discussion took place on the scope which should be given to this item of the agenda. 14. The Delegation of Mexico pointed out that neither the statutes and rules of procedure of the Council nor the decisions previously taken by it, particularly in the course of its sixth ordinary session in October 1971, authorized the Council to consider the drafting of a new treaty in this field. The only task which was incumbent on the Council was that of considering a revision of the Lisbon Agreement with a view to promoting new accessions, and of improving the agreement with respect to certain points where revision appeared desirable. 15. The view expressed by the Delegation of Mexico was supported in principle by the Delegations of Czechoslovakia, France, Israel and Portugal. These Delegations pointed out inter alia that a revision of the Lisbon Agreement was called for not only with a view to promoting new accessions, but also in order to fill a number of gaps in the Agreement and to improve it with respect to certain points which were not entirely to the satisfaction of the member coun tries of. the Lisbon Union either. It was desirable in particular to revise the actual concept of the appellation of origin, and thus to redefine the object of protection, and also to examine the question of the definition of the beneficiar ies of protection. The Lisbon Agreement should be maintained in any event, and the interest shown by some countries in protection at the international level was not such that two different treaties on the subject should be contemplated. 16. The Delegations of Cuba, Hungary, Italy and Senegal said that the study to be undertaken should not overlook, apart from the possibility of revising the Lisbon Agreement, that of merging the Lisbon Agreement with the Madrid Agreement for the Repression of False or Deceptive Indications of Source, or again the possibility of a new treaty, if this should prove an easier means of achieving the desired objectives. 17. The Secretariat remarked that for the moment it was only a question of undertaking studies in order to find the best way of improving the protection, at the international level, of appellations of origin and, should the situation arise, indications of source. The fact that the drafting of another treaty had also been contemplated was not supposed to mean that the basic principles of the Lisbon Agreement should be abandoned: it was merely intended that the stu dies to be undertaken should cover all possible solutions, including for example that of merging the Lisbon Agreement with the Madrid Agreement for the Repression of False or Deceptive Indications of Source. It should be pointed out, moreover, that the solution of drafting a new treaty could procure certain advantages as far as procedure was concerned: in particular, all member countries of the Paris Union could take part in the Diplomatic Conference, with the right to vote, and the adoption of the new treaty would require a majority of only two-thirds of the votes cast. It should also be borne in mind that the Executive Committee of the Paris Union had just entrusted the International Bureau with the task of studying, with the aid of a working group, the revision of existing Agreements in the field of the protection of appellations of origin and indications of source, or the drafting of a new treaty on the subject; it would therefore be desirable to harmonize the work to be undertaken within the Paris Union and that within the Lisbon Union. 18. After this exchange of views, the Council reached the conclusion, on a pro posal by the Chairman, that a revision of the Lisbon Agreement was called for both to promote new accessions and to improve the protection system which it provided; that the study to this end should be undertaken on as broad a scale

3 AO/VII/5 page 3 as possible and should take into account not only the results of the inquiry carried out by the International Bureau, which appear in documents P/EC/VIII/6 and 7, but also all other sources of information; that the study should be con cerned first and foremost with a revision of the Lisbon Agreement, yet without disregarding other possible solutions if they might be expected to give better results, in particular the merging of the Lisbon Agreement with the Madrid Agree ment for the Repression of False and Deceptive Indications of Source or the drafting of a new treaty; and finally that the Director General would present the results of his study to the next session of the Council, at which time the Council could take a decision, with all the facts at its disposal, on what it considered to be the most suitable means of attaining the desired objectives. 19. The Delegation of Iran said that its country planned to accede to the Madrid Agreement for the Repression of False or Deceptive Indications of Source as well as to the Lisbon Agreement and with this in mind had taken steps towards the adoption of the necessary national legislation. 20. The Delegation of Senegal recalled that a Convention affording protection to appellations of origin had been adopted by the Governing Body of the African and Malagasy Industrial Property Office (OAMPI), and that, after they had rati fied the Convention, the member countries of OAMPI might consider accession to an Agreement which took into account the special circumstances of countries such as themselves. 21.' Finally, the Council unanimously adopted, in the sense indicated in para graph 18 of this document, the proposal of the Director General set out in document P/EC/VIII/ Before closing the meeting, the Chairman welcomed the presence of the Delegation of Algeria, which was participating for the first time in the work of the Council as a member of the Lisbon Union. /End of document; one annex follows/ r

4 Annexe au document AO/VII/5 Annex to document AO/VII/5 LISTE DES PARTICIPANTS/LIST OF PARTICIPANTS I. PAYS MEMBRES/MEMBER COUNTRIES ALGERIE/ALGERIA M. Salah BOUZIDI, Directeur a.i. de I1Office national de la propriety industrielle, Alger Mme Ghaoutia SELLALI, Secretaire d'ambassade, Mission permanente de l'algerie aupres des Nations Unies, Geneve CUBA M. Jose M. RODRIGUEZ PADILLA, Directeur du Registre de la propriety industrielle, La Havane M. Enrique PRETEL, Chef du departement technique des brevets, La Havane M. Frank ORTIZ RODRIGUEZ, Premier secretaire, Mission permanente de Cuba, Geneve FRANCE M. Roger M.N. LABRY, Conseiller d'ambassade, Ministere des Affaires etrangeres, Paris M. A. DEVLETIAN, Chef du Service Stranger a l'institut national des Appellations d'origine, Paris HONGRIE/HUNGARY Mr. Emil TASNADI, President of the National Office of Inventions, Budapest Mr. Jen6 BOBROVSZKY, Legal Advisor, National Office of Inventions, Budapest ISRAEL Mr. Mayer GABAY, Commissioner of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks, Ministry of Justice, Jerusalem ITALIE/ITALY M. Vincenzo OLIVA, Chef de Division, Ministere de 1'Industrie, du Commerce et de l'artisanat, Rome MEXIQUE/MEXICO Mr. Jose SANDOVAL ULLOA, Director General de la Propiedad Industrial, Secretaria de Industria y Comercio, MSxico Mr. Jorge FRAYMANN CASTRO, Asesor, Direccion General de la Propiedad Industrial, Secretaria de Industria y Comercio, MSxico PORTUGAL M. Jose Luis ESTEVES DA FONSECA, Directeur general du Commerce, Lisbonne M. Jorge VAN-ZELLER GARIN, Adjoint a la Direction generale du Commerce, Lisbonne

5 Annexe au document AO/VII/5 Annex to document AO/VII/5 page 2 TCHECOSLOVAQUIE/CZECHOSLOVAKIA M. Jaroslav PROSEK, Chef de la Section des marques, Prague M. Jiri SPRINGER, Premier secretaire d'ambassade, Prague II. OBSERVATEURS/OBSERVERS ALLEMAGNE (REPUBLIQUE FEDERALE)/GERMANY (FEDERAL REPUBLIC) Dr. Heribert MAST, Ministerialrat, Ministere federal de la Justice, Bonn AUTRICHE/AUSTRIA M. Thomas LORENZ, Vorsitzender Rat des Patentamtes, Vienne CANADA Mr. Finlay William SIMONS, Senior Representative of the Commissioner of Patents, Patent and Copyright Office, Ottawa Mr. Jacques CORBEIL, Counsellor, Patent Office, Ottawa ESPAGNE/SPAIN M. Antonio FERNANDEZ-MAZARAMBROZ, Jefe del Registro de la Propiedad Industrial, Ministerio de Industria, Madrid FINLANDE/FINLAND Mr. Erkki TUULI, Director General, Finish Patent Office, Helsinki IRAN M. Mehdi NARAGHI, Directeur de 1'Office de 1'enregistrement des societes et de la propriete industrielle, Teheran NORVEGE/NORWAY Mr. Leif NORDSTRAND, Director General, Patent Office, Oslo SENEGAL M. Babacar NIANG, Professeur technique, attache a la Direction de I1Industrie, Ministere du Developpement industriel, Dakar SUEDE/SWEDEN Mr. Claes UGGLA, Chairman on the Board of Appeals, Royal Patent Office, Stockholm SUISSE/SWITZERLAND M. Paul BRAENDLI, Vice-Directeur du Bureau federal de la propriete intellectuelle, Berne TURQUIE/TURKEY M. Saglam ADIL, Directeur de la propriete industrielle, Ankara M. Yaslicam VEDAT, Chef du Bureau de la propriete industrielle, Ankara

6 Annexe au document AO/VII/5 Annex to document AO/VII/5 page 3 III. BUREAU DU CONSEIL/OFFICERS OF THE COUNCIL President/Chairman : M. Jose M. RODRIGUEZ PADILLA (Cuba) Vice-president/Vice-Chairman : M. Jose Luis ESTEVES DA FONSECA (Portugal) SecrStaire/Secretary. : M. Leon EGGER (OMPI/WIPO) IV. ORGANISATION MONDIALE DE LA PROPRIETE INTELLECTUELLE/ WORLD INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ORGANIZATION M. Joseph VOYAME, Second Vice-directeur general Mr. B.A. ARMSTRONG, Senior Counsellor, Head, Administrative Division M. Leon EGGER, Conseiller, Chef de la Division des enregistrements internationaux M. Albert JACCARD, Chef de la Section des finances /Fin du document End of document/