After TTIP Round, “Important” Differences Remain On GIs, Negotiators Say

At the conclusion of another round of talks for a bilateral trade agreement in Miami today, Europe and the United States negotiators said they remain far apart on the issue of protection of geographical indications. But they made progress on pharmceuticals and medical products, they said.

The 11th round of negotiations for a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) was held from 19-23 October.

Chief TTIP Negotiator for the US Dan Mullaney and Chief TTIP Negotiator for the EU Ignacio Garcia-Bercero provided some details of the week of talks in a press call today.

Overall, the negotiators gave a positive report on the week’s progress, mainly on services and on the elimination of tariffs on up to 97 percent of bilateral trade in goods. Mullaney urged that negotiations be targeted for completion before the end of President Obama’s term in 2016. Garcia-Bercero agreed that it is a target but said negotiations could continue with the next administration, and should not have to be re-negotiated.

Among the topics discussed were automobiles, pharmaceuticals, medical devices, engineering, textiles, information and communication technology, and chemicals/pesticides, they said.

On pharmaceuticals, Garcia-Bercero said there was a “very good engagement” by both sides. It is a question of mutual inspections, he said, and also how to facilitate approval of biosimilars.

Mullaney said they are looking for an opportunity in each sector to create efficiencies and benefits for consumers. In pharmaceuticals and medical devices, he said they are looking for an outcome in which manufacturers could avoid multiple inspections by authorities so regulators don’t have to devote duplicate resources. Each of these sectors has specific things they are looking at to reduce burdens of costs, he said.

The next round of talks is expected in early 2016 and intensive work will be done on many issues up till then, they said.

The negotiators were asked about geographical indications, which are products named for locations and specific characteristics, and whether they might try to go beyond their existing bilateral agreement on wines.

Both negotiators confirmed that negotiations on GIs are “ongoing.” Garcia-Bercero said they had discussions in the course of this week.

“It is clear there are still important differences on how to deal with this issue” between the two sides, he said. They are talking about it, having an exchange of views.

“We hope it will be possible to identify a way forward to protect European GIs not only in the wine sector but in other sectors,” the EU negotiator said.

Mullaney noted that the wine agreement was a good agreement reached recently after 20 years of “hard negotiations.” It covers names, labelling and wine-making practices, he said.

On GIs, he said, “this has been a a longstanding discussion between the US and EU.” It is “ongoing in the course of these negotiations.”

For the US, he said, “We are approaching GIs from lens of promoting the ability of our agricultural producers to sell their products in other markets, including those who depend on trademark and on common food names.”

The issue of the GI and trademark systems has been a hot one recently at the World Intellectual Property Organization, where Europe and the United States faced off last week at the annual WIPO General Assembly (IPW, WIPO, 15 October 2015).

Negotiators on the TTIP press call made no mention of any other intellectual property issues nor of investor-state dispute settlement procedures.

 

Image Credits: EU