Mr. Chairman, On 2 February 2007, five years will have passed since the adoption of the rulings and recommendations of the WTO Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) in this dispute. By the way, that is a little less than half of this Organization’s existence. Since then and until today, the United States of America (U.S.) has qualified as a flagrant non-complier and it intends to get us accustomed to the damaging practice of presenting succinct, repetitive and empty status reports without any indication of the date on which it will comply with its obligations. It should be mentioned that this is one of the three longest-standing disputes on the DSB’s agenda and symptomatically, in all three cases, its settlement depends on the U.S., the only Member that shows an irreverent apathy towards the observance of its obligations under the WTO Agreements. Mr. Chairman, The attitude of the U.S. sends very negative signals to the rest of the WTO Members and calls into question the efficacy of the dispute settlement system. At the same time, it undermines the balance between rights and obligations, equality among the parties and the predictability of the Multilateral Trading System. As we have previously denounced, the continued implementation of Section 211 -which has been declared incompatible with the TRIPS Agreement and the rules and principles of the WTO- has given way to the arbitrary and illegal decision of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office to refuse an application to renew the registration of the Havana Club trademark submitted by the Cuban company that owns it, which would have only maintained the status quo of the trademark. However absurd it may seem, this decision has the only aim of favouring the selfish political and commercial interests of the Bacardi rum company, which intends to usurp the Havana Club trademark while putting hundreds of U.S. entrepreneurs who own more than 4000 trademarks registered in Cuba and the future of multilateral agreements on intellectual property at risk. So much so that when the decision of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office was made public, Bacardi announced that it would begin manufacturing rum under the Havana Club brand name. Its purpose is to deceive consumers who acquire the product in the U.S. market by taking advantage of the recognized prestige and the clear association of the Havana Club brand with Cuba, thereby selling a product which is not of Cuban origin and cannot be compared in terms of quality to the rum commercialized worldwide by the Cuban-French joint venture Havana Club International. Although the U.S. makes unfruitful efforts to deny it, this dispute is indeed related to this trademark and everything related. The content of Section 211 and the events that have taken place since its adoption prove it. Its objective is to deprive Cuban holders or their successors, including foreign companies having interests in Cuba, of the recognition and enjoyment in the U.S. of their rights to commercial trademarks or brand names that have been duly registered and protected, thereby preventing their legitimate owners from defending their trademarks in U.S. courts or renewing them in that country. Once again, we reiterate our call upon the U.S. to repeal Section 211 and to constructively consider the concerns and claims expressed month after month by several Members of this Body. The U.S. should think about the probable consequences of its negligent acts. I thank you, Mr. Chairman.
|