In discussions on IPIC/CE/IV/4 (Presidency proposals for amendments to the Treaty to allow Community participation) no basic objections were raised to Community accession to the Treaty but many delegations insisted that the respective competences of the Commission and the member states should be spelt out (the law of the Sea treaty was cited as a precedent). The extent of the Commission's obligations was also questioned.
11. The Commission's replies tended to confuse rather than inform delegations and there were calls for further information in the form of a paper to be circulated well in advance of the Conference. This was somewhat grudgingly agreed to by the Commission and delegates were thereafter reluctant to spend any more time on Community matters. (This did not however prevent Community questions being debated at length in the ensuing preparatory meeting, to the increasing irritation of non-member states.)
12.
The debate on the Indian proposal for a codicil to the Berne Convention (IPIC/CE/IV/5) as an alternative to a sui generis treaty demonstrated that the Indian delegation were almost completely ignorant of Berne's provisions. The South American countries said that the proposal should be submitted to the Diplomatic Conference, and this was given some ill-judged support by the US. There was however alarm among those developing countries such as Ghana who questioned whether non-Berne states would be able to accede to the protocol.
13. Dr Bogsch firmly exposed the deficiencies in the Indian approach. He pointed out that while the Diplomatic Conference was free to decide on its documentation, WIPO could not submit a proposal which was contrary to Berne (cf Article 20). He listed the inconsistencies between the codicil and Berne, and said unequivocally that only Berne Union members could accede to the protocol. It was agreed to return to the status of this document in the preparatory meeting.