{"database": "openregs", "table": "congressional_record", "rows": [["CREC-1994-12-20-pt1-PgS13", "1994-12-20", 103, 2, null, null, "URUGUAY ROUND AGREEMENTS", "SENATE", "SENATE", "FRONTMATTER", "S", "S", "[{\"name\": \"Bob Packwood\", \"role\": \"speaking\"}]", null, "140 Cong. Rec. S", "Congressional Record, Volume 140 Issue 150 (Tuesday, December 20, 1994)\n\n[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 150 (Tuesday, December 20, 1994)]\n[Senate]\n[Page S]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]\n\n[Congressional Record: December 20, 1994]\nFrom the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]\n\n                        URUGUAY ROUND AGREEMENTS\n\n Mr. PACKWOOD. Mr. President, one of the key achievements of\nthe Uruguay agreement is the obligation it establishes in respect of\nprotection of intellectual property rights. America is the preeminent\nproducer and exporter of creative and inventive products--motion\npictures, software, records, books, computers, airplanes, to name but a\nfew--all of which are subject to copyright patent or trademark\nprotection. By implementing the Uruguay round agreements, foreign\ncountries will be obligated to provide American right holders\nprotection under their national laws. These steps will improve our\nability to sell our products overseas, and encourage further creative\nand inventive efforts in our country.\n  It is our intention that this agreement establish a new floor for\nfuture initiatives to improve intellectual property protection, and not\na ceiling on standards or an obstacle to further efforts to upgrade\nprotection. In this implementing legislation, the U.S. Congress directs\nthe administration to continue its trade policy initiatives aimed at\nimproving export opportunities through bilateral negotiations and\nconsultations. In 1984, and again in 1988, we amended our trade laws to\nrequire the U.S. Trade Representative [USTR] to undertake deliberate\nand forceful bilateral trade initiatives to promote protection of\nAmerican intellectual property rights. Over the past decade, progress\non intellectual property issues has been achieved through complementary\nbilateral and multilateral initiatives. The World Trade Organization\n[WTO] agreements represent a major step forward on the multilateral\nprong of this approach. While the WTO result is a necessary element for\nattaining our goal of increased export opportunities, bilateral\ninitiatives remain an indispensable element.\n  Implementation of the Uruguay agreements leaves unchanged the intent\nof the Congress mandating continued effective bilateral negotiations.\nThus, this implementing legislation states specifically that,\nnotwithstanding that a foreign country may have implemented the\nspecifically enumerated obligations contained in the TRIP's chapter of\nthe WTO, or the obligations of any other bilateral or multilateral\nagreement, those acts by themselves do not mean that the country's laws\nmeet the ``adequate and effective protection'' standard of the U.S.\ntrade law.\n  Bilateral initiatives are especially important for at least two\nreasons. First, they are to be used to ensure that countries that have\nbeen the subject of past bilateral negotiations move promptly to\nimplement adequate and effective protection, and not take advantage of\nthe overly long transition periods that are in almost all cases\nunnecessary. Bilateral efforts are necessary to ensure that the United\nStates has the ability to address all impediments to trade such as\nmeasures which deny Americans the right to use, exploit, and derive\nfull commercial benefits from their intellectual property. Experience\ndemonstrates that bilateral negotiations can produce immediate results.\nMoreover, bilateral initiatives are well suited for resolving trade\nirritants unique to certain markets. Finally, bilateral negotiations\nhave consistently resulted in high levels of protection and effective\nenforcement measures.\n  For all these reasons, the intent of the Congress with respect to\nbilateral initiatives remains clear and unchanged: The USTR shall not\ndiminish in any way bilateral efforts under Special 301, GSP, CBI, and\nATPA programs to improve protection for U.S. holders of intellectual\nproperty. Implementation of the Uruguay round agreements shall not be\nconstrued or interpreted as a change in this mandate. Such bilateral\nefforts shall aim to supplement and strengthen the standards and\nobligations contained in the WTO's TRIP's agreement, secure their early\nimplementation and to eliminate discrimination, unreasonable exceptions\nor preconditions to the protection, enforcement or commercial enjoyment\nof the full economic benefits arising from any use or exploitation of\nintellectual property rights. In particular, the United States, through\nbilateral negotiations, shall seek to secure fair, equitable and\nnondiscriminatory market access opportunities for U.S. persons holding\nintellectual property rights.\n\n                          ____________________"]], "columns": ["granule_id", "date", "congress", "session", "volume", "issue", "title", "chamber", "granule_class", "sub_granule_class", "page_start", "page_end", "speakers", "bills", "citation", "full_text"], "primary_keys": ["granule_id"], "primary_key_values": ["CREC-1994-12-20-pt1-PgS13"], "units": {}, "query_ms": 8.83077783510089, "source": "Federal Register API & Regulations.gov API", "source_url": "https://www.federalregister.gov/developers/api/v1", "license": "Public Domain (U.S. Government data)", "license_url": "https://www.regulations.gov/faq"}