trademark attorney firms and industrial property services of companies, but were also from industrial property offices of member or potential member countries of the Madrid Union.
WIPO staff members spoke about the Madrid system in nine seminars, training courses or other meetings in the Central African Republic, Germany, Liechtenstein, the Netherlands and Spain, and at WIPO headquarters.
Officials from Cuba, Germany, Italy, Japan, Mongolia, Romania, Sudan, and the United States of America and from the Inter‑American Association of Industrial Property (ASIPI)
Conducted a one-week training program in the International Registry of Marks for two officials of Kenya.
Published and distributed a new information brochure entitled “Protecting Your Trademark Abroad: Twenty Questions About the Madrid Protocol,” intended mainly for trademark owners of countries party to the Madrid Protocol, but not to the Madrid Agreement, and their attorneys.
Published updates to the second edition of the Guide to the International Registration of Marks under the Madrid Agreement and the Madrid Protocol in English and French in April 1998.
Began work for the first issue in the second half on 1998 of a newsletter on the Madrid system and production of a promotional video on the Madrid Protocol commissioned from a specialized firm.
Improved the Madrid system page on WIPO’s site on the Internet.
Staff members participated in meetings of the Institute of Trademark Agents (ITMA) and the International Trademark Association (INTA).
Belgium, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Slovenia, and Yugoslavia became bound by the Madrid Protocol. Kenya deposited its instrument of accession to the Madrid Agreement and the Madrid Protocol and Romania and Georgia their instruments of ratification and accession to the Madrid Protocol; when these instruments take effect, this will bring the membership of the Madrid Agreement to 48, the membership of the Madrid Protocol to 31, and the total membership of the Madrid Union to 56.