Dr. Axel Gietz:

Yes, an historian. I do not think the intellectual property rights are up for grabs as a matter of principle because property rights are property rights. Companies like ours in the fast-moving consumer goods industry have three kinds of asset. These are, in no particular order, our people, our facilities and factories and our brands. We have invested a lot of money over a long time in each of these three. If one owns anything and somebody says, for whatever reason, it is a good idea to take it away from one, it is not an irrational or inappropriate reaction on our part to say we do not agree. Intellectual property rights are an important asset for us, as for any other industry in the fast-moving consumer goods sector.
As far as unintended consequences go, it has been pointed out that foreign investment in Ireland hinges on, among other things, the security of continuing to enjoy property rights, including the intellectual ones. I suggest this would send a very disturbing signal to many foreign direct investors into this country, including and foremost, those in the United States, which are the leading direct investors in this country. According to the American Chamber of Commerce in Ireland, 26% of Irish gross domestic product is based on American foreign direct investment.
Four American Congressmen sent a letter to this committee at the outset of these hearings indicating that property rights should be protected. In an article in The Irish Timesit was said that these Congressmen would be invited to discuss this. Today is the last day of these hearings. Ours is the penultimate session. To my knowledge these men are not sitting outside. Not all aspects of unintended consequences and signals being sent-----