In 1966 and 1967, an attempt was made to tackle this problem by creating a new treaty that would reflect the needs of the time and not the world of the 1890s, when the agreement was adopted. This led to the drafting of the Trademark Registration Treaty (TRT), adopted in Vienna in 1973 and entered into force in 1980 with five Contracting States, namely Burkina Faso, Congo, Gabon, the Soviet Union and Togo. In the absence of new accessions to the TRT and the low number of registrations recorded since its introduction, it was clear that the TRT was unlikely to replace the Madrid Agreement. As we approach the introduction of a European multi-legal (or at least pan-European) Community trade mark (GM), the relevance of the Madrid system has been put to the test. The pressure on WIPO to maintain its relevance and strengthen the agreement by increasing the number of members, possibly through amendments.  The main reason why the Protocol is more popular than the Agreement is that the Protocol introduced a number of amendments to the Madrid System that have significantly increased its usefulness for trademark owners. The accession of the United States and the European Union to the Madrid Protocol on November 2, 2003 and October 1, 2004, respectively, were two major developments in international trademark law. With the inclusion of these jurisdictions in the protocol, most of the major commercial jurisdictions have joined the Madrid system. In principle, the main advantage of the Madrid system is that a trademark owner can obtain protection for a trademark in one or all Member States by filing an application in a jurisdiction with a certain number of fees and having no modification (e.g. .