GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS

1
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS

• Is the only Champagne French Champagne?
• Erik W. Ibele
• Neider Boucher, S.C./UW Law School

2
What are geographical indications?

• Link a product to a particular region
• Indicate qualities, attributes, reputation
  associated with geographic origin
• Suggest connection to regions inherent
  characteristics (e.g., soil, climate, terrior)
• May also imply production skills/processes
  associated with region

3
Examples of geographical indications

• Columbia Columbian coffee
• India Basmati (rice)
• Greece Ouzo (spirit)
• France Champagne (sparkling wine), Roquefort
  (cheese)
• Mexico Tequila (spirit)
• Italy Parma ham
• Switzerland Etivaz, Gruyere (cheese)
• Portugal Port (wine)

4
Geographical indications and trademarks

• GIs are closely related to trademarks both
  indicate product origin
• GIs and trademarks differ in two ways
• A trademark belongs to a particular company it
  distinguishes that companys products. GIs are
  shared by all producers in the region identified
  by the GI.
• GIs attach to a location trademarks dont.

5
Territorial nature of GIs, Trademarks

• GI, Trademark protection is territorial
• International measures
• multilateral agreements (Paris, Madrid)
• national laws (Section 44, Trademark Act)
• regional application mechanisms
• Registration procedures, protection a function of
  national law

6
Why are geographical indications valuable?

• GIs are a marketing tool
• Reputation for quality associated with place name
  used on labels, advertising
• GI-identified products are believed to command
  higher prices
• Of particular interest to developing countries

7
Whats the controversy?

• Consumer vs. producer interests
• Long-time, generic use of expressions that have
  geographic origins (parmesan)
• Differing national treatment of GIs
• -weaker (Canada, US) Canadian Champagne
  American-made Pecorino cheese
• -stronger (EU) GI use reserved to producers in
  the region, even if other origin is indicated

8
International GI protection WTO/TRIPS Agreement

• Members obligated to prevent use of GIs by
  nonoriginal producers so as to mislead as to
  product origin, or constitute competition
• Higher level of protection for wines, spirits
• Exceptions
• GIs used prior to TRIPS Agreement
• (ii) GIs that have become part of common usage

9
International GI protection bilateral agreements

• EU agreements for wines, spirits with Australia,
  Canada, Chile, Mexico, South Africa.
• EU-US Agreemetn on Trade in Wines (2005)
• US to limit use of semi-generic names
• current use grandfathered
• greater US access to EU wine market

10
GIs in the WTO Doha Development Round (2001-2008)

• Establishment of multilateral system for
  registration of geographical indications
• Extension of higher level of protection to
  products other than wines, spirits
• claw back of certain GIs
• EU agenda

11
Multilateral GI register

• Scope of coverage only wines and spirits vs.
  additional products
• Legal effect of registered GIs legal presumption
  of protection and obligation to protect GIs vs.
  advisory function of register
• Legal effect in nonparticipating countries

12
Extension of higher level of protection for GIs

• Procedural issues under WTO treaty
• Developing country interests
• India, Kenya, Thailand
• have non-wine/spirit GIs
• New World producers
• Pragmatic arguments
• consumer choice
• existing level of protection sufficient

13
EU Claw-back proposal

• Would prohibit use of GIs by nonoriginal
  producers worldwide
• Examples Gorgonzola, Parmigiano Reggiano,
  Roquefort
• Many GIs have become generic in certain countries
• Doha Ministerial Declaration procedure dispute

14
Current status of GI discussion

• Failure of Doha Development Agenda
• larger agricultural issues remain unresolved
• Post-crash perspective
• many GI products are luxury goods
• reduction in consumer spending
• limited development budgets
• GIs and sustainable development