January 2006
European Commission publishes two proposals to modify EU system for protecting geographical indications
The vast range of specialised foods throughout Europe is protected and promoted through a system of classifications of Protected Designation of Origin (PDOs,) Protected Geographical Indication (PGIs) and Traditional Speciality Guaranteed TSGs
There are over 720 PGIs and PDOs protected under EU Regulation (2081/92/EC) from Scotch beef to Cornish Clotted Cream and Feta Cheese to Kölsch beer. By contrast, there are only nine TSGs, including Mozzarella cheese protected under a different Regulation (2082/92/EC).
All these products have brand values and flavours unique to the geographical region in which they are produced. These regional protections are available to any producer in the region concerned to ensure that only products genuinely originating in that region are allowed in commerce as such.
In 2003 Australia joined the US in its request to the World Trade Organisation (“WTO”) to investigate whether the EU system of PGIs was compliant with the principles of Trade-related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (“TRIPS”) and asked the European Commission to bring its legislation into line with TRIPS.
The trade ministers at the WTO concluded that the EU's system was generally TRIPS-compliant but it had to allow non-EU products originating from WTO countries to participate in the system (e.g. Basmati rice, Alphonso Mangos, Florida Oranges), even if they did not operate equivalent levels of protection and inspection.
The EU has until April 2006 to comply with the WTO ruling to remove the requirement for “reciprocity and equivalence” from existing rules and allow producer-groups from third countries to submit applications and objections directly, rather than through their governments.
The draft Regulations put forward by the Commission are intended to fulfil their obligations by:
- Removing the requirement for reciprocity and equivalence:
Products from non EU countries do not have to be subjected to an equivalent system in their own country of origin and the country concerned does not have to give reciprocal protection to EU products. Inspection arrangments and rights to object to registrations which are equivalent to those applicable to EU products are no longer required.
- Changing the registration procedure:
If the name in question is protected in its non-EU country of origin, producer-groups can submit their applications either directly to the European Commission or through their own national authorities.
- Maintaining the Rules for EU Members States
Producer-groups in EU member States are still required to submit their applications in a unified application document, first to their national governments, which are to ensure that the application meets the conditions of the draft Regulations. Members States are also are required to introduce an opposition procedure at national level to allow interested parties to contest the application.
The proposals also seek to boost the image of labels and the use of EU logos to increase consumer recognition.
BRIFFA'S Comment:
Protected Designation of Origin or Geographical Indication should ideally be both a consumer protection measure and a way of protecting producers of a region's traditional foods. In reality, such designations may often become the subject of divisive politics.
The proposals are steps in the right direction for well-known foods that originate outside the EU to register as regional marks. The producer groups will still have to overcome objections that the name in question has become generic or lacks the necessary connection with the geographic area.
Because of the two-stage opposition procedure, both at Member State and at EU level, producers from EU member states are at a disadvantage over non-EU producers.
Sophie Lachowsky
sophie@briffa.com