#France #INPI #NonAgricultural: “Pierre de Bourgogne” recognized as Geographical Indication (GI)
On 29 June, “pierre de Bourgogne” was recognised as GI by the “Institut national de la propriété industrielle” (INPI – France). This is the 4th non-agricultural product’s name approved in France following the introduction of a national sui generis system through law n. 2014-344 of 17 March 2014 (see Chapter IV, “Indications géographiques et protection du nom des collectivités territoriales”). The other non-agricultural GIs recognized by the INPI are « siège de Liffol » (December 2016), « granit de Bretagne » (January 2017) et « porcelaine de Limoges » (December 2017). Meanwhile, 6 additional products’ names have been filed and are currently under scrutiny.
“Pierre de Bourgogne” represents 15.8% of the limestone and marble production in France. The sector employs nearly 600 people with a turnover of 53 million euros (22% obtained through export). The group “Association pierre de Bourgogne” (representing 27 companies in the geographical area) will be responsible for the management of the GI. More information available (in French) @ https://www.inpi.fr/fr/bourgogne-franche-comte/indication-geographique-l-inpi-homologue-la-pierre-de-bourgogne
We take this opportunity to announce that, in June 2018, INPI – France has joined oriGIn global network as an associate member. Over the years several similar institutions, such as the Swiss Institute of Intellectual Property (IPI), SAKPATENTI Georgia, OMPIC Morocco, the Intellectual Property Office of Cambodia, the “Institut national de l’origine et de la qualité” (INAO – France), the “Conseil des appellations réservées et des termes valorisants” (CARTV) of Quebec, have joined oriGIn. This shows how oriGIn has become a truly global “GIs think-thank” and opinion-maker, where the most important issues affecting all GIs sectors are debated and new partnerships developed.
#Cambodia #Mozambique #India #EU #WorldwideGIsCompilation #GenevaAct: GIs recognitions around the world and need of legal certainty
The month of June has been quite intense in terms of GIs recognitions around the world.
On top of “pierre de Bourgogne” mentioned in the previous article, just to mention a few examples: “Koh Trong pomelo” (a pomelo grown in the Kratie’s Koh Trong commune in Cambodia) became the third national recognized GI; “Tete goat” (meat product from the province of Tete, in Mozambique, first goat producer in the country) was recognized, making it the first national GI; “Swamimalai bronze” (bronze icons from Swamimalai, in the South of India), obtained the GIs status in India, where the non-agricultural GIs keeps growing; “Cairanne” (a wine from the department of Vaucluse, south of France) was recognized as Protected Designation of Origin (PDO) at the EU level; “Pitina” (a meat product of the Pordenone province in the north east of Italy) as Protected Geographical Indication (PGI) in the EU.
oriGIn keeps track of these developments in its Worldwide GIs compilation, which indicates as well the protection that each GI enjoys in third countries. To establish a truly international register of GIs, and increase legal certainty and transparency, it is crucial to strengthen oriGIn as well as individual members efforts to promote the adoption of the Geneva Act of the Lisbon Agreement within WIPO among a large number of countries around the world. To learn what oriGIn has done so far in this respect, please visit our “Policy and Advocacy” page devoted to the activities carried out at the WIPO level.
#Australia #TRIPS #WTO #PlainPackaging: WTO panel report on tobacco plain packaging
On 28 June, the WTO panel report concerning the cases brought by Honduras, the Dominican Republic, Cuba and Indonesia against Australia – Certain Measures Concerning Trademarks, Geographical Indications and Other Plain Packaging Requirements Applicable to Tobacco Products and Packaging” (DS435, DS441, DS458 and DS467) was published.
The cases concern a number of legislative measures adopted by Australia in 2011 and 2012 (The Tobacco Plain Packaging Act 2011, the Tobacco Plain Packaging Regulations 2011, amended in 2012, and the Trade Marks Amendment – Tobacco Plain Packaging Act 2011 – TPP measures), consisting in imposing removal of logos and obligations of minimal branding and coloring for tobacco products (for GIs, prohibition of the use of any stylized or figurative elements contained in a GI or figurative signs constituting a GI on tobacco products), with the objective to reduce consumption. Such measures had been contested by Honduras, the Dominican Republic, Cuba and Indonesia, because considered inconsistent with Australia obligations under the TRIPS Agreement, in particular the ones concerning the protection of trademarks and GIs.
The WTO panel ruled in favor of Australia, rejecting the arguments raised by the countries contesting plain packaging measures for tobacco products. On GIs, in particular, the panel did not consider that the measures at stake are likely to violate art. 22.2 (b) of the TRIPS, as the complainants have not demonstrated that the public would be misled about product characteristics in respect of GIs as a result of the requirement to present tobacco products for retail sale in a standardized form. Likewise, the arguments consisting in a violation of TRIPS art. 24.3 by Australia (measures which diminish protection available to GIs in Australia prior to date of the entry into force of TRIPS) were dismissed as, in the panel view, the protection available in Australia under consumer protection laws ad common law prior to 1995 was not diminished by the TPP measures.