The 1995 Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), at article 22(1),
defines a “geographical indication,” or GI, as pertaining to a good originating from a country, “or a
region or locality” in that country “where a given quality, reputation or other characteristic of the good is
essentially attributable to its geographic origin.” Examples include “Champagne,” “Bordeaux,” “Tequila,”
and “Roquefort.” The United States has generally opposed the specific protection of GI’s and the US
Patent & Trademark Office continues to provide GI-type protection through its grant of certification
marks. Even so, the United States has agreed with the European Union to provide specific GI
protections for certain alcoholic beverages under the terms of the March 10, 2006 Agreement between
the United States and European Community on Trade in Wine. This is in line with TRIPS article 23’s
“higher level” protection of GI’s associated with wines and spirits.
While the federal government of the United States has
been generally opposed to intellectual property
protections based upon geographical
indications, the State of California
has taken the significant step of
protecting the name “Napa Valley,”
restricting its use to wines originating
from that area.
Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 25241. Since that time, the California Supreme Court has upheld that state’s
GI protection of Napa Valley wines in Bronco Wine Co. v. Jolly (2004), such that other states may be
able to follow suit and provide GI-type protection regimes for food products.
The European Union does provide protection to products based upon their geographical indications,
and its Customs Regulation 1383/2003 provides for government action against those who import
products into the European Union in violation of GI protections. Following-up on its earlier court
successes in the United States and France in vindicating its trade and certification marks for
“Darjeeling,” the Tea Board of India has since requested that the European Commission list “Darjeeling”
as a protected GI under European Union law. The Tea Board has already made effective use of the
Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration & Protection) Act, 1999 (No. 48 of 1999), to protect the
names “Darjeeling,” “Assam,” and “Nilgiri,” which it refers to as the “Distinguished Triad” of Indian teas.
The Tea Board has also designed logos to be used as certification marks for teas that it permits to be
called by these names. The Tea Board's logos for these teas are separately protected under the trade
mark statutes in force in each state or country where the logos have been registered.
If the Tea Board’s petition to the European Commission is granted, Darjeeling will be the first tea to be
specifically given GI protection under European law. So far, there is no indication that the Tea Board
has moved to request or encourage similar protections in individual American states, such as California,
where GI-type protection laws may exist.
defines a “geographical indication,” or GI, as pertaining to a good originating from a country, “or a
region or locality” in that country “where a given quality, reputation or other characteristic of the good is
essentially attributable to its geographic origin.” Examples include “Champagne,” “Bordeaux,” “Tequila,”
and “Roquefort.” The United States has generally opposed the specific protection of GI’s and the US
Patent & Trademark Office continues to provide GI-type protection through its grant of certification
marks. Even so, the United States has agreed with the European Union to provide specific GI
protections for certain alcoholic beverages under the terms of the March 10, 2006 Agreement between
the United States and European Community on Trade in Wine. This is in line with TRIPS article 23’s
“higher level” protection of GI’s associated with wines and spirits.
While the federal government of the United States has
been generally opposed to intellectual property
protections based upon geographical
indications, the State of California
has taken the significant step of
protecting the name “Napa Valley,”
restricting its use to wines originating
from that area.
Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 25241. Since that time, the California Supreme Court has upheld that state’s
GI protection of Napa Valley wines in Bronco Wine Co. v. Jolly (2004), such that other states may be
able to follow suit and provide GI-type protection regimes for food products.
The European Union does provide protection to products based upon their geographical indications,
and its Customs Regulation 1383/2003 provides for government action against those who import
products into the European Union in violation of GI protections. Following-up on its earlier court
successes in the United States and France in vindicating its trade and certification marks for
“Darjeeling,” the Tea Board of India has since requested that the European Commission list “Darjeeling”
as a protected GI under European Union law. The Tea Board has already made effective use of the
Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration & Protection) Act, 1999 (No. 48 of 1999), to protect the
names “Darjeeling,” “Assam,” and “Nilgiri,” which it refers to as the “Distinguished Triad” of Indian teas.
The Tea Board has also designed logos to be used as certification marks for teas that it permits to be
called by these names. The Tea Board's logos for these teas are separately protected under the trade
mark statutes in force in each state or country where the logos have been registered.
If the Tea Board’s petition to the European Commission is granted, Darjeeling will be the first tea to be
specifically given GI protection under European law. So far, there is no indication that the Tea Board
has moved to request or encourage similar protections in individual American states, such as California,
where GI-type protection laws may exist.
Law of Tea.com
A WEB RESOURCE FOR THE TEA INDUSTRY
A WEB RESOURCE FOR THE TEA INDUSTRY
TEA REGULATION
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS
| © 2009 Law of Tea.com |