PTC FORUM : PUBLICATIONS
INTERNATIONAL / GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS / TRIPS
University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Economic Law
The Protection of Geographical Indications (Who will raise the white flag?)
Stacy Goldberg
For better or worse, the TRIPS agreement includes provisions on geographical
indications; and, in this article, the author outlines the scope of the TRIPS
provisions and the proposals by the European Union for adding to them. The author
points out that the United States, Canada, Japan and Australia were opposed
to the inclusion of any provisions in TRIPS in the first place and describes
the different approaches to the problem of a geographical indications in Europe
and elsewhere. The article refers to the Paris Convention on the Protection
of Industrial Property, the Madrid agreement on Indications of Source and the
Lisbon Agreement on Appellations of Origin; discusses in detail the effects
of Articles 22, 23 and 24 of the TRIPS agreement; brings the reader up to date
on continuing TRIPS negotiations; and summarises the current complaint by the
United States against the European Union in respect of the European Union Council
Regulation 2081/92 on the protection of geographical indications and designations
of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs. As the author puts it, the
United States seems to be fighting the battle against greater protection for
geographical indications on two fronts - within the World Trade Organisation
dispute settlement process and within the TRIPS negotiations. According to the
author, a compromise would not be impossible: perhaps on the basis that existing
generic terms, such as Chablis, Burgundy, Champagne and so on, which tend to
be regarded as generic by consumers, should be accepted as such and a strong
system instituted to prevent future trends towards generic recognition. As for
the conflict between trade mark law and the law protecting geographical indications,
this can be resolved, in the author's opinion, by allowing the two systems to
co-exist and to be governed jointly by the traditional rules on priority. [20054]