Terroir IPR Part 1: Geographical Indications and IP Protection for Your Appellation of Origin

Quote

The wine industry is characterised by a wide variety of producers, often very much linked to specific grapes, blends and terrains. The European Union has put in place a system of Geographical Indications (GIs), that are used to distinguish the origin of goods, often also linked to the quality and reputation of a purple-grapes-vineyard-napa-valley-napa-vineyard-45209specific product. In China, a large market for European wines, these GIs are as important, and once registered they are protected as trademarks. Nonetheless, as with trade marks, it is important to monitor the market for infringement of GIs and act against illegitimate users of your collective mark.
Wine has been classified by region for almost the entirety of its long and varied history, the Ancient Greeks stamped amphorae with the seal of the region they came from, and references to wine, identified by region are found throughout the Bible and other religious texts. Whilst this tradition of geographical identification continued throughout Antiquity and the Middle Ages, it was only in 1716, with the introduction of the Chianti region in Italy, protected by edict of the then Grand Duke of Tuscany.

Today, the concepts of appellation and terroir have spread around the world. France protects over 300 Appellation d’Origine Contrôlée (AOC)[1], and Italy over 400 Denominazione di Origine Controllata e Garantita (DOCG) and Denominazione di Origine Controllata (DOC) wines[2]. With similar systems and numerous varieties are grown and protected throughout Europe and the rest of the world, appellation of origin plays an important role in the classification of wines, as well as consumer decision making. As a result, the protection of the integrity of this classification system is of paramount importance to producers, distributors, retailers, and of course, consumers.

Protection of the appellation of origin of a product falls to the legal principles associated with so called Geographical Indications (GIs). Similar to trade marks, GIs are distinctive signs used to distinguish the origin of goods, thereby enabling consumers to accurately associate a particular quality or reputation with the products in question.

GIs differ from trade marks however in that rather than protecting a single producer’s rights, they protect a whole class, based on their geographical location and the production methods used. GIs therefore ‘belong to all those resident producers who comply with the specific by-laws and regulations set to ensure that the consumer ‘link’ between the quality /reputation of a product and its place of origin is maintained.[3]

Continue reading “Terroir IPR Part 1: Geographical Indications and IP Protection for Your Appellation of Origin” »

Thailand Joins Madrid Protocol

Quote

On August 7, 2017, the Thai government officially deposited the instrument of accession to the Madrid Protocol with the WIPO, marking the starting date of the three-month period before the Protocol becomes effective in Thailand. Consequently, the Madrid System will come into effect for Thailand (the 99th member) as from November 7, 2017.

In its instrument, the government makes declarations on three issues. Firstly, a period to issue provisional refusal will be extended to eighteen months, with further extension possible in case of an opposition. Secondly, an individual fee to be specified in Ministerial Regulations to be issued by virtue of the accession will apply to international applications/registrations designating Thailand. Thirdly, recordal of a license agreements with the International Bureau will not be effective with regard to Thai applications/registrations.

After this deposition, the next step is to issue Ministerial Regulations to elaborate on the process. It is anticipated that the Regulations will contain the following details:

  • All documents submitted through the Thai Trademark Office to the International Bureau must be in English. If the Thai Office finds an international application incorrect or incomplete, the applicant will have to remedy it within 15 days upon receipt of a notice. Otherwise, the Thai Office may not be able to forward the application to the International Bureau within 120 days and the date of filing with the Thai Office will not be considered as the filing date of the international application. If the applicant does not comply with the Thai Office’s notice within 120 days, the application will be deemed abandoned.
  • For an international application designating Thailand, the Thai Trademark Office will translate the necessary content into Thai. In case of provisional refusal, the applicant is required to appoint an agent in Thailand to deal with it.  The response may have to be in Thai. In case of failure to respond, the Thai Office may partially accept the application for the goods/services in relation to which the refusal does not apply.

Continue reading “Thailand Joins Madrid Protocol” »

Enforcing IP Rights with the Customs in Vietnam: A Case Study

Quote

shutterstock_118547785Border control can be an effective means for European SMEs for enforcing their IP rights in Vietnam, and it serves the purpose of preempting and suppressing IP counterfeits of SMEs’ products at Vietnam’s borders. Border control has gained more attention over the past few years from business owners wishing to protect their IP in Vietnam as the Vietnamese government recently granted the Customs more powers, making it more efficient.

Even though, Vietnamese Customs are actively looking for possible infringing products crossing the border of the country, it is advisable for the European SMEs to actively cooperate with the Customs authorities by recording their IP with the Customs and by actively monitoring the market and letting the Customs know of suspected infringing shipments, to fully benefit from the Customs protection.

How does Customs Protection Work

Vietnamese customs laws prohibit the importation of goods that infringe IP Rights, and Vietnamese Customs has the authority to impose fines on infringers and confiscate infringing goods for import. However, infringing goods for export are not subject to any penalties imposed by the Vietnamese authorities so far. If the infringement of IP Rights exceeds a certain threshold, the Customs authorities can also arrange criminal proceedings to be brought against the infringing party. Continue reading “Enforcing IP Rights with the Customs in Vietnam: A Case Study” »

China’s New Ecommerce Law: What this will mean for Consumers, Operators and Providers

Quote

shutterstock_167099189Today’s blog post has been kindly drafted for us by our China IPR SME Helpdesk expert Mr. Daniel Albrecht from Starke Beijing. In this article, Mr. Albrecht gives a comprehensive overview on the latest changes in China’s new e-commerce law that will inevitably effect the activities of consumers, operators as well as providers. 

China’s Ecommerce Market 

In accordance to analysis by digital marketing researcher eMarketer, cross-border Ecommerce in China was due to hit USD 85.76 billion in 2016, up from USD 57.13 billion in 2015. Furthermore the China Internet Network Information Center (CNNIC) reported 710 million Internet users in June 2016. Notably, 40 per cent of China’s online consumers are buying foreign goods and eMarketer estimated the amount of money that each of them would have spent an average of USD 473.26 in 2016. 

If the projection that cross-border Ecommerce will have a compound annual growth rate of 18 percent through to the end of the decade — reaching an estimated USD 222.3 billion — will come true, the consequence would be that China’s Ecommerce market will catch up with those of the US, Britain, Japan, Germany and France combined by 2020. 

China’s New Ecommerce Law 

As the Ecommerce market is constantly changing and undoubtedly its major impact on social life and the current economy cannot be denied, it seems to be necessary to provide a legal framework to give answers to upcoming questions within the scope of Ecommerce. 

Hence a new Ecommerce law is in progress and drafts are waiting to be adopted. The new law shall remedy the current situation by promoting the Ecommerce market’s development, putting things straight and satisfying all the parties’ interests. These central ideas are laid out in Article 1 of the recent draft law and shall summarize simultaneously the political objectives pursued by this law. 

Continue reading “China’s New Ecommerce Law: What this will mean for Consumers, Operators and Providers” »

Indonesia’s New Trademark Law – An Overview of the Changes

trademarkToday’s blog post has been kindly drafted for us by our South-East Asia IPR SME Helpdesk expert Mr.  Somboon Earterasarun from Tilleke & Gibbins. In this article, Mr. Earterasarun gives a comprehensive overview on the latest changes in Indonesia’s Trade Mark Law that came to force in November  last year. 

The Indonesian Parliament approved amendments to the country’s Trademark Law on October 27, updating the Trademark Law No. 15, which had been in force since 2001. The amended Trademark Law has now entered into force—it took effect on November 28, 2016—introducing a number of significant changes that refine current practices, add new features, and clarify certain provisions.

Some of the major changes include provisions designed to speed up the examination process. The new law also increases criminal penalties and provides more clarity on preliminary injunctions, both of which may help lead to better enforcement. Another change relating to the transfer of ‘‘associated marks’’ may be particularly important to international rights holders who need to transfer registrations to business partners.

Publication and Substantive Examination

Under the new Trademark Law, the publication stage—during which oppositions can be made—must now take place before the examiner conducts the substantive examination stage (i.e., the stage in which the distinctiveness and similarity to prior-registered marks are examined). The publication stage now lasts for two months, instead of three months. It is also the only opportunity for trademark owners to oppose third-party applications prior to registration. Continue reading “Indonesia’s New Trademark Law – An Overview of the Changes” »