Regional trade marks, such as Champagne, Parma Ham or even
Florida Oranges, relate to products that are connected with a
particular territory. These are geographical indications that,
unlike normal trade marks, are not an exclusive individual right,
but are available to any producer in the region concerned. As such,
the
EU
gives them special protection.
But in 2003 the
US
and Australia filed separate
complaints with the
WTO
over what they see as the
EU
's discriminatory approach to geographical
indications, alleging that the
EU
does not allow the
geographical indications of other
WTO
members to be
registered, and protected, in the
EU
unless that other
member provides the same protections as the
EU
.
This, the Office of the United States Trade Representative
explained at the time, is inconsistent with national treatment and
most favoured nation obligations under international trade
agreements, as it allows the
EU
to treat imported
products in a less favourable manner than
EU
products.
The
WTO
set up a dispute settlement panel to
investigate the complaint in October 2003, and yesterday that panel
issued its report, upholding the
EU
system of
geographical indications, but extending its rights to
non-
EU
states.
The ruling has both sides claiming victory.
According to the European Commission, the report upholds the
integrity of the
EU
system and rejects the majority of
the claims made by the United States and Australia.
The panel upholds an important element of the
EU
system, said the Commission: the requirement for inspection
structures to verify that the conditions for each geographical
indication are fulfilled in order to benefit from the high level of
protection against unlawful use.
The panel also confirmed that the provision of the
EU
system allowing for the 'coexistence' of
geographical indications with prior trade marks under certain
circumstances is fully justified under the TRIPS
(Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights) Agreement,
said the Commission.
"By confirming that geographical indications are both legal and
compatible with existing trade mark systems, this
WTO
decision will help the
EU
to ensure wider recognition
of geographical indications and protection of regional and local
product identities," said Peter Mandelson, Commissioner for
Trade.
But the panel report also asked the
EU
to clarify
its rules in respect of applications for registration of
geographical indications from third countries.
According to the Office of the United States Trade
Representative, the
WTO
panel agreed that the European
system discriminates against
US
products and producers
and is therefore contrary to
WTO
rules.
The panel also agreed with the United States that Europe could
not, consistent with
WTO
rules, deny
US
trade mark owners their rights, stating that any exceptions to
trade mark rights for the use of registered geographical
indications were narrow, and, for instance, limited to the actual
geographical indication name as registered.
"We're very pleased with this decision," said the Acting
US
Trade Representative Peter F Allgeier. "It's a
clear win for American farmers and food processors."
According to the
BBC
, the Australian mission to the
WTO
has also welcomed the report, adding, "It is rare
in
WTO
disputes for either party to win on all
claims".
