Wall Street protesters: We're in for the long haul

Started by garbon, October 02, 2011, 04:31:46 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

garbon

Quote from: crazy canuck on October 11, 2011, 11:28:48 AM
You mean people in Russia really do call Prosecco Champagne?  Well I think you have done a great service in undermining Garbon's argument.

Not really sure what Russia has to do with my argument. At any rate, I can totally someone who doesn't know of prosecco calling it champagne.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/champagne
Quote1: a white sparkling wine made in the old province of Champagne, France; also : a similar wine made elsewhere
"I've never been quite sure what the point of a eunuch is, if truth be told. It seems to me they're only men with the useful bits cut off."
I drank because I wanted to drown my sorrows, but now the damned things have learned to swim.

MadImmortalMan

Quote from: DGuller on October 11, 2011, 11:29:50 AM
I don't think boxed wine is much better.  I tried Franzia wine, and it seems to go bad within seconds of opening.

Indeed, even before.
"Stability is destabilizing." --Hyman Minsky

"Complacency can be a self-denying prophecy."
"We have nothing to fear but lack of fear itself." --Larry Summers

Darth Wagtaros

So the protestors trashed the park they were staying at in NY?
PDH!

Admiral Yi

Heard on CNN that the protesters plan to move uptown and protest in front of the residences of Jamie Dimon, Henry Paulsen, and Rupert Murdoch.  They are going to protest their "hoarding of wealth."

Malthus

Quote from: The Minsky Moment on October 11, 2011, 11:35:24 AM
Quote from: Malthus on October 11, 2011, 10:32:08 AM
The basic problem here is humpty-dumptism.

No, I mean I think we are going around in circles as in I already responded to that same point.

You mean here?

QuoteThis is a separate point - whether a particular name has become so associated with the general concept that it can't be entitled to protection anymore, just as with a trademark.  But even if true, the situation only arose in the Americas precisely because for a long time, the governments here refused to protect origin designations, so in effect the argument is somewhat perverse - that because we blocked the Champenoise from taking reasonable steps to protect their designation in the past, they should now be prevented from ever taking those steps in the future.

I don't see this as a "perversity". Many legal innovations fail to have retrospective effect, and in any event, "champagne" has been a genericized term for a very long time.

Point here is that it may well be "fair" for some value of fairness to require (say) all hamburger vendors to cease, as of now, labelling hamburgers as hamburgers unless they actually come from Hamburg, but it is simply too late, as the word has already entered the language as a generic term - and thus does legislation have to bend to reality.

Same with "Bologna sausage" - should one be able to legally call baloney, baloney?  ;)
The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane—Marcus Aurelius

frunk

Quote from: The Minsky Moment on October 11, 2011, 09:10:49 AM
There are two propositions here and they are contradictory to one another.  Proposition 1 is that there is no problem for the consumer because wine labels clearly indicate origin; proposition 2 is that protecting names of origin - which is the very thing on the label that tells you provenance - is unecessary.  Of course, without protecting the origin names, the usefulness of labels indicating origin is seriously undermined.

It's not contradictory.  There is value in communicating to the consumer where a product is from.  There is no compelling need such that there should be a regulatory issue for the name of the product to be the signifier of origin.  This goal is achieved just as ably by other package labeling and advertising.

Sheilbh

Quote from: Malthus on October 11, 2011, 10:22:48 AMIn this case, you have IP being used specifically to protect vested interests without any reference to innovation. Not I think a good use of the legal remedy.
I don't think it's protecting vested interests so much as tradition and heritage.  In much the same way as it protects innovation rather than just the marketing guy. 

But I agree with Minsky it seems to me the key is to help consumers.

Quote
Until Garbon suggested such a thing I didnt know Champagne was used a generic term either.
Neither did I.  I know Champagne's different from, say, Cava or Prosecco but they're all sparkling wines. 

QuotePoint here is that it may well be "fair" for some value of fairness to require (say) all hamburger vendors to cease, as of now, labelling hamburgers as hamburgers unless they actually come from Hamburg, but it is simply too late, as the word has already entered the language as a generic term - and thus does legislation have to bend to reality.
Also hamburger's the name of a product not a specific variation of a product - and there's more to it than geography.  This analogy makes it sound like the EU only allows Parma ham to be called 'ham' which isn't the case.  If there was a specific method of producing hamburgers from Hamburg then I'd be fine with restricting usage of Hamburg hamburgers :P
Let's bomb Russia!

Malthus

Quote from: Sheilbh on October 11, 2011, 12:27:27 PM
Quote from: Malthus on October 11, 2011, 10:22:48 AMIn this case, you have IP being used specifically to protect vested interests without any reference to innovation. Not I think a good use of the legal remedy.
I don't think it's protecting vested interests so much as tradition and heritage.  In much the same way as it protects innovation rather than just the marketing guy. 

But I agree with Minsky it seems to me the key is to help consumers.

Quote
Until Garbon suggested such a thing I didnt know Champagne was used a generic term either.
Neither did I.  I know Champagne's different from, say, Cava or Prosecco but they're all sparkling wines. 

QuotePoint here is that it may well be "fair" for some value of fairness to require (say) all hamburger vendors to cease, as of now, labelling hamburgers as hamburgers unless they actually come from Hamburg, but it is simply too late, as the word has already entered the language as a generic term - and thus does legislation have to bend to reality.
Also hamburger's the name of a product not a specific variation of a product - and there's more to it than geography.  This analogy makes it sound like the EU only allows Parma ham to be called 'ham' which isn't the case.  If there was a specific method of producing hamburgers from Hamburg then I'd be fine with restricting usage of Hamburg hamburgers :P

Champagne is the name of a product, not simply a variation on a product, just as much as "hamburger" or "bologna".

One could easily call hamburger "ground beef" or baloney "sausage".

Point here is that it is silly to "protect consumers" by restricting the language legally in ways it has never been restricted before.
The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane—Marcus Aurelius

Sheilbh

Quote from: Malthus on October 11, 2011, 12:45:28 PMChampagne is the name of a product, not simply a variation on a product, just as much as "hamburger" or "bologna".
Champagne's a white wine from the Champagne region, that ferments in bottle (unlike other sparkling wines, to the best of my knowledge) and is only from a list of permitted grapes.  I don't think you could get much more specific.  The name's been associated with that specific type of wine - and with the houses that produce it - for far longer than it's been a 'generic' product.

As far as I can see it's only a generic product for Russians, certain Canadians and some Americans.
Let's bomb Russia!

MadImmortalMan

Looks like they've taken over the Hart Senate office building in DC.
"Stability is destabilizing." --Hyman Minsky

"Complacency can be a self-denying prophecy."
"We have nothing to fear but lack of fear itself." --Larry Summers

Darth Wagtaros

Is it time to: invest in canned goods and shotguns?
PDH!


Sheilbh

Quote from: Admiral Yi on October 11, 2011, 01:13:10 PM
What is Prosseco?
Sparkling white wine from Italy.  It's drier than asti so is often used by cheap bars (like the ones I've worked in) as the champagne in Bellinis.
Let's bomb Russia!


The Minsky Moment

Quote from: Sheilbh on October 11, 2011, 12:52:02 PM
Champagne's a white wine from the Champagne region, that ferments in bottle (unlike other sparkling wines, to the best of my knowledge)

Not entirely true - there are many non-Champagnes that use the methode champenoise (and there are many that do not).

But otherwise, I agree with the point.

QuoteAs far as I can see it's only a generic product for Russians, certain Canadians and some Americans.

The US example I think is illustrative.  US wine labelling has always been carefully regulated; why then did the US authorities permit what seems like the misleading practice of calling a wine "Burgundy" that bears no resemblance to an actual burgundy, including the varietals used?  For the same reason the Chinese for many reasons permitted rampant DVD piracy - to protect the interests of a weak domestic industry.

But fast forward several decaded to the point where the US wine industry has made many gains qualititatively and quantitatively, and those same rules start to look inconvenient.  Now the US has names to protect - regional names like Napa and Sonoma, and even more specific designations (AVAs) like Howell Mountain or Russian River.  So the US cut a deal with the EU to give greater protection to designations of geographic origin.

Russia has no quality wine industry to speak of, and Canada just has the niche icewines in southern Ontario, and so there is no incentive to extend reciprocal treatment.  As a matter of national policy, this is sensible enough, but to try to concoct a position of principle out of that policy choice is another matter.
The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.
--Joan Robinson