Forbes on Kobe Beef (and Champagne)

[Barrister]

What's the problem with extra virgin olive oil?

[Sheilbh]

To claim hypocrisy on trademark vs. origin you have to overlook differences (possibly fundamental ones!) between the two.  Such as the fact that the origin people are trying to grab back something that has been in the public domain for a very long time.

You can be sensible about it though.  One key EU law case we had to learn involved 'cremant' which the EU designated as sparkling wine from France or Luxembourg that's not champagne.  A Spanish cava producer was able to challenge that, successfully, in part because that was a trademark they had and had used the trademark 'gran cremant' in Spain for around 80 years.

[Sheilbh]

What's the problem with extra virgin olive oil?

In the EU it's got a more strictly regulated meaning than in the US.  I think generally it has to be first press but there's other stuff too.

[Admiral Yi]

In the EU it's got a more strictly regulated meaning than in the US.  I think generally it has to be first press but there's other stuff too.

You can't heat the olives before pressing.

[Jacob]

It was a bit of a quibble.  IP means knowledge, which has virtually nothing to do with the place of origin rule.  People in California know everything the Champagnois know about making bubbly.

In my line of work, IP includes branded products.

To claim hypocrisy on trademark vs. origin you have to overlook differences (possibly fundamental ones!) between the two.  Such as the fact that the origin people are trying to grab back something that has been in the public domain for a very long time.

I acknowledge there are some differences, but I still thing it is hypocritical not to acknowledge it when at the same time you keep delaying other forms of IP entering the public domain (a number of Disney creations, for example).

[Jacob]

Are American producers allowed to use the same brand name?

They seem to use "Champagne" fairly frequently.

[derspiess]

It was a bit of a quibble.  IP means knowledge, which has virtually nothing to do with the place of origin rule.  People in California know everything the Champagnois know about making bubbly.

In my line of work, IP includes branded products.

To claim hypocrisy on trademark vs. origin you have to overlook differences (possibly fundamental ones!) between the two.  Such as the fact that the origin people are trying to grab back something that has been in the public domain for a very long time.

I acknowledge there are some differences, but I still thing it is hypocritical not to acknowledge it when at the same time you keep delaying other forms of IP entering the public domain (a number of Disney creations, for example).

There are huge differences IMO.  I'd say a proprietary brand name would qualify as IP.  Something that is added to the label as a descriptor or denotes that it originates from a particular area, not so much.

[Barrister]

In the EU it's got a more strictly regulated meaning than in the US.  I think generally it has to be first press but there's other stuff too.

You can't heat the olives before pressing.

Are there places where you can buy EVOO that is not cold-pressed?

[Jacob]

There are huge differences IMO.  I'd say a proprietary brand name would qualify as IP.  Something that is added to the label as a descriptor or denotes that it originates from a particular area, not so much.

Champagne is a proprietary brand name. It belongs to the wine producers of the Champagne region, and it applies to the sparkling wine they produce.

[Admiral Yi]

I acknowledge there are some differences, but I still thing it is hypocritical not to acknowledge it when at the same time you keep delaying other forms of IP entering the public domain (a number of Disney creations, for example).

And I see differences and think's it not hypocritical.  So there.

[Jacob]

Are there places where you can buy EVOO that is not cold-pressed?

Apparently the US?

[Jacob]

And I see differences and think's it not hypocritical.  So there.

There indeed.

[Admiral Yi]

Are there places where you can buy EVOO that is not cold-pressed?

First I've ever heard about it.  Track down the poster who said they don't buy Italian olive oil.

[Malthus]

The very fact that producers are fighting to use term like champaign or Kobe beef means these terms have value and should be protected.

That doesn't follow. The fact that something has value doesn't mean it *should* be treated as a species of property, and belong to someone. Particularly where there is no issue of anyone "earning" that value.

In most cases of IP, the argument is that we ought to give IP rights to protect someone's work - in writing a song, or inventing a new process. Nobody "worked" to be born in France. Being a French wine or cheese maker is no greater effort than being a wine or cheese maker elsewhere. Certainly France is heir to a great tradition of wine and cheese making, but being heir to a tradition isn't the same as creating new value.

[Malthus]

One interesting recent trend in wine - again I'm generally ignorant - is that countries like Argentina and Australia are signing up with deals with the EU where they respect names like Champagne and other wines.  In large part this is because there are now Argentine and Australian wine-making brands and traditions that they want to protect and to have recognised in Europe.  I believe there's similar moves in the US by California and other states' vineyards who don't like their 'brand' being used by others.

Edit:  So I think on the wine the New World wines may have disliked this while they were sort-of insurgent wines.  Now they're established in their own right they see the attraction.

Naturally, everyone likes having something that they have that others place value on declared a species of property that they own. 

The issue is whether that is a good idea or not.

I'm kinda surprised that the lefty types here seem most outspoken about creating and protecting new property rights, thus commodifying things which had not previously been commodified.