Welcome to our blog for Intellectual Property Law and Practice in Latin America!
¡Bienvenidos a nuestro blog de Derecho y Práctica de la Propiedad Intelectual en Latinoamérica!
Bem-vindo ao nosso blog sobre Direito e Prática de Propriedade Intelectual na América Latina!
Showing posts with label appellation of origin. Show all posts
Showing posts with label appellation of origin. Show all posts

Friday, 10 July 2020

Patricia Covarrubia

Colombia: smell [successful] coffee

    No comments:
SIC, the Colombian IPO office recently published a short graphic noting Colombian's coffees that have successfully been registered as Denominations of Origin.

Every morning, before I even brush my teeth, I enjoy an espresso. I not only enjoy the taste, but the smell of fresh coffee is very pleasant. I am use to strong coffee, (being Venezuelan with an Italian husband) and actually, I was raised in a farm that on my teenager years was just harvesting coffee beans – what a wonderful time (except the mosquito bites).

I am, by nature please to see how farmers and their respective associations try to protect their products and with it, their farms, their people, their family. I do also understand (as academic and researcher) that no everything is gold at the end of the rainbow when we discuss Geographical Indications. However, just the fact that farmers unite for a common aim, for me, it is a successful goal. Sharing good practices and feeling part of a community is extremely important. In this regard, I see the value of the product as it is explained by the Lisbon Agreement when referring to appellation of origin – a human factor.


SIC explain DO as ‘a sign that is directly related to the community and in which associativity plays a role of special importance’ – I could not agree more. Colombian DOs are defined in Decision 486, which is the Andean Community legislation (equivalent to ‘Regulation’ in EU law) and nationally, under Resolution No 57530. The spirit and the wording of the texts are similar to the one noted as Appellation of Origin under the Lisbon Agreement because they include the natural factors of the region focusing on human factors such as traditional knowledge and methods of elaboration.

Up to today, Colombia has registered as Denomination of Origin SEVEN coffees. And please, if you are taking notes, it is Colombia (country), no Columbia (US state). [I was so heart broken when I saw the final publication of a chapter in a book that I was involved with, that the editorial decided to change Colombia for Columbia !! (that is another story to tell you later)]. Anyways, all started with ‘Café de Colombia’ (2005) which was the first DO in Colombia itself but also the first foreign DO registered in the EU (what an achievement). This opened the door to other farmers that saw the benefits. In 2011, TWO coffees were granted DO: ‘Café de Nariño’ and ‘Café de Cauca’; [I wrote a chapter in a book (not the one that edited Colombia) covering a case study on Café de Narino and a company that wanted to registered as a trade mark such name in Spain [published online by Inter-America Association of Intellectual Property (ASIPI)]. In 2013, ‘Café de Huila’ and 2014, ‘Café de Santander’ successfully registered their DOs. The last TWO were granted on the same date, 30 January 2017 to ‘Café de Tolima’ and ‘Café de Sierra Nevada’.

Way to go Colombia!
The graphic can be seen here.
Read More

Wednesday, 2 October 2019

Patricia Covarrubia

Chile vs Peru: the battle over ‘Pisco’ continues

    No comments:
The Peruvian Ministry of External Relations has issued a Press Release stating that Peru will appeal to the ruling of the Court of First Instance of Thailand against the registration of a Chilean association that intends to use the term Pisco.
Press Release 010 - 19
Given the news reports that advance the ruling of the Court of First Instance on Intellectual Property and International Trade of Thailand, it should be stressed that despite the exclusive ownership of the Peruvian Denomination of Origin Pisco in Thailand, said Court ruled that in that country you can use "Pisco Chile".
Peru considers that this first decision of the Thailand Court does lead to consumer confusion in that country, since the Pisco Denomination of Origin is Peruvian and this is confirmed by the historical, geographical, cultural and scientific arguments that our country supports and defends in all the world’s court.
In that sense, the ruling in the first instance will be appealed immediately by Peru, in order to continue opposing any attempt to register because these are obvious errors of fact and law.
A Pisco sour for a sour battle
Years of international dispute have persisted over the origin of Pisco which both Chile and Peru have produced since colonial times. Both countries recognize it in their own jurisdiction as a Denomination of Origin. Additionally, back in 2018, Chile was open to accepting the name of Peruvian Pisco if Peru accepted the name of Chilean Pisco – a qui pro quo that did not go far since Peru did not accept such a proposal.

The case brought appears straightforward. If the Thailandese Registry of Industrial Property recognized Pisco as a Denomination of Origin (DO) produced in Peru, it does then prevents the registration of the name and any marketing of Pisco within the Thailand market if it has not complied with the Peruvian national regulation. Clearly, if Pisco was not made in Peru it cannot be called as such. Well, it is not that simple. In India, the dispute over the name went over 9 years (finally won by Peru) and this appears to be the case now in Thailand. The dispute is over a year on, so get ready for a long battle.

The whisky exchange webpage (where I get my inspiration from:) ) notes that ‘Pisco is a grape brandy produced in Chile and Peru’. In the EU (oh BREXIT is coming…who will register first in the UK, Chile or Peru) both, Chile and Peru, were granted geographical indication. Chile had an association agreement (2002) where recognition was given, and then Peru applied for the registration of Pisco as GI (granted in 2013).
Read More

Friday, 14 September 2018

Patricia Covarrubia

Brazil: GI update

    No comments:
This week the Brazilian National Congress published the Legislative Decree No. 154, of 2018. This Decree approves the agreement signed between Brazil and Mexico for the mutual recognition of ‘cachaça’ (Brazil) and tequila (Mexico) as geographical indications respectively.

Same line of news, we also heard that Brazil registered another national GI. This time the registration of GI was granted, as a designation of origin (DO), to bananas of the Region of Corupá ---published in the Magazine of Industrial Property (RPI) nº 2486.

The banana is from the subgroup Cavendish, with mean values higher than those of other fruit varieties. Another quality existing in this banana is its sweet taste joined with a lower acidity. The registration may have some social-economic implications as the Corupá Region has many rural families who benefit from the production of bananas in this unique environment. The region benefits from some peculiarities of climate, the ‘know-how’, traditions and local cultures.
Read More

Friday, 2 March 2018

Patricia Covarrubia

Mexico: it’s all about the cheese!

    No comments:
Since May 2016 the EU and Mexico are trying to modernize the trade agreement between them. By January 2018, there has been eight round of talks/negotiations.

On of the key issues that we see in the negotiation is Geographical Indications (GI). There is no possibility of registering foreign GI in Mexico although Appellations of Origins (AO) are feasible. Therefore, if a foreign company would like to protect their GI it can do so by the multilateral international registration i.e. Lisbon Agreement (Mexico is a member). The other route was by the bilateral agreement but this is limited to spirits and yet again only for AO. A foreign company could also register its GI as a ‘collective trade mark’.

The GI table of negotiation
There are in excess of 330 EU products in the list of negotiation, and this includes the sensitive product cheese. This is so because Mexico’s dairy industry produces many cheeses which names, or better say, GI names, originate from EU terroir.

On one hand, the EU claims their exclusive right to use such names, while on the other, Mexico claims that they have the right to keep producing such products. This is based on the fact that the names have become either generic or even acknowledging a different cheese that has become very much a national product and yet using a GI name. An example in mind would be the ‘Queso Manchego’, a cheese product coming from La Mancha region, Spain. According to its Dossier No ES/PDO/0117/0087 and the EU Commission implementing Regulation No 129/2012 of 13 February 2012, ‘Queso Manchego’ is “[p]ressed cheese made from milk of ewes of the ‘Manchega’ breed, aged for a minimum of 30 days for cheeses weighing up to 1, 5 kg and from 60 days up to a maximum of 2 years for larger cheeses.” The Mexican version is made from cow’s milk and so, the Mexican counterparts claim that the Manchego cheese “is ingrained in local culture and does not even resemble the Spanish original.” Moreover, the head of the National Chamber of Dairy Industries claims that “people identify it as a very national product that isn’t even related to the European version”; “people don’t expect a Spanish Manchego when they go to the supermarket and ask for a Manchego.”

Say 'Cheese'.
Next meeting would be in Brussels. The EU sees the latest talks as ‘very good’. Table of negotiations already closed are: competition, SMEs, transparency, sanitary issues, good regulatory practices, and trade and sustainable development. Pending are: market access and rules, including geographical indications and investment protection. The EU is Mexico’s third trading partner. Since 2000, the EU and Mexico trade in goods has increased by 180% which amounted to €53 billion in 2015. (source: here)

The proposed chapter on IP by the EU is available here.
Read More

Wednesday, 4 October 2017

Patricia Covarrubia

A legal battle over a ‘Champagne Biscuit’

    No comments:
Carozzi, a Chilean multinational company specialised in the food industry, won a legal dispute against the Comité Interprofessionnel du Vin de Champagne (Inter-Professional Committee for Champagne Wine - CIVC) for the use of the word Champagne to identify one of its products.
The controversy began two years ago when Carozzi requested the registration of the mark ‘Costa Galleta Champaña’ (Coast Champagne Biscuit) before the National Institute of Industrial Property (Instituto Nacional de Propiedad Industrial – INAPI). At that time, the Committee for Champagne Wine opposed the registration of the mark, claiming the non-authorised use of a French appellation of origin recognised by Chile and world famous sparkling wine.

Pouring the news...
The INAPI initially rejected the registration of the mark. However, Carozzi appealed the decision, and the Chilean Industrial Property Tribunal later granted its registration. Dissatisfied with the decision, the Committee for Champagne Wine filed an appeal (in cassation) with the Supreme Court. The Second Chamber of the Supreme Court of Chile analysed whether the registration of the mark ‘Costa Galleta Champaña’ would affect the intellectual property rights of the French wine sector due to possible confusion among consumers generated by the use of the word ‘Champagne’, as alleged by the CIVC.

In that regard, the Court concluded that the mark and the appellation of origin could coexist peacefully on the market because there is no risk of misunderstanding, deception or confusion on the part of consumers. As expected, the Committee for Champagne Wine filled a revocation before the Constitutional Court, which upheld the decision.

In this way, all legal instances were used and, despite the utilisation of a protected appellation of origin, Carozzi can freely use the word Champagne as the name of one of its most popular products in Chile.

Sources here, here and here.

Post written by Florelia Vallejo Trujillo
Assistant Professor, Universidad del Tolima, Colombia
PhD Candidate University of Nottingham, UK
Read More

Tuesday, 8 August 2017

Patricia Covarrubia

New Geographical Indications on the Sight

    No comments:
From various jurisdictions we received some Geographical Indication news:
Flag, Mexico, Mexican Flag, Sky
Mexico: The Mexican Industrial Property Institute (IMPI) informed that under International Register No. 1062, published in the Bulletin ‘Appellations of Origin’ No. 45, the WIPO has granted international protection for the Mexican ‘Cacao Grijalva.’ This cacao has been protected as denomination of origin in Mexico since August 2016.

For its part, the diary El Economista reported that the National Association of Designations of Origin (ANDO) of Mexico is seeking legal protection for the red octopus ‘Pulpo Maya,’ as well as international recognition for the appellation of origin ‘Arroz Morelos.’


Flag, Chile, Chilean, America
Chile: Lst Friday was inaugurated the ‘First Festival of the Longaniza’ in Chillán, Chile. According to the Regional Diary EDÑUBLE, this is one of many actions developed in the search for an appellation of origin to present this product to the world. Before the festival, local producers of 'longaniza' participated in a talk on geographical indications, featuring speakers from the INAPI. As reported by this news agency, at this stage, 20 local producers of longaniza have received the first general outlines to obtain the geographical indication ‘longaniza de Chillán.’


Post written by Florelia Vallejo Trujillo
Assistant Professor, Universidad del Tolima, Colombia
PhD Candidate University of Nottingham, UK
Read More