IPTango: certification mark

Showing posts with label certification mark. Show all posts

Tuesday, 8 December 2020

Products and Services: a guarantee of regionalism for the Amazonian people

Patricia Covarrubia December 08, 2020 No comments:

The Peruvian National Intellectual Property (INDECOPI) brings us the news that the Regional Government of Amazonas has received a certification mark. ‘Purum Machu’ is the selected certification mark for the region, which seeks to promote and boost the economy of the region.

A certification mark, like its counterpart trade mark, is a distinctive sign that is applicable to both products and services whose quality is guaranteed by the owner of the mark. The development of the certification marks was brought by regional and local organizations aiming to differentiate products and services due to their territorial origin. ‘Purum Machu’ was registered for use on the Nice classification for products under 24 (textiles), 29(foodstuff of animal and vegetable origin), 30 (foodstuff of plant origin except for fruit and vegetables), 31 (land and sea products that are not I need of preparation for consumption),33 (mainly alcoholic beverages but beer); and services 39(transport of people, animal or goods) and 43 (providing food, drinks, and temporary accommodation). The request to be authorized to use the mark will be free for the first year.

In accordance with Andrei Guerrero Garcia, who is the Regional INDECOPI leader, ‘Purum Machu’ signifies, Amazonian ‘live culture’, ‘tradition’, ‘identity’. Purum means ‘savage’, ‘not Christianised’, ‘gentile’; and Machu that signifies ‘old’, ‘ancient’; these together identify the Amazonian region, and more specifically, the Chachapoyas (Warriors of the Clouds) culture. Searching at UNESCO ‘search tool’ just the word ‘Amazon’, one can see the wealth of culture that exists in the region which covers several South American countries.

Last year, around the same time, the INDECOPI granted for free 164 collective marks, which helped small organizations, including artisans, farmers, and a few directly involving ‘native communities such as ‘Comunidad Shampuyacu’; and ‘Communidad nativa Chirikyaku’.

ASIPI launches the interactive map of AOs, GIs, collective and certification marks

Verónica Rodríguez Arguijo August 30, 2020 No comments:

The Inter-American Association of Intellectual Property (ASIPI) launched the interactive map of appellations of origin (AOs), geographical indications (GIs), collective and certification marks of the Americas.

The Committee of Geographical Indications of ASIPI carried out the project which aims “to provide a tool that, in addition to being a source of consultation, would allow interaction for feedback and permanent updating”.

The interactive map allows to sort per country, and it is available in Spanish and English. A brief description of the GIs, AOs or marks is displayed when they are selected, and the relevant regions are highlighted on the map.

So far, the AOs, GIs, collective and certification marks* of the following countries are available on the map:

Argentina
Belize*
Bolivia
Brazil
Chile*
Colombia,
Costa Rica*
Cuba
Dominican Republic
Ecuador
El Salvador
Guatemala
Jamaica
Mexico
Nicaragua
Panama
Peru
Puerto Rico
The United States*
Venezuela

ASIPI encourages to submit here and here any updates or additional information concerning the map.

Image of Arek Socha on Pixabay.

Chile on promoting national products

Patricia Covarrubia September 12, 2019 No comments:

In Sept 2019, the Chilean Intellectual Property Office (INAPI) and Pro Bono Foundation signed a cooperation agreement seeking to promote the ‘education and culture of industrial property protection.’ The aim is to disseminate and guide users about ‘how to protect their brands and innovations’.

Background: Pro Bono is a NGO and a non-profit organization launched back in 2000. The organization ‘promotes and facilitates democratization in access to justice for the benefit of vulnerable people and groups and social organizations.’ It is made of 39 legal firms, 10 companies and an array of lawyers.

One of the key areas will be the use of ‘sello de origen’ - seal of origin, which aims to preserve and stimulate particular forms of traditional manufacturing/production, traditional crafts, and unique ‘national’ products. The purpose of ‘sello de origen’ is to promote the ‘adequate use of industrial property tools for the recognition and protection of Chilean products through the registration of Geographical Indications (GI), Denominations of Origin (DO), Collective (CoM) and Certification Marks (CeM)’. Check our previous post on this here.

There are six regions in continental Chile and as on the 12th of Sept 2019, the following products are benefiting (or to benefit) from these tools:

Norte Grande
Oregano de la Precordillera de Putre (oregano) – registered as GI
Aceitunas de Azapa (olives) – registered as GI
Maíz Lluteño (corn) – registered as GI
Limon de Pica (lime) – registered as GI

Norte Chico
Aceite de Oliva del Valle del Huasco (olive oil) – registered as DO

Centro
Manos de Isla negra (textiles handicraft) – registered as CeM
Dulces de Ligua (sweet pastries) – registered as GI
Sabor Limachino (tomatoe) – registered as CeM
Chicha de Curacaví (alcolic drink) – registered as DO
Dulces de Curacaví (sweet pastries) – registered as GI
Viñedos Casablanca Route (wine products) - registered as CoM
Sandía de Paine (watermelon) – registered as GI
Corazón de Paine (watermelon_ - registered as CoM
Chamantos y mantas corraleras de Doñihue (textiles) – registered as DO
Sal de Cahuil - Boyeruca Lo Valdivia (salt) - registered as DO
Alfarería de Pomaire (traditional clay jars) – registered as DO
Crin de Rari (miniature knitting) – registered as DO
Loza de Pilén (clay pots) – registered as DO
Puerro Azul de Maquehue (leek)– pending as GI
Mieles Altos de Cantillana Producida en Alhué 100% Natural (honey) – pending as a CoM

Sur
Alfarería de Quinchamalí (sweet pastries) – registered as DO
Tomate Angolino (tomatoes) – registered as GI
Prosciutto de Capitán Pastene (ham) – registered as DO
Piedra Cruz (semiprecious stone) – registered as DO
Sidra de Punucapa (cyder) – registered as DO
Cerveza Valdiviana Región de Los Rios (beer) – registered as CoM
SIPAM Chiloé (agricultural patrimony products) – registered as CeM
Cordero Chilote (lamb) – registered as GI
Chupallas de Ninhue (traditional handmade hats) – registered as DO

Austral
Calidad Aysén Patagonia-Chile (products and services) – registered as CeM

Insular
Atún de Isla de Pascua (tuna) – registered as GI
Langosta de Juan Fernández (lobster) – registered as GI
Cangrejo Dorado de Juan Fernández (crab) – registered as GI
Joya Negra del Pacífico (handicraft) – registered as CeM

The first non-traditional trademark registrations have been granted in Mexico

Verónica Rodríguez Arguijo May 03, 2019 No comments:

This post was first published on The IPKat blog:

The Mexican Industrial Property Law was significantly amended last year through two batches of amendments. Read this Kat's reviews on the first batch here and the second one here and here.

The second batch of amendments to the Law entered into force on 10 August 2018 and modified a number of provisions related to trademarks. One such amendment provides that trade dress, scents, sounds, holograms, the combination of colors and certification marks are entitled to trademark protection under Mexican IP Law.

Non-traditional trademarks and other amendments to the Mexican IP Law (Second Part)

Verónica Rodríguez Arguijo April 27, 2019 No comments:

This post was first published on The IPKat blog:

This Kat summarizes in the second part of the report on the second batch of amendments to the Mexican IP Law, the highlights of the provisions thoroughly modified in relation to trademarks and administrative procedures. Read the first part here.

Trademarks

Let’s dive into the amendments to Mexican IP Law!

Specific products and services. According to article 113 section IV, the specific products or services to be covered by the mark must be indicated in the application form.

Co-existence agreements and letters of consent. The grounds for refusal of a trademark registration established in sections XVIII, XIX and XX of article 90 (which inter alia refer to signs confusingly similar to another in respect of which a pending application has been filed or a trademark registration in force) are not applicable to confusingly similar trademarks when the “… consent is expressed, in writing, in accordance with the Regulations of … [the] Law”.

Brazil: shaping the examination process

Patricia Covarrubia August 04, 2017 No comments:

Collective marks, certification marks and 3-D shape trade marks require specific requirements in Brazil. Additional documentation is needed for these type of marks and thus, the application process and its examination takes time and expertise.

"I spy with my little eye..."

As it is expected these applications have a long process – adding to the backlog that the INPI already has. Yet, the INPI acknowledges that since 2013, it has been adopting administrative measures to remedy this. It now affirms that applicants may expect to receive the first review in about six months.

The data released by INPI shows that approx. 900 applications for collective marks per year are received; 300 for certification marks and; 160 3-D. However, it admits that in cases of collective and certifications marks 90% of applications are wrongly classified or do not submit certain and crucial documentation. In regards to 3-D marks it notes that applicants need to submit images of all views of that object which needs to have a ‘specific format’ be ‘unique and different from the competition’ and more importantly, the shape cannot be dictated by a technical utility (technical function). It also elaborates that a 2-D draw of a mark ‘with shadow or volume effect does not configure a three-dimensional mark.’

Finally it informs that there are currently 476 3-D marks, 273 collective marks and 68 certification marks registered.

Chilean Sello de Origen: Adding value to heritage products

Patricia Covarrubia July 27, 2016 1 comment:

This week I received my WIPO Magazine and I was happy to see that Chile made the front cover. I immediately recognised the words Sello de Origen and of course, quickly I went to read the article titled ‘Adding value to Chile’s heritage products with the Sello de Origen’. I felt that I was reading the iptango in a nutshell -- from day one we have cover the news starting from ‘pica’ lemon (Chilean first GI, 2010) to their lovely ‘paine’ watermelons (last GI recorded, 2016). We have also covered other products that are still recognised by the Sello de Origen and thus, we have covered AOs, certification and collective trade marks. For those that are not familiar with this program, The Chilean Ministry of Economy together with the Chilean Instituto Nacional de Propiedad Industrial (INAPI) launched a program aiming to promote traditional products through the grant of Geographical Indication (GI), Appellation of Origin (AO), Collective Trade Marks and/or Certification Marks.

The magazine article puts forward how the program operates and brings a case study i.e. the salt of Cahuil (AO, 2013), and how successful Sello de Origen has been for their trade.

The article finishes with some of the words that we use when covering GI in general, which is that GI (in this case Sello de Origen) is a “tool for adding value to the products of …rich heritage”. When explaining the case study, the article acknowledges that the local producers are trying to develop tourism in the region and that they look to capitalize on their product and to encourage younger generations to keep the tradition which helps their future. However, the article does not cover any spoiler. And we all know that GIs do not work for everyone.

Actually, part of the Sello de Origen project is, in its first step, to identify the products, but then, there is a selection process (second step), where products are singled out if they are ‘worthy’ of IP protection. Then the question is: what is to be worthy? Any product which is the creation of a person or group of people not only is worthy of protection but must be protected. This is, if I am not mistaken, the bare notion of IP and its regulation i.e. is a set “of the intangible products of human creativity” (Abbott, Cottier & Gurry) and “Intellectual property law regulates the creation, use and exploitation of mental or creative labour” (Bently & Sherman).

While any product is worthy there is indeed the issue of GI which apart from using it as a tool for enhancing cultural value, it can sometimes have a negative effect since some of these products are created or extracted by farmers or small communities where the value given to the product is given by its uniqueness. If production is pushed and rushed due to demands, individuality will be lost -- as we are reminded in the case studies of Chulucana in Peru and Tequila in Mexico.

This last comment is not of detriment to the Sello de Origen program, on the contrary, it has been always supported by the blog. But it would be correct to see that projects and campaigns also put in ‘black and white’ the flaws and problems that SMEs may face.

GI: does it help?

Patricia Covarrubia January 28, 2016 No comments:

‘Sello de Origen’ (Label of Origin) is a Chilean program developed by the Ministry of Economy together with INAPI. The aim is to provide resources for those interested in applying for their product to be distinguishing by this label i.e. sello de origen, which may comprise a geographical indication, denomination of origin, collective marks and/or certification mark. The resources are used to develop the technical studies required for the application. The sign seeks to protect and commercially promote the typical products of Chile.

According to INAPI, ‘sello de origen’ aims to protect and promote typical products and it stimulates entrepreneurship and productive development of communities in the country. The program started back in 2012 where each region in Chile submitted a list of potential products that could be enhanced by this sign. The list then was analysed by a technical committee which started to prioritized products that had potential.

This year starts by granting the label and geographical indication to ‘Sandías de Paine’ (watermelon from Paine). Paine’s watermelons made an application in late 2014 stating that the watermelons were distinctive from others due to its high sweetness and nutritional quality. Each variety been different from each other because of their size, shape, and harvest time.

Among other Chilean GIs there are: Limón de Pica (lime); Langosta de Juan Fernández (lobster); Atún de Isla de Pascua (tuna); Cangrejo Dorado de Juan Fernández (crab); Dulces de la Ligua (sweet); Maíz Lluteño (corn). A more recent certificate granted through this program was the certification mark ‘Manos de Isla Negra’ for hand woven material – embroidery; each piece been unique and with a processing time between 2 to 6 months.

GIs are launched as a promoting tool for products but we need to make sure that apart for promoting they still protect - protection not in the IP sense because surely GI works as a distinctive sign which refrains others without right from using it. GIs, as in the case in here, and actually the whole 'sello de origen' covers unique typical products. Usually these products are produced by farmers or small communities where the value given to the product is given by uniqueness. If we push that production because the demand is higher are we potentially destroying it? I am reminded of the Chulucana's case in Peru and Tequila in Mexico. Do you know any other cases?

Symposium: Geographical Indications in the EU -- Policy aspects and future regulation

Patricia Covarrubia September 14, 2015 No comments:

Image result for geographical indication

Starting a new week and I am still not able to detach from a symposium that I attended last week. The reason could be that the high standard of the speakers and the friendly debate have woken up my Latin passion. While I am not an expert on GI, I followed every single speaker with such an understanding and desire that I may have found my topic for years to come [watch up Nick!]

Yet, you may wonder why I am covering GI in the EU since this blog is dedicated to Latin America. Well, for a start I was invited to speak in the symposium (I am not sure why if as I said I am not an expert on GI) but it was not until the end of the debate that I realised a key point (I will come to this later on). The majority of speakers while assessing the situation in the EU some extended as to cover international law, bilateral trade agreements, and the basic understanding of what is protected and why, and thus, relevant to any other jurisdiction. Generally, speakers when covering GIs provided opinions on: territorial development and the creation of public goods (Dev Gangjee – University of Oxford)); the principle of coexistence between trade marks and GIs (Gail Evans – Queen Mary University of London); insight field work and stories from farmers and the registration process (Funda Lancaster DEFRA); consumer confusion (Vito Rubino - Universita del Piemonte Orientale); the controversies between EU legislation and national protection (Nicola Coppola aka Nick – University of Bournemouth); the protection of non-agricultural products (Natasha Chick – UK IPO); and the Lisbon system and the Geneva Act (Matteo Gragnani - WIPO). While the speakers focused on these issues there were also some comments or remarks noting sustainable development, know-how, and biodiversity. Actually there were two questions from the audience that were identifying cultural heritage (one coming from a heritage consultant). By writing this remarks you can just grasp the different approaches that one system (GI) may have.

Image result for geographical indication aguadeno hat

I was the last speaker and been not an expert on the area I was getting nervous by the minute. My topic was the protection of non-agricultural products in Latin America and perhaps what I brought to the table was something that maybe was not fully addressed by the previous speakers i.e. to preserve and safeguard culture. The point been that while it is important to ‘protect’ meaning preventing unauthorised or inappropriate use (IP negative right), it is also important to connect this protection to conservation of biological diversity and the rights of indigenous peoples. As I undertook to cover Latin America I gave examples from Brazil, Panama, the Andeans countries and Chile. I also indicated that GIs are not for everyone and gave the example of ‘chulucanas’ in Peru (see Rosemary Coombe). Other jurisdictions use IPs as a way to improve their quality of life (trade mark: Coopa Roca (Brazil)); or helping to reconstruct a region (Collective marks: Afloralta (Brazil)); adding value -tourism (Sello de Marca (Chile)); while for example Panama is using a specific sui generis right that helps protecting non-agricultural products GIs. Another issue that I needed to put across was that in some of the Latin American GI’s systems, the product/service become part of the goods of a nation i.e. become state property. This is an important issue since there exists amongst farmers, artisans and indigenous peoples mistrust -- resulting in having less GIs and more collective marks or nothing at all. Many of you may believe that actually when covering cultural heritage the IP regime is actually not appropriate at all, I may be of the same thought, however it is important to realise that for some products, it has helped. It has helped communities into social unity and it has helped us as citizens/consumers to create a sense of pride.

Indeed the conference raised a number of fascinating questions and I thank Nick for putting this symposium all together and for the generous sponsors that made it a reality (Grana Padano and CIIPM).