The USA has for over 100 years been an IP/Trademark pirate.

[Hangfire]

My argument is this. The US arguments for intellectual property law with regards to software, films and other forms of media ring hollow, weak and false in light the United States governments repeated and insistent refusal to enter into any treaty with internationally recognized Protected Geographical Indicators.

For example, Champagne, it took France and then the EU from the Treaty of Madrid onwards in 1891 only 115 years to get the American government to agree to ban all new producers from labelling their sparkling wines as Champagne.

The United States bans the use from all new U.S.-produced wines. Only those that had approval to use the term on labels before 2006 may continue to use it and only when it is accompanied by the wine's actual origin (e.g., "California").

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Champag...word_champagne

(iii) The requirement of this clause is met if the person, or its successor in interest, using the semi-generic designation held a Certificate of Label Approval or Certificate of Exemption from Label Approval issued by the Secretary for a wine label bearing such brand name, or brand name and fanciful name, before March 10, 2006, on which such semi-generic designation appeared.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/26/5388.html

How about Parmigiano-Reggiano or Parmesan to the English speakers?

The name is trademarked, and in Italy, legal exclusive control is exercised over its production and sales by the Parmigiano-Reggiano cheese Consorzio, which was created by a governmental decree. Each wheel must meet strict criteria early in the aging process, when the cheese is still soft and creamy, to merit the official seal and be placed in storage for aging. Because it is widely imitated, Parmigiano-Reggiano has become an increasingly regulated product, and in 1955, it became what is known as a certified name (which is not the same as a brand name).

Thus in the European Union, "Parmigiano-Reggiano" is a protected designation of origin (PDO); legally, the name refers exclusively to the Parmigiano-Reggiano PDO cheese manufactured in a limited area in northern Italy. Special seals identify the product as authentic, with the identification number of the dairy, the production month and year, a code identifying the individual wheel and stamps regarding the length of aging.

Outside Europe, most notably in the United States, commercially produced imitation cheeses may be legally sold under the generic name Parmesan, although there are substantial differences in terms of quality, taste and nutritional components. When sold in Europe, such cheese are obliged to use another name, such as Kraft's "pamesello italiano".

Then there's the latest deal.... Kobe beef.

Let's talk about some of the work needed to go into making "Kobe beef"

From wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kobe_be..._beef_in_Japan

Kobe beef in Japan is a registered trademark of the Kobe Beef Marketing & Distribution Promotion Association (?????????? K?beniku Ry?ts? Suishin Ky?gikai?). It must fulfill all the following conditions:

Tajima cattle born in Hy?go Prefecture
Farm feeding in Hy?go Prefecture
Bullock (steer) or castrated bull, to purify the beef
Processed at slaughterhouses in Kobe, Nishinomiya, Sanda, Kakogawa and Himeji in Hy?go Prefecture.
Marbling ratio, called BMS, of level 6 and above.
Meat Quality Score of 4 or 5
Gross weight of beef from one animal is 470 kg or less.

But... from the USDA website... http://www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/c..._beef_vs.shtml

WASHINGTON, May 28, 2010 – The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) notified the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) on April 22, 2010, that effective immediately APHIS veterinary services (VS) has placed temporary restrictions on certain commodities from Japan due to foot-and-mouth disease (FMD), based on notifications from Japan of an outbreak in cattle that is consistent with FMD. As a result, APHIS is drafting an interim rule that would remove Japan from the list of regions recognized as free of FMD. Once published, that rule would indefinitely prohibit the importation of susceptible animals and most products from susceptible animals from Japan.

Ruminant (cattle, sheep, goats, camelids and cervids) meat and meat by-products are currently prohibited from Japan due to bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), with the exception of boneless cuts of fresh beef, normally referred to as Kobe beef. Under these new import restrictions, boneless/Kobe beef will now be refused entry, including in passenger baggage.

So what about Kobe or Wagyu beef sold in America? Well "Wagyu" means, well it means Japanese cattle, great, except all cattle from Japan is now banned! So we're talking maybe breeds of Japanese cattle grown overseas? Not so much actually, the Wagyu cattle lines for sale to Americans have been bred into American breeds. So it's rather much like your typical Irish or Scottish or Italian or whatever other hyphenated American you can come up with. They're not actually that, they're just plain old American. There is none of the standards required in America like there is for Kobe beef in Japan (quality controls and an ability to track where your piece of Kobe Beef came from the serial number printed on the packaging) There is no specific definition set in American law defining Kobe Beef, nothing.

It annoys me to no end, because what we have here are groups of people who have spent not merely their whole lives but presumably generations working, crafting and moving to a point of excellence that is now widely admitted and internationally acclaimed. Then some thieving bastard from America gets to rip off all that hard work?

Actually I'd say this is even worse because it's not just theft of ephemera like say a cam copy of the latest fucking tweenie movie hunger games but it's also fraudulently passing off someone else's hard work as your own to defraud the consumer.

I mean we regulate these exceptional products so that you can be assured of an excellent product at a set criteria of quality, time and time and time again. Why has the USA refused to sign ANY kind of treaty with regards to Protected Geographical Indicators for almost 120 years? Doesn't that strike you as fundamentally a fraudulent practice, stealing not from just the hard work of the producers but also stealing from you, the American consumer and denying you the opportunity to understand and experience the hard work that has gone into ensuring the quality of the produce that has been guaranteed, not by just a trade organisation but by national and even international agreement?

To say American protestations for recognition of international trademarks and intellectual property in light of all this rings a little false and hollow is a bit of an understatement to say the least, gross hypocrisy and fraudulent behaviour against not just people who have worked their whole lives in maintaining the intergrity and quality of these brands but against the American consumer. Frankly I find such behaviour to be not just unethical but immoral too.

[Pocktio]

I imagine stealing cheese to be illegal, regardless of the name.

[Buguba]

Two wrongs make a right, amirite?

[Langy]

Both Champange and Parmesan are generic terms referring to generic products in the US (or were prior to the incredibly stupid 2006 law mentioned in the OP).

In fact, I find it pretty bloody stupid that these French/Italian food-makers were able to convince politicians to legally protect the labeling of products based purely upon the region they were made in. To me that sounds very much like unfair business practices. If one item has the same qualities as another, and the name is not a protected trademark (as opposed to one that's been genericized, which both champagne and parmesan have), then there should be no issue with someone labeling their item in that fashion.

Look here for a good example of why this is an unfair business practice:

The village of Champagne, Switzerland, has traditionally made a still wine labelled as "champagne", the earliest records of viticulture dated to 1657. In an accord with the EU, the Swiss government conceded in 1999 that by 2004 the village would phase out use of the name. Sales dropped from 110,000 bottles a year to 32,000 after the change. In April 2008 the villagers resolved to fight against the restriction following a Swiss open-air vote.[17]

Just altering the name from the traditional (hundreds of years old) name to a new one made the sales drop by well over half in a single year. That's some rank bullshit right there.

[Hangfire]

So you'd be ok if I grew an orange tree from Florida in a hothouse in Texas and sold the juice as florida orange juice? I mean the tree was from Florida right?

How about this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parmesa...giano_Reggiano

ommercial Parmesan cheeses common in North America typically differ from Parmigiano-Reggiano in several ways:

The cheese is aged for a shorter time.
The milk used is pasteurized.
The curds for the American-made Parmesan are cut in bigger fragments than the rice grain size used for Parmigiano-Reggiano. The smaller curds drain more effectively.
American Parmesan is mechanically pressed to expel excess moisture.
Parmesan wheels in the United States average 11 kg (24 pounds), Parmigiano-Reggiano 38 kg. The size difference can affect their salt saturation during the brining process; Parmigiano-Reggiano on average contains two-thirds less salt than the average Parmesan.
It is often sold grated.

For added fun!

Nutrition Facts
Serving Size 2 tsp (5g)

Amount Per Serving
Calories from Fat 15
Calories 20

% Daily Values*
Total Fat 1.5g
Saturated Fat 1g
Trans Fat 0g
Cholesterol 5mg
Sodium 75mg
Total Carbohydrate 0g
Dietary Fiber 0g
Sugars 0g
Protein 2g

Vitamin A 0%
Vitamin C 0%
Calcium 6%
Iron 0%

From http://www.parmigianoreggiano.com/ma...s/default.aspx

Mean composition for 100 g of Parmigiano-Reggiano:
Water g 30,8
Total Proteins g 33,0
Fat g 28,4
Energy Value Kcal 392
Sodium Chloride g1,39
Calcium mg 1160
Phosphorus mg 680
Sodium mg 650
Potassium mg 100
Magnesium mg 43
Zinc mg 4
Vitamin A mcg 270
Vitamin B1 mcg 34
Vitamin B2 mcg 370
Vitamin B6 mcg 110
Vitamin B12 mcg 4,2
Vitamin PP mcg 55
Pantothenic Acid mcg 320
Choline mg 40
Biotin mcg 23

I will take the American values and multiply them by 20 (Is the American listing of Sodium shorthand for salt/Sodium Chloride? I will assume so)


American Fat 30g Italian Fat 28.4
American Sodium 1500mg Italian Sodium 680mg

These are the only two factors that I can declaratively compare. It's not looking good is it? I didn't compare calories as the EU and US calories differ but I forget how. Can someone else help with that?

More facts for added fun!

Kraft "Parmesan"
Grated parmesan cheese (part-skim milk, cheese culture, salt, enzymes), cellulose powder (added to prevent caking), potassium sorbate to protect flavor.

Cellulose powder!!!! Hey wait a minute... Weren't the Russians during the siege of Leningrad reduced to eating sawdust to survive? I'm glad you guys are defending your rights to call that a quality product! Hot diggity my mouth waters at the thought of chewing paper just like I did when I was bored at school.

Or Maraschino Cherries?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maraschino_cherry

From Marasca cherries in a Maraschino liqueur to any old Cherry in a Sodium Metabisulfate brine with food coloring yum!

I love this line

After Prohibition was repealed in 1933 the Food and Drug Administration revisited federal policy toward canned cherries. It held a hearing in April 1939 to establish a new standard of identity. Since 1940, "maraschino cherries" have been defined as "cherries which have been dyed red, impregnated with sugar and packed in a sugar sirup [sic] flavored with oil of bitter almonds or a similar flavor".

Americans! You WILL by God defend your rights to eat non Food food and I guess we'll have to claw those E numbers out of your cold dead hands?

[SquidDNA]

This was an interesting idea for a thread before you went on a nationalist tangent, Hangfire.

[CommissarRezail]

Its because we use those words as category not actually trade marks. Consider if i have Champagne , but i name the liqour Blah blah. Thats not stealing. Its my own brand of Champagne i call it blah blah... I am saying that word right Sham pain?

As long you say "Florida Orange juice: Hang Fire Brand" than you won't get sued, they don't care if it don't come from Florida. Considering most stuff don't actually come from where the name says on the box is. Same thing with the Category of liquor and the Category of cheese. Those are category and not exactly brand names.. Its one way to organise things with out say Kraft cheese, and if all you can just say is craft cheese every one will be looking at you wondering which cheese you want so you end up say Kraft: Parmesan. Plus its their own custom recipe to the product as well. Thus they can say kraft : permesan, which they do not put the whole recipe on the box just whats in it. Not how its stack together and in what way.

Americans! You WILL by God defend your rights to eat non Food food and I guess we'll have to claw those E numbers out of your cold dead hands?

Also i find that offensive.

Now lets say, there Joe cheese, it taste good and all that jazz made with x amount of stuff cooked a certain way. Than you go ahead and Make Joe cheese, with same name and make it the same amount of way. Than you just stole Joe cheese.

[Nurizeko]

Hangfire, if I see a cheese that I know generically as parmesan, I'm going to call it parmesan. If I see a bubbly slightly alcoholic wine like drink I'm going to call it Champagne.

What's next, suing cities in America for stealing my home town's name? Fuck you Aberdeen, California, and the rest of you unoriginal thieving ****-filchers. That goes for you to Aberdeen, Saskatchewan. Fucking fraudulent bastard. There is only one city on the confluences of the Dee and the Don. Yo.

Most people are going to know 'the original' product from the generic ones, simply making it illegal to claim to be from the geographical origin is more than enough protection, especially for products who's names have come to stand for the common name for the type of product in general.

[Paladin]

Regional product name protections are absurd. If you want to say that certain standards must be met to call a product by a given name, fine, but region of origin is meaningless and should never be one of them. If a craftsman in Timbuktu can manage to create a product that's essentially identical to a product produced in some french province, claiming they can't use the name because they're from somewhere else is just ridiculous IMO.

[Argonaut]

The idea behind making something a PDO is that it conveys the image that things are made in a certain way only available in that area and to a high quality. Champagne, Bordeaux, Prosecco, Parmagianno-reggiano,Rioja, etc. The main argument I can see you making is that people associate the alleged sub standard product with the genuine article.

Well, by the US government allowing the use of the generic terms to describe any old shyte, then you're not getting the genuine article. Big Woop. Believe it or not there is some really bad french champagne that is also benefiting from the ability to label the bottles as champagne purely because it's in the right region - exactly the same as some US wines get labelled champagne. IF it is the quality that the French Vintners are complaining about then have a long hard look at some of the dross coming out of the champagne region and ending up on the shelves at Tesco.The argument isn't whether the US should be able to label a sparkling wine as Champagne, but whether it is actually quantifiable to define what makes a high quality champagne. Once it is quantifiable and therefore enforcable by law you could have some kind of case against the US labeling system. You'd also need to stop the French making some totally shit champagnes as well. Good luck with that. Oh, and everyone needs to agree in international law. Regional restrictions on a product name are a silly idea, although meeting a standard set (for example) by cheese makers in the correct region of italy, and marking the cheese out as "Made to Parmaggiano-Reggiano standards" is better.

Never gonna happen.

As for stealing IP, are any of the products you've mentioned definitively someones IP? Could the entire Champagne region make a case to defend their IP?

[Nanaki]

As for stealing IP, are any of the products you've mentioned definitively someones IP? Could the entire Champagne region make a case to defend their IP?

I saw this thread as a riff on the RIAA/MPAA constantly pushing IP protection legislation in the US and other countries, especially since the US (and Hollywood in particular) was built upon stolen IPs.

[Wargrim]

Protecting regional product names is actually a very good idea. It is a common and wide spread practice in Europe, and if you care where stuff you buy is coming from, as many customers here do, it makes sure you are not decieved by misleading names.

[Paladin]

No, it's not a good idea. All you need is to require that all products have their country/region of production/origin stamped on them. If you care about where your champagne comes from, that's your prerogative, but it's also your responsibility to actually read the packaging.

[CommissarRezail]

Protecting regional product names is actually a very good idea. It is a common and wide spread practice in Europe, and if you care where stuff you buy is coming from, as many customers here do, it makes sure you are not decieved by misleading names.

There no real point of doing it, considering , most people really don't care where it come from as long as it taste the same and cheap....

[scoiatollo]

Comissar that might be the case over the big pond, it's not here! People care where their stuff comes from. We Austrians are a very funny nation when it comes to food, we pay ridiculously high prices compared to other European countries (ie ~25% more than German no matter which product you look at) just to ensure that it's produced in Austria.

Also Champagne from the actual region will always taste different than where ever else you will produce it (and yes I know terrible stuff comes from that region as well), simply because the soil it grows on is "unique". There are a lot of wine regions with a specific grape/taste that are protected by law.

Just because someone decided to get lazy and profit from a well established name doesn't mean that it's right...

[Argonaut]

Having Champagne on a bottle USED to denote something of quality, but this is before the "new world wines" labelled their wine based upon the blend of grapes involved rather than the region, and before the screw top bottle became involved. - wine snobbery was also rife.

The situation now is that simply having Champagne on the bottle doesn't mean anything anymore because the US (one amongst many BTW) have decided to label whatever they like as Champagne. Obviously, if you make high quality products you don't want it denigrated by other people trying to ride on the quality associated with the Champagne label. If anything an international quality identifier will fall on it's ass as well, because some people like the 1975 vintage Dom Perignon and think it is a much better Champagne than the 1947 vintage.

Does anyone actually go out and specifically look for US, South American or Aussie sparkling wine for a special occasion? Didn't think so - so you can understand why they label their sparkling wine as Champagne, and why the French get so pissy about it. TBH I'd be pretty pissed off if I was an Aussie Vintner making a superb quality sparkling wine (better than many European ones) and it wasn't even considered as a purchase for a special occasion. Being held back purely because it isn't in the right region must be hard.

[CommissarRezail]

Heh most people in the usa don't even know champagne was a place first and not a drink lol. No I'm serious. People wouldn't know specfically about cheese, they wouldn't know thats the name or place or care.

[Paladin]

Sure, lots of people go out looking for California wines/champagnes, at least in California

The point is that a product name should denote a specific type of product, not a specific place of manufacture. If you want to have a group designate quality standards to qualify for that, fine, but they need to be objective standards and not designed specifically to prevent people in other parts of the world from using the term.

If you want to encourage the consumption of the products of a certain regions industry, you do what they do in the US. Form a consortium, and trademark a logo as a seal that can be placed prominently on your product's packaging only with the permission of said consortium. Problem sorted. Then you just go looking for Champagne with the Champagne regional consortium's seal of authenticity on it.

Just like people who care about their purchases' place of origin in the US look for say, the "Real California Cheese" seal, for example.

[scoiatollo]

Well sucks to be American company than producing sparkling wine rather than champagne (for reasons Argonaut explained) since their sales would probably go down because the customers don't know their product...

[Argonaut]

@Raziel; Therefore it's understandable that within the US, having something labelled as Champagne when it's not may not matter - although I think to say "most americans don't know Champagne is a place" is a bit of a sweeping statement.

@Paladin; The regions name did used to be the seal of authenticity, and denoted a specific type of product - however as the name has been used (and maybe it could be argued the IP has not been defended properly?) the authenticity and quality of the products image has also been completely diluted. I agree with everything you're saying, but the Champagne name (Or Parmagianno for that matter) used to count for something. It still does for me, and millions of other consumers. You're also right in that reading the packaging has become more important now.

The French thought they'd sorted out some kind of seal of authenticity when in the 15th century Roquefort was protected by Palimentary decree. and in 1935 with the Appelation d'origine controlee. The AOC can get horrifically tangled to enforce because of the use of trademarks, legal trade agreements between countries and the owner of a certification trademark is even allowed to sell licences to be used for certain products that meet the owners criteria. So, like I said the IP hasn't been defended very well.

[Paladin]

Most just implies "more than 50.0%", and I'd wager that if you did a survey that would hold up.

[EDIT: A quick glance around the internet indicates that currently, only 20-30% of the US population have passports (Not counting an unsourced and unsupported claim from The Economist that it's 34%). Before 9/11 and the recent tightening of border security making day trips into Canada and Mexico require a passport where they previously did not, that figure may have been as low as15%. Most Americans have never been overseas, or even out of the country to one of our neighboring nations. You think they know that Champagne is a region in France when the only context they've ever heard it in is "wine with bubbles"?

Hell, I consider myself far less provincial than most Americans (And I feel I have cause to do so), but even I didn't have a passport until last year because I'd never had the opportunity to travel abroad before that, though I'd always wanted to.]

[Wargrim]

You can not simply put measureable quality standards on food. Taste can not be put in numbers. Sure, you can measure all sort of ingredients, toxines, fat, salt, suggar, how many square meters your cow had available and so on. There are many such standards today, but even if two companys are 100% within those standards, the products will still differ. And you certainly can not measure stuff like tradition. You can eat a Wiener Schnitzel anywhere in the world, but it wont be the same thing. Regionality DOES matter to a whole lot of european customers. It the americans dont care, i dont have a problem with that. What works for us doesnt have to work for you or the other way around.

[Paladin]

Taste is subjective and subjective qualities are the province of branding, not product name.

[Wargrim]

But that is right that, protected regional names ARE brands, that stand above company level brands.

[Nurizeko]

Comissar that might be the case over the big pond, it's not here! People care where their stuff comes from. We Austrians are a very funny nation when it comes to food, we pay ridiculously high prices compared to other European countries (ie ~25% more than German no matter which product you look at) just to ensure that it's produced in Austria.

Also Champagne from the actual region will always taste different than where ever else you will produce it (and yes I know terrible stuff comes from that region as well), simply because the soil it grows on is "unique". There are a lot of wine regions with a specific grape/taste that are protected by law.

Just because someone decided to get lazy and profit from a well established name doesn't mean that it's right...

I'm on your side of the pond and care not for geographical poncery. It's about quality not pretentious localism.

If some third world Africans could somehow produce a high quality champagne, I'd buy that over the French stuff any day, especially if it is cheaper.

I also knew of the drink before the region myself, and again, this side of the water.


Unless your product contains an ingredient that can only be found in a specific limited geographical region which cannot be transported over long distance so must be used within said region, the world is simply too big and interconnected for geography to be a useful viable means to establish quality.

protected regional names ARE brands, that stand above company level brands.

"Fuck the west's technology and social/economic ordering, the old ways are best, let's stick to fucking tribalism/feudalism and spears/swords!"

As a history student I've learned one important lesson: Keep up with the reality of the times or be consigned to a book I'll get round to reading.

People know the type of drink champagne as champagne. Parmesan is parmesan. Society and culture has moved and these regional producers need to keep up. I'm not going to stop calling champagne champagne regardless of where it's from. They can develop an actually valid practical way to ensure quality.

Britain couldn't hold onto its out-dated heavy industry when cheaper better industry was sourced elsewhere, the French region of Champagne cannot cling to its position if other countries can make a drink like theirs for cheaper and better.

Future's now, adapt or die clinging to your old ways.

[scoiatollo]

Sparkling wine out of the Champagne is called champagner, because it comes out of the champagne, the best sparkling wines I've had so far didn't even come from that region, BUT it's not champagne, it's sparkling wine! Once you get your head around that difference you'll see that it makes sense...

The ingredient that can only be obtained in the Champagne is the soil, since it's quite unique, if you find the exact same soil, weather conditions, etc in a different region than you could argue that it tastes exactly like the champagne year XY from Z, but it still wouldn't be champagne, it's sparkling wine.

[Sinogrim]

So, we should all start calling every Asian guy "Chinese", right? Cause hey, they're all kind of similar and perhaps this dude from Taiwan is a better "Chinese" than an actual Chinese guy, right? Besides, I knew the word "Chinese" before I knew the word "Asian", so why change what "worked" for me in the past?

[Wargrim]

It's about quality not pretentious localism.

It is all about "pretentious" localism. For those who care. If it was only about quality, jea, you could certainly do without regional labeling. But it is also about tradition. And it helps with quality, even if it doesnt guarantee it. It is entirely impractical to use company/brand names as a replacement for regional labeling when there might be many, many small traditional fabricators of a certain product in a specific region.

Let me put it another way. In the supermarket, i see a tin of Shrimps, named "Tasty Shrimps". If i want to know where they come from, i look at the backside. Next to it, i see a tin labeled "Baltic Shrimps." With regional labeling, i can be confident that tin number two does in fact include shrimps from the Baltic sea. Without it, it could just be the brand "Baltic", or the company "Baltic", selling Vietnamese Shrimps. If i dont care where they come from, i do not win or lose anything with regional labeling. If i care, it is a great convenience feature, because i can see it from some meters away, and not only after making the mental connection that the labeling could be misleading, turning the tin around and reading the small print note that tells me its actual origin.

[Shoota Fodder]

Sparkling wine out of the Champagne is called champagner, because it comes out of the champagne, the best sparkling wines I've had so far didn't even come from that region, BUT it's not champagne, it's sparkling wine! Once you get your head around that difference you'll see that it makes sense...

I think that was an absolutely amazing post that has made me switch sides in this argument to that of the OP's. The only reason sparkling wine is called Champagne is because the most famous sparkling wine is called Champagne. I would say it's as much a brand name as anything else and other producers, although making a similar almost identical product, should not be able to use the name as it does not even refer to the type of drink. Champagne is Sparkling Wine (Champagne), the American equivalent should be Sparkling Wine (California) etc etc.

Just like how products that taste like Coca Cola are not allowed to be called Coca Cola, and are instead called things like Coke. They are similar, taste virtually the same and are made from the same things, but the Coke company cannot say it is selling Coca Cola.

[Paladin]

Strongly disagree. There's no need for protected regional "branding" as another tier above normal branding. Names should be descriptive of the type of product, full stop. It just breeds confusion to have a thousand different names for sparkling wine just based on their region of origin. It makes vastly more sense to have them all called by a single term and then have regional consortium stamps to differentiate the branding for the minority who actually give a fuck about where each of two identical products come from.

[Mr Carrot]

Just to really fuck with your heads the majority of brut champagne made in Champagne is made with grapes not grown in champagne (usually England) because the Champagne region has been too hot and dry for decent vintages......

[roflmao]

We need to rename RelicNews in the US because Relic is Canadian. We don't want to defraud people, or do we?

[RexOmniaLupus]

While champagne might originally have applied to sparkling wines from the Champagne region of France, it seems that it has become a generic term for sparkling wine, at least in the United States. So from the perspective of champagne being a generic term, it doesn't make sense to allow only certain producers to call their product by that name and force others to use another term. It's not misleading to call non-French sparkling wines "champagnes" if you don't approach the term with the preconception that it refers to specifically French products. The products still are not allowed to claim to be produced in the Champagne region if they are not, and other producers are not allowed to sell under brand names such Dom Pérignon, so consumers are not getting misled.

An example similar to the case of champagne would be cheddar cheese. From what I can tell it is not protected in the EU, even though that style of cheese is named after an English village where it originated. It is simply the generic name for a cheese made in that style, no matter where in the world the cows were raised or the cheese produced. If you want cheddar from that region of England, you can read a label. Simple enough.

[Moe]

If I see a bubbly slightly alcoholic wine like drink I'm going to call it Champagne.

You can do that, but you'd be wrong. There's Prosecco, Cava. Vouvray, and a bunch of others, and that's just in the "sparkling wine" category. I'm withholding judgment on the whole regional copyright issue, but there is a difference between Champagne and Prosecco that is obvious even to non wine experts. Champagne, real champagne that is, is a very high quality wine. Regional copyright disputes aside, the six dollar crap you can get at your local convenience store being labeled as Champagne is just false advertising.

This boils down to what's in a name. Originally, champagne meant a certain type of sparkling wine of high quality that originated from the Champagne region of France. Now you may be able to argue that if someone were to use their methods and ingredients and produce a sparkling wine that's similar in quality but was made in a different location that this should count as Champagne. However, even if you think regional copyrights are ridiculous, I don't think it's fair to "steal" the brand name and slap it on an obviously inferior product. It dilutes the name, and a lack of control leads to something like the current cell phone generation clusterfuck, where every network can claim that they have "4G speeds", even if those are significantly shittier than their competitors.

it seems that it has become a generic term for sparkling wine, at least in the United States.

Yes. Other languages have separate names for the lower quality stuff and Champagne. I would be pissed if I paid for Kobe beef at a restaurant and got the crappy US version rather than the ridiculously high quality Japanese stuff.

[Wargrim]

There's no need for protected regional "branding" as another tier above normal branding.

I regard it as important. And obviously there are a whole lot of regions in Europe that are also gladly making use of it.

[Hangfire]

There's no need for protected regional "branding" as another tier above normal branding.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napa_Declaration_on_Place

The Declaration to Protect Wine Place and Origin, commonly known as the Napa Declaration on Place, is a "declaration of joint principles stating the importance of location to wine and the need to protect place names." The Declaration was signed in July 2005 by four United States winegrowing regions and three European Union winegrowing regions.

The signatory regions from the US were:

• Napa Valley
• Washington
• Oregon
• Walla Walla Valley

The signatory regions from the EU were:

• Champagne
• Oporto (the region where Port wine is produced)
• Jerez (the region where Sherry is produced)

You might want to tell the guys on the West coast that. Hmm?

[Langy]

Those were apparently signed by individual people, not any actual authority. Yes, some people (specifically those located at prestigious wine-growing regions) may believe that this kind of thing makes sense (since it specifically helps them and hinders their competition), but that doesn't mean that everyone does.

In any case, proving that people who would benefit from something like this support it is a horrible way to show that it's actually good. I'm sure many organizations approve of unfair business practices that specifically help them and hinder their competition. Rational third parties should realize that supporting those unfair business practices is a Bad Idea.

[Paladin]

Hey, I never denied that my country is full of idiots too.

[scoiatollo]

How is demanding that you use the correct word instead of a well established (brand-)name wrong? The product still has the same quality, if it's clearly above the product it's trying to mimic and cheaper it shouldn't be hard to convince people to buy it instead of the original, unless of course your product is shit compared to the original yet sold for a similar price.

[Argonaut]

unless of course your product is shit compared to the original yet sold for a similar price.

Here you go, this is why the French attempt to get shitty about things. My point is, France produces shit Champagne too, but real champagne is far and above the quality most people have glugged at a wedding reception.

[scoiatollo]

I am not disagreeing with you, even said that myself earlier, that doesn't change anything on the subject that the word champagne refers to a certain kind of sparkling wine with a long tradition. The only reason why the word is used for some different product than what it's intended for is an increase in sales on false promises. Nobody hinders any region to create their own name/identity, that takes time and money though so it's easier "stealing" an established name and altering it's original meaning.

[Nurizeko]

I think that was an absolutely amazing post that has made me switch sides in this argument to that of the OP's. The only reason sparkling wine is called Champagne is because the most famous sparkling wine is called Champagne. I would say it's as much a brand name as anything else and other producers, although making a similar almost identical product, should not be able to use the name as it does not even refer to the type of drink. Champagne is Sparkling Wine (Champagne), the American equivalent should be Sparkling Wine (California) etc etc.

Just like how products that taste like Coca Cola are not allowed to be called Coca Cola, and are instead called things like Coke. They are similar, taste virtually the same and are made from the same things, but the Coke company cannot say it is selling Coca Cola.

Until some hypothetical town/region called Sparkling 'region brands' it's product. Yawn.

In other news having a quality product that people actually want is probably the best way to ensure your business' future, not trying to dictate a newspeak to the world because your shitty wine is deserving of special treatment for its dirt.

Coca-Cola is a brand name, not the name of the beverage, which is just called Cola. Also if I go to a restaurant and ask for coke and get a pepsi, I'm still getting a coke.

While champagne might originally have applied to sparkling wines from the Champagne region of France, it seems that it has become a generic term for sparkling wine, at least in the United States. So from the perspective of champagne being a generic term, it doesn't make sense to allow only certain producers to call their product by that name and force others to use another term. It's not misleading to call non-French sparkling wines "champagnes" if you don't approach the term with the preconception that it refers to specifically French products. The products still are not allowed to claim to be produced in the Champagne region if they are not, and other producers are not allowed to sell under brand names such Dom Pérignon, so consumers are not getting misled.

An example similar to the case of champagne would be cheddar cheese. From what I can tell it is not protected in the EU, even though that style of cheese is named after an English village where it originated. It is simply the generic name for a cheese made in that style, no matter where in the world the cows were raised or the cheese produced. If you want cheddar from that region of England, you can read a label. Simple enough.

Those were apparently signed by individual people, not any actual authority. Yes, some people (specifically those located at prestigious wine-growing regions) may believe that this kind of thing makes sense (since it specifically helps them and hinders their competition), but that doesn't mean that everyone does.

In any case, proving that people who would benefit from something like this support it is a horrible way to show that it's actually good. I'm sure many organizations approve of unfair business practices that specifically help them and hinder their competition. Rational third parties should realize that supporting those unfair business practices is a Bad Idea.

Sense. Made.

Originally, champagne meant a certain type of sparkling wine of high quality that originated from the Champagne region of France.

I'm not arguing the origins of the term, merely how some people are refusing to accept that the usage has changed. Gay used to mean happy and what-not but all the same if someone calls me gay I'm going to assume it's a comment on my supposed sexuality.

As Langy said, regional branding is just a sore attempt to stifle competition because the people in these regions feel somehow entitled to have their business' unfairly insulated from natural market forces based merely on the fact that their town/region/dead great grandmother's name is now the generic widespread name for the type of product.

[Argonaut]

Also if I go to a restaurant and ask for coke and get a pepsi, I'm still getting a coke.

In the UK it is possible to be prosecuted if someone asks for a Coke and you give them pepsi without telling them. I'm not sure anyone has actually been prosecuted for it, but it is possible.

[Langy]

How is demanding that you use the correct word instead of a well established (brand-)name wrong? The product still has the same quality, if it's clearly above the product it's trying to mimic and cheaper it shouldn't be hard to convince people to buy it instead of the original, unless of course your product is shit compared to the original yet sold for a similar price.

I gave an example upthread about a champagne, ironically created in the region of Champagne, Switzerland (rather than Champagne, France), that was forced to change its name from 'Champagne' to something else due to these regional branding laws. That next year it sold much less than half the number of bottles as it did the prior year. Something like this can completely devastate a product through no fault of the product's.

[Derivative]

Champagne used to describe a type of wine is used so much that a judge could rule its too common to be used as a trademark. It has happened several times before. You might as well be arguing that 'No, its not called aspirin! its called acetylsalicylic acid!' or 'stop calling it super glue! its cyanoacrylate adhesive!' The list goes on. The ipad could be next. The best time to fight to keep a brand name a brand name is when its first starting to lose its power. It's a little late to start that now.

[Arinax]

Actually i have to go with Scoiatollo and the rest of the brand defenders. Champagne is a definition for sparkling wine from a certain region called Champagne. Otherwise you have to use the term sparkling wine, prosecco and so on. You cannot just call something more fancy than it is just because the term which you should use does not have such a good reputation. Work on the reputation and work on your brand so it gets it reputation it deserves. I dont know how Americans handle it with Vermont Cheese, but wouldnt you find it akward when a Texan company would call there cheese Vermont cheese? It's not about the brand name but the respect to certain traditions and nationalities and historical grown masterpieces

[Langy]

Respect to 'historical grown masterpieces', 'tradition', and 'nationalities' has absolutely no place in the branding of consumer goods. Champagne is the generic term for 'sparkling wine'. This may be due to 'historical grown masterpieces' being from Champagne, France, but that's too damned bad. Trademark law has to take into account the way the world works now, and now 'champagne' just means 'sparking wine', not 'sparkling wine sold by some people in an extremely specific location in France'. This is especially true because the grapes for that wine aren't even grown in the Champagne region any longer, as mentioned up-thread.

Should hamburgers not made in Hamburg no longer be allowed to be called 'hamburgers'?

Another example is 'Philadelphia cream cheese'. It's trademarked, so only that specific company can make it, but it isn't made in Philadelphia. Should it be illegal to call it that?

If they want some special designation for their produce, they should trademark something, and if that trademark becomes genericized, too fucking bad. If they want to designate the region of origin, they should actually designate the region of origin (such as something on the label saying 'made in XXXX') rather than just using the region of origin as the generic term for the product.

EDIT: The real concern is that the EU protects these phrases from genericization for no apparent purpose, even if they truly have been genericized. That's pretty fucking stupid.

[scoiatollo]

Champagne is NOT the generic term of sparkling wine, some companies made it to that in the US appearently, it never was here in Europe and never will be. Your example proves my point btw, the term champagne boosts the sales because that's what people know rather than the correct word. If I buy champagne I expect it to be from the Champagne, I don't expect it to be the best sparkling wine I had or will have but the name refers to the origin. Keep arguing that it's now a common word for sparkling wine (in the US) but blame that on clever marketing and/or the lack of prosecution.

[Arinax]

Langy we in Europe really care about the origin. In fact here these terms are region-trademarks, i guess the only reason why European companies dont sue the Americans is because they think there product is far superior to the American one OR they know they would not stand a chance at an American court. In Europe there is a strict definition of local-trademarks. You cannot give products a fancy name which could lead you to the false direction of what the product is like. It is written down(for Austria) in the Codex of Food. There are certain specifications a products has to have so it can be called that way. If you come up with fancy fantasy names it alright but you are not allowed to use specific terms. The same goes with regional-trademarks. You cannot say its "Tyrolian-Bacon" when it is not manufactured in Tyrol. The European Union prohibits such abuse because it deludes the customer.

Champagne is (in whole Europe) per definition a product of sparkling wine manufactured in the Champagne. Still what about Vermount Cheddar? Are there American companies outside Vermount using that term, do they get prosecuted ? Just because America is over the big pond does not mean American companies can fool around with our trademarks.

[roflmao]

Heh. I think this thread is perfectly illustrating the ultimate problem with the type of legislation proposed by the OP. Definitions are largely subjective. The fact that there has been a one page discussion on the meaning of champagne ironically illustrates that .