GIs toolbox

Bibliography

Kyrylenko A., Zafrilla Díaz-Marta V., The ever-growing scope of Geographical Indications’ evocation: from Gorgonzola to Morbier, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, Volume 16, Issue 4-5, April-May 2021, Pages 442–449 (2021)

Click here to consult the publication

The European Union Geographical Indications (GI) framework has granted, from the outset, a broad scope of protection to producers of GI-protected products. This already broad scope of protection has been expanded further by the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), particularly in evocation cases [...]

Read more

The European Union Geographical Indications (GI) framework has granted, from the outset, a broad scope of protection to producers of GI-protected products. This already broad scope of protection has been expanded further by the case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU), particularly in evocation cases, where its case-specific approach has resulted in a gradual expansion of the protection of registered names against evocation. Based on CJEU decisions, the authors attempt to propose a systematic test for GIs’ evocation, the goal being to contribute to greater coherence and legal certainty on decisional practice. Moreover, they advocate for a more principled approach which ensures an appropriate balance between the goals of the GI system and GIs’ scope of protection with a special reference to the—recently decided—Morbier case.

Montero P., Towards a core unitary legal regime for Geographical Indications in the European Union digital market, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, Volume 16, Issue 4-5, April-May 2021, Pages 427–434 (2021)

Click here to consult the publication

Recently the European Commission has launched two road maps affecting geographical indications (GIs) regulations from two different perspectives: one regarding a revision of agricultural products, wine and spirits regulations and another regarding intellectual property. In this second plan, special attention will be paid to upgrading the system for IP protection [...]

Read more

Recently the European Commission has launched two road maps affecting geographical indications (GIs) regulations from two different perspectives: one regarding a revision of agricultural products, wine and spirits regulations and another regarding intellectual property. In this second plan, special attention will be paid to upgrading the system for IP protection, by exploring ways to strengthen the protection system for GIs of agricultural products and considering the introduction of an EU protection system for non-agricultural GIs. This article aims to explore the principal challenges of reforming the GI legal regime, and the opportunity to establish core common principles for those rights by considering the unitary legal nature of GIs as an intellectual property right while analysing and preserving differences within each sector. The article shows the value of analysing GIs as an intellectual property right in a coordinated way, as an essential element of the EU Action Plan addressed to upgrade the EU IP system to facilitate the digital and green transition. The study analyses EU GIs case law, in comparison with other jurisdictions such as Spain.

M Ramli A., Epi Sukarsa D., Citra Dewi I., Septiono S., Geographical indication protection for non-agricultural products in Indonesia, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, Volume 16, Issue 4-5, April-May 2021, Pages 405–414 (2021)

Click here to consult the publication

This article analyzes the current laws, regulations and legal doctrines applicable to the registration of geographical indications in Indonesia. Notably, this contribution considers the complications in implementing the protection for geographical indications for non-agricultural products in Indonesia following the adoption of the Minister of Justice and Human Rights Regulation (MJHR [...]

Read more

This article analyzes the current laws, regulations and legal doctrines applicable to the registration of geographical indications in Indonesia. Notably, this contribution considers the complications in implementing the protection for geographical indications for non-agricultural products in Indonesia following the adoption of the Minister of Justice and Human Rights Regulation (MJHR) 2019. Non-agricultural products have a strong link with local cultural factors but, in some instances, a weaker link with natural factors. This makes them difficult to be registered as geographical indications under the current language and requirements of MJHR 2019. This article uses primary and secondary sources as well as semi-guided and in-depth interviews to make its conclusions and recommendations. In particular, the article proves the current text of Regulation 2019 is in contradiction with the trade mark and geographical indications law of 2016 as well as the previous regulation of 2007. Accordingly, it suggests that the current requirements of MJHR Reg. 2019 be harmonized.

Eylül Yalçın B., Kadir Yilmaztekin H., Turkish law on infringement of Geographical Indications and its degree of alignment with the EU law, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, Volume 16, Issue 4-5, April-May 2021, Pages 376–383 (2021)

Click here to consult the publication

This article addresses how much Turkish law on infringement of Geographical Indications (GIs) is in alignment with the EU law. It is divided into two broad parts. While the first part will portray the types of GIs that exist in Turkey, the second part will explore the grounds for infringement [...]

Read more

This article addresses how much Turkish law on infringement of Geographical Indications (GIs) is in alignment with the EU law.
It is divided into two broad parts. While the first part will portray the types of GIs that exist in Turkey, the second part will explore the grounds for infringement of a GI in the light of case law.

Guerrieri F., The Farm to Fork strategy as an external driver for change: possible impacts on nested GI rule systems, Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, Volume 16, Issue 4-5, April-May 2021, Pages 331–340 (2021)

Click here to consult the publication

Geographical indications (GIs) as distinctive signs and catalysts for local development identify local, national, European and international governance systems, regulated by heterogeneous rules and stakeholders. These rule systems can evolve, and their robustness and resilience can be challenged by external drivers. Among the objectives of the new Farm to Fork [...]

Read more

Geographical indications (GIs) as distinctive signs and catalysts for local development identify local, national, European and international governance systems, regulated by heterogeneous rules and stakeholders. These rule systems can evolve, and their robustness and resilience can be challenged by external drivers. Among the objectives of the new Farm to Fork strategy of the Green Deal, the European Commission envisages the introduction of sustainability criteria in the EU GI sui generis system. This article gives an overview of the possible impact of these criteria on the GI rule systems at the local, national and EU level. It also describes some of the implications of the reform for producers’ groups and for national and EU authorities.