On the side of a World Intellectual Property Organization meeting last week working to revise a treaty protecting appellations of origin and soon to include geographical indication, a private-sector seminar was organised with the hope of generating economic interest in non-agricultural geographical indications.
The seminar on the socio-economic potential and challenges for non-agricultural geographical indications (GIs) was organised by the Organization for an International Geographical Indication Network (oriGIn). The seminar, held on 5 December, aimed at identifying the economic potential of non-agricultural GIs and look into the issue of their misappropriation.
Several speakers were asked to present the current situation in Europe and in particular the new French legal framework for non-agricultural GIs. Other speakers talked about their experience of non-agricultural GIs in emerging economies, their potential and the opportunities to add value to traditional knowledge.
Massimo Vittori, managing director of origGIn, said non-agricultural GIs are a crucial and strategic topic for the network. The Lisbon System for the International Registration of Appellations currently being revised, provides a broad definition of GIs, as does the World Trade Organization Agreement on Trade-Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), and can include non-agricultural GIs.
Geographical indications is a collective intellectual property protection referring to products having a specific geographical origin from which they derive particular qualities, reputation or characteristics.
Non-agricultural GIs cover all kinds of products, such as cotton, silk, cigars, pottery, ceramics, stones, marble, hats, leather, fabrics and jewellery, he described. In South and Central America, he added, out of 380 GIs currently protected, 89 are for non-agricultural products. In India, 144 out of 195 protected GIs concern non-agricultural products, while in the European Union, there are some 834 potential non-agricultural GIs, he added.
Miguel Angel Medina, associate partner for Elzaburu, a Spain-based law firm, said that at the European level, three types of GIs are currently protected: agricultural products and foodstuff, wines, and spirits. For non-agricultural GIs there is no harmonisation yet, he explained.
Some 14 European countries have a national sui generis system, such as Hungary and Estonia, but the level of protection is not harmonised. Some countries have developed a specific protection for a particular sector, such as Italy for ceramics, crafts in Spain, and watches in Switzerland. GIs have also been protected through bilateral trade agreements, he said.
Yves Bugmann, head of the Legal Department of the Federation of the Swiss Watch Industry said the Swiss Watch and clock industry dates back 400 years and was born in Geneva in the middle of the 16th century. Today, it represents the third largest export sector of Switzerland with CH21 billion (US$23.4 billion) in 2012.
Switzerland has a particular ordinance governing the use of the appellation “Switzerland” or “Swiss” for watches. The ordinance offers a definition of a Swiss watch, and a Swiss watch movement, (internal mechanism of a watch) he said. For example, a watch is considered to be Swiss if its movement is Swiss, its movement is cased up in Switzerland, and the manufacturer carries out the final inspection in Switzerland.
Misuse of the Swiss GI on watches is very common, he said, some examples of misuse are “Swiss Quartz,” “Swiss Parts,” or “Swiss Design,” he said. The global disparity in the protection of non-agricultural GIs is insufficient and the global disparity in the protection of GIs leads to different standards and “finally to insecurity for consumers,” he said.
Etienne Levoy from the French Intellectual Property Institute described the new French legal framework protecting non-agricultural GIs. The new project law has been approved both by the National Assembly and the Senate after its first reading. Its second reading is now pending at the National Assembly and is expected to be validated in January 2014, after which a decree will be necessary to make it effective, he specified.
Levoy spoke in favour of the new law. It answers a set of concerns, among which is the fact that some denominations have become generic and led to a sharp increase of products produced abroad at low cost, feeding unfair competition and consumer misleading, he said. This has led to a decrease of local production and knowledge, he added. He also said trademark law was not adequate to protect GIs in France as a trademark cannot be registered if it is only descriptive. Some countries have a different view about trademark in their countries.
The new legislation aims to extend the GI system to non-agricultural products. The definition of GIs will be the same as in the TRIPS agreement, he said, and the procedure of GI homologation will be integrated into the intellectual property code. Product specifications for this homologation will include the name of the product, the definition of a geographical area, and the quality, reputation or characteristic attributable to the geographical origin, he detailed.
A public inquiry procedure will be held during the homologation procedure and local authorities, professional and consumer associations will be consulted, he said.
Developing Country Experiences
Alexander Parra, coordinator of the intellectual property project “Artesanias de Colombia,” said the objective of the project is to provide legal tools to the artisanal sector to protect their handicrafts through the implementation of collective marks, certification marks, GIs and a marketing strategy.
Colombian handicrafts include hats, biscuits, ceramics, pottery, bags, and woodcarving. In the face of an increase in products imitating genuine handicrafts, the Colombian IP office recently ordered the immediate suspension of production, marketing or sale of all hats that are found to be imitation of Vueltiao hats, a traditional Colombian hat.
From the Moroccan Industrial and Commercial Property Office, Fatima Belkacen, chief of the Opposition Body and in charge of GIs and distinctive signs, said handicraft represents between 15-20 percent of the country’s GDP and provides about 30 percent of total jobs at the national level. The Moroccan government has been paying particular attention to handicraft products for several years, she said.
There are two categories of GIs in Morocco, she said, the first with a strong cultural content, such as decoration, furniture, jewellery and clothing. The second one is utilitarian handicraft, such as shoes or modern furniture.
The Moroccan government is currently finalising a new “project law” concerning handicraft GIs, she said.
In India, the legislation is very detailed as to the particular conditions for registration of GIs, said Kopresa Chari, national advisor on handicrafts at Pochampally Handloom Park. Some 24 percent of all registered GIs concern agricultural products, 66 percent handicrafts, and 8 percent manufactured goods, he explained.
GIs, he said, could facilitate the protection of the collective rights of the rural and indigenous communities on their indigenous knowledge. They could ensure that the entire community stands to benefit from the knowledge they have preserved and “this is not locked up as the private property of one individual.”
The potential benefit of GIs in India is hampered by a number of challenges. One of them is the definition of the exact geographical boundaries of a product, in particular in the context of non-agricultural products, he said. There is also a constant need for building capacity and awareness about GIs among stakeholders, including consumers, he said.
The potential benefits of non-agricultural GIs in India are significant, Chari said, but a pro-active approach is needed by the government. The success depends on effective marketing and promotional efforts to develop consumer perceptions, he said. However, building up a reputation involves time, patience, money, quality control and well-crafted marketing strategies, he detailed.
He said that the implications of GIs in the context of rural development need to be studied, in particular for sectors like agriculture, fisheries, crafts and artisanal works that provide livelihood for a large section of the poor in India.
Cécé Kpohomou, head of the GI Program at the African Intellectual Property Organisation (OAPI), said OAPI has not yet registered a request for a non-agricultural GI, although there is a rich and diversified potential in OAPI member countries. This potential lies with stakeholders who are in difficult situations, do not have sufficient means to develop their activity, and generally live in isolated areas, he said.
Usurpation and fraud is massive, permanent and often goes unpunished, he said, and the support of public authority is not visible enough. Several challenges lie in the way of exploiting the potential of non-agricultural GIs, he said, among which awareness raising, mobilisation, and support to actors in order to valorise products related to non-agricultural GIs, he said.
National authorities have to get involved in concrete actions in support of the promotion and protection of such products, he said.