Studie over beschermde geografische aanduidingen voor niet-landbouwproducten
Uit 't persbericht: Protecting products with a geographical indication: Commission publishes study on whether to extend the system to products other than food.
De studie heeft betrekking op de bescherming via geografische aanduidingen voor niet-landbouwproducten op de interne markt. De algemene doelstelling van het onderzoek was om de Europese Commissie te voorzien van informatie over beschermde en mogelijk te beschermen niet-agrarische producten. Er is momenteel geen systeem van bescherming via geografische aanduiding voor niet-agrarische producten op EU-niveau. Het gepubliceerde onderzoek wordt meegenomen in de analyse van de commissie, bij de analyse van het bestaande wettelijke kader en de economische gevolgen, alsmede de mogelijke oplossingen.
The overall objective of the study was to provide the European Commission with precise information on protected and potentially protected non-agricultural GI products in the 27 Member States of the EU to determine whether or not a unitary system of protection for non agricultural GI products at the EU level should be established. (...)
A consolidated list of 129 non-agricultural products that are protected or could be protected as a geographical indication was put together. Experts then undertook to collect as much information as possible on these products using legal and economic questionnaires to gather the relevant data. Based on their findings, a detailed legal analysis was carried out. It focused on the protection available at the national and international levels. (...)
In the 31 countries, there is no harmonised approach when it comes to the legal instruments available for the protection of non agricultural GI products. The legal frameworks differ quite significantly in terms of scope, effect and cost of protection. (...)
Trade marks offer the right holder with a positive and exclusive right on the use of the name. However, on the one hand, there is a limitation of rights conferred by a mark, notably the impossibility to prevent a third party to use the name in accordance with honest practices. On the other hand, it is extremely difficult to secure word trade mark registration and the need to rely on figurative trade marks to protect the name of non agricultural products bearing a geographical indication. (...)
In parallel, we undertook an economic analysis of the economic data gathered with a view to measure the economic impact of non-agricultural geographical indications which are already protected in the EU Member States. We also looked into the economic and social value of potential GIs. (...)
Based on these economic findings, the interest of producers, consumers and policy-makers for a new EU framework that would improve the protection of non-agricultural GI products is likely to vary. In the countries where producers currently face competition and pressures from imitations or counterfeited products, they will probably be supportive. For other countries, where the problem is less acute, there could be more reluctance, as the establishment of such a system will generate costs (...)
In defining a new EU legal instruments for the protection of non-agricultural GIs, the EU decision-makers will have to make difficult choices which will have an impact on the attractiveness, credibility and efficiency of the system, but also on the burden which will be put on the authorities which will be in charge of the system and on producers who will have to use it. (...)
