By Victoria Hines

In January 2013, the Champagne Bureau, a lobbying organization based in Washington, criticized the Obama administration’s decision to list “Korbel Natural Russian River Valley Champagne” on the menu of the inauguration dinner. To them, Champagne is characteristic of Champagne, France, and thus California wineries are mislabeling their wines by using the Champagne label. 117 countries are sympathetic to this sentiment, and protect the Champagne name, while the U.S. allows the label to be used by wine produced outside the Champagne region. Several agreements, including the WTO’s TRIPS Agreement, have included increased protections for geographical indicators of various products over the past two decades, yet the U.S. has consistently failed to follow suit in offering its own protections. However, the U.S. may now be more willing to protect such geographical indicators not only for wine, but also for other food products, such as feta cheese and Darjeeling tea.

Read More

September 10, 2015

By Nathaniel DeLucia

In 2011, Australia became the first country to pass a “plain packaging” law – a law that requires all tobacco products to be sold in plain unadorned packing, devoid of any identifying marks, colors, or logos.  The plain packaging law was enacted in order to discourage people from smoking. 

In response, the tobacco industry and five WTO members (Ukraine, Honduras, Dominican Republic, Cuba, and Indonesia), who sell tobacco products in Australia, filed a dispute challenging the law at the WTO’s Dispute Settlement Body. Challenges have also been brought in two of the WTO’s committees: the TRIPS (Trade-Related Intellectual Property Rights) council and the TBT (Technical Barriers to Trade) Committee.  However, Australia has contested these additional challenges as inappropriate and redundant in light of the ongoing dispute settlement case in the WTO’s Dispute Settlement Body.

Resolution of this dispute will have a tremendous impact on the global tobacco industry, as many other countries are considering measures similar to the plain packaging law passed in Australia.

For the latest on the dispute, check out IP –Watch’s article, located here.

Read More

December 10, 2014

By Nathaniel DeLucia

At a recent WTO meeting, members discussed several key questions about the future of the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) agreement.  Most notably, the fate of the “non-violation” complaints was expected to be decided.  Non-violation complaints allow member countries to bring complaints to the WTO against another member country, even if no violation of an agreement has occurred.  The decision as to whether or not to continue allowing non-violation complaints had continually been put off by the council, however, they were expected to finally address the issue at the upcoming meeting.

For the complete story on non-violation complaints and the WTO meeting generally, see the IP-Watch article, located here.

Read More

November 14, 2014

By Nathaniel DeLucia

The U.S. Trade Representative’s (USTR) recent “out-of-cycle review” of India’s IP laws is a perfect example of the tension that arises between patent laws and international treaties. The USTR launched its investigation because it believes India’s laws may be hurting products covered by US patent and copyright.  Specifically, the USTR takes issue with India’s practice of issuing compulsory licenses over the objections of the patent owners and the allegedly high rates of internet piracy.  Two international agreements, to which both the US and India are members, complicate the matter  The first is the TRIPS agreement, which outlines what the member countries feel are appropriate IP laws and which India appears to be in compliance with.  Second, is that as a WTO member, the US is supposed to settle this dispute in the WTO and not by taking unilateral action.

For a detailed discussion of how these agreements complicate the USTR investigation, see IP-Watch’s article, located here.

Read More

November 13, 2014