5 ms·

Consumer protection is a bad thing?

Romanulus 9y ago
Nope! We should also ban steak because babies have a hard time eating it.
neximo64 9y ago
Only if it actually protects consumers instead of national interests. In the EU 'consumer protection' is the guise of protecting suppliers. For example, protecting consumers from Buffalo Mozzarella means that only 4 regions of Italy may produce it (via the Protected designation of origin scheme) (it doesn't matter if the recipe/methods are correct). This way the consumer is 'protected' from being sold Buffalo Mozzarella from regions that can produce it cheaper. This method seems to be a way to force compliance online. The EU is great but their digital initiatives are always examples of overreach. Last time it was those ridiculous cookie notices you see on websites notifying you that the website uses cookies.
- germanier 9y ago
  Anybody anywhere can produce Buffalo Mozzarella. The protected term in the EU is "Mozzarella di Bufala Campana" which has the region already in it's name. The scheme has been introduced as trademarks protection of such terms that often have been associated with a specific region for centuries is not possible. It's really no different than regular trademarks for modern brands. Historically those schemes were introduced over a hundred years ago after faked products misled consumers. It's also a weaker interference in the free market than copyright protection: Anybody can start producing Mozzarella di Bufala Campana in the region while the rights to Kraft Cheese belong to a single company. Producing a product the cheapest way possible is not the end goal. If those cheap products drive the traditional way out of the market (as consumers have no reliable way of distinguishing products) consumers that specifically want the product from that region are harmed. All others can buy generic Buffalo Mozzarella produced anywhere just fine.
  - germanier 9y ago
    "than copyright protection" should read "than trademark protection", sorry.

Nope! We should also ban steak because babies have a hard time eating it.

Only if it actually protects consumers instead of national interests. In the EU 'consumer protection' is the guise of protecting suppliers. For example, protecting consumers from Buffalo Mozzarella means that only 4 regions of Italy may produce it (via the Protected designation of origin scheme) (it doesn't matter if the recipe/methods are correct). This way the consumer is 'protected' from being sold Buffalo Mozzarella from regions that can produce it cheaper. This method seems to be a way to force compliance online. The EU is great but their digital initiatives are always examples of overreach. Last time it was those ridiculous cookie notices you see on websites notifying you that the website uses cookies.

germanier 9y ago
Anybody anywhere can produce Buffalo Mozzarella. The protected term in the EU is "Mozzarella di Bufala Campana" which has the region already in it's name. The scheme has been introduced as trademarks protection of such terms that often have been associated with a specific region for centuries is not possible. It's really no different than regular trademarks for modern brands. Historically those schemes were introduced over a hundred years ago after faked products misled consumers. It's also a weaker interference in the free market than copyright protection: Anybody can start producing Mozzarella di Bufala Campana in the region while the rights to Kraft Cheese belong to a single company. Producing a product the cheapest way possible is not the end goal. If those cheap products drive the traditional way out of the market (as consumers have no reliable way of distinguishing products) consumers that specifically want the product from that region are harmed. All others can buy generic Buffalo Mozzarella produced anywhere just fine.
- germanier 9y ago
  "than copyright protection" should read "than trademark protection", sorry.