5 ms·

PDO laws don't have standing in the United States, so you can buy domestic Parmesan and Champagne wjthout difficulty.

freeflight 6y ago
How comparable is that to ignoring other countries trademarks/patents? Couldn't the same argument be used to justify Chinese patent/IP theft, as American patent law does not apply in China? What are the legal difference here why one of these is defensible because of "not their jurisdiction", and the other is something whole economies get sanctioned over even tho patent jurisdiction also doesn't apply?
- twoodfin 6y ago
  There are international conventions & treaties, to which the US is a signatory, that codify international trademark and IP law.
  - freeflight 6y ago
    But the US being signatory to something does not mean that everybody else is a signatory too. The closest to that I could actually find is the World Intellectual Property Organization for trademarks. But afaik copyrights and patents entirely depend on separate registrations in the individual countries, the only thing the WIPO helps with patents is simplifying the patent application process by filing it in multiple countries for the applicant, but those filings can still be denied by the individual countries. [0] In that context I just find it a bit curious how American "trademark" theft of EU PDO is handwaved away with "no jurisdiction", yet the American government still insists that its patents, trademarks and IP be respected everywhere around the world, even in places where it too has no jurisdiction. [0] https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/does-your-us-patent-trademark-or-copyright-protect-you-overseas https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/does-your-us-patent-trade... edit: Apparently the WTO TRIPS Agreement actually covers geographical indications, and the US is a member to that [1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRIPS_Agreement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRIPS_Agreement
    - TT3351 6y ago
      Just as the case with US disrespect/neglect of provincial specific good restrictions, other countries also don't fully enforce our [American] notions of intellectual property rights.
    - kmeisthax 6y ago
      The American government insists that patents, trademarks, and copyrights are respected worldwide without jurisdiction because they got everyone else in the room to agree to do that in exchange for import market access. That's why the WTO TRIPS agreement exists. Everyone agreed to the same laws, and agreed to allow foreigners to sue domestic businesses, so it doesn't matter who has jurisdiction over what. America doesn't buy your cheese unless you agree to protect their movies. The only outliers are countries which have already pissed off America so much that market access without regime change is off the table. So, if you see someone say, for example, "but DMCA doesn't apply in my country", they're either wrong, or you should start looking up the export regulations involved with knowingly talking to Iranians before you wind up in federal prison. This isn't even exclusively an American problem. The EU and Japan do it too, and more countries will start doing that as they start getting stronger domestic creative industries. The more money a country makes from owning copyrighted works, the more protection they will demand from other countries. Hell, the last major copyright term extension (the "Sonny Bono" one in the US) was started by the EU doing the same thing to America. The EU passed a term extension that had a reciprocality requirement: if America didn't agree to the term extension, then American works would enter the public domain in the EU quicker than EU-origin works did. This is a fiendishly clever way to ratchet in term extensions, and it works because the WTO treaties only specify maximums for copyright exceptions, not protection. You're always allowed to go stricter.
      - freeflight 6y ago
        > That's why the WTO TRIPS agreement exists. As far as I can tell, TRIPS includes the EU PDO protections, so why are US companies selling "fake" EU food products when the US government agreed to respect EU PDO trough TRIPS? Do EU companies simply not sue against that in US courts? I tried looking for cases like that, but I couldn't really find any examples. > Everyone agreed to the same laws, and agreed to allow foreigners to sue domestic businesses, so it doesn't matter who has jurisdiction over what. China is also member of TRIPS, don't have Americans the right to sue in China? Why is that not good enough when it's apparently good enough for EU PDO being violated in the US?
TwoBit 6y ago
That's not true. Champagne became protected in USA in 2006, though existing makers were grandfathered.

How comparable is that to ignoring other countries trademarks/patents? Couldn't the same argument be used to justify Chinese patent/IP theft, as American patent law does not apply in China? What are the legal difference here why one of these is defensible because of "not their jurisdiction", and the other is something whole economies get sanctioned over even tho patent jurisdiction also doesn't apply?

twoodfin 6y ago
There are international conventions & treaties, to which the US is a signatory, that codify international trademark and IP law.
- freeflight 6y ago
  But the US being signatory to something does not mean that everybody else is a signatory too. The closest to that I could actually find is the World Intellectual Property Organization for trademarks. But afaik copyrights and patents entirely depend on separate registrations in the individual countries, the only thing the WIPO helps with patents is simplifying the patent application process by filing it in multiple countries for the applicant, but those filings can still be denied by the individual countries. [0] In that context I just find it a bit curious how American "trademark" theft of EU PDO is handwaved away with "no jurisdiction", yet the American government still insists that its patents, trademarks and IP be respected everywhere around the world, even in places where it too has no jurisdiction. [0] https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/does-your-us-patent-trademark-or-copyright-protect-you-overseas https://www.legalzoom.com/articles/does-your-us-patent-trade... edit: Apparently the WTO TRIPS Agreement actually covers geographical indications, and the US is a member to that [1]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRIPS_Agreement https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRIPS_Agreement
  - TT3351 6y ago
    Just as the case with US disrespect/neglect of provincial specific good restrictions, other countries also don't fully enforce our [American] notions of intellectual property rights.
  - kmeisthax 6y ago
    The American government insists that patents, trademarks, and copyrights are respected worldwide without jurisdiction because they got everyone else in the room to agree to do that in exchange for import market access. That's why the WTO TRIPS agreement exists. Everyone agreed to the same laws, and agreed to allow foreigners to sue domestic businesses, so it doesn't matter who has jurisdiction over what. America doesn't buy your cheese unless you agree to protect their movies. The only outliers are countries which have already pissed off America so much that market access without regime change is off the table. So, if you see someone say, for example, "but DMCA doesn't apply in my country", they're either wrong, or you should start looking up the export regulations involved with knowingly talking to Iranians before you wind up in federal prison. This isn't even exclusively an American problem. The EU and Japan do it too, and more countries will start doing that as they start getting stronger domestic creative industries. The more money a country makes from owning copyrighted works, the more protection they will demand from other countries. Hell, the last major copyright term extension (the "Sonny Bono" one in the US) was started by the EU doing the same thing to America. The EU passed a term extension that had a reciprocality requirement: if America didn't agree to the term extension, then American works would enter the public domain in the EU quicker than EU-origin works did. This is a fiendishly clever way to ratchet in term extensions, and it works because the WTO treaties only specify maximums for copyright exceptions, not protection. You're always allowed to go stricter.
    - freeflight 6y ago
      > That's why the WTO TRIPS agreement exists. As far as I can tell, TRIPS includes the EU PDO protections, so why are US companies selling "fake" EU food products when the US government agreed to respect EU PDO trough TRIPS? Do EU companies simply not sue against that in US courts? I tried looking for cases like that, but I couldn't really find any examples. > Everyone agreed to the same laws, and agreed to allow foreigners to sue domestic businesses, so it doesn't matter who has jurisdiction over what. China is also member of TRIPS, don't have Americans the right to sue in China? Why is that not good enough when it's apparently good enough for EU PDO being violated in the US?

TwoBit 6y ago

That's not true. Champagne became protected in USA in 2006, though existing makers were grandfathered.