10 ms·
But the thing is, what if you produce feta with the exact same ingredients and recipe in Australia? The customer gets the exact same thing, only made somewhere
by roelschroeven 5y ago
But the thing is, what if you produce feta with the exact same ingredients and recipe in Australia? The customer gets the exact same thing, only made somewhere else.
I'm all for quality standards, so that customers can now exactly what they get. But be able to use a name based on the location where something is produced, that doesn't protect the customer at all. It only protects a selected set of producers.
- skywal_l 5y agoWhat if you produce exactly the same sneakers than Nike? That does not protect the customer and protects the producers too. But somehow, nobody compains about that. I don't see why brands should be more protected that countries or regions name.
- anoncake 5y agoThen you should be allowed to apply the Nike brand to them. Producers' interests don't matter. They only exist to serve the customer.
- mantas 5y agoSo we'd end up with Nike made by Nike and Nike made by someone else? Then, in general public eyes, Nike-made-by-Nike would become true Nike.
- anoncake 5y agoIf someone is willing to pay extra for an identical product because it's made by a more famous company they have only themselves to blame.
- WanderPanda 5y agoHow long must one keep his IT infrastructure as cattle instead of pets to come to believe that such a thing like an „identical“ product exists? :p In the real world almost nothing is fungible. Additionally, even with white labelling there is value created (look at Xiaomi for an example).
- bawolff 5y agoHave you met humans? Most status-symbols are all about the brand name, identical products made by other people don't count. And im ok with that. If someone makes a shitty knock-off,i dont think the original manufacturer should get the blame.
- anoncake 5y ago> shitty knock-off I wrote "identical"
- iso1210 5y agoSure, it's also their choice. I wouldn't buy Nike trainers or Levi jeans, but I'm sure some people do, and by taking away that choice you are stealing from them.
- anoncake 5y agoWhat choice am I taking away from them?
- iso1210 5y agoThe choice of where to spend their money - if they choose to spend it with Adidas, despite you and me thinking the product is terrible, and a far cheaper copy is better - that's their choice. By preventing them from knowing where the money is going, you are harming the consumer. This is different to copyright or patents where the consumer is prevented from buying the alternative.
- iso1210 5y agoWhich is why the Nike brand shouldn't be on them. As a consumer I want to know who made it. By all means sell the same shoes and call them "Victoria" or "Kratos" or something, and I might even buy them if I felt they were an appropriate value.
- anoncake 5y agoThe packaging should make clear that these Nike shoes aren't made by Nike. But there is no reason to restrict what the shoes themselves look like. At most, a label on the soles would be reasonable so second hand buyers can identify who made their shoes.
- roelschroeven 5y agoChampagne is not a trademark like Nike. While I think everyone should be able to produce Champagne under the name Champagne, I think only Veuve Clicquot, Bollinger, ... should be able to use those specific names. Those are trademarks like Nike.
- ginko 5y agoThat's the point of PDOs though. That they are essentially a form of trademark.
- dantheman 5y agoBut it's not a trademark - it's a location. Can beef made outside of England be called beef? Can any english name for food be used outside of England? Can french onion soup be sold outside of France?
- seszett 5y agoBeef made outside of England can be called beef, but not English beef, which is the point of protected geographical indications (although this case doesn't need PGI, it's already protected under other laws regarding the indications of the origin of products).
- dantheman 5y agoBut we don't call it french champagne, we just call it champaign or cognac.
- 123pie123 5y agochampagne is a region in france ie a location, no need to call it 'french' champagne. so they're able to say champagne can only be made in the region of champagne You're free to say sparkling wine - which is what champagne is
- pimterry 5y agoThe argument is that the details matter. Slightly different breeds of animal, different weather conditions, or different bacterial ecosystems affect the resulting cheese. You can make something similar to these products elsewhere, but it won't be exactly the same. Some products are famous and specific enough that customers have a right to be able to know when it's the real deal (and there are many such customers - otherwise these names wouldn't matter at all). If you want to produce something similar, you can start a new brand with other local businesses (Australeta say), label it Feta-like until customers recognize and choose it because they like it. You can agree whatever rules you like between you for how it's made and what constitutes 'real' Australeta so you have a consistent quality product. You can even do that and register your own new protected name - see the recent split of Corpinnat from Cava as a recent real-world example: https://www.thedrinksbusiness.com/2019/02/nine-producers-break-with-cava-to-form-corpinnat/ https://www.thedrinksbusiness.com/2019/02/nine-producers-bre...
- DiogenesKynikos 5y agoI always feel these arguments are a bit disingenuous. You would be extremely hard-pressed to tell "authentic" Feta cheese apart from "Feta-like" cheese produced in any number of places around the world. These laws are not about protecting the consumer from inauthentic products. They're about protecting producers from competition. Exclusive ownership of famous culinary names like "Feta" and "Champagne" is valuable, and local producers throughout the EU want that edge and lobby to obtain it. Benefiting certain producers in this manner may be something that's worthwhile doing, but we should at least be honest about what the real goal of the policy is.
- alkonaut 5y ago> The customer gets the exact same thing, only made somewhere else. That’s not exactly the same thing: buying one item gives support to producers in the original location while buying the other product doesn’t. I’m sure an American company (or Australian Greeks) could make a better product, but the actual physical product itself is just half the story.
- golemotron 5y agoExcept when the 'local thing' is a local business owned and/or financed by a multinational. It's the easiest way to get around such things and it happens all the time.
- alkonaut 5y agoIt’s not the small scaledness or local ownership that’s protected. It’s the tradition of making X in the region where X is traditionally made, and some of the how it’s made. Nothing else.
- bassman9000 5y agoBut the thing is, what if you produce feta with the exact same ingredients and recipe in Australia? The customer gets the exact same thing, only made somewhere else. You can't replicate weather and other local conditions, specially on foods that require precise humidity/temp control, even air quality. So it's not the same thing. That's the whole point of geographical.
- dantheman 5y agoSo is the weather the same year after year? does that impact it - can we say, tell producers that the weather varied from the day we established the standard so that it can't be called that this year?
- bassman9000 5y agoYes it does, as locals know how to control e.g. drying of iberico, or cheese curing, as they've been doing for hundreds of years, with just basic construction techniques (most of the time meaning open buildings, or basic caves). And they can do that because, minor variations aside, local weather remains the same.
- djbebs 5y agoIf you put it to the test you would be very hard pressed to find and identifiable difference, just like wine experts can't tell a 5$ wine from a 500$ wine
- bassman9000 5y agoNow we're shifting goalposts. No longer about the combination of local conditions/local expertise/local ingredients resulting in a unique product, but about if you'll be able to tell them apart.
- iso1210 5y agoBut the thing is, what if you produce a Big Mac with the exact same ingredients and recipe at O'Donnels burger joint? The customer gets the exact same thing, only made somewhere else. Still that's OK, I slap "Made in America" and a US flag on some plastic bald eagle I make in China and I'm sure nobody has a problem with it. PGIs, like trademarks and "Made in USA" protections are good for the consumer. It empowers them. Nobody is stopping you buying cheese made in the greek style way, or stopping you putting cheese and some lettuce and a couple of burgers in a bun. They're stopping someone from passing off what they made as something else.
- rwmj 5y agoNothing stops you from making this style of cheese in Australia, it's just that to sell it into the EU you have to call it something else. Literally you have to make up a new name for it, that's all. Interestingly the Australian wine industry fought a long and hard battle in the 1980s to use French names like "Beaujolais" (against the French INAO). They lost. And now they produce their own wines with different names and have been hugely successful at it. Probably more successful than if they had been seen as making "knock-off" Beaujolais.
- Muromec 5y agoWell, that's what article points out -- you can't do it in domestic market too.
- TravelPiglet 5y agoWhy not call it something else and it would sell equally well on its own merits? You are basically given a better starting position because of the association with the name Feta, Champagne or Cognac. If Nike, the North face or some other trademark owner moves production to a different factory, you can’t continue production of the same goods even if the quality is the same. The GI and trademark name translates to extra value.
- newnamenewface 5y agoYes, but certain things are no more owned by one country or region than the world due to the dispersive nature of culture. If a Greek moves to the US and starts making feta there (say, even with the same milk fermenting bacteria), it's still feta, unless it's truly believed that national character imparts flavor. What then becomes the difference if a Greek teaches another how to make feta and they do it elsewhere? Or if someone replicates it on their own? A chef's national identity does not a good dish make
- makapuf 5y agoThe exact same argument can be made for nike shoes.
- newnamenewface 5y agoDiscounting a whole lot of nuance, you apparently can use Nike shoes in any argument.
- Symbiote 5y agoIf an employee of Nike, at whatever level, leaves the company to make their own shoes, they can no longer use the Nike trademark to market them.
- newnamenewface 5y agoThere's a difference here. Most people don't make shoes in their kitchen. Most people do produce foods and pick up recipes from regions proximal and distant. It's one of the inherent motivators of travel and commerce for centuries. Further, Feta, for instance, has existed for hundreds of years. It's no more owned by one person than Greeks themselves at this point. It's spread over the world, in the same way as Parmesan, or other cheeses and foods. The supposition that this is exactly like trademark law is absurd and mechanical.
- himinlomax 5y agoWhat if you make Cola that tastes exactly like Coca Cola, with the same ingredients? Geographical origins serve the same purpose as registered trademark, the only significant difference is that they don't belong to a single corporation.
- TheJoeMan 5y agoWhat if Atlanta, GA, USA decrees that “Cola” has to be made in Atlanta, and that cheap stuff at Walmart has to be “RC Cola-style”?
- Zababa 5y agoAtlanta doesn't have a multiple hundred years tradition of making "Cola" that started before the industrial age, which is the case for most EU food concerned by this.
- rsynnott 5y agoBased on the European rules, they might have some success claiming exclusivity on ‘Atlanta cola’ (though Coca Cola probably wouldn’t want them to do this, as any company making it in Atlanta to a specified standard would be able to use the name). Honestly I assume this is more or less why the food industry resents protected names so much; it’s perceived exclusivity/specialness, but not based on a brand controlled by a single company.
- 8note 5y agoTheir main purveyor of cola will probably disagree, since they want to make cola everywhere
- himinlomax 5y agoFirst they're already strongly protected by trademark law, second they make their Cola pretty much everywhere (except maybe the base syrup), third there's already a bunch of Cola (ever heard of Pepsi Cola?).
- denton-scratch 5y agoIt suits the Coca Cola corporation to manufacture Coke all over the world, using mass-produced syrup combined with local soda water. A PDO would destroy the Coke company.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- ska 5y ago> the exact same ingredients and recipe in Australia? One problem is this might not be possible. Can Australia use raw milk? Do they have any of the right cows? Do they have the right feed for the cows? How far does "same ingredient" go? I'd likely support such an approach, e.g. you could make "parmiagano reggiano" somewhere other than parma, so long as you used exactly the same inputs and processes and quality control measures, but depending what country you are in that might not even be legal. Even in that case you should probably have clear "product of X" labeling so people could decide. Of course the flip side is as soon as you did that, GI's groups would probably try and tie process to their region specifically in some rediculous way.
- kergonath 5y ago> But the thing is, what if you produce feta with the exact same ingredients and recipe in Australia? The customer gets the exact same thing, only made somewhere else. Just give it a sexy, Aussie-sounding name and Bob’s your uncle. No need to pass your product for something it is not. There are also many marketing opportunities if you are not constrained by the traditional or old-fashioned image associated with PGIs.
- danmaz74 5y agoHow do you ensure that feta in Australia is made with the same ingredient and recipe as Greek feta? And how do you ensure that the same happens in China, Vietnam, or any other place which would like to compete for the international feta market? It's not like the Greek can go and check what they do in China (or Australia). Just call it Australian feta-style cheese, and if consumers like it, they'll buy it. But at least they'll be able to choose if they want the "Greek feta as in from Greece" or a different thing, with different guarantees.