Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

[scriver]

I don't really see the problem with it. I was under the impression you're not supposed to supply the consumer with false information.

Except when when place names get accepted into another language as the word for the product, they're generally become a word for the product, not meaning it's from a geographical area. Hence, in Sweden, Champagne was what we called bubbly wine, not wine from Champagne, and "Parmesan" is what we called that kind of cheese regardless of whether it was from Parma or not. Wiener Schnitzel is a way a of cooking the schnitzel, not a schnitzel from Vienna. It wouldn't have been false information as long as the wine was bubbly, the cheese had suitable characteristics and taste, and the schnitzel was prepared in roughly the correct way. That's the kind of things they should be protecting if anything, not superficial bullshit like where they're from. Obviously the EU is going to be protectionist when it comes to French and Italian products, though.

[Sheb]

I don't know if it would be that bad: we manage fine in Europe with those laws, and I like the idea that my Black Forest ham actually come from the black forest. Of course, I guess Americans are so used to those name changing them would be a bitch.

[10ebbor10]

Yup, this is exactly what they're trying to prevent. It's a bit late, but the point is that they don't want their special product's name to become the generic name, as it's rather hard to compete that way. Because the name of the product becomes generic, the value of the label drops dramatically.

When can we start forcing the metric onto America?

All the important scientific institutes already switched, and who cares about the plebs anyway.

[Sheb]

Also the USA already enforce Geographical indications for some stuff like Florida Oranges or Vidalia onions, plus accept some foreign GIs such as Cognac or Darjeeling.

[XXSockXX]

Geographical indications are a good idea in theory, but there are some problems in practice. With wine you can base it on where it's from or on the grapes. If it's just a name however, there can be conflicts. For example there was a local Silesian pastry (I forgot the name and other details), that is also made in parts of Germany near the border. However with the new rules only Silesian bakerys can use the name, while the German ones can not, even if it is a traditional pastry in the whole region.

BTW Wiener Schnitzel is just a way of preparing the schnitzel, not a geographical indication.

[Sheb]

Same with feta: it has to be made in Greece only, despite the fact that Cyprus has been making it too for like forever.

[Helgoland]

Kölsch can only made in Cologne (traditionally you had to be able to see the cathedral from the brewery). In Bonn, Kölsch is the dominant kind of beer, but you can't brew it here. So what do we call Kölsch-style beer made in Bonn? Bönnsch. (It's not that tasty, anyway.) If your product is good, you can use another name without problems.

The name protections aren't about protectionism, they're there to prevent the watering-down of standards. That's why it's a good idea to require Parmesan to come from Parma, but nobody would propose to limit Black Forest Cake production to parts of southern Germany.
The examples Sheb and Sock gave show that this isn't always implemented the right way, but in general it's a principle we should fight to uphold.

[Sheb]

But the question becomes, should we fight to get our name recognition stuff be adopted by the US? It's a real problem for words that had already become generic there (otherwise you could just get a producer's board to trademark it in the US, like for Cognac).

[Owlbread]

I fully endorse the campaign to get EU protected geographical status for chicken tikka masala in Glasgow.

[XXSockXX]

It's not the principle, just the implementation in detail. That is pretty much my stance on almost anything the EU does, great idea, poor execution.

It's these minor things that can cause unforeseen problems. Another example was some popular Croatian diary product (again I forgot the name), that would no longer be allowed to be produced by EU standards, thus disrupting a whole branch of local culture and economy.

[scrdest]

I think the whole attempt is rather idiotic. People will still continue to make the stuff under genericized names, people will keep calling them by original names, and regions will be accidentally hurt. I actually live in a region that has its own protected product - a cheese, to be specific.

The only thing that changed was that the biggest market for it - that is, locals selling it to tourists - sells the exact same product under a slightly altered name (literally, inserting one letter and the like) because it can't be arsed to follow the regulations, which among others require the cheese to be made from sheep milk, and obviously cow milk is much cheaper.

[Helgoland]

How do you propose should products from their original regions be marked? "Parmesan from Parma"? "Black Forset Ham from the Black Forest"?

A compromise I could get behind would be limiting the use of the products' name in the native language of their area of origin to the originals and forbidding false and misleading advertising (as in the feta example from the article).

Ninjaedit: Cow milk vs sheep milk makes a hell of a difference. Those would be completely different products.

[scriver]

The name protections aren't about protectionism, they're there to prevent the watering-down of standards. That's why it's a good idea to require Parmesan to come from Parma, but nobody would propose to limit Black Forest Cake production to parts of southern Germany.

Don't be naive, it's all about protectionism. If it were about "preventing lowered standards" then they would've made the law about products needing to have certain attributes or fit certain criteria, not needing to be from a particular region.

And really, there's literally no more certain way of making sure watering down standards will happen than a product being from Italy

But the question becomes, should we fight to get our name recognition stuff be adopted by the US? It's a real problem for words that had already become generic there (otherwise you could just get a producer's board to trademark it in the US, like for Cognac).

We should fight to to remove these embarrassing laws in the EU, or at the very least change them into something that isn't completely irrational.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

This whole thing is moronic. Something isn't special just because it was made in a very specific place. Your alcohol isn't changed because it was made in a specific city, and your feta cheese isn't imbued with Essence of Greece because it was made there. I can almost guarantee that European name protection will never be adopted in the US, no more than we ourselves would demand that all Kentucky Fried Chicken be made in Kentucky.

[Helgoland]

Something isn't special just because it was made in a very specific place.

Wine drinkers will disagree.

scriver: How about my compromise, then? The current implementation is faulty, that's a given - how do we fix it?