Print

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

[GlyphGryph]

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/europe-wants-its-parmesan-back-seeks-name-change

EUROPE WANTS ITS PARMESAN BACK, SEEKS NAME CHANGE

WASHINGTON (AP) — Would Parmesan by any other name be as tasty atop your pasta? A ripening trade battle might put that to the test.

As part of trade talks, the European Union wants to ban the use of European names like Parmesan, feta and Gorgonzola on cheese made in the United States.

The argument is that the American-made cheeses are shadows of the original European varieties and cut into sales and identity of the European cheeses. The Europeans say Parmesan should only come from Parma, Italy, not those familiar green cylinders that American companies sell. Feta should only be from Greece, even though feta isn't a place. The EU argues it "is so closely connected to Greece as to be identified as an inherently Greek product."

So, a little "hard-grated cheese" for your pasta? It doesn't have quite the same ring as Parmesan.

U.S. dairy producers, cheesemakers and food companies are all fighting the idea, which they say would hurt the $4 billion domestic cheese industry and endlessly confuse consumers.

"It's really stunning that the Europeans are trying to claw back products made popular in other countries," says Jim Mulhern, president of the National Milk Producers Federation, which represents U.S. dairy farmers.

The European Union would not say exactly what it is proposing or even whether it will be discussed this week as a new round of talks on an EU-United States free trade agreement opens in Brussels.

European Commission spokesman Roger Waite would only say that the question "is an important issue for the EU."

That's clear from recent agreements with Canada and Central America, where certain cheese names were restricted unless the cheese came from Europe. Under the Canadian agreement, for example, new feta products manufactured in Canada can only be marketed as feta-like or feta-style, and they can't use Greek letters or other symbols that evoke Greece.

Though they have not laid out a public proposal, the EU is expected to make similar attempts to restrict marketing of U.S.-made cheeses, possibly including Parmesan, Asiago, Gorgonzola, feta, fontina, grana, Muenster, Neufchatel and Romano.

And it may not be just cheese. Other products could include bologna, Black Forest ham, Greek yogurt, Valencia oranges and prosciutto, among other foods.

The trade negotiations are important for the EU as Europe has tried to protect its share of agricultural exports and pull itself out of recession. The ability to exclusively sell some of the continent's most famous and traditional products would prevent others from cutting into those markets.

Concerned about the possible impact of changing the label on those popular foods, a bipartisan group of 55 senators wrote U.S. Trade Representative Michael Froman and Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack this week asking them not to agree to any such proposals by the EU.

Led by New York Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., and Pennsylvania Sen. Patrick Toomey, R-Pa., the members wrote that in the states they represent, "many small- or medium-sized, family owned businesses could have their businesses unfairly restricted" and that export businesses could be gravely hurt.

Schumer said artisanal cheese production is a growing industry across New York.

"Muenster is Muenster, no matter how you slice it," he said.

Trevor Kinkaid, a spokesman for the U.S. trade representative, said conversations on the issue are in the early stages but that the U.S. and E.U. have "different points of view" on the topic.

The agency wouldn't disclose details of the negotiations, but Kinkaid said the U.S. government is "committed to increasing opportunity for U.S. businesses, farmers and workers through trade."

Large food companies that mass-produce the cheeses are also fighting the idea. Kraft, closely identified with its grated Parmesan cheese, says the cheese names have long been considered generic in the United States.

"Such restrictions could not only be costly to food makers, but also potentially confusing for consumers if the labels of their favorite products using these generic names were required to change," says Kraft spokesman Basil Maglaris.

Some producers say they are incensed because it was Europeans who originally brought the cheeses here, and the American companies have made them more popular and profitable in a huge market. Errico Auricchio, president of the Green Bay, Wis., company BelGioioso Cheese Inc., produced cheese with his family in Italy until he brought his trade to the United States in 1979.

"We have invested years and years making these cheeses, " Auricchio says. "You cannot stop the spreading of culture, especially in the global economy."

He says that companies who make certain cheeses would have to come together and figure out new names for them, which would be almost impossible to do.

His suggestion for Parmesan? "I Can't Believe It's Not Parmesan," he jokes.

Jaime Castaneda works for the U.S. Dairy Export Council and is the director of a group formed to fight the EU changes, the Consortium for Common Food Names. He says the idea that only great cheese can come from Europe "is just not the case anymore."

He points out that artisanal and locally produced foods are more popular than ever here and says some consumers may actually prefer the American brands. European producers can still lay claim to more place-specific names, like Parmigiano-Reggiano, he says.

"This is about rural America and jobs," he said.

Summary: Europe wants mozzarella, feta, champagne, and many other products to be legally restricted from being sold in the United States unless they call themselves something different or were actually made in Europe.

It's called a POD, and I was wondering what opinions here at the Bay12 are on the issue.

[Foamybeard]

I smell Greece at work here. :|

The EU can go take a long walk off a short pier. Its the style of cheese, you can't just demand that they change the name of stuff because some foreign (To people in the US, at least) power is upset they don't get to have a monopoly on the type of cheese because people prefer to buy the cheaper things to save money.

[kaijyuu]

I'm fine with enforcing labels like "not made in Parma" for parmesan cheese. I don't think a full name change is reasonable.

I understand that where something is made is important to some people, and they should know that about what they're buying. For the rest of us though, it doesn't matter.


I'm looking at this 100% from a consumer's perspective and don't particularly care about any other.

[Frumple]

It's called a POD, and I was wondering what opinions here at the Bay12 are on the issue.

Go check the european politics thread

[GlyphGryph]

But Frumple, this isn't about Europeans, it's about us poor Americans and how they are trying to hold a boot of oppression down on our necks!

I'm fine with enforcing labels like "not made in Parma" for parmesan cheese. I don't think a full name change is reasonable.

I understand that where something is made is important to some people, and they should know that about what they're buying. For the rest of us though, it doesn't matter.

US law already requires almost everything to list where it is made, and it's legally required to be accurate. So this is already the case.

This is an important thing to note.

US Law already requires food to be sourced to point of origin on the label. American English just doesn't use the particular concept of "Place Name" in the title meaning the region where an object is produced, and instead uses it to represent where the food was originally popularized or developed.

[LeoLeonardoIII]

There's some precedent in Europe for names of specific wines. I don't think it's an international issue: nobody expects a $10 bottle of Champagne in a Washington convenience store is going to be made in France. I agree that it would be acceptable to require a location of origin on all products - which I suspect is already the case in the US.

The Feta example is just ludicrous.

Remember: just because some scamp proposes a law doesn't mean it has a snowball's chance in hell of actually getting anywhere. Even if the EU does decide to make it a law, the US wouldn't be bound by it. What will the EU do, impose trade sanctions because companies in the US still want to call their cheese Gorgonzola? Right.

[Sirus]

* Sirus laughs hysterically

[GlyphGryph]

LeoLeonardo, a bunch of countries in Europe were opposed to the PDO scheme and basically forced into it, and the US Treaty-writers basically have permission to create US laws without legislative action which is, like, SUPER DUMB, but something to keep in mind since they've made it perfectly care they don't care about running roughshod over American law so long as they get to make their favoured American companies more money in another market in return somehow.

[Gigaz]

This is an important issue in the free trade talks.
The idea behind this free trade stuff is that someone in the US can sell his product in Europe and noone has to be concerned if it violates some law because these laws would be basically the same. By EU law, noone outside Greece sells Feta and noone outside Parma sells Parmesan. I doubt that the USA can have it any other way.
Is it possible to buy and sell US-made champagner in the US?

[Sheb]

Actually it is EU law.

I'll just note that the US already enforce something similar for some products, like Florida Orange needing to be produced in Florida. Even some European products (like Cognac) already have this kind of protection.

Now, the thing is, they're trying to make a free-trade deal. However tariffs are already super-low (like 2% on average), so the main way to boost trade is to make it so legislations are as similar as possible. Which is causing issue for stuff like this, where names are protected in Europe, but cannot be trademarked in the US because they've become generic there.

Actually, we probably need a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership megathread, with all the bullshit in that stuff. ( They may want to take your parmesan's name, but they're trying to force us to accept hormone-fed beef and they want corporations to be able to sue government everywhere).

[GlyphGryph]

Actually it is EU law.

I'll just note that the US already enforce something similar for some products, like Florida Orange needing to be produced in Florida. Even some European products (like Cognac) already have this kind of protection.

You don't really understand American law, since that is nothing like this. (Florida Origins is a trademark owned by an organization, and there is no legal requirement those Florida Oranges be grown in Florida. Same for Idaho potatoes. You just aren't allowed to sell items under another companies trademark. Mind you, getting permission to use the name requires it, but that's a practical consideration, nothing more.)

Being a trademark, it follows the normal standards of trademarks in the US, none of which are remotely applicable to the items being discussed since even if a trademark was attempted it would instantly fail the genericization clause.

The example you're looking for, in search of a US analogue, would be bourbon. Although most Europeans don't seem to understand that one either, it's at least close. And I think us trying to force that restriction on other countries is still retarded.

I think we should keep this on topic about the food names though, because I think (hope?) everyone thinks the TTIP as a whole is a big pile of garbage that should be burned before it can do any more damage.

[Sheb]

TPP is the other one, the Pacific treaty. :p

More seriously, as far as US laws goes, I'll take the word of the US Patent and Trademark Office rather than yours.

The specific details may change, but geographical indications are a thing under US law.

[GlyphGryph]

Hmm... I actually didn't realize we had unregistered GI requirements. I know Florida Oranges and Idaho Potatoes are registered, though, and managed.

That's a dumb statute, and now that it has been brought to my attention, I think we should get rid of that stuff too.

The US has several incredibly frustrating examples of internal protectionism, built to empower entrenched actors, that I think should be removed.

Edit: Also, I fixed my acronym. So many "TP" treaties to hate on, so little time!

[Sheb]

Look like a culture shock then. I just can't imagine a herve not coming from Herve. Maybe it's because as the "Old world", we had the time to develop way more culinary traditions than you guys, and we feel the need to protect them.

[DeKaFu]

I personally don't really see an issue with this... Having a protected name for a particular product made in a particular place/method seems like it makes sense, since we do that with most other products out there.

It's like Kobe beef. People in the U.S. have been charging a premium for Kobe beef in restaurants for years, despite the fact that actual Kobe beef wasn't exported outside of Japan until 2012. What were the restaurant-goers actually getting? A different product which may or may not have the actual qualities of Kobe beef.

I don't see how more regulation on what people can call their products is a bad thing if it gives more information to the consumer.