US and the WTO - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Mephisto2 · 12-21-2004, 04:30 PM

Quote:

US claims victory in EU trade dispute
December 22, 2004 - 9:34AM

The United States claimed victory in a trade fight with the European Union over the right of US exporters to use geographic food names such as Florida oranges or Idaho potatoes to describe their products in European markets.

US officials said a ruling from the World Trade Organisation upheld US claims that the EU was discriminating against American products and producers by not granting them the right to use "geographical indications" for their products.

"This is a big win for American farmers and food processors," US Trade Representative Robert Zoellick said in a statement.

"We brought this case because we believed that, under WTO rules, US farmers, ranchers and other food producers should have the same access to protection for 'geographical indications' as European food producers. Europe clearly failed to provide this access."

EU officials took issue with that claim, saying they had not impeded geographic registrations from producers outside of Europe.

"We did not impede the registration of third countries' GI's. We even welcome it," Claude Veron-Reville, an EU spokeswoman on trade issues, said in Brussels. "The panel has vindicated our GI system."

The US and European officials were commenting on a WTO report that was provided Tuesday to the parties in the dispute but has not yet been made public.

The ruling will not be adopted officially by the WTO for several more months. At that point, the losing side can appeal against the case to a WTO appeals panel.

US officials said if the EU accepts the WTO decision it will force European countries to accept petitions from American companies for "geographical indications."

They said the ruling will help US producers of such products as oranges and other citrus products from Florida, Texas and California, potatoes from Idaho and onions from Vidalia, Georgia.

© 2004 AP
REF: http://www.smh.com.au/news/Business/...391804315.html

I have a couple of comments on this.

First and foremost, I'm with the US on this one. It does seem unfair practice to prevent the use of geographical names to differentiate products. So, well done to the US Trade Department (correct term?) and the WTO for making the right decision.

Secondly, I find it intriquing that the US can and regularly does embrace international organizations like the WTO (part of the UN) when it suits its interests. As you Americans say, "Go figure"...

Mr Mephisto

cyrnel · 12-21-2004, 04:58 PM

Is there more behind this? Any chance the EU didn't want it for a good reason? Business being business I could believe they're just trying to nullify a marketing advantage, but could it also be that they don't agree with our standards for the labeling? As in maybe not all of our "made in blah" labels are accurate at all times of the year?

Mephisto2 · 12-21-2004, 05:41 PM

Whatever their reasons, they were over-ruled.

For once (with regards to WTO issues), I'm with America on this one.

Mr Mephisto

stevo · 12-21-2004, 09:07 PM

You are a good man Mephisto, even if we don't see eye to eye on a lot of issues, at least you always take a fair and pragmatic approach to the issues discussed (I think thats 2 posts by you tonight that have made me think that, don't remember the other exactly).

As far as the US embracing international organizations when it suits their interests, there isn't one country in this world that would act against its own self interest, so I guess what you said for the US goes for every country.

Quote:

Originally Posted by crynel

Is there more behind this? Any chance the EU didn't want it for a good reason? Business being business I could believe they're just trying to nullify a marketing advantage, but could it also be that they don't agree with our standards for the labeling? As in maybe not all of our "made in blah" labels are accurate at all times of the year?

That may be true for manufactured products, but Florida oranges come from Florida, Idaho potatoes come from Idaho and, well, you get the point.

Mephisto2 · 12-22-2004, 04:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevo22

As far as the US embracing international organizations when it suits their interests, there isn't one country in this world that would act against its own self interest, so I guess what you said for the US goes for every country.

Yeah, well I had to throw in something!

Mr Mephisto

cyrnel · 12-22-2004, 04:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevo22

...
That may be true for manufactured products, but Florida oranges come from Florida, Idaho potatoes come from Idaho and, well, you get the point.

I'm not familiar with standards in this area so my question was just a question. Is that an FDA thing, FTC, DOA? I can see a conflict between the region and businesses in protection vs. marketing.

The Prophet · 12-22-2004, 04:46 AM

I think you will find that controlled by the Department of Agriculture, at least for food products. Maybe Department of Commerce, also. A lot of products in the states use geography as a marketing tool, and foriegn ones at that. I would assume it is the same elsewhere.

I understand the EU's skepticism. American corporations and marketers stretch the truth whenever they are given a chance. How about French wines? I don't think the US honors their rules for geographical names. Can't we but champagne made in California?

I think too that Europeans are far more progressive in "labeling laws," but I may have heard that in a dream. American's are too centered on marketing, thanks to the thoughtless consumerism that exists here.

Mephisto2 · 12-22-2004, 06:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Prophet

I think too that Europeans are far more progressive in "labeling laws," but I may have heard that in a dream. American's are too centered on marketing, thanks to the thoughtless consumerism that exists here.

Europe is indeed caught up in "labeling laws"; banning the use of the word feta for goat's cheese not made in Greece for example.

I find it humorous that they do not extend the same standards to our American cousins.

Mr Mephisto

PS - I'm a European and an ardent supporter of the EU. However in this case, I think they've got caught up in anal retention.

smooth · 12-22-2004, 10:23 AM

I don't have enough information from this article to agree or disagree with the US position.

They claim they brought the suit because they were being impeded from using geographic indicators. Yet, the EU spokepersons claims that wasn't the case.

So I don't know the basis of the concerns brought before the WTO.

ahh, here is something:

Quote:

EU Ready to Protect Florida Oranges

PAUL AMES

Associated Press

BRUSSELS, Belgium - The European Union said Wednesday it was looking forward to including Florida oranges and other U.S. products in its system of protecting traditional regional foods following a World Trade Organization ruling on the issue.

"Europe's system of protecting geographic names does not prevent access for products from other countries," said Claude Veron-Reville, trade spokeswoman at the European Commission.

"We are very much looking forward to registering names from other countries, not least the United States," she told reporters, adding that the EU's head office had yet to receive any requests to register American products.

The WTO ruled Tuesday on U.S. and Australian complaints against the EU system which says only foods produced in their original region can carry certain well-known labels.

Under the system, only ham produced using traditional methods near the Italian city of Parma can be called Parma ham, Roquefort cheese must come from its native region in southern France and Madeira wine from the Portuguese island of the same name.

Veron-Reville said the WTO ruling upheld the EU's system, while clarifying that products from outside the 25-nation bloc could also apply for similar protection.

"We do not see in the conclusions of the (WTO) panel any questioning of the European system of protection for geographical names, on the contrary," she said.

The United States on Tuesday claimed the WTO ruling as a victory.

"This is a big win for American farmers and food processors," U.S. Trade Representative Robert Zoellick said in a statement. "We brought this case because we believed that, under WTO rules, U.S. farmers, ranchers and other food producers should have the same access to protection for 'geographical indications' as European food producers."

The WTO ruling will not be officially published until March, and Veron-Reville criticized Washington for going public early. "We regret the fact that the confidentiality rule which applies to these panel ruling has been infringed," she said.

U.S. officials said the ruling will help U.S. producers of such products as oranges and other citrus products from Florida, Texas and California, potatoes from Idaho and onions from Vidalia, Georgia.

There were varying trans-Atlantic interpretations of the WTO ruling's impact on the long-running battle between U.S. beer giant Anheuser-Busch Inc. and Czech brewer Budejovicky Budvar NP over the rights to Budweiser, Bud, and related beer brand names.

Anheuser-Busch said the ruling meant the Czechs could not use regional label protection to claim the name Budweiser - the old German name of beer from the Czech town of Ceske Budejovice. The St. Louis brewer has brewed beer under the Budweiser label since 1876.

However, Veron-Reville said the WTO backed the EU's view that products with protected regional names could exist side-by-side with those protected by earlier trademarks. "The panel recognizes our coexistence scheme as being in total conformity with WTO rules," she said.

So the issue becomes less clear when we are discussing trademarks or copyrights than when we are talking about oranges actually growing somewhere. This seems to fit into the trend of the EU having to feel its way around intellectual property concerns.

Regardless, now I have some more insight into why Mephisto is so enamored by the US position (it's his country's, too

)

Yakk · 12-22-2004, 11:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Mephisto

Europe is indeed caught up in "labeling laws"; banning the use of the word feta for goat's cheese not made in Greece for example.

I find it humorous that they do not extend the same standards to our American cousins.

It could be a case of quid-pro-quo.

We'll acknowledge your geographic trade marks if you acknowledge ours. Sort of like Brazil's fingerprinting and photographing of American foreigners entering their nation.

Mephisto2 · 12-22-2004, 03:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by smooth

Regardless, now I have some more insight into why Mephisto is so enamored by the US position (it's his country's, too

)

Hahaha... I'm not enamoured of the US position. I just think the WTO made the right decision. Of course there are arguments on both sides, but I think the American ones were more valid.

And my country is Ireland. I just live in Australia.

Mr Mephisto

stevo · 12-23-2004, 01:42 AM

When I think about the US's arguement I think, as far as the states are concerned, that its not necessarily a geographic representation at heart, but state recognition. I think growers and farmers in individual states take pride in the fact that they produce produce (is there a better way to say that?) in their state and contribute to their state's economy. I bet a lot of it comes down to representation at market. Kind of a sign that says "made in (insert state here) and proud of it." Of course marketing is intertwined as a farmer is going to believe that the best (whatever) are grown in his state. I dunno, just a possibility.

Konichiwaneko · 12-23-2004, 07:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stevo22

You are a good man Mephisto, even if we don't see eye to eye on a lot of issues, at least you always take a fair and pragmatic approach to the issues discussed (I think thats 2 posts by you tonight that have made me think that, don't remember the other exactly).

As far as the US embracing international organizations when it suits their interests, there isn't one country in this world that would act against its own self interest, so I guess what you said for the US goes for every country.

That may be true for manufactured products, but Florida oranges come from Florida, Idaho potatoes come from Idaho and, well, you get the point.

Yes, ever since I asked Mephisto a few months back some questions in which he a gave a very solid and well thought answer, I've enjoyed reading and discussing his topics and point of view. I can easily admit he is one of the better contributers to the political forum.

I'm glad the US won, because to my knowledge the US really does embrace products that have a "From, or Made in" label on it. Then again we were bred like that. I could honestly see though how Europe (mostly france) could see this as another way of "Americanizing" it's people, but if a person becomes a american because they by a sack of potatos I would have a good laugh.

Mephisto concerning your comment about how the US uses the WTO when it's convenient, I think most countries are like that probably. Conspiracy theorist inside me also say that those organizations aren't angels so like other international program/groups they could be internally bias towards the United States. There's so many reasons, and being who I am and my disinterest in reading about the WTO I can tell you this. I don't know crap about it.

vox_rox · 12-23-2004, 08:00 AM

Well, I have to say, reluctantly, that I'm glad of this decision. After all, European wines have been using geographic names for product specificity for hundreds of years, and I see no reason why any region that produces products specific to that region cannot use that as a product descriptor. The fact that they were in court over this at all shows you how powerful trade concerns have become. In fact, they even trump most legislation world-wide now due to the overwhelming acceptance that trade makes the world go round.

That is my only issue with this whole thing, that we even need an organization like the WTO. Together with the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and the G8, the interests of trade and commerce will always come before the interests of humanity, and billions of dollars will be spent on truly pathetic issues like whether a chees is from a city in Italy or a fucking potato comes from the ground in Idaho.

Could this money be better used elsewhere? What do you think!

Peace,

Pierre

Pacifier · 12-23-2004, 08:10 AM

Has anyone a good article about how this started and what it is about?
The article in this threads confuse me. Normally the EU is very concerned about certain names (like the already mentioned "Parma" or "champange")

Locobot · 12-23-2004, 08:33 AM

I oppose this action as it is an extension of the dictatorial control over language that many European countries hold. "Florida oranges" does not mean the same thing as "grown in Florida." I see no reason someone shouldn't be able to take an orange tree from Florida and plant it in California and let people know where the tree originated.

I believe this all got started with the French being upset about people producing "champagne" outside of the Burgundy region of France. No, you cannot buy "champagne" made anywhere else. Now you have to buy "sparkling wine" or "Krystal" if it was produced outside of France. It's no longer "parmesan cheese" unless it comes from Parma Italy, "roquefort" is now "bleu" and so on. There are so many products connected to a geographical location that soon we'll only be allowed to use generic names for anything. It gets really upsurd when you get to examples like "Budweiser" beer that can only be produced in St. Louis, not in Budweis Czech Republic. It just becomes a game of who can trademark names fast enough. I can't wait to hear what Vidalia onions not grown in Vidalia Georgia will be called.

Just about every food name has a connection to a geographical location how far do we want to take this? Should "potatoes" only come from the South American natives who originated that word? If they're grown elsewhere we can call them "white tubers" or something. How do we really know if a beer is a "pilsner" if it doesn't come from Pilsen Czech Republic? What about "cheddar cheese" not produced in Cheddar England? We'll have to call it just "yellow cheese."

I'd like to see American businesses start trademarking everything as "Parisan ...." or "French ...." until the only place "French" products can be made is New Jersey.

smooth · 12-23-2004, 09:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pacifier

Has anyone a good article about how this started and what it is about?
The article in this threads confuse me. Normally the EU is very concerned about certain names (like the already mentioned "Parma" or "champange")

Without digging into it further, my best stab at the roots of this would be that the EU created some legislation protecting local growers in order to incentivize the smaller countries to become member states.

Given the spokeperson's statement that the EU was not opposed to the US use of geographical indicatators, and that they welcomed the WTO's ruling, it's likely that the legislation was pro-EU and not anti-US. That is, the inability of the US to use GI's was probably some legal snafu as a consequence of the legislation passed earlier that appeased economically weaker members, like Greece, to ease their integration into the larger EU market. A method to retain a semblence of history and sovereignty (or autonomy if you prefer), not much more than that.

Now it appears that one can make hay about this and read the decision as the WTO siding with the US against the EU (or even against France, as one poster seems to be willing to believe). However, its far more likely the EU and US parties were in agreement before the WTO court and requested similar judgement. Without reading the pleadings, we don't know, but my interpretation seems reasonable given the commentary following the ruling.

Or it could be something much deeper (as the case of the Budweiser animosity demonstrates) and Florida Oranges is just an extreme example being used to galvanize people on the wrong side of the debate. As in, we may agree that farmers in Florida should be able to label their oranges as "Florida Oranges," but the EU laws already appeared to have protected that distinction. What they didn't protect was "Florida Oranges" being grown in California.

May not make much difference in agribusiness, but in at least some of the foods there are hundreds if not thousands of years of technique behind the production of particular commodities. Their taste, reputation, and prestige belong to the orignal technique, not to be bestowed upon mass manufacturing that may or may not meet the standards of the traditional method, in my opinion.

Locobot · 12-23-2004, 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by smooth

May not make much difference in agribusiness, but in at least some of the foods there are hundreds if not thousands of years of technique behind the production of particular commodities. Their taste, reputation, and prestige belong to the orignal technique, not to be bestowed upon mass manufacturing that may or may not meet the standards of the traditional method, in my opinion.

I have no problem with laws that require accuracy as to where a product was made, "made in..." But let the consumers decide. If you want to buy champagne made in Korea instead of France, that should be your option. This issue is about conglomerates and corporations seeking to control the language of brands and nothing else. I'm positive that Krystal is a better product than most of the champagne produced in France. When is the last time you complained at the deli that the cheddar on your sandwich wasn't produced in Cheddar England?

If it's important to you to buy authentic products then you have every right to check where your products were made and buy accordingly.

Who here raises hell at the ballpark if their frankfurter didn't come from Frankfurt am Main? Or if their wiener didn't come from Vienna (Wien)?

fuzyfuzer · 12-23-2004, 11:25 AM

you have to also relise that i am sure we wn't always be following WTO rulings because recently the US was penalized for an anti dumping law on products i can't find an article because i am walking out the door but i have trouble believeing that we will be following this ruling without some underhanded attempt to get oout of it

smooth · 12-23-2004, 05:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Locobot

I have no problem with laws that require accuracy as to where a product was made, "made in..." But let the consumers decide. If you want to buy champagne made in Korea instead of France, that should be your option. This issue is about conglomerates and corporations seeking to control the language of brands and nothing else. I'm positive that Krystal is a better product than most of the champagne produced in France. When is the last time you complained at the deli that the cheddar on your sandwich wasn't produced in Cheddar England?

If it's important to you to buy authentic products then you have every right to check where your products were made and buy accordingly.

Who here raises hell at the ballpark if their frankfurter didn't come from Frankfurt am Main? Or if their wiener didn't come from Vienna (Wien)?

I could come up with any number of responses, but the one that I'm most knowledgable about (although, limited to say the least) is champagne. According to people who would argue against the position you just laid out, one simply can not possibly purchase champagne from korea. It doesn't exist.

They argue that champagne is from a particular grape, in a particular region, grown in a particular environment, by a people who have tended such vines for centuries. That's the premium a bottle fetches when it has "Champagne" written across it. Far more informational than "Premium."

That's their argument and it makes sense to me. I don't know enough about wines to judge if all the hype is warranted, but I know people who are in to wines enough and claim to be able to discern a difference between a champagne and a sparkling wine from korea. Those are the people I know care about such a distinction, but it doesn't even really affect me.

Mephisto2 · 12-23-2004, 08:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by smooth

They argue that champagne is from a particular grape, in a particular region, grown in a particular environment, by a people who have tended such vines for centuries. That's the premium a bottle fetches when it has "Champagne" written across it. Far more informational than "Premium."

Well Champagne is not made from any different grape than most other sparkling wines. They all tend to be made from the Pinot Noir grape.

It's really the region and the method, and the soil.

I agree. Champagne comes from the Champagne region in France. Everything else is either sparkling wine, or perhaps Spumante if you're Italian.

For what it's worth, I love champagne and drink it regularly. Everyone seems to think you need a special occasion, but not I. I used to spend far too much money on it, but now I limit myself to a few good bottles a year. I have a $500 bottle of Krug sitting beside a $700 of Crystal right before me as I write; both of which are whispering "drink me, drink me" into my ears each time I look at them.

SIGH

Mr Mephisto

12-22-2004, 04:46 AM	#7 (permalink)
The Prophet Tilted Location: Space, the final frontier.	I think you will find that controlled by the Department of Agriculture, at least for food products. Maybe Department of Commerce, also. A lot of products in the states use geography as a marketing tool, and foriegn ones at that. I would assume it is the same elsewhere. I understand the EU's skepticism. American corporations and marketers stretch the truth whenever they are given a chance. How about French wines? I don't think the US honors their rules for geographical names. Can't we but champagne made in California? I think too that Europeans are far more progressive in "labeling laws," but I may have heard that in a dream. American's are too centered on marketing, thanks to the thoughtless consumerism that exists here. __________________ "The death-knell of the republic had rung as soon as the active power became lodged in the hands of those who sought, not to do justice to all citizens, rich and poor alike, but to stand for one special class and for its interests as opposed to the interests of others. " - Theodore Roosevelt

12-23-2004, 08:00 AM	#14 (permalink)
vox_rox Psycho Location: Comfy Little Bungalow	Well, I have to say, reluctantly, that I'm glad of this decision. After all, European wines have been using geographic names for product specificity for hundreds of years, and I see no reason why any region that produces products specific to that region cannot use that as a product descriptor. The fact that they were in court over this at all shows you how powerful trade concerns have become. In fact, they even trump most legislation world-wide now due to the overwhelming acceptance that trade makes the world go round. That is my only issue with this whole thing, that we even need an organization like the WTO. Together with the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund, and the G8, the interests of trade and commerce will always come before the interests of humanity, and billions of dollars will be spent on truly pathetic issues like whether a chees is from a city in Italy or a fucking potato comes from the ground in Idaho. Could this money be better used elsewhere? What do you think! Peace, Pierre __________________ --- There is no such thing as strong coffee - only weak people. ---

12-23-2004, 08:10 AM	#15 (permalink)
Pacifier undead Location: Duisburg, Germany	Has anyone a good article about how this started and what it is about? The article in this threads confuse me. Normally the EU is very concerned about certain names (like the already mentioned "Parma" or "champange") __________________ "It seems to me that the idea of a personal God is an anthropological concept which I cannot take seriously. I also cannot imagine some will or goal outside the human sphere. Science has been charged with undermining morality, but the charge is unjust. A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death — Albert Einstein

12-23-2004, 11:25 AM	#19 (permalink)
fuzyfuzer Insane Location: st. louis	you have to also relise that i am sure we wn't always be following WTO rulings because recently the US was penalized for an anti dumping law on products i can't find an article because i am walking out the door but i have trouble believeing that we will be following this ruling without some underhanded attempt to get oout of it __________________ "The difference between commiment and involvment is like a ham and egg breakfast the chicken was involved but the pig was commited" "Thrice happy is the nation that has a glorious history. Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs, even though checkered by failure, than to take rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy much nor suffer much, because they live in the gray twilight that knows neither victory nor defeat." Theodore Roosevelt

12-21-2004, 04:58 PM	#2 (permalink)
cyrnel Adequate Location: In my angry-dome.	Is there more behind this? Any chance the EU didn't want it for a good reason? Business being business I could believe they're just trying to nullify a marketing advantage, but could it also be that they don't agree with our standards for the labeling? As in maybe not all of our "made in blah" labels are accurate at all times of the year?

12-21-2004, 05:41 PM	#3 (permalink)
Mephisto2 Junkie	Whatever their reasons, they were over-ruled. For once (with regards to WTO issues), I'm with America on this one. Mr Mephisto

12-23-2004, 01:42 AM	#12 (permalink)
stevo Rail Baron Location: Tallyfla	When I think about the US's arguement I think, as far as the states are concerned, that its not necessarily a geographic representation at heart, but state recognition. I think growers and farmers in individual states take pride in the fact that they produce produce (is there a better way to say that?) in their state and contribute to their state's economy. I bet a lot of it comes down to representation at market. Kind of a sign that says "made in (insert state here) and proud of it." Of course marketing is intertwined as a farmer is going to believe that the best (whatever) are grown in his state. I dunno, just a possibility.

12-23-2004, 08:33 AM	#16 (permalink)
Locobot is awesome!	I oppose this action as it is an extension of the dictatorial control over language that many European countries hold. "Florida oranges" does not mean the same thing as "grown in Florida." I see no reason someone shouldn't be able to take an orange tree from Florida and plant it in California and let people know where the tree originated. I believe this all got started with the French being upset about people producing "champagne" outside of the Burgundy region of France. No, you cannot buy "champagne" made anywhere else. Now you have to buy "sparkling wine" or "Krystal" if it was produced outside of France. It's no longer "parmesan cheese" unless it comes from Parma Italy, "roquefort" is now "bleu" and so on. There are so many products connected to a geographical location that soon we'll only be allowed to use generic names for anything. It gets really upsurd when you get to examples like "Budweiser" beer that can only be produced in St. Louis, not in Budweis Czech Republic. It just becomes a game of who can trademark names fast enough. I can't wait to hear what Vidalia onions not grown in Vidalia Georgia will be called. Just about every food name has a connection to a geographical location how far do we want to take this? Should "potatoes" only come from the South American natives who originated that word? If they're grown elsewhere we can call them "white tubers" or something. How do we really know if a beer is a "pilsner" if it doesn't come from Pilsen Czech Republic? What about "cheddar cheese" not produced in Cheddar England? We'll have to call it just "yellow cheese." I'd like to see American businesses start trademarking everything as "Parisan ...." or "French ...." until the only place "French" products can be made is New Jersey.