There's another Commission Regulation on protected geographical indications. It's the cutely named Commission Regulation (EC) No 1483/2004 of 20 August 2004 supplementing the Annex to Regulation (EC) No 2400/96 on the entry of certain names in the Register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (‘Carne de la Sierra de Guadarrama’, ‘Ternera de Navarra’ or ‘Nafarroako Aratxea’, ‘Carne de Vacuno del País Vasco’ or ‘Euskal Okela’, ‘Ternera Asturiana’ and ‘Carne de Cantabria’).

The IPKat has all but given up complaining about the descriptive nature of protected GIs (Carne de Cantabria is the Spanish for "meat from Cantabria"), but he still wants to know: what do people call meat from Cantabria that doesn't fit the legal conditions for use of the GI?

Carne de la Sierra de Guadarrama here
Ternera de Navarra here
Nafarroako Aratxea here
Carne de Vacuno del País Vasco here
Carne de Cantabria here

MORE GI PROTECTION FOR SPANISH MEAT ... MORE GI PROTECTION FOR SPANISH MEAT ... Reviewed by Jeremy on Friday, August 27, 2004 Rating: 5


  1. Sorry have not set up an account, but...
    This is nothing new. To take the most famous GI of them all, Champagne, in the Champagne region they produce still red wine, the most famous of which is Bouzy Rouge. You can't call it champagne though, of course, because that AC is reserved for sparkling wines made by the methode champenoise. Unfortunately, you look in vain for any sense in this system.

  2. I disagree with you here. The whole point of geographical indications that that they're geographical and hence descriptive. If that was not the case, we may as well ditch GIs and use certification marks instead. Also, have you checked the specifications of the GIs in question to see whether or not it is hard for other producers in the area to meet them?

  3. I am not sure whether you are disagreeing with Jeremy or me. In any case, surely the problem with GIs is that they attach to a descriptive term conditions which have nothing to do with the geographical origin, thus monopolising a descriptive term in a manner which does not relate (or at least only relates partially) to its descriptive meaning. Personally I am against the whole system. I guess that Jeremy is too.


All comments must be moderated by a member of the IPKat team before they appear on the blog. Comments will not be allowed if the contravene the IPKat policy that readers' comments should not be obscene or defamatory; they should not consist of ad hominem attacks on members of the blog team or other comment-posters and they should make a constructive contribution to the discussion of the post on which they purport to comment.

It is also the IPKat policy that comments should not be made completely anonymously, and users should use a consistent name or pseudonym (which should not itself be defamatory or obscene, or that of another real person), either in the "identity" field, or at the beginning of the comment. Current practice is to, however, allow a limited number of comments that contravene this policy, provided that the comment has a high degree of relevance and the comment chain does not become too difficult to follow.

Learn more here:

Powered by Blogger.