Unfortunate Tokyo trade mark

GI japes

Seems like GIs are the order of the day.

*AND reports that Ethiopia is considering the first draft of a geographical indications bill. Said Yakob Yala:

“It is recognised that geographical indications can be valuable marketing symbols to promote economic prosperity for producers of goods produced in particular geographical areas…It is believed that protection of geographical indication rights will have a positive impact on the national economic advancement and especially on the trade and industrial development of the country.”

* No one seems happy with New Zealand’s GI bill. Both the wine-growers and the Maori Party are objecting (for different reasons).

The IPKat notes that, while GIs bring a heap load of trouble, no one can afford to ignore them once everyone else has them.

GEOGRAPHICAL JOLLIES GEOGRAPHICAL JOLLIES Reviewed by Unknown on Sunday, August 20, 2006 Rating: 5


  1. There's an old story, I do not know if its an urban legend of or not. Back in the late 70' s and early 80's Suntory (the Japanese company who posted the sign above) tried to sell its brand "Black Nikka" whiskey in the US market.

    To make matters worse, they marketed it as an entry level whiskey (read cheap rock-gut). With limited distribution, they focused on major US cities. So they put up huge billboards and in-stores in mostly poorer areas of major US cities. The problem, as you may guess, is these poorer areas are disproportionally afro-american.

    So after protests and Japanese befuddlement on why the whiskey was not selling the product was relaunched as "Black Velvet" whiskey.

  2. I purely agree with his message. There should be a lot of considerations and further studies for such businesses.


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.