DESIGNATIONS OF ORIGIN WITHIN THE EU: LEGAL CHALLENGES 47 and wines must be prepared therein25, it is worth wondering if allowing a 15% importation of raw material, the mixing of species within the same vine genus and a challenging assessment of the connection with the geographical area justify that binary concept of protection. To conclude, and despite having previously shown sympathy for the European legislator who opted for differentiating designations of origin from geographical indications, in the case of this wine legislation’s wording, their definitions being so bewildering, such differentiation should not prevail. Maybe the best way forward would have been either to dismiss the geographical indication for wine or respect the horizontal solution, as defined by the 2012 Regulation. The agreed legal formulation for wine will eventually distort the concept of geographical indication that would have been sensible to protect. 3. THE NEBULOUS FORMULATION OF THE LEGAL STATUS AND ITS PUBLIC-LAW NATURE We have alluded above to the legal uncertainty hanging over the legal nature of designations of origin, traditionally viewed as private-law signs. Most certainly, from the moment a designation of origin is approved by a legal entity, the name attached to it becomes a sign protected under industrial property law. Unfortunately, this private-law nature has been attributed beyond this distinctive sign to the singular designation of origin status itself, the legal status and the specific name or sign attached to it being clearly diverse concepts. It is imperative that the prevailing stance on this should be revisited. Unsurprisingly, some have claimed in France that “the legal definition of protected designations of origin [the term traditionally used across the Pyrenees] is hotly disputed by French scholars”, but “draws nobody’s attention outside of France”26. Moreover, unlike the Spanish doctrine’s prevailing view, it appears to be more sensible – notwithstanding the distinctive sign nature of the protected name – to view DOs as a public-law legal status. This would involve distinguishing between the nature (and legal holder) of a right and the legal act by the authority that confers such exceptional right. 25 It might be worth noting that the draft CMO Regulation for wine that the Commission submitted to the Council in July 2007 [COM (2007) 372 final, of 4 July 2007] did not contain the preparation requirement taking place in that same geographical area – that requirement was brought by the Council into the 2008 text. It is striking that the Commission’s proposal did not contain such requirement for DOs, in stark contrast – and somewhat unjustifiable – with the definition established by the horizontal Regulation. 26 LE GOFFIC, C. (2010). La protection des indications géographiques. France-Union Européenne-États Unis, Litec, París, p. 234.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE4NzM5Nw==