Scrutinizing the Expanding Scope of Geographical Indication Protection: A Critical Analysis of the Justifications for the Anti-Evocation Measures

IF 2.2 3区 社会学 Q2 ECONOMICS World Trade Review Pub Date : 2023-10-26 DOI:10.1017/s1474745623000320
Xinzhe Song
{"title":"Scrutinizing the Expanding Scope of Geographical Indication Protection: A Critical Analysis of the Justifications for the Anti-Evocation Measures","authors":"Xinzhe Song","doi":"10.1017/s1474745623000320","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The global trend towards heightened protection for geographical indications (GIs) has been bolstered by the incorporation of anti-evocation provisions in various bilateral and regional trade agreements, primarily led by the European Union (EU). While these anti-evocation measures have raised GI protection to an unprecedented level, they also place limitations on the freedom of expression and competition for other market players. This article conducts a critical analysis of the necessity of those restrictions by evaluating the justifications for implementing anti-evocation protection. Specifically, the analysis centres on the formal justifications put forth by law enforcement authorities and their direct contribution to enforcement errors and inconsistencies. Furthermore, inherent limitations within these justifications are also identified. Clarifying the rationale for anti-evocation protection and establishing a clearly defined scope of protection, substantiated by sound justifications, could effectively mitigate errors and inconsistencies in law enforcement and minimize any undue impact on the public interest. Countries that have adopted or are considering adopting anti-evocation protection, following the EU's lead, should exercise caution to avoid similar pitfalls.","PeriodicalId":46109,"journal":{"name":"World Trade Review","volume":"6 4","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"World Trade Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/s1474745623000320","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract The global trend towards heightened protection for geographical indications (GIs) has been bolstered by the incorporation of anti-evocation provisions in various bilateral and regional trade agreements, primarily led by the European Union (EU). While these anti-evocation measures have raised GI protection to an unprecedented level, they also place limitations on the freedom of expression and competition for other market players. This article conducts a critical analysis of the necessity of those restrictions by evaluating the justifications for implementing anti-evocation protection. Specifically, the analysis centres on the formal justifications put forth by law enforcement authorities and their direct contribution to enforcement errors and inconsistencies. Furthermore, inherent limitations within these justifications are also identified. Clarifying the rationale for anti-evocation protection and establishing a clearly defined scope of protection, substantiated by sound justifications, could effectively mitigate errors and inconsistencies in law enforcement and minimize any undue impact on the public interest. Countries that have adopted or are considering adopting anti-evocation protection, following the EU's lead, should exercise caution to avoid similar pitfalls.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
审视地理标志保护范围的扩大——浅析反撤销措施的正当性
主要由欧盟(EU)牵头,在各种双边和区域贸易协定中纳入了反撤销条款,加强了对地理标志(gi)保护的全球趋势。虽然这些反唤起措施将地理标志保护提高到前所未有的水平,但它们也限制了其他市场参与者的言论自由和竞争。本文通过评估实施反唤醒保护的理由,对这些限制的必要性进行了批判性分析。具体而言,分析集中在执法当局提出的正式理由及其对执法错误和不一致的直接影响。此外,还指出了这些理由的内在局限性。明确反唤起保护的理据,明确界定保护范围,并以合理的理据为依据,可以有效减少执法中的错误和不一致,最大限度地减少对公共利益的不当影响。已经采用或正在考虑采用反唤醒保护的国家,应遵循欧盟的领导,谨慎行事,以避免类似的陷阱。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
World Trade Review
World Trade Review Multiple-
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
7.70%
发文量
41
期刊最新文献
Alienated Twins – The Overlooked Private Law Dimension of Global Trade and Investment Governance The Demise of Globalization and Rise of Industrial Policy: Caveat Emptor Smart Cities and International Trade Law Norm Entrepreneurship in Digital Trade: The Singapore-led Wave of Digital Trade Agreements Accounting for Carbon Pricing in Third Countries Under the EU Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1