Ángel Martínez Gutierrez

Protection of Agricultural Food GI figures in cases of the use of the protected product as ingredients in other compound products. Analysis of new legislative developments.

Introduction

Protection of agricultural food gi figures in cases of the use of the protected product as ingredients in other compound products. Analysis of new legislative developments. . Analyzes EU Regulation 2024/1143 on Agricultural Food GIs used in compound products. Highlights conflicts between consumer information rights and exclusive PDO/PGI rights, urging a balanced solution.

Abstract

Regulation (EU) 2024/1143 introduces regulatory changes that raise concerns about poor legislative technique and a lack of balance of interests at stake. The regulation conflicts with two important rights in the agri-food market: the right of consumers and users to information, and the exclusive right to the protected name granted to legitimate users of PDO/PGIs. The regulation appears to liberalize the use of the protected name by allowing operators other than the Regulatory Board to include it in the list of ingredients of a composite product to satisfy consumers' right to information, which could, however, strain the group's exclusive rights. It is necessary to coordinate all the interests involved to find a solution that seeks to satisfy all, as the European Commission's 2010 communication on the matter attempted to do and as is now regulated—not without errors—by Article 27 of the current Regulation. It is therefore imperative to find a solution that balances the rights and interests at stake.

Review

This article promises a timely and critical analysis of Regulation (EU) 2024/1143 concerning the protection of Agricultural Food Geographical Indication (GI) figures, particularly when these protected products are utilized as ingredients in composite foods. The abstract clearly identifies a central tension introduced by the new legislation, positing that it suffers from poor legislative technique and a fundamental imbalance between competing interests. Specifically, the authors aim to explore the perceived conflict between the consumer's right to information and the exclusive rights granted to legitimate users of Protected Designations of Origin (PDO) and Protected Geographical Indications (PGI), framing this as a critical legal and commercial challenge within the agri-food market. The core argument put forth is that the new regulation appears to unduly liberalize the use of protected names by allowing operators, even those outside the control of the Regulatory Board, to include GI names in ingredient lists to satisfy consumer information demands. While acknowledging the legitimacy of the consumer's right to information, the abstract suggests this approach could significantly strain the exclusive rights of the GI groups, thereby undermining the very protection mechanisms GIs are designed to afford. The abstract points to previous attempts at coordination, such as the European Commission's 2010 communication and Article 27 of the current Regulation, implying that these earlier efforts, though imperfect, provided a more considered approach than the present legislative changes. Given the abstract's concerns, this article addresses a highly pertinent issue that will undoubtedly impact producers, consumers, and legal practitioners alike. The authors' call for a balanced solution that coordinates all involved interests underscores the article's potential to contribute significantly to the ongoing debate surrounding GI protection in the face of evolving market practices and legislative frameworks. By dissecting the perceived errors and imbalances within Regulation (EU) 2024/1143, the article is poised to offer valuable insights into the complexities of safeguarding intellectual property rights within the food sector while simultaneously upholding consumer transparency.

Full Text

Comments

You need to be logged in to post a comment.