31–40 of 265 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then you should be allowed to apply the Nike brand to them. Producers' interests don't matter. They only exist to serve the customer.
So we'd end up with Nike made by Nike and Nike made by someone else? Then, in general public eyes, Nike-made-by-Nike would become true Nike.
> The wording is strange, it looks like they say that it is wrong to say that it is inauthentic. But, there is no doubt, if you buy Greek feta that is manufactured in Australia in addition with different recipes and ingredients origins, it is clearly inauthentic and deceptive.
But the thing is, what if you produce feta with the exact same ingredients and recipe in Australia? The customer gets the exact same thing, only made somewhere else. I'm all for quality standards, so that customers can now exactly what they get. But be able to use a name based on the location where something is produced, that doesn't protect the customer at all. It only protects a selected set of producers.
Some products are famous and specific enough that customers have a right to be able to know when it's the real deal (and there are many such customers - otherwise these names wouldn't matter at all).
If you want to produce something similar, you can start a new brand with other local businesses (Australeta say), label it Feta-like until customers recognize and choose it because they like it. You can agree whatever rules you like between you for how it's made and what constitutes 'real' Australeta so you have a consistent quality product.
You can even do that and register your own new protected name - see the recent split of Corpinnat from Cava as a recent real-world example: https://www.thedrinksbusiness.com/2019/02/nine-producers-bre...
I'd also like to try "Crab Mac 'n' Cheese Dog"...
One thing is that in US there is always this range of quality. There is only one place in the world where I've been bitten by bed bugs and that was smack in the middle of NY. I couldn't believe my eyes when I saw the bite-marks, IM IN NEW YORK, how can this be?! But that range can be devastating when marketing. The "no regulations"-crowd can... hinder... progress as well as help.
On a more positive note [Wikipedia]:
"Bourbon's legal definition varies somewhat from country to country, but many trade agreements require that the name "bourbon" be reserved for products made in the United States. "
"Tennessee whiskey is straight whiskey produced in the U.S. state of Tennessee. Although it has been legally defined as a bourbon whiskey in some international trade agreements,[1][2][3] most current producers of Tennessee whiskey disclaim references to their products as "bourbon" and do not label them as such on any of their bottles or advertising materials. "
> The wording is strange, it looks like they say that it is wrong to say that it is inauthentic. But, there is no doubt, if you buy Greek feta that is manufactured in Australia in addition with different recipes and ingredients origins, it is clearly inauthentic and deceptive.
There is pizza. There is New York (style) pizza, Chicago (style) pizza, Detroit, Montreal, etc. Each of those (styles) can be made anywhere. There's no reason why Chicago-style (deep-dish) pizza couldn't be made in London. Beside the physical location, what 'technical differences' are there between feta made in Greece versus Australia?
There are similar 'feta-style' cheese found in many other places:
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feta#Similar_cheeses
Personally I don't necessarily mind protected labels, but I think that when you register a new one that an 'official alternative' should also be mandated so that people who want to make 'knock-off products' can know what to use if they're using the same recipe/process. This way consumers know what is "real" and and what is an alternative.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can use the same recipes in Australia as in Greece. Ingredients could be tricky, but let's assume that you can make sheep milk in Australia that has the same properties as Greek sheep milk. Then why should it matter where the feta has been manufactured?
Cybernetic again, cheese is more than the sum of its part. I’m only half joking. Plus, for some recipe the food that the cow ate and the altitude do make a difference in the output. I’m all for other places making cheese and whatnot. But when you buy the said cheese to find the exact taste you know since childhood, and that you miss in the exotic land you are living as a adult… You can be picky on the product. I want…
> but let's assume that you can make sheep milk in Australia that has the same properties as Greek sheep milk.
> The wording is strange, it looks like they say that it is wrong to say that it is inauthentic. But, there is no doubt, if you buy Greek feta that is manufactured in Australia in addition with different recipes and ingredients origins, it is clearly inauthentic and deceptive.
Feta comes from φέτα/~"slice", so it's not named after a region. Melbourne has one of the largest Greek populations in the world. Why don't these Greek people have right to their heritage? If the British were to start trying to say that "sandwich" was protected and American sandwiches were "inauthentic and deceptive" would you take such a claim seriously?
Probably because it would be difficult to find any reasonable middle ground between “can only be made at the geographical origin” and “can be made anywhere by anyone”
Also for a lot of product the origin more than the heritage of the people is central, such as the climate and soil in Champagne (which perhaps soon will be most historically authentic in southern Sweden after some climate change).
This is about regions keeping the right to their products, not necessarily people retaining that right. Move from Champagne and you can’t make Champagne. Not that complicated. Feta is a regional produce too - the name doesn’t really change that.
> If the British were to start trying to say that "sandwich" was protected and American sandwiches were "inauthentic and deceptive" would you take such a claim seriously?
No?
Surely the USA can develop its own authentic regional foods?
Yes, in principle, but why would Kraft Foods help develop something that's tied to a part of Michigan instead of something that's tied to Kraft? The US has unusually many large companies and unusually few small ones and farmers, so this question matters.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
But the thing is, what if you produce feta with the exact same ingredients and recipe in Australia? The customer gets the exact same thing, only made somewhere else. I'm all for quality standards, so that customers can now exactly what they get. But be able to use a name based on the location where something is produced, that doesn't protect the customer at all. It only protects a selected set of producers.
What if you produce exactly the same sneakers than Nike? That does not protect the customer and protects the producers too. But somehow, nobody compains about that. I don't see why brands should be more protected that countries or regions name.
> The wording is strange, it looks like they say that it is wrong to say that it is inauthentic. But, there is no doubt, if you buy Greek feta that is manufactured in Australia in addition with different recipes and ingredients origins, it is clearly inauthentic and deceptive.
You can use the same recipes in Australia as in Greece. Ingredients could be tricky, but let's assume that you can make sheep milk in Australia that has the same properties as Greek sheep milk. Then why should it matter where the feta has been manufactured?
One reason is that I want to support the production there, as it would be a tragedy if (say) Parmesan producers in Italy were out competed by producers in the US (again, regardless of quality or properties of the product).