Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The EU’s disputed system of geographical indications is taking over the planet (2017)

politico.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 265 posts

Re: The EU’s disputed system of geographical indications is taking over the planet (2017)

#121

Post by dantheman »

seszett wrote: post #94
dantheman wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it's not a trademark - it's a location. Can beef made outside of England be called beef? Can any english name for food be used outside of England? Can french onion soup be sold outside of France?

Beef made outside of England can be called beef, but not English beef, which is the point of protected geographical indications (although this case doesn't need PGI, it's already protected under other laws regarding the indications of the origin of products).

But we don't call it french champagne, we just call it champaign or cognac.

Re: The EU’s disputed system of geographical indications is taking over the planet (2017)

#122

Post by ska »

api wrote: post #111
ska wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We mostly know what makes it taste different. The problem is, most of it is expensive and time consuming. People would like to take cheaper approaches and market as the same thing. The terroir aspect is often overblown but does contribute. Far more often the issues is something like "milk is milk, right?" which just isn't true.

That seems like a clearer description of the problem. The issue isn’t so much where it comes from as how it’s made. Someone in the original place of origin could cut corners too.

> Someone in the original place of origin could cut corners too.

This is often part of the domain control also though, and producers are audited to avoid it. But there is a real range and this also depends on the product, heavily.

Re: The EU’s disputed system of geographical indications is taking over the planet (2017)

#123

Post by DiogenesKynikos »

ben_w wrote: post #108
DiogenesKynikos wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always feel these arguments are a bit disingenuous. You would be extremely hard-pressed to tell "authentic" Feta cheese apart from "Feta-like" cheese produced in any number of places around the world. These laws are not about protecting the consumer from inauthentic products. They're about protecting producers from competition. Exclusive ownership of famous culinary names like "Feta" and "Champagne" is valuable, an…

I’ve never tried American-made “feta”, but I have tried American-made “cheddar”, and it’s so far from the real stuff it’s closer to “vegan cheese”. If this is due to generally lower standards, or actually because of the differences in milk and/or bacterial cultures, I couldn’t possibly comment. But it is noticeable.

"Cheddar cheese" has been produced in America for hundreds of years - the technique was brought over by English colonists. There are many different types of "cheddar" in the US now, including several different regional cheddars (think Vermont cheddar and Wisconsin cheddar). Some are more like English cheddar, some are quite different. But it would be silly to insist that only cheddar from Cheddar in England can be called "cheddar."

Re: The EU’s disputed system of geographical indications is taking over the planet (2017)

#124

Post by vinceguidry »

mustafa_pasi wrote: post #103
greatgib wrote: post #9

> 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.

The notion of "authentic" food is a manufactured marketing gimmick. There is always variation present, even from household to household, but for marketing purposes we now like to pretend that some particular food is always prepared exactly in this one way, with no room for deviation at all. This is nonsense.

You're using the word 'authentic' to refer to what should properly be called 'traditional'.

For example. I was watching a few videos by Isaac Toups, a Cajun chef. Being Cajun myself, I was curious how he'd approach the cuisine. At first I saw a few of the things he was doing and guessed he wasn't from the Lafayette area, but in fact he is. So I watched his techniques more closely.

I determined his cooking technique to be authentically Cajun, but not traditionally Cajun. He incorporated techniques from his roots, to make new dishes. This is how we can have Cajun pizza, Cajun spaghetti.

Tradition is making what your grandma made, the same way she made it. Authenticity is making what your grandma would love to make if she were still young and spry.

It's worth discussing how authentic a restaurant is. Taco Bell is most certainly not authentic Mexican, and different Mexican restaurants can be more or less authentic even while neither make traditional dishes.

Restaurants can be purposefully inauthentic, I think fusion is as far as this can go while still remaining identifiabally ethnic. I recall a Neapolitan-style pizza joint that would put whatever you wanted on their pizzas that still had that crispy, charred crust. They didn't pretend to be traditional or even authentic. It was all about great pizza, and while it wasn't the best pizza in the city, I greatly enjoyed many meals there.

Re: The EU’s disputed system of geographical indications is taking over the planet (2017)

#125

Post by DiogenesKynikos »

ska wrote: post #118
DiogenesKynikos wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I always feel these arguments are a bit disingenuous. You would be extremely hard-pressed to tell "authentic" Feta cheese apart from "Feta-like" cheese produced in any number of places around the world. These laws are not about protecting the consumer from inauthentic products. They're about protecting producers from competition. Exclusive ownership of famous culinary names like "Feta" and "Champagne" is valuable, an…

> You would be extremely hard-pressed to tell "authentic" Feta cheese This is absolutely not true, at least in countries I've lived. Do I believe that someone in the USA is capable of producing very good feta? Absolutely! And I've had some. However, the vast majority of what you will find in the typical grocery stores isn't very good, majority of it notably inferior not only to the imports, but random stuff I've boug…

No offense, but there's nothing particularly special about Feta produced in Greece. Feta-style cheeses are produced across a fairly wide region in the Eastern Mediterranean, and I don't think the style is so singular that it can't be (or isn't) authentically reproduced elsewhere.

More generally, I can understand consumer protections that focus on the nature of the product itself, but where the product comes from is irrelevant. If the goal were simply to make sure that Feta always tastes like "authentic" Feta, then the regulations would focus on ingredients, process and the final product. But regulations about where the product is produced exist because producers want to exclude competition. Lawmakers do, of course, argue that they're just trying to protect consumers, because that's what they have to do in order to justify the policy, but the goal is obviously to help Greek cheese-makers, French viniculturalists, etc.

Re: The EU’s disputed system of geographical indications is taking over the planet (2017)

#126

Post by bcrosby95 »

l320093jj wrote: post #117
greatgib wrote: post #9

> 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.

Here's the thing: I'd argue in the US calling it "feta" is not deceptive, because most people I know have no expectation that feta cheese necessarily comes from some area of Greece. I have no problem labeling a cheese "feta" if the location of production is clearly indicated. "Feta" is just "shorthand" for "feta-style". Everyone will just call it "feta" anyway. Maybe it doesn't matter if it says "feta-style" or "feta…

Note that Cheddar isn't protected, but "West Country Farmhouse Cheddar" is.

My cynical take is that it doesn't have a more general designation because companies couldn't profit from Cheddar the way they do if it had to be produced in Cheddar Gorge.

Re: The EU’s disputed system of geographical indications is taking over the planet (2017)

#127

Post by TheJoeMan »

himinlomax wrote: post #69
roelschroeven wrote: post #20

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 make Cola that tastes exactly like Coca Cola, with the same ingredients? Geographical origins serve the same purpose as registered trademark, the only significant difference is that they don't belong to a single corporation.

What if Atlanta, GA, USA decrees that “Cola” has to be made in Atlanta, and that cheap stuff at Walmart has to be “RC Cola-style”?

Re: The EU’s disputed system of geographical indications is taking over the planet (2017)

#128

Post by ska »

DiogenesKynikos wrote: post #125
ska wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You would be extremely hard-pressed to tell "authentic" Feta cheese This is absolutely not true, at least in countries I've lived. Do I believe that someone in the USA is capable of producing very good feta? Absolutely! And I've had some. However, the vast majority of what you will find in the typical grocery stores isn't very good, majority of it notably inferior not only to the imports, but random stuff I've boug…

No offense, but there's nothing particularly special about Feta produced in Greece. Feta-style cheeses are produced across a fairly wide region in the Eastern Mediterranean, and I don't think the style is so singular that it can't be (or isn't) authentically reproduced elsewhere. More generally, I can understand consumer protections that focus on the nature of the product itself , but where the product comes from is…

Greece was just an example, hence the “say” it’s not close to my favourite.

My point stands, there is a huge gulf in the US and Canada, UK (smaller experience with local feta there but it wasn’t good) etc. I wouldn’t support a GI limited to Greece , edited to clear that up.

I suspect we are making compatible points - you that other countries exist that make good feta by default (true!) - me that countries exist where the default is not good (at least to my taste) and definitely distinguishable from the former category (also true).

I guess feta is a good example of the problem of defining these things by region not process. I feel pretty confident that "feta" shouldn't belong to any one country in the region with a tradition of making it; on the other hand differentiating it from cheap knock offs also makes sense to me.

Re: The EU’s disputed system of geographical indications is taking over the planet (2017)

#129

Post by dmitriid »

lou1306 wrote: post #113
dmitriid wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. So what? Some of those "protected wines" didn't even exist before the agreement and no one cares if they are protected, or not. This is basically a "in exchange of a few thousand names [1] that you can never use even if you produce an identical product, we will protect some names many of which not even you care about, or weren't even ever used before this agreement". 2. That "protected spirit"? That's the new inve…

> Imagine if no country could call whisky, well, whisky, and each country had to invent their own name for it. Well that's actually what happens, more or less: we do have Scotch whisky, Irish whiskey, and bourbon, and you cannot make some whisky in, say, France, and sell it as "Scotch". For what it's worth, EU laws also struck Italy, which cannot sell "Tocai" wine no more (now it's called Friulano) because the name s…

> you cannot make some whisky in, say, France, and sell it as "Scotch"

I'm actually totally fine with geographic specifications for a general name. Like "Scotch whiskey" vs. "Irish whiskey".

But some things do reach ridiculous proportions like Greece, Bulgaria and Turkey all trying to lay claim to yoghurt.

Re: The EU’s disputed system of geographical indications is taking over the planet (2017)

#130

Post by fennecfoxen »

riffraff wrote: post #119
api wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That seems like a clearer description of the problem. The issue isn’t so much where it comes from as how it’s made. Someone in the original place of origin could cut corners too.

The EU system is pretty weak, but it's the result of trade offs, like everything else. You could be more strict, as France and Italy do for wines for example: italian wine can come with either an IGT label ("made in the right place") or a DOC one ("made in the right place in the right way") or a DOCG one ("made in the right place, the right way, and we actually checked the specific production"). The alternative is to…

The PDO approach impairs competition by making it impossible to legally refer to food with a name that people understand.

In the US we see similar complaints arise from time to time when various agencies declare that you may not name your product "oat milk" because milk is defined as cow milk that is fortified with vitamins A and D (skim milk that is not fortified, for instance, gets to be named "imitation skim milk" or "imitation milk product"). Similar complaints abound around labeling meat substitutes as "burgers" (Tofurky had to sue the state of Louisiana over this one). French wine regulators have even sent sternly worded letters to the maker of "Cat Wine," an artificially colored liquid catnip product sold in novelty bottles (they objected to "purrsecco", I believe it was?)

There is something real all these product-identity labels are protecting — it's just that over 80% what they're protecting is some producer's grasp on the market; actual customer benefit is a distant second.

Post reply on HN