Conflicts and Coexistence Between Geographical Indications and Ordinary Trademarks: Legal Framework and Practical Pathways
Abstract:
As an essential component of the intellectual property protection system, Geographical Indications (GIs) share the function of distinguishing the origin of goods and maintaining market order alongside ordinary trademarks. This paper analyzes the fundamental differences between GIs and ordinary trademarks, referencing international conventions and representative cases to explore their conflict mechanisms and coordination paths in the globalized market. It aims to provide theoretical guidance for constructing a balanced intellectual property protection system.
I. Essential Legal Differences
Different Logics of Rights Creation
The legitimacy of Geographical Indications stems from the natural and cultural attributes of a specific region, with collective rights holders (e.g., the Comité Champagne in France). In contrast, ordinary trademarks are established based on the "first-to-file" principle, granting exclusive rights to a single enterprise upon registration. For example, the GI "West Lake Longjing" belongs collectively to tea farmers in Hangzhou, while the trademark "Master Kong" is owned by the Tingyi Holding Corporation.
Divergent Core Values in Protection
Geographical Indications emphasize the inseparable connection between a product and its origin, imposing strict territorial restrictions (e.g., the EU’s PDO certification requires both raw materials and processing within the place of origin). Ordinary trademarks focus on brand reputation accumulation and can expand cross-regionally via licensing, as seen with the Coca-Cola trademark being used in over 170 countries.
II. Forms of Conflict
Overlapping Claims to Rights
A classic case involves the conflict between the GI "Champagne" and trademarks such as "Apple Champagne." The Comité Champagne succeeded in canceling such trademark registrations in over 40 countries through the Lisbon Agreement, yet still faces legal challenges in countries like the United States, which are not parties to the Agreement.
Cultural Recognition Differences Leading to Disputes
The conflict between the GI "Shaoxing Huangjiu" and the Japanese trademark "Shaoxing Wine" highlights cross-border clashes over cultural symbols. By leveraging the territorial principle of trademark law, Japanese companies registered homonymous trademarks, causing consumer confusion. Eventually, a coexistence agreement was reached through bilateral negotiations between China and Japan.
III. Building International Coordination Mechanisms
Balancing Mechanisms Under the TRIPS Agreement
Articles 22–24 of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) establish a three-tiered protection system: basic protection (prohibiting misleading use), enhanced protection (for wines and spirits), and exceptions (good faith prior registration can be maintained). However, the ambiguous provisions lead to enforcement inconsistencies, with the United States adopting a trademark law-based protection model for GIs, conflicting with the EU’s dedicated legislative approach.
Judicial Insights from Representative Cases
In China’s "Dong’e Ejiao" trademark opposition case, the court established the principle of "priority of historical use," allowing coexistence between registered trademarks and GIs, provided the trademark holder adds an origin statement. This "label differentiation + market separation" solution offers a practical model for resolving such conflicts.
IV. Exploring Multi-Party Governance Pathways
Establishing Tiered Protection Lists
Drawing from the EU’s Protected Names Register, this approach classifies traditional premium products for differential management—for instance, granting absolute protection to products like "Zhenjiang Vinegar" with a history of over a century, while applying relative protection to emerging GIs.
Improving Conflict Warning Systems
The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) is developing a global GI database that enables cross-checks during trademark examination. By 2023, the system had already prevented 127 potentially infringing trademark applications.
Developing Contractual Coexistence Models
The collaborative case between the GI "Anxi Tieguanyin" and the trademark "Bama Tea" demonstrated that through usage agreements specifying rights boundaries, brand value can be jointly leveraged. This model increased Anxi tea farmers’ incomes by 23% and boosted the company’s market share by 15%.
Conclusion:
In a modern market where globalization and localization are deeply intertwined, the conflict between Geographical Indications and ordinary trademarks essentially reflects a clash of values between traditional knowledge protection and commercial free competition. Constructing a multi-party governance framework encompassing international coordination, technological empowerment, and contractual governance is key to achieving a constructive interaction between these two systems. Moving forward, efforts should focus on promoting a multilateral GI protection agreement under the WTO framework and developing technological support systems like blockchain traceability, ultimately forming a new intellectual property order that respects cultural heritage while enhancing market efficiency.
Share this page
