[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [wg-b] Noncommercial protections for words

To: <rmeyer@mhsc.com>, <KathrynKL@aol.com>, <mpalage@infonetworks.com>, <wg-b@dnso.org>
Subject: RE: [wg-b] Noncommercial protections for words
From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <Harald@alvestrand.no>
Date: Fri, 03 Dec 1999 18:18:06 +0100
In-Reply-To: <013201bf3daf$8fcde5f0$ecaf6cc7@lvrmr.mhsc.com>
References: <4.2.0.58.19991203094713.04c2aa90@dokka.maxware.no>
Sender: owner-wg-b@dnso.org

At 08:58 03.12.99 -0800, Roeland M.J. Meyer wrote:
>But the growers in Napa, California, are not allowed to use the mark and
>have to call their product "Sparkling Wine" as a result. Ergo, it is not
>geographically limited.
>
> > At 23:04 02.12.99 -0800, Roeland M.J. Meyer wrote:
> > >What about Champagne?
> > Also a region (I think WIPO calls this class "geographical marks").

No, the category is based on a requirement that anything using that name 
has to originate from a specific geographic area.
Cognac and Champagne are both regions of France.

                     Harald

--
Harald Tveit Alvestrand, EDB Maxware, Norway
Harald.Alvestrand@edb.maxware.no

References:
- RE: [wg-b] Noncommercial protections for words
  - From: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <Harald@alvestrand.no>
- RE: [wg-b] Noncommercial protections for words
  - From: "Roeland M.J. Meyer" <rmeyer@mhsc.com>

Prev by Date: RE: [wg-b] Noncommercial protections for words
Next by Date: [wg-b] RE: (wg-b) Noncommercial protections for words
Prev by thread: RE: [wg-b] Noncommercial protections for words
Next by thread: Re: [wg-b] Noncommercial protections for words
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread