Activities of Francisco GUERREIRO related to 2022/0115(COD)
Shadow opinions (1)
OPINION on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on geographical indication protection for craft and industrial products and amending Regulations (EU) 2017/1001 and (EU) 2019/1753 of the European Parliament and of the Council and Council Decision (EU) 2019/1754
Amendments (19)
Amendment 133 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 17
Recital 17
(17) It is possible for certain Member States to obtain a derogation from the Member States’pt-out from their obligation to designate a national authority in respect of geographical indications for craft and industrial products to take charge of the procedures for registration, national opposition, amendments to the product specification and cancellation of the registration under certain circumstances specified in this Regulation. That derogation, that should take the form of a Commission Decision,. That derogation can also takes into account the fact that certain Member States do not have a specific national system for the management of geographical indications for craft and industrial products and that the local interest in these countries to protect these geographical indications is minimal. Under these circumstances, it would not be justified to oblige the respective Member State to set up an infrastructure, employ the necessary personnel and purchase facilities for the management of these geographical indications. It is more effective and economical to provide an alternative procedure for the producer groups from these Member States to protect their products by a geographical indication. The “direct registration procedure” has cost advantages reaped by Member States. Pursuant to this derogation, procedures for registration, amendments to the product specification and cancellation should be managed directly by the Office. In this regard the Office should receive the effective assistance of the administrative authorities of that Member State when required by the Office, through designation of a contact point, as regards in particular aspects related to the examination of the application. In those cases, the Office should be entitled to charge a registration fee, considering that this procedure generates more work for the Office than the management of Union applications. However, the application of the “direct registration procedure” should not exempt Member States from the obligation to designate a competent authority for the controls and enforcement and to take the necessary actions to enforce the rights set out in this Regulation. The competent authority maintained or designated for the management of the geographical indications and the competent authority designated for the controls and enforcement may differ, when a Member State so decides.
Amendment 134 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 18
Recital 18
Amendment 137 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 22
Recital 22
(22) To ensure transparency and uniformity across Member States, it is necessary to establish and maintain an electronic Union register of geographical indications for craft and industrial products. The register should be an electronic database stored within an information system, and should be easily accessible to the public in machine- readable, commonly used formats. The Union register of geographical indications for craft and industrial products should be developed, kept and maintained by the Office and also the personnel for its operation should be provided by the Office. The register of geographical indications for craft and industrial products should be included in the database already administered by the Office aggregating all geographical indications registered in the EU and at international level.
Amendment 140 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 27
Recital 27
(27) It is necessary to establish an Advisory Board, which is a pool of experts, composed of representatives from Member States and the Commission. The purpose of the Advisory Board is to provide the necessary local knowledge and expertise concerning certain products and knowledge about the local circumstances that may influence the outcome of the procedures laid down in this Regulation. In order to support the Office on its assessment of individual applications at any stage of the examination, opposition, appeal or other procedures with specific technical knowledge, the Geographical Indications Division or the Boards of Appeal, at its own initiative or at the request of the Commission, should have the possibility to consult the Advisory Board. The consultation, when necessary, should also include a general opinion on assessing quality criteria, establishing reputation and renown, determining generic nature of a name, and assessing fair competition in commercial transactions and the risk of confusing consumers. The opinion of the Advisory Board should not be binding. The Advisory Board should also include experts in the field of the product category concerned, including from academia. The appointment procedure of the experts and the operation of the Advisory Board should be specified in the rules of procedure of the Advisory Board approved by the Management Board.
Amendment 141 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 30 a (new)
Recital 30 a (new)
(30a) Homonymous indications are spelled or pronounced in the same way, but refer to different geographical areas. A name which is wholly or partly homonymous with a geographical indication registered or applied for earlier, should not be registered, unless certain circumstances make its protection justified, considering the need for equal treatment of the producers and the need for consumers not to be misled as to the true origin of the products.
Amendment 142 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 33
Recital 33
(33) The relationship between internet domain names and geographical indications should be clarified as regards the scope of the application of the remedy measures, the recognition of geographical indications in dispute resolution, and the fair use of domain names. Persons having a legitimate interest in a registered geographical indicationThe holders of a registered geographical indication or a producer group having a legitimate interest in it should be empowered to request for the revocation or the transfer of the domain name in case the conflicting domain name has been registered by its holder without rights or legitimate interest in the geographical indication or if it has been registered or is being used in bad faith and its use contravenes the protection of a geographical indication. Alternative dispute resolution procedures should not prejudice the possibility of bringing domain name disputes before a national court. In case of conflicts on domain names with non-EU Country-codes, or with EU country codes concerning non- EU Geographical Indications, the dispute settlement should be conducted by EUIPO in cooperation with the international dispute settlement systems already in place, such as the ones managed by WIPO and ICANN.
Amendment 145 #
Proposal for a regulation
Recital 40
Recital 40
(40) The added value of geographical indications is based on consumer trust. Such trust can only be well-founded if the registration of geographical indications is accompanied by effective verification and controls, including the producer’s due diligence. Citizens and consumers should expect that any geographical indication count with robust verification and control systems, regardless of whether the products originate from the EU or a third country.
Amendment 213 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point a a (new)
(aa) the type of product(s) covered by the name;
Amendment 220 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point h a (new)
Article 7 – paragraph 1 – point h a (new)
(ha) the competent product inspection authority;
Amendment 258 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
Article 15 – paragraph 1 – introductory part
1. By way of derogation from Article 11, the Commission shall be empowered to exempt a Member State may opt-out from the obligation to designate a competent authority in accordance with Article 11(1) and to handle the management of the applications of geographical indications for craft and industrial products at national level, if the Member State, by 6 months from the date of entry into force of this Regulation, provideinforms the Commission about its opt-out with evidence that shows that the following conditions are met:
Amendment 262 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 2
Article 15 – paragraph 2
2. The Commission may request further information from the Member State before adopting a Commission Decision on the derogation referred in paragraph 1.
Amendment 265 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 15 – paragraph 5
Article 15 – paragraph 5
Amendment 296 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 26 – paragraph 1
Article 26 – paragraph 1
1. A publicly accessiblen electronic Union register of geographical indications for craft and industrial products shall be made easily accessible to the public, in machine- readable, commonly used formats. It shall be developed, kept and maintained by the Office for the management of geographical indications for craft and industrial products.
Amendment 322 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 33 – paragraph 5
Article 33 – paragraph 5
5. The Advisory Board shall be composed of one representative of each Member State and, one representatives of the Commission and their respective altern, their respective alternates and independent experts in the field of the product category concerned, including from academia, as well as representatives of regional or local authorities, where appropriates.
Amendment 332 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 1 – point b
Article 35 – paragraph 1 – point b
(b) any misuse, imitation or misleading evocation, even if the true origin of the products or services is indicated or if the protected geographical indication is translated or accompanied by an expression such as ‘style’, ‘type’, ‘method’, ‘as produced in’, ‘imitation’, ‘flavour’, ‘like’ or similar;
Amendment 335 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 35 – paragraph 3
Article 35 – paragraph 3
3. Paragraph 1 shall also apply to a domain name containing or consisting of the registered geographical indication within the limits of Article 41.
Amendment 357 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 41 – paragraph 1
Article 41 – paragraph 1
1. Country-code top-level domain name registries established in the Union may, upon request of a natural or legal person having a legitimate interest or rightsbeing the rights-holder of a geographical indication or being mandated by a producer group having a legitimate interest in a protected geographical indication, revoke or transfer a domain name registered under such country-code top- level domain to the producer group of the products with the geographical indication concerned, following an appropriate alternative- dispute-resolution procedure or judicial procedure, if such domain name has been registered by its holder without rights or legitimate interest in the geographical indication or if it has been registered or is being used in bad faith and its use contravenes Article 35.
Amendment 363 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 44 – paragraph 2
Article 44 – paragraph 2
2. In the case of craft and industrial products originating in the Union that are marketed under a geographical indication, the Union symbol referred to in paragraph 1 mayshall appear on the labelling and advertising material or communication materials. The geographical indication shall be in the same field of vision as the Union symbol.
Amendment 398 #
Proposal for a regulation
Article 64 – paragraph 1 a (new)
Article 64 – paragraph 1 a (new)
The Office shall ensure that digital systems are made easily accessible to the public, in machine-readable and commonly used formats, and design it in such a way that it can be used by the Member States’ competent authorities for their national procedure in accordance with this Regulation.