Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
exception (see Zanzig, 2013). The TRIPS Agreement had directed criminal
enforcement primarily against 'cases of wilful trademark counterfeiting or
copyright piracy on a commercial scale'
1
and this focus was replicated in the EU
in Council Regulation (EC) No 1383/2003 of 22 July 2003 concerning customs
action against goods suspected of infringing certain IPRs and the measures to
be taken against goods found to have infringed such rights.
2
This Regulation
has now been replaced by Regulation (EU) No 608/2013 of the European
Parliament and of the Council of 12 June 2013 concerning customs enforce-
ment of intellectual property.
3
7.02
The new Regulation includes in the definition of 'counterfeit goods': 'goods
which are subject of an action infringing a geographical indication and bear or
are described by a name or term protected in respect of that geographical
indication'.
7.03
For various constitutional reasons, the EU has not yet been able to enact an
instrument providing for criminal sanctions against IPR infringements,
4
although the EU has participated in the negotiation of the Anti-counterfeiting
Trade Agreement (ACTA), which contains a suite of such sanctions (see
Blakeney, 2012). Whether the EU will introduce legislation to implement
ACTA remains very much a political issue. In the absence of criminal sanctions,
EU enforcement of GIs is left to civil enforcement under the terms of the
'Enforcement Directive' (Directive 2004/48/EC of the European Parliament
and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the enforcement of intellectual property
rights)
5
and 'the Customs Regulation' (Council Regulation (EC) No 1383/
2003 of 22 July 2003 concerning customs action against goods suspected of
infringing certain intellectual property rights and the measures to be taken
against goods found to have infringed such rights).
6
This chapter will analyse
the implications of both instruments for the protection of GIs.
1
TRIPS Agreement, Art 61.
2
OJ L 196, 2.8.2003, pp. 7-14 (hereinafter 'the Customs Regulation').
3
OJ L 181/15, 29.6.13, pp. 15-34.
4
In an environmental law case decided in 2005 (Case C-176/03,
Commission of the European Communities v
Council of the European Union
[2005] ECR I-07879), the ECJ indicated that the EU had a limited competence in
the field of criminal law if the application of effective, proportionate, and dissuasive criminal penalties is
necessary to ensure the efficiency of important Community policies.
5
OJ L 195, 02/06/2004 pp. 16-25
.
6
OJ L 196, 2.8.2003, pp. 7-14.
