Editing Geographical indication (section)

==Differences in philosophy==
One reason for the conflicts that occur between European and United States governments is a difference in philosophy as to what constitutes a "genuine" product. In Europe, the prevailing theory is that of ''[[terroir]]'': that there is a specific property of a geographical area, and that dictates a strict usage of geographical designations. The [[European Union]] has been successful internally in promoting geographical indications as intellectual property.<ref name=":4" />{{Rp|page=39}} Producers from a designated place can exclude those who produce elsewhere from using the geographical name for similar products.<ref name=":4" />{{Rp|page=39}} Thus, anyone with sheep of the right breeds can make [[Roquefort]] cheese if they are located in the part of France where that cheese is made, but nobody outside that part of France can make a [[blue cheese|blue]] sheep's milk cheese and call it Roquefort, even if they completely duplicate the process described in the definition of Roquefort.

Historically, European immigrants to countries such as the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand brought production of place-name related items to their new homes.<ref name=":4" />{{Rp|page=39}} In these countries, the place named products became generic product names that were not restricted in their use.<ref name=":4" />{{Rp|page=39}} This difference causes most of the conflict between the United States and Europe in their attitudes toward geographical names.<ref name="Zappalaglio-2015">{{cite journal |last1=Zappalaglio |first1=Andrea |title=The Protection of Geographical Indications: Ambitions and Concrete Limitations |journal=University of Edinburgh Student Law Review |date=2015 |volume=2 |page=88 |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/277867915 |access-date=24 June 2020}}</ref> The US generally opposes EU-style geographical indication regulation because place names have either already been registered as trademarks or lost their distinctiveness through generic use.<ref name=":4" />{{Rp|page=40}} Disagreements on geographical indications is one of the few areas in global intellectual property governance where the EU and the US oppose each other.<ref name=":4" />{{Rp|page=40}}

However, there is some overlap, particularly with American products adopting a European way of viewing the matter.<ref>{{cite journal |doi=10.1016/j.worlddev.2016.08.017 |last1=Le Goffic |last2=Zappalaglio |first1=Caroline |first2=Andrea |title=The Role Played by the US Government in Protecting Geographical Indications |journal=World Development |year=2017 |volume=98 |issue=C |pages=35–44 }}</ref> The most notable of these are crops: [[Vidalia onion]]s, [[Florida]] [[orange (fruit)|orange]]s, and [[Idaho]] [[potato]]es. In each of these cases, the state governments of [[Georgia (U.S. state)|Georgia]], Florida, and Idaho registered trademarks, and then allowed their growers&mdash;or in the case of the Vidalia onion, only those in a certain, well-defined geographical area within the state&mdash;to use the term, while denying its use to others. The European conception is increasingly gaining acceptance in American viticulture; also, vintners in the various [[American Viticultural Area]]s are attempting to form well-developed and unique identities as [[New World wine]] gains acceptance in the wine community. Finally, the United States has a long tradition of placing relatively strict limitations on its [[American whiskey|native forms]] of [[whisky|whiskey]]; particularly notable are the requirements for labeling a product "[[straight whiskey]]" (which requires the whiskey to be produced in the United States in accordance with certain standards) and the requirement, enforced by federal law and several international agreements, ([[North American Free Trade Agreement|NAFTA]], among them) that a product labeled [[Tennessee whiskey]] be a straight [[Bourbon whiskey]] produced in the state of [[Tennessee]].

Conversely, some European products have adopted a more American system: a prime example is [[Newcastle Brown Ale]], which received an EU protected geographical status in 2000. When the brewery moved from Tyneside to Tadcaster in [[North Yorkshire]] (about 150&nbsp;km away) in 2007 for economic reasons, the status had to be revoked.