[CHRONICLE] How can wines and spirits be protected? (Part 3/3)

The wine and spirits sector plays a central role in the French and European economies. It is a strategic pillar of the agri-food industry, a major export driver, and a cultural symbol deeply rooted in national identity. The entire industry represents thousands of farms, hundreds of unique wine-growing areas, and centuries of internationally recognized expertise. Beyond their economic value, wines and spirits contribute to a cultural prestige that feeds France’s reputation as a land of gastronomic and artisanal excellence. This is the conclusion of Nathalie Dreyfus’s three-part column.

The cultural importance of wines and spirits in France and Europe explains their increased exposure to legal and commercial risks. Wine products are among the most affected by counterfeiting, misappropriation of reputation, parasitism, but also cybersquatting, identity theft, and fraudulent practices in e-commerce.

After examining the characteristics of copyright, particularly design rights in the wine and spirits sector, in the second part of her article, Nathalie Dreyfus turns her attention to the assessment of geographical trademarks.

Geographical trademarks

In the world of wines and spirits, the territorial dimension plays a central role. Terroir is not only an organoleptic criterion, but also a vector of reputation, authenticity, and differentiation. In addition to specific tools such as geographical indications and appellations of origin, operators can use what are known as “geographical” or “territorial” trademarks. These allow a geographical name to be incorporated into the commercial identity of an estate, a vintage or a house, provided that certain legal requirements are met to prevent any undue appropriation.

The principle: a geographical name can constitute a trademark

Under French and European Union law, a geographical name can constitute a valid trademark provided that it meets the general conditions of distinctiveness and does not undermine the general interest in access to the sign.

Thus, any type of geographical name—the name of a municipality, a locality, a neighborhood, a cadastral domain, or even a natural area—may be registered as a trademark, provided that it does not unjustifiably prevent other economic operators from using this reference to describe the actual origin of their products.

This approach is based on a fundamental principle: trademark law must not lead to the private monopolization of a geographical name that the community of producers legitimately needs.

Limitations relating to grounds for refusal or invalidity (Art. L.711-2 CPI)

Geographical trademarks are particularly vulnerable to absolute grounds for refusal or invalidity, due to the sensitive nature of the link between the territorial name and the actual origin of the products.

The descriptiveness of a geographical trademark

Article L.711-2 CPI expressly refers to signs consisting exclusively of indications that may serve to designate the geographical origin of the products. A geographical name is therefore inadmissible for registration when it is perceived by the public as indicating the origin of the wines or spirits concerned, or as likely to indicate it in the future.

Recent case law perfectly illustrates this approach. The December 21, 2023 ruling by the Aix-en-Provence Court of Appeal concerning the sign “Tizzano” significantly illustrates the rigor with which the courts assess the descriptiveness of a geographical trademark.

The mark, registered by a cooperative winery for wines (class 33), used the name of a town near Ajaccio. The court applied the European method of analysis, based on the one hand on an assessment at the time of registration, and on the other hand on the possibility that a relevant link may subsequently be formed between the name and the products in question. Noting the existence of local wine-growing activities, consumption habits, and objective elements likely to associate the municipality with wine production, the judges ruled that the sign constituted a descriptive geographical indication and canceled it. There are two options in such a situation: to initiate a process of recognition as a PDO or PGI in order to establish the collective use of the name, or to enrich the sign with additional distinctive elements, preventing the place name from being perceived as simply designating the origin of the products.

The misleading or deceptive nature of a geographical trademark

A trademark is refused or canceled when it is likely to mislead consumers as to the actual origin of the product. This ground is particularly sensitive in the wine sector.

In the “La Madeleinoise” ruling “ (CA Douai, September 22, 2022), the Court of Appeal validated the registration of the trademark for beers, considering that the term referring to the town of ”La Madeleine” did not enjoy any particular reputation in this sector and therefore did not risk misleading consumers.

This decision illustrates an essential rule. Firstly, a geographical name may be registered if it does not evoke a usual origin for the products concerned. On the other hand, it is inadmissible if it suggests that there is a link with a territory recognized in this field.

Thus, the use of a municipal name linked to a wine-growing tradition for wine produced elsewhere could be canceled on the grounds of misleading, even in the absence of strict descriptiveness.

The relative grounds relating to local authorities

Under Article L.712-3 of the CPI, local authorities may oppose the registration of trademarks that include their name or identifying signs when such use is likely to mislead the public or damage their image.

This relative ground allows municipalities, departments, or regions to protect their names against abusive registrations. It prevents private operators from appropriating geographical names with a strong impact on tourism or heritage. Finally, it ensures consistency between the use of the place name and the activities actually present in the territory.

This intervention by local authorities further reinforces the vigilance required when registering geographical trademarks in the wine and spirits sector.

Building a comprehensive protection strategy

The protection of wines and spirits should not be seen as a juxtaposition of isolated rights, but as a coherent ecosystem, linking legal, organizational, and operational instruments around a risk management approach. In a sector characterized by the strong symbolic value of its products, the heritage dimension of the terroir, and a growing presence on international markets, it is essential to adopt a structured, proactive, and evolving strategy.

The development of this strategy begins with a precise mapping of intangible assets. This process consists of identifying elements of value—the name of the estate, iconic vintages, distinctive packaging, expertise, local reputation, digital presence—and determining their degree of exposure and strategic importance. This step, which is too often overlooked, makes it possible to prioritize, identify areas of vulnerability, and guide legal investments.

Based on this mapping, operators must implement an integrated protection policy based on a two-pronged approach: securing what needs to be secured and monitoring what can be monitored.

From a legal standpoint, security requires the creation of a coherent portfolio, not only in terms of formal rights (trademarks, designs, copyrights), but also in terms of usage rights, interprofessional agreements, distribution contracts, and internal governance of know-how. The aim is not to accumulate titles, but to build a clear, structured, and sustainable system that can evolve in line with commercial developments and changes in packaging.

At the operational level, an active monitoring policy must be put in place. The wine and spirits sector is particularly exposed to fraudulent behavior, whether through the copying of labels, the misuse of geographical names, or the exploitation of the reputation of estates on digital platforms. Monitoring must be territorial (sensitive export markets), sectoral (similar or competing products), and digital (social networks, e-commerce sites, domain name registrations). The challenge is to intervene quickly to prevent unauthorized uses from taking root and diluting the value of the trademark.

The strategy must also provide for graduated intervention mechanisms, combining warnings, extrajudicial procedures (particularly online), customs actions, and targeted litigation. This gradation is essential to maintain the balance between protection, proportionality, and resource optimization. Simplified administrative procedures—delisting, platform notifications, customs measures—often make it possible to resolve situations without resorting to more burdensome litigation.

Finally, a modern protection strategy involves an organizational dimension. Training internal teams, establishing clear communication protocols, centralizing evidence, coordinating with interprofessional organizations or appellation unions, and implementing document governance all reinforce the effectiveness of the system. In a sector where reputation is built over several generations, the sustainability of protection depends as much on legal rigor as on the quality of internal practices.

When approached in this way, the protection strategy becomes a real tool for adding value: it secures the history, uniqueness, and identity of wines and spirits, while guaranteeing operators the stability they need to develop their markets and strengthen their competitive positioning.

In conclusion

The protection of wines and spirits requires a comprehensive approach based on the articulation of wine law, intellectual property tools, and modern digital surveillance mechanisms. SIQOs defend origin and know-how; trademarks, designs, and copyrights guarantee commercial identity; while the fight against online fraud helps preserve consumer confidence.

The economic and cultural value of the sector requires constant vigilance and a structured strategy capable of anticipating risks, effectively defending assets, and adapting to rapidly changing commercial practices. Producers who combine these different levers have a real competitive advantage and robust protection, ensuring the sustainability, reputation, and security of their entire business.

Read also > [COLUMN] How to protect wines and spirits? (Part 2/3)

Featured photo: Getty Images/Unsplash+