A couple of years back, we discussed a win in the courts for the U.S. Dairy Export Council against both French and Swiss consortiums that had attempted to trademark the word “Gruyere” in America. Both of those groups were jointly attempting to get a PDO/PGI trademark for the term, arguing that gruyere cheese should only be labeled such if it came from the region around Gruyeres, a Swiss town somewhat near the French border. This style of trademark is the sort used by consortiums such as that for champagne, which has successfully argued for protected status on products based on geographic origin. In this case, both the USPTO and the U.S. courts rightly concluded that these consortiums could not unring this bell. Americans have been eating gruyere cheeses for years and years, with the vast majority of them likely not even knowing that the town of Gruyeres existed, never mind being confused into thinking that the cheese they bought at the store must have come from that region.
While both groups claimed they planned to appeal the ruling, that seems less likely now. Recently, the Swiss government declined a motion to continue defending the gruyere name around the world, instead softening its language around what the government would be doing about it. That motion was in reaction to the United States’ court decision, meant to force the Swiss government to include such protections in future trade deals.
On Monday, the Swiss Senate tacitly rejected a motion aimed at better defending PDO and PGI (protected geographical indication) products like Gruyère cheese. It did, however, say it was prepared to raise awareness of these labels.
The House of Representatives had approved the motion last year, after Gruyère cheese’s PDO was definitively abandoned by American retailers.
The text of the motion was changed to remove the requirement that the government enforce such protections. The Swiss Senate correctly decided that this would hamstring the government’s ability to engage in and adopt new trade agreements out of deference to the cheese-people should a partner country not agree to those protections.
So instead of an enforcement mechanism, the government is instead supposed to take educational and advocacy measures instead.
Such a measure would restrict Switzerland’s room for manoeuvre in terms of foreign trade, and could even prevent the conclusion of new agreements, declared Economy Minister Guy Parmelin.
However, the Senate has proposed an alternative to the motion, with very few constraints. It encourages the government to make a greater commitment to respecting the recognition of products of Swiss origin. Awareness-raising could, for example, be carried out as part of trade agreement negotiations. This adapted motion was tacitly approved by the Senate and now goes to the House of Representatives for approval.
The updated motion still needs to be passed by the Swiss House, but it’s obviously a better plan than the original motion. Sure, making sure people understand the history of this cheese as part of Swiss culture can be a good thing. Educating the consumer about the origins of that style of cheese may also drive foreign consumers to want to buy gruyere cheeses from its historical birthplace, too.
But what it won’t do is lock up the name of what has become a style of cheese in foreign lands like America that consumers don’t currently associate with that birthplace.