I. TRIPS FLEXIBILITIES FOR THE PROTECTION OF GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS: Their use in Latin America

This line of research contemplates a detailed analysis of the scope of the provisions of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) regarding the protection afforded to geographical indications (GIs) in Articles 22, 23 and 24. The objective is to identify if Latin American countries (LA) have done effective use of the flexibilities available in TRIPS when incorporating the standards of protection into their respective regional and national legislation. 

This is in line with the comparative study “Collective distinctive signs in Latin America: Promoting development. Valuing origin and quality”

Indeed, as shown in the aforementioned comparative study, the incorporation of TRIPS obligations into national legislation has not been uniform across countries in the region and has been uneven at the regional level. 

It is therefore appropriate to analyse whether Latin American countries and regional integration schemes have made effective use of the TRIPS flexibilities regarding the protection provided for GIs, in light of the general objectives of the Agreement, the private nature of intellectual property rights (IPRs) and the specific needs that regional and national laws and regulations must reflect.

To this end, an analysis will be conducted to determine whether Latin American countries and integration schemes made effective use of TRIPS flexibilities when implementing multilateral commitments to regional regulations: the cases of the Andean Community of Nations (CAN) and the Southern Common Market (Mercosur). Selected Latin American countries: Argentina, Brazil, Bolivia, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Mexico, Paraguay, Peru and Uruguay.

II. DIFFERENCES AND ADVANTAGES IN THE USE OF COLLECTIVE MARKS COMPARED TO GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS FOR LATIN AMERICAN PRODUCERS OR SERVICE PROVIDERS.

Although Geographical Indications (GI) and Collective Trademarks are similar in identifying and differentiating products and services from others, indicating their origin, avoiding confusion and preventing misuse of goodwill, they may present different advantages depending on their usage. The Geographical Indication is often linked to the territory and other socio-cultural and historical elements. Consequently, it demands immutability and perennity. Therefore, such a link presents greater resistance to innovation and the necessary adaptations related to climate change.

Alternatively, the Collective Trademarks are more flexible in implementing modifications and adaptations, for instance, to internalise sustainability-related practices. This characteristic may also be useful to the development of innovations. Besides, the trademark system is more consolidated by international agreements and national legislation, so it finds more facilitated access to other markets. These features may represent more economical options for producers and service providers, as well as ensure possible entry into other markets.

This line of research aims to comprehend those differences and identify their usages. Latin-American enterprises, especially small and medium-sized companies and start-ups, need accessible, dynamic and efficient legal instruments to develop innovations. This study can result in knowledge for better use of these instruments based on existing resources and realities.