American Viticultural Areas
From Wine Institute Wiki
AMERICAN VITICULTURE AREAS
Overview
You might have run across one or several of them but not known about it. You may have been familiar with one for years, but not known it was one of them. You may have driven through a few in your lifetime without knowing you did.
When a US winery wants to tell you the geographic pedigree of its wine, it uses a tag on its label called an Appellation of Origin. This tag must meet federal and state legal requirements. A lot of people believe that the term appellation of origin is synonymous with viticultural area, but that's not the case.
Viticultural areas are to appellations like grapes are to fruit. Viticultural areas are one kind of appellation. Not all appellations are viticultural areas. An appellation of origin can be the name of a country, the name of a state or states, the name of a county or counties within a state. Viticultural areas are a hybrid appellation. In size, they range from extremely small to extremely large (larger than a few states). In terms of plantings, a viticultural area may be filled with vineyards or could be almost sparse. In terms of quality, there is no guarantee that a wine labeled with a viticultural area is any better or worse than wines that don't bear such information.
Facts
Fact #1 - Viticultural Areas Are BIG!
Some are REALLY big.
The regulations define a viticultural area as a "delimited grape growing area." But AVAs can be quite large, larger than a state.
Viticultural areas come in all shapes and sizes. The largest area (OHIO RIVER VALLEY) spans an area of 26,000 square miles. Second in line is TEXAS HILL COUNTRY - that one's about 15,000 square miles - so large you can stuff New Hampshire into it (or Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Hawaii, or New Jersey) and still have room for the pool and rumpus room. (See also the Texas Wine Country site for more information on Texas wines).
Viticultural areas can also cross state borders. For instance, there are twelve viticultural areas with boundaries that cross into more than one state:
- OZARK MOUNTAIN (AR,MO,OK)
- SOUTHEASTERN NEW ENGLAND (CT,MA,RI)
- OHIO RIVER VALLEY (IN,KY,OH,WV)
- MISSISSIPPI DELTA (LA,MS,TN)
- CUMBERLAND VALLEY (MD,PA)
- CENTRAL DELAWARE VALLEY (NJ,PA)
- MESILLA VALLEY (NM,TX)
- LAKE ERIE (NY,OH,PA)
- KANAWHA RIVER VALLEY (OH,WV)
- COLUMBIA VALLEY (OR,WA)
- WALLA WALLA VALLEY (OR,WA)
- SHENANDOAH VALLEY (VA,WV)
The relatively large boundaries of some viticultural areas has led to some criticism that AVAs do little to inform the consumer about their wine purchases, and that the viticultural area concept is meaningless. Despite some of the more gargantuan viticultural areas, the majority of them are much more precise and meaningful, providing consumer information and product value at the same time.
Fact #2 - Viticultural Areas Are SMALL!
Some are tinier than the shopping mall you buy your wine in.
The regulations define a viticultural area as a "delimited grape growing area." Talk about delimited - the smallest area (COLE RANCH) covers a little less than a quarter square mile.
There is a hidden economy to a successful AVA, one that is recognized by consumers as a good grape growing area. For some consumers, the appellation of origin is one more indication of value and is an important pricing factor. But pricing factor for who?
It can be extremely difficult to develop consumer recognition for a viticultural area when your entire crop yield is based on what a quarter acre can produce. The relatively small boundaries of some viticultural areas will not offset the total cost of obtaining the AVA in the first place.
AVAs add premium to the grapes, allowing a grower to command higher prices for his or her crop, permitting a winery to command more of a price for its products, with increases realized through the distribution chain. All of this adds up to consumer prices that should reflect quality for the price paid or the consumer won't buy it.
AVAs can add value to a product, and therefore most AVAs are not quite as small as Cole Ranch. Like other forms of intellectual property, AVA recognition is valuable and wineries try very hard to develop that value.
Fact #3 - Viticultural Areas Are Not Quality Designations
ATF may set standards of identity for wine (see those standards established by 27 CFR Part 4), but they don't grade or regulate quality any more than that. When the agency declares than an area is an AVA, it is only stating that the petitioners proved all they need to prove in accordance with their regulation. ATF's boilerplate language may not be clear on that point, so let me put on my dark suit and Washington face and recite their lines:
"The establishment of viticultural areas and the subsequent use of viticultural area names as appellations of origin in wine labeling and advertising will help consumers better identify the wines they may purchase, and will help winemakers distinguish their products from wines made in other areas."
There, did I sound Jeffersonian? Really?
What ATF is carefully saying is that the Federal Alcohol Administration Act, their Magna Carta, authorizes to enact regulations that will provide consumers with adequate information on alcoholic beverages. By law, ATF can't start grading quality levels for wine like our government does with eggs, hamburger, or veal, because they're really not legally authorized to do so.
Fact #4 - Viticultural Areas Convey Quality
Even though ATF can't make an AVA a quality designation, AVAs just happen to become that very thing by an amazing set of coincidences, some marketing and some capitalistic but all consistent with the ATF regulations themselves. See Atlas Peak's site, for example.
The very result that wineries and growers want to achieve after they are forced to endure the experience of federal administrative rulemaking is that the viticultural area denotes quality grapes and quality wines from a quality area known for good grapes and good wine. Why go through the angst and expense of it all for an area that DOESN'T have a reputation for quality? See Virginia Wine Country.
All Things Viticultural ...
Viticultural area value is not restricted to US wines. The term "viticultural area" has become a frequently used term to build value for wines from outside the United States. See Ontario's Wine Regions, which discusses the attributes of some of Canada's grape growing areas.
For many wine consumers, brand name recognition is the most important purchase factor (for many wine consumers, wine only comes in three flavors - red, white, and other). But for some, a viticultural area is a major quality tag for a wine product. That is how nature intended it.
Fact #5 - It's not a Viticultural Area Until ATF says it's an AVA
AVAs are creatures of regulation. They don't exist until the words are cast in CFR (for Code of Federal Regulations). All viticultural area boundaries are defined in regulations found at 27 CFR Part 9, and we provide each and every one of those regulations for those of you who are incessantly curious or pathologically looking for the next link to click on.
The point to all of this is to remember that AVAs are not just created at whim. The entire process between start to regulation may take years. The costs involved in establishing a viticultural area can be great simply in preparing the petition that commences the rulemaking proceedings with ATF. Hiring the historian, the soil expert, the meteorologist, the attorney, all add up. Boundaries have to be selected carefully, lest you find yourself in a position later to have to amend them (as with Paso Robles). A lot of work is done even before the petition is filed, forging alliances and conducting meetings with growers and vintners that might be affected by the establishment of an AVA.
Fact #6 - No Viticultural Area, No Estate Bottling.
Unless a winery is located in, and gets all of its grapes to produce a particular wine from, a common viticultural area from vineyards that it owns or controls, the winery cannot designate the wine as "Estate Bottled" wine.
ATF regulations permit the use of the term "Estate Bottled" to designate combined growing and production conditions. The requirements are very strict and require, among other things, that the bottling winery and the vineyards where all of the grapes are grown are located in the same viticultural area; that the winery own or control the vineyards where the grapes are grown, and that the wine be produced in one continuous process, the wine at no time having left the premises of the bottling winery. (27 CFR §4.26). For purposes of this section, "Controlled by" refers to property on which the bottling winery has the legal right to perform, and does perform, all of the acts common to viticulture under the terms of a lease or similar agreement of at least 3 years duration. If you've got Adobe Acrobat, you may want to see what ATF has to say about what it considers to be "controlled."
There are certain instances where a winery and the winery's own vineyards are NOT in the same viticultural area. In such circumstances, ATF has permitted the winery to designate that the wine has been "Proprietor Grown" or "Vintner Grown" as long as the other requirements of "Estate Bottled" are met (i.e., that the winery grew all the grapes used to make the wine on land owned or controlled by the winery; the winery crushed the grapes and fermented the resulting must, and finished, aged, and bottled the wine in a continuous process (the wine at no time having left the premises of the bottling winery.
Fact #7 - Foreign VAs vs AVAs = 27 CFR Part 12
ATF prohibits the use of an American Viticultural Area on a wine label unless 85% of the wine is derived from fruits grown within the confines of the viticultural area boundaries. Petitions for the establishment of American viticultural areas move painstakingly slow, and the time between filing a petition and the issuance of the final regulation by ATF is measured in years, not months (although recently ATF has been evidencing increased efficiency processing AVAs). But what about "viticultural areas" for imported wine?
Briefly, ATF regulations also contain a definition applicable to "viticultural area" use on imported wines. A viticultural area for imported wine is defined as follows:
(ii) Imported wine. A delimited place or region (other than an appellation defined in paragraphs (a)(2)(i) or (ii) the boundaries of which have been recognized and defined by the country of origin for use on labels of wine available for consumption within the country of origin. (27 CFR §4.25a)
But precision in defining appellations of origin in foreign wine producing countries run the entire regulatory spectrum, from full control with very exacting specifications, to countries like New Zealand, where there is no legal significance on appellation of origin terms used on wine labels. Further, the manner of regulation in some countries allow for the creation and use of terms which transcend the geographically descriptive function of an American Viticultural Area. Some names of foreign wines, for example, describe not just geographic origin, but also specific wines of a particular place or region which are distinguishable from all other wines. In contrast, U.S. wine regulations do not recognize any U.S. term as being distinctive designations.
ATF regulations authorize the Director to recognize terms as being "nongeneric terms of geographic significance." The general rule, as stated in 27 CFR §4.24(c)(1), is that a name of geographic significance may be used in the designation of only those wines of the origin indicated by the name. Additionally, the Director is authorized to make finding that some names are "distinctive" designations of specific wines. A foreign term of geographic significance is deemed to be a distinctive designation if it is known to the U.S. consumer and trade as the designation of a specific wine of a particular place or region, distinguishable from all other wines (e.g., "Chambertin," "Liebfraumilch").
A little over ten years of regulation has resulted in a little over 100 American Viticultural Areas. In contrast, while U.S. wineries may wait years for the establishment of an American Viticultural Area, ATF has already formally recognized 591 foreign terms which the Director has found to be "geographically significant" and an additional 128 foreign terms as "nongeneric names which are also distinctive designations of specific wines," thus protecting these terms in the United States. (T.D. ATF-296; 55 FR 17960; April 30, 1990).
Fact #8 - When 85% + 85% = 100%
There are two instances where the use of two viticultural areas on a wine label is authorized.
A wine label may state the names of more than one viticultural area as an appellation of origin when the stated viticultural areas overlap and when 85% of the volume of the wine is derived from grapes grown in the overlapping area, and it has been fully finished within the State, or one of the States, within which the labeled viticultural area is located (except for cellar treatment pursuant to §4.22(c), and blending which does not result in an alteration of class and type under §4.22(b)).
For the second instance, go to #9.
Fact #9 - Napa Valley: when 85% = 100%
Secondly, there is a California state law which requires the use of "Napa Valley" in conjunction with any sub-viticultural areas within the "Napa Valley" viticultural area. Legislation passed in 1990 (California Business and Professions Code Section 25240) provides that any wine labeled with a viticultural area appellation of origin other than the viticultural area "Napa Valley," and which is located entirely within Napa County, shall bear the designation "Napa Valley" on the label in direct conjunction therewith in a type size not smaller than 1mm less than that of the viticultural area designation provided neither designation is smaller than 2 mm on containers of more than 187 ml or smaller than 1 mm on containers of 187 ml or less.
Fact #10 - AVAs can Spoil A Perfectly Good Trademark.
The establishment of a viticultural area may not always be a good thing. Sometimes it can strip a winery of its brand name identity.
Every American brand name created after July 7, 1986, can be found to be "viticulturally significant" if the brand name incorporates the name of a viticultural area, no matter when created. For example, if a winery has been doing business as "Oakville Cellars" since 1987 and "Oakville" is eventually established as viticultural area, the winery's brand name takes on viticultural significance which triggers the requirements of "geographic brand names" subsection (i) of 27 CFR §4.39.
This regulation requires that "Oakville Cellars" must meet the appellation of origin requirements of "Oakville", the viticultural area (i.e., 85% of the wine must be produced from grapes grown within the confines of the viticultural area). If it cannot meet the percentage requirements, Oakville Cellars would be required to do change its brand name for such wines.
Locations
Origins
It's not a viticultural area until the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms SAYS it's a viticultural area.
The viticultural area concept did not exist in the United States before 1978. Prior to that time, wineries complied with vague regulatory standards that permitted the broad use of many geographic indices on their labels. However, in that year, following over two years of extensive rulemaking proceedings, ATF issued final regulations amending certain regulations relating to wine labeling. Among the changes to the regulations was the addition of procedures for the recognition and establishment of American Viticultural Areas. ATF touted these regulations as providing a "comprehensive scheme for appellation of origin labeling." (T.D. ATF-53).
In the very same final rule, new regulations implemented changes to the percentage requirements for varietal wine, the use of more than one variety, appellation of origin requirements, and the use of "estate bottled" nomenclature on wine labels. All of the regulations made final in 1978, including the viticultural area regulations, had a deferred effectiveness date to allow for a smooth industry transition to the new standards Although finalized in 1978, the regulation became mandatory on January 1, 1983.
Procedures for Establishing a Viticultural Area
All American viticultural areas must be "recognized" and "defined" by ATF. While a geographical term may have been in use for a very long period of time, ATF requires by regulation that both substantive and procedural requirements must be met before it will "recognize" and "define" a viticultural area.
ATF permits anyone to petition it for a rule change. The process is not restricted to wineries or grape growers, although to date there have not been any AVAs established which have come from non-industry representatives. According to the provisions of 27 CFR §71.41(c), interested persons may petition for the issuance, amendment, or repeal of a rule. The Bureau is required to give all petitions careful consideration, and must advise the petitioner of the action taken on the petition. §71.41(c) requires that all petitions be addressed to the Director, ATF, Washington, D.C. 20226. Attention: Compliance Operations.
Normally, rule change petitions are required to identify the section or sections of law involved and set forth reasons for the requested action. However, ATF by regulation sets forth the evidentiary criteria it expects for all viticultural area petitions. Recognition starts with the filing of a petition. The petition may be in letter form, but must contain the following information:
- Evidence that the name of the viticultural area is locally and/or nationally known as referring to the area specified in the application;
- historical or current evidence that the boundaries of the viticultural area are as specified in the application;
- evidence relating to the geographical features (climate, soil, elevation, physical features, etc.) which distinguish the viticultural features of the proposed area from surrounding areas;
- the specific boundaries of the viticultural area, based on features which can be found on U.S. Geological Survey (U.S.G.S.) maps of the largest applicable scale (the U.S.G.S. has completed conventional topographic line maps of all of California of the 7.5-minute 1:24,000-scale quadrangle series. This is the most common "largest applicable scale" map used in petitions for the establishment of California viticultural areas); and
- a copy of the appropriate U.S.G.S. map(s) with the boundaries prominently marked (boundaries are oftentimes described as following, wholly or in part, natural land features. For example, descriptions in viticultural area petitions can contain indefinite phrases such as "following a ridge," "along a height of land," "a watershed," and "thence with the mountain." Boundaries of a viticultural area may be a combination of natural features and a series of tangents from point to point, or may follow along a road or railway).
For U.S.G.S. maps, write the U.S. Geological Survey, Branch of Distribution, Box 25286, Federal Center, Denver, Colorado 80225; if the map name is not known, request a map index by State from the U.S. Geological Survey. (The place names shown on quadrangle maps are those in local usage, "as nearly as can be ascertained from officials and residents of the area and from other sources, such as previously published maps, historical records, and reference publications. In selecting the names that are to be published, the map makers make sure that the most important ones are included and that the overall density of names and descriptive labels is appropriate for the scale of the map." Maps for America, ©1979, U.S. Geological Service. Therefore, a viticultural name that appears on a U.S.G.S. map is probative of historical use, a required element of every viticultural area petition).
Pursuant to the Administrative Procedures Act, if a petition is accepted for rulemaking, ATF staff will develop a set of proposed regulations based on the petition and publish the proposal in what is called a "Notice of Proposed Rulemaking" (NPRM) in the Federal Register. The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking normally sets forth the proposed regulation(s), a brief description of the Bureau's justification for the regulation, and would announce a public comment period where all who wish to express an opinion may do so within the allotted time. Here's a sample of a "Notice of Proposed Rulemaking" for the proposed San Francisco Bay viticultural area". The proposal is also available in Adobe Acrobat format.
Public hearings to receive oral testimony on viticultural area petitions, which were routine for earlier AVAs, are very uncommon now. Even the more controversial viticultural area rulemakings (e.g., Oakville, Rutherford, etc.) have not resulted in public hearings. Rather, viticultural areas are now generally established through a more traditional (and less costly) notice-and-comment period procedure where written comments are solicited through a notice published in the Federal Register.
While the regulatory process to establish a viticultural area has become hearing-less, petitions to establish viticultural areas are required to be much more persuasive. Some earlier viticultural area petitions constituted no more than two typewritten pages. Petitions filed today are much more sophisticated and elaborate, containing among other things comprehensive evidence that is directly responsive to the regulatory evidentiary requirements. Today, it is not uncommon for petitions to contain extensive evidence from soil experts and engineers, meteorologists, historians and researchers to bolster those areas of proof required to be contained in the petition.
Once the public comments are obtained, ATF internally conducts it own review and has the option, based on the evidence and comments received, of issuing a final regulation (called a final Treasury Decision) to formally establish the viticultural area. The regulation is given an effective date and is then codified as law. For a sample of a final rule, you may want to review the Mendocino Ridge viticultural area final rule or some of the other federal register notices that we have posted elsewhere on this site.
Purposes
AVAs In Use
ATF regulations recognize a "viticultural area" as one of several kinds of appellations of origin for U.S. and imported wines. ATF regulation authorizes several ways to denote geographic information. Their regulations make distinctions between appellations of origin for American wine and imported wine (see our chart showing the legal requirements for the use of the various appellations). So here's a quick rundown of the way we were, the way we are, and the way we seem to be going.
- Appellations Before American Viticultural Areas
- Appellations Here and Now
- The Big Issue: Brand Names of Viticultural Significance
The origins of the AVA concept have been discussed elsewhere on this site, and the Quality / No Quality properties of the AVA concept have also been addressed. But look at the regulations and what you'll see is that despite the lack of authority by ATF to regulate quality, they can sure do a great job of regulating the use of words in labeling and advertising. See 27 CFR § 4.39 Prohibited Practices, which addresses prohibited label statements, and 27 CFR Part 12, that entire regulatory section devoted to protecting not US domestic names, but foreign nongeneric names of geographic distinction.
That's where things start to get complicated. In one respect, a viticultural area can at once add value to a grower's grape crop, a winery's sales, and a consumer's enjoyment of wine. But viticultural areas can be victims of their own success, and there have been occasions when there have been attempts to capitalize on the value and recognition fought and won by a brand name by making the name a viticultural area.
We don't go into excruciating detail about the issue; we do, however, want you to be aware of the regulatory dilemma. Still game? Read on.
Controversy
Common Ground
Ready to go? Like with every controversy, there's two very good sides and two very good sets of arguments that you can make. Here's the controversy: Should place names be protected more than brand names? Some believe that a viticultural area's reputation can be diminished and injured if allowed to be used as a brand name without restrictions. Some believe that a producer has the right to call a product by any name as long as it does not conflict with another person's trademark and is not misleading. Some believe a little bit of both. But here's a few points that almost everyone can agree on:
- Wineries commonly use place names as brand names.
It's pretty common for wineries to use place names, real or imagined, as the brand name and trademark for their product. You know, places like Sonoma Vineyards, Napa Ridge, Stag's Leap, are all brand names that just happen to be place names as well. Wineries have brand names because they want to build name recognition. When a regulation operates to restrict the use of a brand name that was used without restrictions, the brand owner gets hurt.
- ATF regulates label and advertising terms.
Despite the lack of authority by ATF to regulate quality, ATF can sure do a great job of regulating the use of words in labeling and advertising. See 27 CFR § 4.39 Prohibited Practices, which addresses prohibited label statements, and 27 CFR Part 12, that entire regulatory section devoted to protecting not US domestic names, but foreign nongeneric names of geographic distinction. ATF can't regulate quality, but they can establish standards and require that truthful, adequate, and specific information reach the consumer.
- Anyone can petition for a viticultural area.
Anyone (actually, any "interested person" - see 27 CFR § 71.41(c)) can petition for the establishment of a viticultural area as long as the evidentiary burden is met.
- Viticultural areas have value.
Viticultural areas have value. Period. That's why they're petitioned for. That's why it's so easy to find examples of wineries promoting their wines by the viticultural areas they're from. If I were an appellation, I'd want to be a viticultural area like Napa Valley. Almost no one challenges your integrity.
- Popular brand names have value.
Winery brand names gain in value the more they're used and the more successful the winery's products become. For those that disagree, go tell McDonald's or Mattel or Disney or Kodak that you're going to run roughshod over their trademarks, and see how quickly you can say "lawsuit."
- Consumers could be confused over the improper use of a brand name or a viticultural area name.
And that's why we have laws that seek to protect the integrity of trademarks, and the integrity of viticultural areas. The problem is, they don't always play well together.
27 CFR Part 4.39(i)
At the heart of the controversy is a ATF regulation that addresses the use of geographic brand names, or brand names that have "viticultural significance."
ATF's Regulation: 27 CFR §4.39(i) Geographic Brand Names.
- Except as provided in subparagraph 2, a brand name of viticultural significance may not be used unless the wine meets the appellation of origin requirements for the geographic area names.
- For brand names used in existing certificates of label approval issued prior to July 7, 1986:
- The wine shall meet the appellation of origin requirements for the geographic area names; or
- The wine shall be labeled with an appellation of origin in accordance with §4.34(b) as to location and size of or type of either:
- A county or a viticultural area, if the brand name bears the name of a geographic area smaller than a state, or;
- A state, county or a viticultural area, if the brand name bears a state name; or
- The wine shall be labeled with some other statement which the Director finds to be sufficient to dispel the impression that the geographic area suggested by the brand name is indicative of the origin of the wine.
- A name has viticultural significance when it is the name of a state or county (or the foreign equivalents), when approved as a viticultural area in Part 9 of this chapter, or by a foreign government, or when found to have viticultural significance by the Director.
Note that ATF treats brand names that were used before July 7, 1986, less stringently than those brand names that came into being AFTER that date. Is it arbitrary? Looks that way, unless you think a brand name that was first used on July 6, 1986, is any less deceptive than the identical brand name used a day later. There's a lot of discretion built into this provision. ATF can simply "find" that a brand name has viticultural significance and can sit back and decide whether a statement sufficiently dispels an impression that it finds misleading.
But 4.39(i) also makes a statement that brand names of viticultural significance can be misleading, and that's a proposition that many would agree with.
Other Products Use Geographic Brand Names
Something happens when products with brand names that bear a likeness to a viticultural area are compared to other products that use geographic areas in their brand names. Our world is not simply limited to wine, and that world is quite complex and confusing in and of itself. Wineries and other businesses and producers use place names regularly. In some cases, we accept these brand names (that just so happen to be place names) as brand names. We know they aren't being used to connote the geographic origin of the product. Here's a couple of examples of this:
Pecans in Santa Cruz?
What? Pecans in Santa Cruz? No, pecans in Arizona. When you buy Santa Cruz Valley Arizona Pecans, you're not supposed to be confused about where the pecans are from because it's pretty obvious that Santa Cruz, at least with respect to pecans, is NOT that place with great surf and a great University and some great wineries, but that place in Arizona that is well known for its pecans.
Likewise, you don't expect your Pontiac Firebird muscle car to derive all of its parts from Pontiac, Michigan. You don't even care if its assembled in Pontiac, Michigan, Molokai, or Tennessee, just as long as it looks like its moving when its standing still.
Chicken Or Egg?
You may not care that your New England Clam Chowder didn't come from New England because you're smart enough to know that the term represents a style rather than an appellation. You'd think that a lawsuit alleging false advertising by Pontiac for not having all of its parts from Pontiac would be ludicrous.
Many wineries use place names as their brand names not to represent a style, but to represent a unique level of quality for their products; in other words, as a trademark. Many wineries use unheard of place names as their brand names until their success develops name recognition in the name and then suddenly you find there's a petition underway to establish your very own brand name as a viticultural area. Then you find your BRAND name being used as an appellation, used to attract consumers that you've worked very hard to acquire through ... brand recognition.
Still other wineries may use place names throughout their label to indicate a wine production function (e.g., "bottled in St. Helena, Napa Valley, CA, from a family with five generations in wine production in Napa Valley, CA") other than the appellation of origin of the wine.
Most wine lawyers will counsel their clients NOT to use a place name, even if its fictitious, as a brand name, because 27 CFR 4.39(i) can really ruin their day. ATF, which denounces any trademark right acquisitions through their label approval process and in fact will claim that it has no such authority to grant trademark rights, has clear authority to enforce geographic origin laws like 4.39(i). And that is where the problems start. Lines between trademark law and geographic origin can get pretty blurry, and 4.39(i) may or may not be adequate to address the issues that arise when intellectual property butts heads with geographic integrity.
AVAs Have Rights, Too
If I could be an appellation, I'd want to be an AVA, and not just any AVA, but the Bill Gates of AVAs. I'd want to be someplace like Napa Valley or Sonoma Valley or Mendocino or Monticello. Someplace famous and well known for grape-growing, where the best wines come from, where I'd be respected and admired and can bask in the secure shelter of my microclimate.
So what happens when someone comes along and plasters your name on everything from auto parts to mineral water? The position of some very well respected people in the wine industry is that viticultural area names deserve to be protected, because allowing the name to be used for other products or as a brand name for wine products not coming from the region misleads consumers and dilutes the integrity that the area has taken great pains to develop. Diluting the integrity of the viticultural area also demeans it and strips some value from its use and meaning. ATF's regulations assume that all brand names that have viticultural significance need special treatment, but allows brand names used before July 7 of 1986 to be treated differently from brand names used after that date, as if to say that consumers are less confused with those brand names of geographic significance that existed before 1986.
We realize that there's some things that consumers buy where origin is extremely important. When a consumer buys her "Kona Coffee," she really wants to buy coffee from Kona. But many of the Kona coffees that you purchase are really Kona blends (as low as 5% Kona coffee). Even the Kona Coffee producers can't decide on how much Kona needs to be in Kona coffee. And when the Martha Stewart types go to their gourmet shops and are solicited with Maui Onions at gazillions times more than regular onions, then you have to ask yourself whether there's something to protecting the integrity of geographic names. And we can predict that Washington State would be justifiably angry if a supermarket tried to pass off apples from Chile as "Washington Apples."
The Future
The Wine Industry Must Reach Some Accord on Intellectual Property Rights and Brand Names of Viticultural Significance
Nothing is as simple as we like to make it appear to be on the web. This is an extremely complex issue that involves all levels of the industry. There are difficult questions that the industry must face, and in the midst of asking these questions we well be also asking ourselves, among other things, whether the AVA process is disingenuous, if it is harming the intellectual property rights of our wineries, if we're spending too much time protecting foreign terms and not enough time protecting US terms here and abroad. In the words of a famous wine writer, to be continued ...
