30 June 2026
Some product names are more than names.
Champagne. Darjeeling. Stilton. Parma. Pisco.
These names point to place, reputation and authenticity. That is why geographical indications, or GIs, matter.
A GI identifies goods as coming from a particular country, region or locality, where the product’s quality, reputation or character is linked to that place.
In simple terms: it protects the commercial value of a place-based product name.
And in Australia, GIs are about to become a much bigger issue.
Australia’s current GI system has been clunky
For wine, Australia already has a specific GI system.
For many other products, however, overseas GIs have usually had to fit into the certification trade mark system.
That can work. Australia already has certification trade marks for names such as Stilton, Darjeeling and Parma.
But certification trade marks are not always an easy fit for GIs. They require rules about who can use the mark, what standards apply, and how compliance will be monitored. Those rules also need to be reviewed.
That may be manageable for one product name.
It is not so neat when hundreds of names need protection.
The Australia–EU FTA changes the scale
Australia and the European Union have now concluded negotiations on their free trade agreement.
As part of that deal, Australia has agreed to protect 396 EU geographical indications. That includes 165 agricultural and food GIs and 231 spirit drink GIs.
That is a big shift.
The EU has long treated GIs as serious commercial assets. For European producers, names linked to place are not just marketing language. They are valuable rights.
Australia is now expected to develop a new GI system. That system is intended to protect the agreed EU GIs, but it should also give Australian producers a clearer pathway to protect Australian GIs.
That second part is important.
This should not only be about protecting European names in Australia. It should also be about giving Australian regions, producer groups and industries a better way to protect their own place-based reputations.
Then came PISCO
The timing of the Federal Court’s PISCO decision could hardly be better.
The Republic of Peru applied in 2019 to register PISCO as a certification trade mark in Australia.
IP Australia rejected the application.
Peru appealed.
In 2026, the Federal Court found in Peru’s favour and ordered that the application be accepted for registration.
That does not mean every issue is necessarily finished. The application still has to go through the remaining trade mark process, including potential opposition.
But it is still a major win for Peru.
It also shows the problem with Australia’s current approach.
Peru spent years fighting for protection of one GI. By comparison, the EU secured Australian protection for 396 GIs through trade negotiations.
That tells you something.
Court proceedings are slow. Trade negotiations are powerful. And Australia’s GI system has not been especially easy for non-wine producers to navigate.
Why businesses should care
This is not just a story about Pisco.
It is a reminder that place names can be commercially valuable.
For Australian businesses, this matters if they:
-
sell food, beverages or agricultural products
-
use regional names in branding
-
import or distribute overseas products
-
export into markets with stronger GI protection
-
use names like “style”, “type”, “kind” or “method”
-
rely on provenance, tradition or origin in marketing
-
want to protect a regional product reputation
A product name that looks harmless in Australia may create problems overseas. Equally, a regional Australian name that has real market value may be worth protecting properly.
The opportunity for Australian producers
Australia has strong regional products and reputations.
Think wine, whisky, cheese, honey, seafood, olive oil, native foods, smallgoods and premium agricultural products.
A better GI system could help local producers protect those reputations, stop misuse and build export value.
But GIs do not protect themselves.
They need rules, governance, standards and a clear connection between the product and the place. Producer groups and regional industries should start thinking about whether their names are valuable enough to organise around.
The bottom line
The PISCO case and the Australia–EU FTA point in the same direction.
Geographical indications are becoming more important in Australia.
For some businesses, that will mean checking whether product names, labels and marketing claims create risk.
For others, it may create an opportunity to protect a regional name with real commercial value.
Either way, place-based branding is no longer something to treat casually.
IP Solved helps businesses manage trade marks, certification marks, geographical indications, product names, labelling claims and brand strategy in Australia and overseas.
If your business uses place-based branding, or wants to protect a regional product reputation, speak with IP Solved before the issue becomes a dispute.
This article provides general information only and is not legal advice. Specific advice should be obtained for your business, product and target markets.
