This article appraises the prospects, benefits and challenges of sui generis protection of geographical indications (GIs) in South Africa (SA). In SA, there is no specific legislation protecting GIs, and the country relies, amongst others, on the common law system and various legislations, such as the Agricultural Products Standards Act of 1990; Counterfeit Goods of 1997; the Liquor Products; the Trademark Act; the Intellectual Property Laws Amendment Act of 2013; and the Consumer Protection Act of 1998. It is therefore argued that SA needs a specific law that considers GIs as a specific, separate intellectual property right (IPR).
ArmisteadJ. (2000). Whose cheese is it anyway? Correctly slicing the European regulation concerning protections for geographic indications. Transnational Law & Contemporary Problems, 10(1), 303–324.
2.
BaeumerL. (1999). Protection of geographical indications under WIPO treaties and questions concerning the relationship between those treaties and the TRIPS Agreement. Symposium on the Protection of Geographical Indications in the Worldwide Context (WIPO Publication No. 760 (E) 12).
BothaL.(2004). Multilateral issues relating to geographical indications. Retrieved 4March2015, from www.tralac.org
5.
CassimF.SibandaO.S. (2012). The consumer protection act and the introduction of collective consumer redress through class actions. Tydskrif vir Hedensdaagse Romeins-Hollandse Reg/Journal of Contemporary Roman-Dutch Law, 75, 586–602.
6.
ChenJ. (1996). A sober second look at appellations of origin: How the United States will crash France’s wine and cheese party. Minnesota Journal of Global Trade, 5, 29–54.
7.
Commission on Intellectual Property Rights. (2004). Integrating intellectual property rights and development policy. London: Commission on Intellectual Property Rights.
8.
DeanO.H. (2009). Red card. Without Prejudice, 9(8), 17–20.
9.
Du BoisM. (2013). Recognition and protection of traditional knowledge interests as property in South African law. European Journal of Property Law, 2(2), 144–170.
GrantC. (2005). Geographical indications and agricultural products: Investigating their relevance in a South African context (MCOM thesis). University of Pretoria.
12.
HarmsL.T.H. (2009). A few negative trends in the field of intellectual property rights. Tydskrif vir Hedensdaagse Romeins-Hollandse Reg/Journal of Contemporary Roman-Dutch Law, 71(2), 175–192.
13.
KraftA.V.G. (2001). New wine in old bottles. Journal of Contemporary Legal Issues, 12, 464–469.
14.
Roht-ArriazaN. (1996). Of seeds and shamans: The appropriation of the scientific and technical knowledge of indigenous and local communities. Michigan Journal of International Law, 17, 919–965.
15.
SnyderD. (2008). Enhanced protections for geographical indications under TRIPS agreement: Potential conflicts under the U.S. constitutional and statutory regimes. Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law, 18(5), 1297–1329.
16.
StatenT.L. (2005). Geographical indications protection under the TRIPS agreement: Uniformity not extension. Journal of the Patent & Trademark Office Society, 87, 221–232.
17.
UlukoH.OyewumniA.MandewoG. (2012). Protecting geographical indications in Malawi: Current situation and future prospects. Journal of Intellectual Property Rights, 17(3), 226–234.
18.
Van Der MerweA. (2009). Geographical indication protection in South Africa with particular reference to wines and to the EU. The Estey Centre Journal of International Law and Trade Policy, 10(1), 186–195.
19.
Van WykM. (2009). The legal protection of geographical indications. Codicillus, 47(1), 39–53.
