They’ve both Australians who have put Europeans
back in their place.
Nobody needs to be told what Mitchell Johnston did to the English Test Cricket team – something that nobody has done since Lillee and Thomson in 1974/75.
Michael Arblaster has been no less effective, but upon a different field. Arblaster is Australia’s Deputy Registrar of Trade Marks. As such, he was the individual before whom the Winemakers’ Federation of Australia (WFA) objected to an application by the European Commission for protection in Australia of the recently installed Italian geographical indication of Prosecco. To try to defend their turf, the Italians changed the name of a grape and created a region whose name is a place that lies well outside that region. But they didn’t fool Arblaster.
Until August 1, 2009 it was universally understood that Prosecco was the name of a grape. This grape was used to make a sparkling wine of somewhat variable quality from the Veneto region of Italy, traditionally in an area near Conegliano and Valdobbiadene in the hills north of Treviso. The name of the grape derives from the village of Prosecco, a short distance from Trieste, but about 100km from where the finer examples of its eponymous wines are grown.
However, on that date Prosecco had its status elevated from DOC to DOCG (Denominazione di Origine Controllata e Garantita), meaning we had a new DOCG level region of that name. Furthermore, the Italians have altered the name of the grape from Prosecco to Glera (or Serprino), both of which I assume are old synonyms for the variety. Many European varieties have a range of such synonyms.
At the same time, DOCG status was also granted for Prosecco di Montello e Colli Asolani. Furthermore, a new DOC was established to replace the old IGT status of the provinces of Belluno, Gorizia, Padova, Pordenone, Treviso, Trieste, Udine, Venezia, and Vicenza. In just a few years, the Italian Government decided that Prosecco had become a part of its winemaking tradition.
Actually, Prosecco’s past is not a distinguished one. Until the 1960s its wine was hard to separate from the basic Asti Spumante of Piedmont. However, improvements in winemaking and a bid to create an identity in the marketplace for its wine did lead to significant recent improvements in quality. But it’s still been promoted in cans by wine luminaries of the likes of Paris Hilton.
But so far, so good. A new wine style and its grape variety had achieved recognition. But by keeping the name of the prosecco grape variety as part of the DOCG names and as part of the DOC zone, the Italians knew that they were stacking their own hands. They played significant geographical tricks as a step towards owning the name of the grape – not through copyright issues, but through the new PDO (Protected Designation of Origin) appellation system within Italy and through the series of agreements made by other wine-producing countries such as Australia with the EU. It’s important to remember that the actual village of Prosecco is rather a long way from these new denominations.
The European Commission then sought to register the new GI of Prosecco as a GI in Australia. This is what the WFA objected to in April 2012. Arblaster agreed with the objection. Had he not, Australian producers would not have been able to use Prosecco on a label. Why? Because in Australia at least, Prosecco remains the name of a grape variety.
Why is this important? Over the last decade and more, Prosecco has grown massively in popularity, and countries like Australia and South Africa have adopted the grape, fashioning a new style of crisp, savoury sparking wine in the process that their consumer have enjoyed. Furthermore, some have found export success. Those that have are not sold as impostor Italian wines. On the contrary, they celebrate a grape variety and a style that in many cases will actually draw buyers back to the wines of Italy.
If I knew their addresses I’d send each of Johnston and Arblaster a case of Prosecco. From Dal Zotto in Victoria’s King Valley.
