Seattle Trademark Lawyer

Today’s New York Times reports on the imminent expansion of the Champagne appellation in France. (NYT map here; past STL discussion here.) Most of the article discusses the reason for the expansion — to make winemakers more money. Indeed, the article says once included in the Champagne zone, a hectare of land — two and a half acres — would jump in value from 6,000 euros to almost one million euros.

We get it. The Champagne designation is valuable.

What is largely missing from the discussion is why that is true. To me, the expansion suggests one of two things: either (1) the zone is imprecise as it has been drawn since 1927, meaning that some wine produced outside the zone possesses all the qualities of wine sold under the “Champagne” designation, or (2) the zone is precise as drawn, but is being re-drawn to include wine with different qualities anyway so producers with land outside the region can charge a premium for their wine once it is re-packaged and sold as “Champagne.”

In the interests of brand integrity, I would think Champagne trade groups would embrace the first option. However, I don’t see that happening. Instead, most of what I read suggests the expansion is being driven by economics.

For example, the NYT quotes the head of the Union of Champagne Houses as explaining: “The euro is rising and the dollar is falling, and soon we’ll have a real structural problem if the cost of the grape keeps increasing every year.”

This is the Champagne industry’s spokesperson. What I don’t hear him saying is that grapes grown one kilometer outside the zone are just as good as grapes grown inside the zone, so it only makes sense to include wine made from those grapes as “Champagne.” I instead hear him saying something akin to: “We have no choice but to expand because production costs and international economics are killing us.”

What does that say about the Champagne brand? The Champagne brand should immediately tell consumers: “If you buy Champagne, you can be assured your sparkling white wine will have qualities X, Y, and Z, which are worth the extra cost because Champagne is better than sparkling white wines made from grapes grown elsewhere.” By expanding the zone, this message risks being watered down.

The article does state: “The current Champagne growing region encompasses a patchwork of territory sprawling over 87,000 acres, in 319 villages. In March, a team of experts appointed by the French government approved more than 40 more communes, or communities, to add to the Champagne territory, zones that are now the subject of final appeals.”

That’s the message on which Champagne trade groups should focus: “The best scientists have scoured the French countryside. After exhaustive tests, they have discovered that grapes grown in certain neighboring areas share the identical qualities as grapes grown within the Champagne region. Rejoice! By recognizing these fine wines as Champagne, the Champagne you have come to love will soon be more plentiful!”

That’s a far cry from what I’ve been hearing so far.