How do we think EU negotiations will go? (Vol 13)
Discussion
Sway said:
Oh no, without the EU's protection we'll be f
ked!
The US fked the French, they'll fk us too...
See the logical flaw?
As for anecdote outweighing data, well that bit of the pyramid of debate is wider than the upper levels - so it's bigger and therefore better, right?
EU membership hardly protected French champagne...ked!The US f
ked the French, they'll fk us too...See the logical flaw?
As for anecdote outweighing data, well that bit of the pyramid of debate is wider than the upper levels - so it's bigger and therefore better, right?
Tuna said:
Refuse to answer? I answered your original question three times. Now you've gone off on one and I'm meant to be responsible for you? Do you not have a carer?
Come on Nick, you can do better than this.
Tuna my point is relation to our future trade deal with the USA.Come on Nick, you can do better than this.
I do not believe it is likely to be unbiased and yes we do have the opportunity to reject proposals but the pressure to come to a deal may need some unfortunate concessions.
Surely The fact that the USA have already achieved an advantageous position with regard to Champagne evidences their power.
cb31 said:
don'tbesilly said:
Never mind that video I think this is closer to the mark for Mr Gnomehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8Kum8OUTuk
Nickgnome said:
Surely The fact that the USA have already achieved an advantageous position with regard to Champagne evidences their power.
You either don't know how they (US) skirt the trademark or you're obfuscating the facts. It dates back over 100 years and the use of Champagne on US wines is not allowed in Europe. And in any event, if you can read you would notice the labels clearly sale 'California' in bold font.It has nothing to do with pressure and achieving a trade advantage. It's a questionable loophole post WW1
Burwood said:
Nickgnome said:
Surely The fact that the USA have already achieved an advantageous position with regard to Champagne evidences their power.
You either don't know how they (US) skirt the trademark or you're obfuscating the facts. It dates back over 100 years and the use of Champagne on US wines is not allowed in Europe. And in any event, if you can read you would notice the labels clearly sale 'California' in bold font.It has nothing to do with pressure and achieving a trade advantage. It's a questionable loophole post WW1
I take a simplistic analysis.
Is it an advantageous position for the USA? Surely the rest of the whys and wherefores drop away.
How do we ensure a more equitable position for the U.K.
Baby Shark doo doo doo doo said:
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: This thread 
Although Russia is several hours ahead which might explain things
Tuna said:
Nickgnome said:
If you don’t mind that some of our brands disappear it’s not an issue.
I've told you specifically why that's not going to happen. That's why you got the first response - because of your selective blindness when people do respond to your nonsense.Nickgnome said:
No I don’t know how they skirt trademarks. That’s not really my point.
I take a simplistic analysis.
So, from a complete ignorance of the subject you come to the conclusion that the USA will force us to trade weaker trademark protection as part of a trade deal. in the cold light of day, isn't the smallest glimmer of doubt entering your peripheral vision?I take a simplistic analysis.
Using Champagne as a reference is particularly weak - as you simultaneously make is clear that this is something 'close to your heart' and show you have never discussed the matter with anyone who knows. One of your preferred Californian sommeliers would be more than capable of explaining the system, and the history behind it.
Nickgnome said:
Earthdweller said:
Nickgnome said:
I. Never suggested it did.
Yet it protects Melton Mowbray’s finest export ?Nickgnome said:
fatboy18 said:
Would the Melton Mowbray Pork Pies be from Good British English Stock Pork or Imported Stuff?
It won’t matter soon. No Eu to ensure those trade marks are protected.You will be able to buy your Melton Mowbray from Minnesota and Cheddar from Carolina and single malt Scotch from Scottsdale.
jsf said:
So will I still be allowed to make 'Lancashire' hot pot for tea here in the Midlands? Or will I need to pay royalties or something?Need to know because I think it's my turn to do some meal planning.
Digga said:
jsf said:
So will I still be allowed to make 'Lancashire' hot pot for tea here in the Midlands? Or will I need to pay royalties or something?Need to know because I think it's my turn to do some meal planning.
Wherever I make my home I make my hotpot
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff