For The Love Of Port

http://www.decanter.com/news/wine-news/ ... laret-name

Fascinating, your thoughts on this?

A British term for a French wine. As long as they do not try to trademark it, I have no problems. Claret is one of the generic terms allowed by the US BATF.

Great, another level of confusion enters French wine nomenclature. These guys are, and have been since the departure of Alexis Lichine from the scene, the gang that couldn't shoot straight when it comes to marketing. If it weren't for Robert Parker's hype and conspicuous consumption in the Far East, Bordeaux would be left with no coherent marketing plan whatsoever...

Claret is still a well-used term in the UK and is used by a number of supermarkets on the labels of their Bordeaux-sourced BOBs. Restricting the term to only part of the production of the region is likely to add confusion for the consumer.

I like claret wines, but do not think the French should "own" it. It's too generic of a term that does not imply France, french or a techinque crafted in France.

Moses Botbol wrote:I like claret wines, but do not think the French should "own" it. It's too generic of a term that does not imply France, french or a techinque crafted in France.

That depends on whether you live in the old or the new world. In the UK, and I suspect in most of Europe, "claret" = French red wine from the region now known as Bordeaux. When I hear the word I think of France, nowhere else.

Fine, as long as the French pronounce the "t" at the end To drop it would be a hypercorrection, or is that a hyperforeignism?

Looked it up. It is a hyperforeignism.

Since "claret" was a generic term that originated outside Bordeaux, i'm not sure i go along with the idea that the Bordelais are "reclaiming" it rather than simply "appropriating" it!

I suppose the big question for me is whether they intend to stake any sort of exclusive claim to the "brand" name (which they are at pains to stress does not comprise a new appellation...). For instance, the following sentence sounds to me like they might be be wanting to assert some sort of exclusive right to use the term as a brand:

The term has never been official before, and has never used by the French,’ said Sichel, ‘but for the new brand to work, it needs it to have legitimacy not only in England, but in all export markets, and within France itself.

I can't see them getting very far in Europe on the basis of law alone, though i must admit i'm no IP/trademark specialist, but whether they will able to exert enough commercial influence/pressure to prevent ordinary usage by retailers on their own-label bottlings (for example: "Berrys' Ordinary Claret") is another question.