Engagement Paper: Review of Canada's Geographical Indication regime

Purpose of this engagement

The Government of Canada is reviewing its geographical indications (GI) regime to assess opportunities for expansion to include new types of products. We also want to understand how the regime could be improved to better protect and promote Indigenous knowledge, cultural expressions, and the use of Indigenous place names.

This public engagement is a chance for producers, consumers, communities, and Indigenous Peoples to share their views, ideas, and concerns. Your feedback will help guide future decisions about Canada's GI regime.

Introduction

The Government of Canada is reviewing what categories of geographical indications (GI) are protected under the federal Trademarks Act. Right now, Canada's GI regime only covers certain agricultural and food products, as well as wines and spirits. The intent of this review is to assess whether adding new categories of GI protection could help Canadian manufactured goods, and their producers, gain stronger recognition across the country and around the world.

As part of this engagement, the government also wants to hear from Indigenous Peoples about how these changes could be developed in a way to better protect and promote Indigenous knowledge (IK) and Indigenous cultural expressions (ICE), and how Indigenous place names should be appropriately reflected in GIs.

While GIs can be protected in different legal ways, including through common law, trademarks, and certification marks, this engagement is focused on the federal GI regime under the Trademarks Act.

GIs are a type of intellectual property (IP) that links the quality or reputation of a product to a specific place. Well known examples include "Canadian Rye Whisky" for spirit drinks, and "Ontario Icewine," "vin de glace du Quebec", "Niagara Peninsula" and "Okanagan Valley" for wines.

GIs are not widely used in Canada. Out of almost 870 GIs registered in Canada, fewer than 30 are Canadian. However, some Indigenous experts and industry stakeholders have suggested that Canada could consider expanding GIs to other traditional products, such as crafts or industrial goods, which may be tied to longer and richer histories of production that are associated with distinct regions across the country, such as: shipbuilding, weaving and textiles, beadwork, ceramics, wood and stone carvings.

More Canadians are choosing to "Buy Canadian" and support local businesses. Consumers benefit from GIs because they help them trust that a product is genuine, and not a fake or copy. Growing awareness of a GI can also help drive tourism to the region.

GI protections can help local economies grow. Micro, small and medium-sized businesses can benefit when a region becomes known for making high-quality products. This can help business growth and development, and create jobs, especially in developing regions. According to a study conducted by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), GIs can also help keep production and investment in local areas. Because the value of GI products is tied to where they are made, businesses are less likely to move production elsewhere.

Expanding Canada's GI regime could also help Canadian products reach more global markets and gain stronger international recognition. Many places around the world already include non-agricultural products in their GI regimes, including India and many South American countries. The European Union (EU), the global leader on GI promotion, recently expanded its GI regime in December 2025 to include crafts and industrial products. If Canada made similar changes, Canadian products may achieve a similar reputation and recognition as other products marketed and distinguished on the basis of their GIs. It could also support reciprocal protections and enforcement.

Expanding categories of GIs could be beneficial to Indigenous entrepreneurs, especially those working in traditional crafts, manufacturing, and cultural sectors. Indigenous Peoples operate businesses across a range of sectors, including construction, mining, health, technology, and arts and crafts, and have developed distinct processes and products in relation to managing resources from their traditional lands and territories.

Indigenous Peoples have raised concerns regarding the misappropriation of Indigenous products by non-Indigenous businesses and companies, which reduces the reputation and value of authentic Indigenous-made products. These industries are significant contributors to the economy: in 2022, the Indigenous arts, entertainment and recreation sector generated $468 million in revenues, while in 2023, the Indigenous tourism industry generated $1.6 billion in GDP.

It is anticipated that the expanded availability of GIs could help protect traditional knowledge and practices linked to a specific region, thereby promoting cultural heritage, enhancing market value, and helping buyers recognize authentic products. Expanded GIs could also help improve export opportunities for Indigenous businesses, which currently export at lower rates than Canadian small businesses overall.

Section 1: Review of Canada's Geographical Indications (GI) regime

The Government of Canada is reviewing its system for protecting GIs to see if the GI regime should be expanded to include new types of products. The purpose of this public engagement is to gather feedback on how Canada's GI regime could better meet the needs of producers, consumers, communities, and Indigenous Peoples. The Government will also consider how any changes could relate to other IP rights, as well as possible impacts in Canada and internationally.

The Government also wants to hear how changes could better protect and promote IK and ICE, cultural expressions, and how Indigenous place names could be respected and reflected within the system.

This engagement is meant to start a conversation about whether to expand the GI regime and to give people a chance to share opportunities, ideas, or concerns. Feedback gathered through this engagement will inform the Government's future decisions about Canada's GI regime.

Objectives

This engagement aims to:

• Gather input from producers, businesses, industry associations, Indigenous Peoples and the public on how Canada's current GI regime is working;
• Explore opportunities and challenges related to expanding GI protection to other types of products or sectors;
• Understand the potential impacts of any changes on IP holders, trade, innovation, tourism, Indigenous Peoples, and regional development; and
• Support reconciliation by identifying how GIs could, where appropriate, help recognize and protect Indigenous cultural heritage, knowledge, and products linked to place.

The Government of Canada will use this feedback to help assess whether changes to the GI regime could deliver fair, transparent and meaningful benefits for Canadians.

Scope of engagement

This engagement invites views on Canada's GI regime, including how it operates today and how it might evolve. Participants are encouraged to share:

• Perspectives on the effectiveness of the current framework, including strengths and limitations;
• Views on possible areas for expansion, including which types of products might benefit from GI protection and why;
• Opinions on how GIs should interact with other forms of IP such as trademarks, certification marks, or other existing rights, and any other challenges or limitations; and,
• Insights on the role and responsibilities of groups or organizations ("responsible authorities") that could currently request or manage GIs.

The engagement recognizes the significant value and particular insights that Indigenous producers, communities, organizations, and businesses bring on how GIs might complement existing or new ways of protecting and promoting IK, ICE and Indigenous products.

All feedback will help the Government of Canada better understand whether, and in what ways, Canada's GI regime should be adapted to reflect Canada's diverse products, cultures, and economic opportunities.

Overview of Geographical Indications (GIs)

Definition

Geographical Indications (GIs) are a form of IP that acts as source and quality indicators, signaling to consumers that a product is from a certain geographic region, and has a reputation, quality, and/or other characteristics that are essentially attributable to the region.

GIs are governed by sections 11.11-11.24 of the Trademarks Act and defined under section 2:

Currently, Canada's GI regime is limited to certain categories of agricultural products, foods, wines and spirits. Examples of international GIs protected in Canada include "Bordeaux" for French wines, "Parmigiano Reggiano" for Italian cheese, "Kalamata" for Greek olives, and "Ĉeské pivo" for Czech beer. Canadian GIs include "Canadian Whisky", "Okanagan Valley" for wines, and "Maïs sucré de Neuville" for corn.

Canada's GI regime

In Canada, it is unlawful to use a GI on products, or import or export such products, that do not come from the approved area or that are not made according to the applicable processes or standards. However, this applies only to the same type of product. For example, the GI "Niagara Peninsula" for wine can be used to stop wine producers outside the Niagara region from using the name, but cannot be used to stop someone from using "Niagara Peninsula" for peaches.

Canada's GI regime found within the Trademarks Act is administered by the Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO). Information on requesting GI protection can be found on Process to Request that a Geographical Indication be Entered on Canada's List of Geographical Indications page, and detailed information about Canada's GI regime is found in Annex A.

International landscape

Canada's rules for protecting GIs have been influenced by international frameworks and trade agreements that have set standards for the protection and recognition of GIs. These agreements aim to make sure that producers, consumers, and trading partners all have a fair and consistent understanding of what GIs mean and how they can be used.

Global standards for GIs

The Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) is part of the World Trade Organization (WTO) framework. It sets the minimum global standards for protecting IP, including GIs. Under TRIPS, all WTO members, including Canada, must provide the legal means to prevent the misleading use of place names and unfair competition.

• For all products, TRIPS requires member countries to provide the legal means for rightsholders to stop others from using a GI in a way that misleads consumers about a product's true origin.
• For wines and spirits, TRIPS requires member countries to provide extra protection— even if consumers are not misled — to preserve the reputation of well-known regions such as "Champagne" or "Scotch Whisky."

Canada's Trademarks Act supports the implementation of these obligations, ensuring that GIs are recognized and enforced in line with TRIPS standards. TRIPS also allows for certain exceptions to GI protection. For example, there is no obligation to provide protection for common names or for GIs that are either not protected in the country of origin or that have fallen into disuse. These exceptions are designed to balance the protection of genuine regional product names with fair use, existing rights, and clear communication for consumers.

Other Jurisdictions

Across jurisdictions, the enhanced level of GI protection required for wines and spirits has evolved to include not only agricultural products and foods, but arts, crafts, industrial products, and, in some countries, even services. For example, the EU recently expanded its GI regime to include crafts and industrial products. Other WTO members have also expanded or are expanding their GI regimes to include arts and handicrafts. This trend reflects a growing recognition that such goods often embody traditional methods of production and promote sustainability in ways that merit distinct protection.

This section invites input on the future direction of Canada's GI regime. It aims to gather perspectives on what an expanded GI regime could look like in practice, including which types of products or services might be eligible, and how changes could impact economic, cultural, and innovation outcomes, including for Indigenous Peoples.

• When you think about Canada's diverse products, traditions, and cultural practices, which ones seem particularly well suited to GI protections, and why?
• From your perspective, how might expanded GI protections support—or pose challenges for—regional or Indigenous economies, cultural heritage, or creative industries?

Section 2: Understanding current practices

Interaction with existing IP protections

While GIs are governed by the Trademarks Act, they are different from other forms of IP under the Act, including trademarks and certification marks. A trademark distinguishes one company's goods or services from another's, while a certification mark shows that products or services meet certain standards, such as "WOOLMARK" or "FAIRTRADE". Where GIs primarily differ is that they protect names that link a product's quality or reputation to the place it comes from. A GI can be an option when the product's unique character depends on its geographic origin rather than on business ownership or meeting a cross-regional technical standard of quality in production. A GI does not stop others from using similar designs or styles, but it prevents them from using that GI to claim their product comes from that specific region.

Businesses that use local materials or local production methods may benefit from GI protection, particularly when the region's name is recognized by consumers as a sign of quality or uniqueness. By linking a product to the place it comes from and the traditions that make it unique, a GI can protect the reputation or quality of crafts and industrial products such as furniture manufacturing, woodworking, weaving, or drum-making by setting standards for how, where, and by whom they are made.

This section explores how GIs interact with existing IP tools, such as trademarks and certification marks. It seeks to understand how individuals, organizations and Indigenous Peoples currently govern and signal product origin, quality, and tradition. Feedback will help identify potential complementarity, overlaps or gaps.

• How do you currently use trademarks or certification marks to signal origin, quality, or tradition? How might these existing tools relate to—or differ from—the types of protections available through GIs?
• How do you see your or your organization's products or traditions relating to the concept of GIs? In what ways, if any, do you feel they align with the kinds of qualities typically protected through GI systems?
• How might the expansion of GI protections interact with existing trademark or certification mark systems? What types of overlaps, tensions, or complementarities might emerge?

Section 3: Scope and feasibility of an expanded GI regime

Defining new categories

There is growing recognition that protecting handicrafts and artisanal products brings cultural, social and economic benefits. In addition to providing mechanisms for safeguarding artisanal knowledge, GIs can serve as market signals ensuring fair recognition of origin and fostering sustainable local economies.

Defining new GI categories does not need to be restricted to specific types of products but may be based on a standard of production that is tied to the region. For example, the EU's definition of "craft and industrial products' specifies that products must be:

1. produced either entirely by hand or with the aid of manual or digital tools, or by mechanical means, whenever the manual contribution is an important component of the finished product; or
2. produced in a standardised way, including serial production and by using machines.

This definition allows a variety of craft and industrial products to be eligible for GI protection (e.g. glasswork, cutlery, porcelain, wooden objects, lace, natural stones).

Although not common, GIs are also used for services. Tourist-based services, in particular, may be tied to authenticity and quality (e.g., traditional ceremonies, treatments, activities, and outdoor experiences) and can be considered for protection in some jurisdictions.

• What characteristics—whether cultural, environmental, historical, or production related—do you think make certain products or traditions strong candidates for GI protection under an expanded regime?

Responsible authority roles and responsibilities

In Canada, a request for protection of a GI must designate a "responsible authority." A "responsible authority" is a person, firm, or entity, typically a government body or producer association, that acts as the legal applicant and representative for protecting a specific GI. Typically, responsible authorities have a longstanding connection to producers, and tend to either be government bodies, associations, or institutions capable of managing the rights related to GI protection.

Defining a GI and determining a responsible authority may require support from many players: manufacturers/creators of the product, those growing or harvesting materials, Elders or master craftspeople maintaining traditional methods involved in the process. Once there is agreement among everyone concerned about the name of the GI, the product itself, and the methods attached to its creation, they may seek protection for that GI. Being territorial in nature, each country has its own procedure to obtain protection.

Currently, there are four responsible authorities who manage all Canadian-based GIs. They are:

• Vintners Quality Alliance (VQA) Ontario;
• Conseil des appellations réservées et des termes valorisants (CARTV);
• British Columbia Ministry of Agriculture and Lands; and,
• Association of Canadian Distillers (Spirits Canada).

This section aims to gather views on feasibility, governance, and key design considerations to ensure any expansion is effective, inclusive, and reflective of Canada's diverse contexts. To do this, it seeks to identify regional, industry-based associations, artisan groups, Indigenous governments or other organizations operating in Canada who could become a "responsible authority" with respect to a product category.

• Which organizations or groups in Canada could be well-suited to serving as responsible authorities? How do these bodies influence quality, authenticity, or reputation?

Limitations

Scope

GIs can raise challenges when the methods, knowledge, or traditions behind a product are shared across multiple communities or regions. In such cases, defining a single geographic boundary or group of rights holders may risk excluding others with legitimate ties to the practice, or misrepresenting how the tradition is collectively maintained. This can create concerns about who is recognized, who benefits, and how to ensure governance models reflect the full range of communities connected to the product. Alternatively, GIs can cover a whole country or large regions. This can help provide broader support for a responsible authority but may also serve to diminish recognition and impacts to specific regions.

• Are there products that could make strong candidates for expanded GI protection with benefits that are shared across communities or regions? Would broad regional recognition have positive or negative impacts?

Recognition

While trademark holders may specify on their products or labels which word, words, or designs are intended to be used as a trademarks by using the symbol "™" (or, if the mark is registered: "®"), there are no such symbols for GIs in Canada. In the EU, rights holders may include these designated symbols on their packaging to indicate that their GI is protected.

• What role might a national visual identifier(s) or symbol(s) play in supporting GI protections, either domestically or internationally? How do you view potential benefits of these versus implementation and enforcement requirements?

Section 4: Canada's commitment to reconciliation and review of IP laws

The United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples(UN Declaration), under Article 31, as well as Article 11, recognizes that Indigenous Peoples have the right to maintain, control, protect and develop their IP over cultural heritage, traditional knowledge, and traditional cultural expressions (noting that the terms "Indigenous Knowledge" and "Indigenous Cultural Expressions" are preferred in Canada).

UNDA Action Plan Measure 101

As part of Canada's commitment to the UN Declaration, action plan measure (APM) 101 under the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act (UNDA) commits Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada (ISED) and Canadian Heritage (PCH) to:

As part of ISED's mandate and commitment under the UNDA Action Plan to review IP laws, this engagement paper seeks input on establishing GIs as one possible tool to enhance the protection of IK and ICEs, as part of the work to implement APM 101.

It is essential that this review of GIs actively incorporates the perspectives and priorities of Indigenous Peoples. This input will help ensure that any proposed changes are culturally appropriate, responsive to community needs, and aligned with reconciliation commitments. In particular, through this engagement, the Government aims to gain an understanding of whether and how GIs could serve to identify and protect products that are rooted in a particular place and cultural tradition, helping ensure that communities benefit from their use and reputation.

This engagement does not suggest that GIs are the only tool to address the full extent of needs of Indigenous Peoples with respect to protecting their IP. Rather, it seeks input on how and if GIs would impact Indigenous communities and whether GIs could complement other approaches — such as community protocols, labelling initiatives, consumer awareness, programs or other legal measures — to help Indigenous Peoples maintain, control, protect and develop their cultural heritage and knowledge.

In this way, the review of Canada's GI laws is part of a broader effort to align the country's IP frameworks with reconciliation objectives, ensuring that Indigenous perspectives and priorities are meaningfully reflected in Canada's approach to IP and cultural protection.

Indigenous perspectives

Over the past decade, engagements with Indigenous participants have highlighted the limitations of Canada's Western-based IP system to protect IK and ICE. For example, while IP laws emphasize individual ownership and time-limited protection, Indigenous groups have told us that they prioritize collective stewardship, perpetual protection, and oral transmission. These differences can sometimes present challenges for Indigenous communities to safeguard their knowledge and cultural expressions under existing IP laws.

Through past engagements and policy papers, Indigenous organizations and experts, including Canadian Artists Representation/Le Front des Artistes Canadien ( CARFAC ) in its Indigenous Protocols for the Visual Arts, for example, have noted Canada could benefit from expanding GIs to other types of traditional products like crafts, for which there is a much richer history in Canada than for agriculture, wines, and spirits.

How GI expansion could align with Indigenous priorities

While the benefits of an expanded GI regime would apply to all, preliminary analysis suggests that it may help support regionally-based and collective ownership of knowledge, skills, and cultural expression tied to the land, therefore particularly enabling Indigenous communities to assert collective ownership and authenticity over their cultural products.

Indigenous art contributed over $1 billion to the Canadian economy in 2018, with Indigenous artists earning a total of $486 million from creative work according to a 2020 economic study by Big River Analytics. Canada's Indigenous arts sector supported 23,390 direct or indirect jobs and 2,940 jobs in other sectors and industries in 2018.

Additionally, arts and crafts-based businesses are often centered on home-based production, which benefits women and youth. The Canadian Council for Indigenous Business found one in five Indigenous business owners own IP in Canada. More women and young entrepreneurs are opening businesses, and six in ten Indigenous businesses use IK or ICEs in their businesses, skewing higher among women-owned businesses.

Based on preliminary analysis, key bridging features of GIs may include:

• Collective Ownership: GIs are held collectively, not individually, mirroring Indigenous values of shared stewardship.
• Perpetual Association: Unlike patents or copyrights, GIs can offer ongoing protection as long as the product maintains its link to the region and traditional methods.
• Recognition of Traditional Methods: GIs can validate and protect culturally rooted production practices.
• Cultural and Economic Empowerment: By protecting names that link a product's quality or reputation to the place it comes from, GIs can help combat misappropriation, promote economic development, and preserve cultural heritage.

GIs may also be shaped by Indigenous protocols. Indigenous governments, bands, councils or organizations that become "responsible authorities" could be involved in defining the production standards that reflect their values and traditions. For some communities, if an Indigenous name for a product from their region meets the definition of a GI, protecting the name through a GI could help the Indigenous community control the use of that name. This would allow them to connect the name with their traditional knowledge and cultural expressions and protect it as IP at an international level. GI protection in Canada is an important first step in obtaining international recognition and protection, which can open doors for cross-border enforcement and export opportunities which help Indigenous businesses grow while protecting cultural integrity.

This section invites perspectives on how an expansion of the GI regime could be developed in a manner consistent with the UN Declaration. The questions aim to better understand how GIs could support Indigenous Peoples in maintaining, controlling, protecting, and developing their cultural heritage, knowledge and cultural expressions, while respecting Indigenous rights, governance and legal traditions.

• How should Indigenous place names, languages, and traditional territories be reflected or respected within any expanded GI framework?
• What considerations should guide the criteria for "responsible authorities"—particularly when GIs relate to IK and ICEs?
• What specific opportunities or risks do you see for Indigenous communities when it comes to protecting products or ICEs through GIs? How might these challenges be addressed or mitigated in a respectful way?

Conclusion

The public engagement period will be open from May 28 to August 27, 2026.

FAQs

• 1. What is a Geographical Indication (GI)?

  A GI is an intellectual property (IP) right that identifies a product as originating from a specific region, where its quality, reputation, or other characteristics are linked to that geographical origin. It acts as a guarantee of authenticity and traditional production methods.

• 2. What is a trademark?

  A trademark is a sign or combination of signs that is used or proposed to be used by a person for the purpose of distinguishing their goods or services from those of others. A sign can be a word, a personal name, a design, a letter, a numeral, a colour, a figurative element, a three-dimensional shape, a hologram, a moving image, a mode of packaging goods, a sound, a scent, a taste, a texture and the positioning of a sign. Trademarks may be registered or unregistered.

• 3. What if my trademark is not registered?

  Unregistered trademarks are protected under the common law either federally or provincially. A trademark need only be used in a certain area and have a reputation there in order to obtain protection. Registration of that trademark provides some "extra" incentives, for example, a presumption of validity, and a right to the exclusive use throughout Canada. Only registered trademarks may be subject to the border regime with Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA).

• 4. What is a certification mark?

  A certification mark is a type of trademark is used for the purpose of distinguishing goods or services that are of a defined standard from those that are not of that defined standard. Those standards come in four categories: 1) character or quality, 2) working conditions, 3) class of persons producing the goods or performing the services, or 4) the geographical area within which the goods are produced or services performed. A certification mark standard may come from any combination of the four categories.

• 5. Why seek protection through a GI instead of a certification mark?

  While both types of IP provide strong protection, there are certain advantages to GIs. First, GIs are protected indefinitely, with one fee to process the request. Certification marks are protected for renewable 10 year terms. There is an initial examination fee and then subsequent renewal fees. Second, GIs are protected against all translations of that GI. A translation of a certification mark is protected only if there is a likelihood of confusion. Third, a GI may not be used with any qualifiers, such as "like", "imitation", or "style". However, while a GI is protected only for the category of goods listed in the original request, a certification mark could become so well-known that protection may extend beyond goods and services of the original registration.

• 6. How can businesses benefit from GI protection?

  Where GI protection has been obtained for a product in a region, businesses using local materials or traditional production methods can:

  • Protect the reputation and uniqueness of their products.
  • Prevent misuse of the region's name by others.
  • Signal quality and authenticity to consumers, which can enhance market value.
• 7. Does GI protection stop others from making similar products?

  No. GI protection does not prevent others from producing similar designs or styles. It only restricts them from using the protected GI name to claim their product originates from that specific region.

• 8. What degree of connection to the region is required?

  Some GIs may require all materials and methods to originate locally, while others allow partial sourcing from outside the region.

• 9. How do GIs relate to Made in Canada criteria?

  Existing guidelines govern claims related to "Product of Canada" or "Made in Canada" claims. A GI would not need to align with the criteria required for these claims. It would also not impact the ability to use these claims, if applicable.

• 10. Who defines the standards for GI products?

  There may be several groups, entities, or individuals who would be involved in the standard-setting for a GI-protected product, including manufacturers/creators, farmers, livestock raisers, and Elders. A request for protection of a GI in Canada must name a responsible authority, who has a connection with, and is knowledgeable about, the GI and who could be a party to any proceedings involving the GI. Responsible authorities could be, for example:

  • Government bodies
  • Industry associations
  • Indigenous governments, or
  • Artisan groups.
• 11. Is this a review of the entirety of Canada's GI regime?

  No. While we recognize that signs or words that may qualify as a GI may be protected through various means, including via trademarks, certification marks, and the common law, in this case we are looking solely at the statutory GI regime found in the federal Trademarks Act.

• 12. Does this address the commitments under UNDA Action Plan related to IP?

  Action Plan Measure 101 commits the Government of Canada to review IP statutes, regulations and policies for consistency with the UN Declaration. This engagement is only one part of that review.

Annex A: Canada's GI regime

Canada's GI regime was established in 1996 as a distinct type of IP within the Trademarks Act. At first, the regime only applied to wines and spirits. In 2017, following the conclusion of the Canada–European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA), Canada expanded its GI regime. This expansion added protection for various categories of agricultural products and foods, such as cheeses, cured meats, and other specialty foods. The categories of products that are eligible for GI protection are listed in the Schedule to the Trademarks Act.

Administration

The Canadian Intellectual Property Office (CIPO) administers the system, which includes processing requests, maintaining the List of Protected GIs, and publishing statements online for public viewing, which initiates the objection period (see below). CIPO has a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Agriculture and Agri-Food Canada (AAFC) whereby AAFC can provide expertise on whether a certain term has the requisite quality, reputation or other characteristic to qualify as a GI. AAFC will provide expert advice and information, or may raise concerns, to CIPO examiners on the validity of a GI request.

Canada's GI regime is designed to balance fair protection for authentic regional products with consumer transparency and market access. It aligns with international standards, ensuring that Canadian producers can seek protection abroad while foreign GIs are protected in Canada's marketplace.

Eligibility

Not just anyone can apply for a GI. To ensure that GIs are accurate and credible, only certain organizations or groups who, in the opinion of the Minister of Industry (or delegated authority), have a real connection to the product and region can request protection, (known as a "responsible authority"), and may file a request for GI protection with CIPO. This ensures that the people or groups seeking protection truly represent the producers and traditions of the region.

Examples of responsible authorities could include:

• A national or regional government that oversees production in the area;
• A regulatory authority that manages quality or origin standards;
• An association of producers from the region; or
• An individual producer from the region, if they meet the necessary requirements.

Organizations eligible to be a responsible authority can send a request directly to CIPO. They do not need to go through their national or regional government to do so.

One interesting aspect of GIs in some jurisdictions, such as Canada, is that while the exclusive right is limited to excluding producers outside the region from using the GI, other rules may be placed by the responsible authority on the manufacturing of a particular good that go beyond the place of origin.

Review

When a responsible authority requests GI protection, they must show that the GI identifies a specific place and that its qualities, reputation, or other characteristics are linked to that place of origin. This process helps maintain public confidence in GIs by ensuring that only genuine regional products — such as wines, cheeses, and agricultural goods that reflect local traditions and environments — receive official protection in Canada. It also aligns Canada's system with international standards, which encourage transparency and fair use of regional product names.

When CIPO obtains a request for GI protection, the request is reviewed by examiners at CIPO, who may seek information from AAFC. Specifically, reviewers verify that the GI meets the requirements found under s. 11.12(3) of the Trademarks Act, which includes meeting the GI definition and that it is protected in the country of origin. If the requirements are met, the Minister may publish a statement proposing the GI be added to the List of Protected GIs and other relevant information (the GI name, the goods associated with it, the country of origin, the responsible authority's name and address, etc.).

Objection Period

The publication of the statement proposing the GI be added to the list of Protected GIs initiates the two-month objection period, where any interested party may, upon payment of the prescribed fee, file a statement of objection with the Registrar of Trademarks. Objection proceedings are handled by the Trademarks Opposition Board at CIPO.

There are several grounds on which an objection may be made:

• the indication is not a GI;
• the indication is identical to a term customary in common language in Canada as the common name for the good in question;
• the indication is not protected by the law of the country of origin;
• in the case of an indication identifying an agricultural product or food, the indication is confusing with
  1. a registered trademark,
  2. a trademark previously used in Canada and that has not been abandoned, or
  3. a trademark in respect of which an application for registration was previously filed in Canada and remains pending.

Each of these grounds reference the date of the publication of the statement. If no objection is filed, or if an objection is dismissed, the GI is added to the List of Protected GIs and becomes enforceable in Canada. The List contains both domestic and foreign GIs.

Enforcement

GIs, like all IP rights, are private rights and therefore it is up to the rightsholders to enforce them. These prohibitions may be enforced against unauthorized users in the sale and advertising of a product, including the import and export of goods. This means they can stop others from using the same name in connection with a business, as a trademark, or in marketing.

No person shall adopt or use, in connection with a business, as a trademark or otherwise, a Protected GI identifying a product in respect of that product not originating in the territory indicated by the Protected GI.

This protection also applies to translations of the GI and to the use of qualifiers such as "kind," "type," "style," or "imitation." For example, a producer could not label a product "Scotch-style whisky" if it was not made in Scotland.

There is also recourse if a product uses the GI but does not meet the required standards or production conditions associated with the GI under the applicable law in the country of origin. This ensures that only genuine products made according to recognized regional methods carry the GI name.

There are two main ways rightsholder can enforce their GIs in Canada:

• Through the Federal Courts, any interested person can file a civil lawsuit against businesses or individuals that infringe a Protected GI.
• Under the Trademarks Act, the responsible authority can use the Request for Assistance Program to ask the Canada Border Services Agency to detain imported goods suspected of infringing the Protected GI.

If a court finds that a GI has been infringed, possible remedies include financial compensation (damages), repayment of profits made from the misuse, court orders (injunctions) to stop the infringement, and destruction of infringing goods. These enforcement tools help protect the integrity of regional product names, ensure fair competition, and give consumers confidence that products carrying a GI truly come from the place they claim.

Exceptions

Even if a GI is entered on the List of Protected GIs, there are several important general exceptions to GI protection that ensure that such protection does not unfairly limit existing rights or the use of common product terms. A GI is not enforceable if:

• It is the name of a person or their predecessor in title,
• The term has become customary in the Canadian language to describe a type of product rather than its place of origin,
• It is used in comparative advertising, such as to describe how one product compares to another,
• For agricultural products and food GIs, there are existing trademark rights.

There are also some specific exceptions within the Trademarks Act dealing with certain terms such as Feta, Fontina, Comté, and Jambon Bayonne. These exceptions are fact-specific.

Cancellation/Removal

Any interested person may file an application with the Canada's Federal Court to have the GI removed from the List of Protected GIs. The grounds for removal are similar to those for objection proceedings, and the relevant date for each ground may vary. Only the Federal Court or the Minister can order the removal of a GI from the protected list.