“Natural wine”: commercial success in a legal vacuum

While “natural wine” is growing in popularity with consumers, there is currently no official label, legal definition or regulation to describe what makes a wine “natural”, says Manon Brodin.

The concept of “natural wine” (from the French “vin nature”) can be traced back to a movement in France’s Beaujolais region in the 1960s, which saw a return to a way of producing wine before the introduction of pesticides and other chemicals. While it has been around for some time, there is some disagreement as to what exactly constitutes a natural wine, and the term has not yet been codified as a label, or a legal or regulated definition. 

For “organic” and “biodynamic” wine producers, where use of the relevant terms is more strictly controlled (Demeter/Biodyvin), this represents unfair competition and also increases the risk of mislabelling and fraud. There is also a risk of confusion between the terms “organic” and “natural”, which are often used interchangeably by the general public, as well as criticism from conventional growers that monopoly of the term “natural” by this one group of producers would imply that their own products are somehow unnatural or inferior. Unsurprisingly, the issue has been raised with the INAO, the French authority that oversees the country’s more than 350 wine appellations, as well as related organisations in other countries.

Defining a “natural wine”

France's Association des Vins Naturels (AVN) defines in its cahier des charges (charter) that a “natural wine” is a wine that is, among other things: grown in an organic or biodynamic vineyard; harvested by hand; and, created using only indigenous yeasts. In addition, no modification of the grape is permitted, and nothing should be added, including sulphites (other than what is produced naturally and to a defined limit). 

Similar – and sometimes slightly converging – charters are have also been put in place by organisations in other countries, such as to describe “raw wine” in the UK. 

It seems clear that a standard is required by the industry. Two solutions seem possible here: 

  • the establishment of a collective trademark; or 
  • the establishment of a regulated term (as defined e.g. by a national Consumer Code or in European regulation). 

The first option would provide only limited protection, especially since many wine brands include the term “natural” and/or “organic and natural”. Therefore, the second solution would seem to be the most effective in ensuring consumer protection; at least, on a national/regional basis to start.

What is clear is that the debate has not ended. In the meantime, the term “natural wine” can continue to be used by any winegrower, and we only have their word to trust that they are complying with the production conditions proposed by AVN (and other such bodies).

Manon Brodin is an IP attorney specialising in wine. She is based at Novagraaf in Bordeaux.

Insights liés


Check-In refusé pour easyCourier

Le 11 janvier 2023, l’EUIPO a prononcé un refus contre la demande d’enregistrement de marque de l’Union européenne "easyCourier" déposée par la société easyGroup Ltd, titulaire des marques "easy", pour désigner divers services de transport, d'affrètement et de réservation de voyages en classe 39. La société easyGroup a alors tenté, de démontrer la distinctivité intrinsèque de ce signe, et a demandé à ce que l’acquisition du caractère distinctif par l’usage soit examinée à titre subsidiaire. Jeanne Bosson revient sur cette affaire.

Par Jeanne Bosson,
Check-In refusé pour easyCourier
Blog Nova IP Hour

La marque PUT PUTIN IN n’est pas IN

Dans une décision du 23 août 2023, l’EUIPO a refusé la demande de marque de l’Union Européenne PUT PUTIN IN n°018843822, déposée en classe 25 (vêtements, chapellerie), estimant que le signe était contraire aux bonnes mœurs. Le signe peut se traduire, en français, par « faire enfermer Poutine ». Lire la suite

Par Marion Mercadier,
La marque PUT PUTIN IN n’est pas IN
Webinars et évènements

[Webinaire] Contrefaçon en ligne et rôle des plateformes : être ou ne pas être responsable ?

Le développement continu du commerce en ligne entraîne malheureusement celui de la contrefaçon qui trouve de nombreux moyens de diffusion et il n’est pas simple de localiser les atteintes et leurs auteurs. Inscrivez-vous à notre webinaire du mardi 14 novembre 2023 pour découvrir quels enseignements tirer des décisions jurisprudentielles en la matière et comment détecter efficacement les éventuelles contrefaçons ?
[Webinaire] Contrefaçon en ligne et rôle des plateformes : être ou ne pas être responsable ?

Pour plus d'informations ou de conseils contactez-nous

Confidentialité et cookies

Pour fournir la meilleure expérience possible aux visiteurs du site Web, Novagraaf utilise des cookies. En cliquant sur "Accepter" ou en continuant d’utiliser le site, vous acceptez notre politique de confidentialité, y compris la politique en matière de cookies.