Can a wine brand refer to a well-known wine region?

When a trademark owner chooses a name that refers in part to a well-known region, it often clashes with the strict protection of Protected Designations of Origin (PDOs). Can you just use the term “Provence” in a trademark when there's also a protected designation like “Coteaux d'Aix-en-Provence”? The answer is yes, provided there is no direct use, representation (evocation) or deception. In a ruling of 30 September 2025 the Benelux Court of Justice ruled that, despite the geographical overlap, the trademark “SEX en Provence” does not infringe on the PDO “Coteaux d'Aix-en-Provence.”

The facts and context

In this case, two parties faced off before the Benelux Court. On the one hand, the Institut National de l'Origine et de la Qualité (INAO), the organization that watches over French protected designations of origin. On the other hand, Groupe LFE BV, a commercial party that applied to the Benelux Office for Intellectual Property (BOIP) for the word mark “SEX en Provence” for wines on June 30, 2022.

INAO filed an opposition to this trademark based on the earlier Protected Designation of Origin (PDO) “Coteaux d'Aix-en-Provence.” The BOIP rejected this opposition, after which INAO appealed to the Benelux Court of Justice. INAO argued that the trademark “SEX en Provence” infringed European rules protecting PDOs, because it would tarnish and dilute the reputation of the PDO through its association with sex, and because it would be an unlawful ‘representation’ of the protected name.

The decision and regulations

The Benelux Court upheld the decision of the BOIP and allowed registration of the trademark. In doing so, the Court applied the new EU Regulation No. 2024/1143 which has been in force since May 2024 and has immediate effect on ongoing proceedings.

The key points of the September 30, 2025 ruling are:

• No ‘use’ of the PDO: The Court found that there was no identity or a “degree of similarity bordering on identity.” The geographical term “Aix-en-Provence” in the PDO is in itself merely an indication of place. The distinctive element of the PDO is its combination with “Coteaux d'”, which is absent from the mark.
• No ‘representation’ (evocation): To constitute a prohibited representation, the consumer, upon seeing the mark, must immediately envision the image of the protected goods (the specific PDO wine). The Court ruled that when “SEX en Provence” is mentioned, the average consumer is more likely to think of the Provence region in general or a play on words, but not specifically of the PDO “Coteaux d'Aix-en-Provence”.
• No deception: Since the wines under the “SEX en Provence” brand are effectively from Provence (and are limited to certain PDOs from that region), consumers are not misled as to their origin.

Legal analysis and interpretation

This ruling provides an interesting look at the areas of tension within trademark law and the protection of geographical indications (GIs).

Application of the new Regulation (EU) 2024/1143

Legally relevant is that the Court confirms the immediate effect of the new regulation. Although the trademark application dates back to 2022 (under the old Regulation 1308/2013), the assessment must be made on the basis of the rules in force at the time of the ruling. This is in line with established case law of the CJEU, as new protection rules are supposed to directly serve the interests of right holders.

The threshold for ‘Evocation’

The concept of ‘representation’ (or evocation) is interpreted broadly by the CJEU, but it has limits. In cases such as Scotch Whisky and Champanillo it was held that a phonetic or visual similarity or conceptual proximity may be sufficient. However, in Coteaux d'Aix-en-Provence, the Benelux Court drew a clear line:

“Indeed, the Sign does not contain the essential component of the PDO that distinguishes the goods under the PDO from other wines of the region.”

The Court emphasizes that the term “Provence” is a general geographical indication within which many wines fall. A PDO holder cannot therefore claim a monopoly on the name of an entire region (“Provence”) through the back door if its protection specifically relates to a sub-region (“Coteaux d'Aix...”). Moreover, the prominent and conceptually strong word “SEX” causes the consumer's attention to be diverted from the geographical nuance, breaking the direct link to the specific PDO.

What this specifically means

This ruling has practical implications for both trademark owners and producers with protected designations of origin.

• For brand owners and marketers: You have scope to include geographical terms in your trademark, as long as you avoid using the full, specific name of a PDO. A mark that merely refers to a broad region (such as “Provence”) is defensible, especially if you add a strong, distinctive element (such as a provocative word or a unique logo). Just make sure your product actually comes from that region to avoid deception.
• For holders of a PDO: The protection of a PDO is powerful, but not absolute. You cannot oppose every trademark that uses part of your geographical name, especially if that part is a commonly known regional name. Opposition is only likely if the challenged trademark evokes the specific identity of your PDO in consumers.
• For the alcohol sector: The court noted that any conflict with advertising codes (about the link between alcohol and sex) is separate from trademark law. A trademark registration can be valid even if its use in advertising campaigns would be restricted by ethics committees.

FAQ: Frequently asked questions about trademarks and geographical indications

What is the difference between a brand and a PDO?
A trademark (such as Coca-Cola or, in this case, “SEX en Provence”) is a sign that distinguishes products from a specific company. A Protected Designation of Origin (PDO), such as Champagne or Parma ham, guarantees that a product comes from a specific region and has been produced according to traditional methods.

Can I register a trademark that contains a place name?
Yes, that is possible, as long as the mark is not descriptive of the goods or services (or has obtained incorporation) and does not mislead the public. However, if that place name is part of a protected designation (PDO), you must be careful not to unduly ride on the reputation of that PDO.

When is there ‘evocation’ or representation of a PDO?
Evocation occurs when the average consumer, upon seeing your product name, immediately and without thinking, sees before him the image of the product protected by the PDO. This can happen even without the names being identical, such as by visual similarity or sound similarity.

Conclusion

The case of INAO vs. Groupe LFE shows that intellectual property law, and specifically the protection of geographical indications, is a matter of nuance. Not every reference to a region is an infringement of a PDO. As long as sufficient distance is maintained from the specific protected name and there is no confusion or deception as to origin, there is room for creative trademarking.