Acceso usuarios
Wenting Cheng
This Article investigates the interaction between transplanted law and society after legal transplants, focusing on a case study of the changing meaning of geographical indications (GIs) after this legal concept was transplanted from Europe to China. Unlike other studies that assess the feasibility or conditions necessary for successful legal transplants, this Article addresses three specific questions: How did the meaning change after the concept of GIs was transplanted to a new context? Who played a key role in this process of meaning reshaping, and through what initiatives? How is the changed meaning of transplanted law recognized by other actors, particularly those from the law’s original jurisdiction? This Article argues that the interaction between the Chinese traditional concept of regional specialties and the Western concept of GIs is a co-evolving and co-adapting dynamic. Considering that China has abundant regional specialties from its traditional tributary system, which reflects the place–product–reputation link, the Chinese GI system mixes shades of transplanted meaning with some local elements. On the one hand, the local concept of regional specialties has become a foundation for Chinese GI protection; on the other, the original framing of GIs as an intellectual property right has also firmly taken root in China. Furthermore, this Article identifies how Chinese regulators have reshaped the meaning of regional specialties and GIs through three strategies: familiarizing the unfamiliar, upholding a rights-based system, and deconstructing the meaning of tributes. These strategies have enhanced public understanding of foreign law, promoted domestic use of GIs, and mitigated the impacts of possible negative connotations of tributes. This Article further illustrates the pragmatism of the European Union, as the original jurisdiction of GI law, in accepting the meaning of GIs, as reshaped China, through a mutual recognition agreement. This Article contributes a micro-approach to the existing literature on law and society interactions after legal transplants, shedding light on the complexities of engagement between law and culture, discourse, state power, and economic interests in the process of legal transplants.
