Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-4rdpn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-15T07:28:47.277Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Changing and Flexible Nature of Imitation and Adulteration: The Case of the Global Wine Industry, 1850–1914

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 August 2020

Teresa da Silva Lopes ,
Andrea Lluch  and
Gaspar Martins Pereira
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The first wave of globalization, from 1850 to 1914, is considered to be a period when global trade and investment increased at a steady pace, impacting on global economic growth. Yet that evolution was not consistent across all industries. This article explains why, during that period, global trade in wines and other alcoholic beverages was reversed. Apart from diseases that affected vineyards in the main wine-producing countries of the Old World, various factors in the New World—including local government incentives and the presence of consumers (immigrants) with acquired habits of consumption from European countries—created strong incentives for the imitation and adulteration of wines. This study looks at the strategies used both by the imitators in expanding their businesses and by the innovators to survive in institutional environments that were weak with regard to the protection of their intellectual property.

Keywords

global wine industryinnovationimitationadulterationinternational trade and investment
Type
Research Article
Information
Business History Review , Volume 94 , Issue 2 , Summer 2020 , pp. 347 - 371
Copyright
Copyright © The President and Fellows of Harvard College 2020

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

The authors would like to thank three anonymous referees for very valuable comments on the article. The research on Portugal and Brazil benefited from a British Academy Grant (# PM130264).

References

1 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), The Economic Impact of Counterfeiting and Piracy (Paris, 2008); “Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights,” Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization (Geneva, 1994), annex 1C, sec. 4, article 51; Béaur, Gerard, Bonin, Hubert, and Lemercier, Claire, eds., Fraude, Contrefaçon et Contrebande de l'Antiquité à nos Jours (Geneva, 2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Hopkins, Antony, Globalization in World History (New York, 2002)Google Scholar; Berg, Maxine, “From Imitation to Invention: Creating Commodities in Eighteenth-Century Britain,” Economic History Review 55, no. 1 (2002): 1–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Mihm, Stephen, A Nation of Counterfeiters: Capitalists, Con Men, and the Making of the United States (Cambridge, MA, 2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Barry, Andrew and Thrift, Nigel, “Gabriel Tarde: Imitation, Invention and Economy,” Economy and Society 36, no. 4 (2007): 509–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Balleisen, Edward, Fraud: An American History from Barnum to Madoff (Princeton, 2017)Google Scholar; Belfanti, Carlo Marco, “Branding before the Brand: Marks, Imitations and Counterfeits in Pre-Modern Europe,” Business History 60, no. 8 (2017): 1127–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Measuring the Magnitude of Global Counterfeiting: Creation of a Contemporary Global Measure of Physical Counterfeiting (Washington, DC, 2016); OECD, Economic Impact of Counterfeiting; Carsten Fink, Keith E. Maskus, and Yi Qian, “The Economic Effects of Counterfeiting and Piracy: A Review and Implications for Developing Countries” (World Bank Policy Research Working Paper No. 7586, Washington, DC, 2016).

3 Theodore Levitt, “Innovative Imitation,” Harvard Business Review, Sept./Oct. 1966, 63–70.

4 Teresa da Silva Lopes and Mark Casson, “Brand Protection and the Globalization of British Business,” Business History Review 86, no. 2 (2012): 287–310. Illicit trading includes a wide variety of illegal or noncontractual activities, such as traffic in controlled substances, stolen and smuggled goods, trade of all kinds with products infringing intellectual property rights, and even parallel imports. Frédéric Thiesse, Thorsten Staake, and Elgar Fleisch, “The Emergence of Counterfeit Trade: A Literature Review,” European Journal of Marketing 43, no. 3–4 (2009): 320–49.

5 OECD/EUIPO, Trade in Counterfeit and Pirated Goods: Mapping the Economic Impact (Paris, 2017); Alan Zimmerman and Peggy Chaudhry, The Economics of Counterfeit Trade: Governments, Consumers, Pirates and Intellectual Property Rights (Berlin, 2009).

6 Béaur, Bonin, and Lemercier, Fraude, Contrefaçon et Contrebande.

7 Juan Pan-Montojo, La Bodega del Mundo: La Vid y el Vino en España, 1800–1936 (Madrid, 1994); Alessandro Stanziani, “La Falsification du Vin en France, 1880–1905: Un Cas de Fraude Agro-Alimentaire,” Revue D'Histoire Moderne et Contemporaine 50, no. 2 (2003): 154–86; Stanziani, “Information, Quality and Legal Rules: Wine Adulteration in Nineteenth Century France,” Business History 51, no. 2 (2009): 268–91; Kym Anderson and Vicente Pinilla, eds., Wine Globalization: A New Comparative History (New York, 2018).

8 James Simpson, Creating Wine: The Emergence of a World Industry, 1840–1914 (Princeton, 2011), 95.

9 This high level of fraud and adulteration of wines was caused by a combination of poor wine harvests, very low taxes on sugar, and the fact that authorities tolerated the production of artificial wines. Simpson, Creating Wine, 69.

10 António Teixeira de Sousa, A Questão do Douro: Discurso Proferido na Câmara dos Pares pelo Sr. Conselheiro António Teixeira de Sousa nas Sessões 2, 3 e 5 de Abril de 1907 e Projecto de Lei da Mesma Câmara (Porto, 1907).

11 José Morilla Critz, “A Califórnia e o Vinho do Porto entre Dois Séculos,” Douro, Estudos & Documentos 3 (1997): 123–41.

12 Nuno Simões, Os Vinhos do Porto e a Defesa Internacional da sua Marca (Coimbra, 1932).

13 Mira Wilkins, The History of Foreign Direct Investment in the United States to 1914 (Cambridge, MA, 1989); Geoffrey Jones, Multinationals and Global Capitalism: From the Nineteenth to the Twenty-First Century (Oxford, 2005).

14 Tim Unwin, Wine and the Vine (London, 1991).

15 Jean-François Gautier, Le Vin et ses Fraudes (Paris, 1995); Martín Castro Coello, “De la Identificación de los Vinos: Clases, Tipos y Orígenes; De los Vinos Típicos, Artificiales y Facticios; Una Exposición Previa,” in Actas do III Simpósio da Associação Internacional de História e Civilização da Vinha e do Vinho, ed. Alberto Vieira (Funchal, 2004), 793–859; Lopes and Casson, “Brand Protection and Globalization.”

16 António Barros Cardoso, “Vinhos do Porto e Vinhos Portugueses Fabricados no Rio de Janeiro, 1885,” in Actas del I Simposio de la Asociación Internacional de Historia y Civilización de la Vid y el Vino, vol. 2, ed. Javier Maldonado Rosso (El Puerto de Santa María, 2001), 793–859; Luís A. de Oliveira Ramos, “Contrafacções e Defesa da Marca ‘Porto’ em Finais do Século XIX,” in Crise e Reconstrução: O Douro e o Vinho do Porto no Século XIX, ed. Gaspar Martins Pereira (Porto, 2010), 335–53.

17 John Burnett, Liquid Pleasure: A Social History of Drinks in Modern Britain (London, 1999).

18 Thomas Mollanger, “The Effects of Producers’ Trademark Strategies on the Structure of the Cognac Brandy Supply Chain during the Second Half of the Nineteenth Century: The Reconfiguration of Commercial Trust by the Use of Brands,” Business History 60, no. 8 (2018): 1255–76; Simpson, Creating Wine, 81.

19 James Simpson, “Cooperation and Conflicts: Institutional Innovation in France's Wine Markets, 1870–1911,” Business History Review 79, no. 3 (2005): 527–58.

20 Simpson, Creating Wine.

21 Simpson, 95, 105.

22 Marcel Lachiver, Vins, Vignes et Vignerons: Histoire du Vignoble Français (Paris, 1988); Vicente Pinilla and María Isabel Ayuda, “The International Wine Market, 1850–1938: An Opportunity for Export Growth in Southern Europe?,” in Wine Society and Globalization: Multidisciplinary Perspectives on the Wine Industry, ed. Gwyn Campbell and Nathalie Guibert (New York, 2007), 179–99.

23 Pablo Lacoste, El Vino del Inmigrante: Los Inmigrantes Europeos y la Industria Vitivinícola Argentina: Su Incidencia en la Incorporación, Difusión y Estandarización del uso de Topónimos Europeos 1852–1980 (Mendoza, 2003).

24 Alejandro Fernández, Un Mercado Étnico en el Plata: Emigración y Exportaciones Españolas a la Argentina, 1880–1935 (Madrid, 2004).

25 Anderson and Pinilla, Wine Globalization, 4.

26 Patricia Barrio de Villanueva, “Controles estatales a la Industria del Vino en Mendoza, 1890–1914,” H-industri@: Revista de Historia de la Industria, los Servicios y las Empresas en América Latina 7, no. 4 (2013), https://ojs.econ.uba.ar/index.php/H-ind/article/view/425.

27 In the case of Australia, an exception is a type of wine suitable for the London market, known as “dry red for export.” “Types of Australian Wines,” Wine and Spirit News and Australian Vigneron, 26 May 2013, 201.

28 Javier Maldonado Rosso, “Producción y Comercialización de ‘Madeiras’ en la Provincia de Cádiz, siglos XIX y XX,” in Os Vinhos Licorosos e a História, ed. Alberto Vieira (Funchal, 1998), 141–62.

29 Simões, Os Vinhos do Porto.

30 Leo Loubère, The Red and the White: A History of Wine in France and Italy in the Nineteenth Century (Albany, 1978); Lachiver, Vins, Vignes et Vignerons.

31 Femke van Horen, Breaking the Mould on Copycats: What Makes Product Imitation Strategies Successful? (Ridderkerk, 2010).

32 “Bodegas prefilóxericas: cantidad y calidad” and “Nada volvió a ser igual,” in El Rioja Histórico: La Denominación de Origen y su Consejo Regulador, ed. José Luis Gómez Urdáñez (Logroño, 2000), 60-78.

33 “Nada volvió a ser igual,” 78.

34 Pan-Montojo, La Bodega del Mundo, 352.

35 See, for example, the case of Brazil, A. Cardoso Gouvêa & Comp. America do Sul registered trademark number 4697 “A.C.G. & Co.—Fino Champagne—Cognac” in 1906. He was a manufacturer of a variety of drinks, including beer, liqueurs, syrups, and brandy in Rio de Janeiro. Also, Alfredo F. Gomes Savedra, a manufacturer and merchant of vinegar, syrup, and other beverages based in Rio de Janeiro, registered the trademark number 3957 “Ginebra Superior Savedra” in 1904, among other alcoholic beverages trademarks such as numbers 2122 and 2162, Série Indústria e Comércio – IC3, Arquivo Nacional do Rio de Janeiro.

36 Asa Briggs, Wine for Sale: Victoria Wine and the Liquor Trade, 1860–1984 (London, 1985).

37 OECD, The Economic Impact of Counterfeiting (2008).

38 Lopes and Casson, “Brand Protection and Globalization.”

39 Pedro C. Breuer Moreno, Tratado de Marcas de Fábrica y de Comercio, 2nd. ed. (Buenos Aires, 1946), esp. 400; Emilio Gabay v. Juan Teic, Federal Court, Argentina, 1930, in Patentes y Marcas (1930): 363.

40 “Wine Merchants’ Trade Mark Case,” Morning Post, 21 June 1883, 3.

41 Simões, Os Vinhos do Porto; Lachiver, Vins, Vignes et Vignerons.

42 Pablo Lacoste, Jiménez Cabrera, Diego Ignacio, Briones Quiroz, Félix Maximiano, Amalia Castro, Rendón Zapata, Bibiana Marcela, Jeffs Munizaga, and José Gabriel, “Burdeos de Talca y Champagne de Mendoza: Denominaciones de Origen y Contaminación Identitaria de Vinos en Argentina y Chile,” Mundo Agrario 15, no. 29 (2014): 1–16.

43 Simpson, Creating Wine, 180–81.

44 Burnett, Liquid Pleasure.

45 Alberto Francisco Ribeiro de Almeida, Denominação de Origem e Marca (Coimbra, 1999), 144.

46 David Higgins, Brands, Geographic Origin and the Global Economy: A History from the Nineteenth Century to the Present (Cambridge, U.K., 2018); Teresa da Silva Lopes, Paul Duguid, and John Mercer, “Reading Registrations: An Overview of 100 Years of Trademark Registrations in France, the United Kingdom and the United States,” in Trademarks, Brands and Competitiveness, ed. Teresa da Silva Lopes and Paul Duguid (London, 2010), 9–30; Monika Holtmann, ed., Arreglo de Madrid: Cien Años de Marcas Internacionales, 1891–1991 (Madrid, 1992).

47 Pedro Lains, A Economia Portuguesa no Século XIX: Crescimento Económico e Comércio Externo, 1851–1913 (Lisboa, 1995); Teresa da Silva Lopes, Internacionalização e Concentração no Vinho do Porto: Uma Abordagem de Custos de Transacção (Porto, 1997); Gaspar Martins Pereira, Unicer: Uma Longa História (Leça do Balio, 2014).

48 Lachiver, Vins, Vignes et Vignerons; Critz, “A Califórnia e o Vinho do Porto”; Lacoste, El Vino del Inmigrante.

49 Simpson, Creating Wine.

50 Argentina was second only to the United States as a recipient of immigrants between 1821 and 1932. Immigrants were also a major source of entrepreneurs. In 1895, 85 percent of individual companies in Argentina were owned by immigrants. María Inés Barbero, “Estrategias de Empresarios Italianos en la Argentina: El grupo Devoto,” Anuario del CEEED 1, no. 1 (2009): 9–41.

51 “Al Comercio y al Público,” Las Novedades, 1 Oct. 1892.

52 Harry W. Paul, Science, Vine, and Wine in Modern France (New York, 1996); Stanziani, “La Falsification du Vin.”

53 SA Importadora de Productos Cinzano y otros versus Pedro Aguirre, Falsificación, Usurpación de marca, box 19, reg. 312, 1917, file A-1169, no. 321, Archivo Histórico Provincial Santa Rosa, La Pampa, Argentina.

54 Simpson, Creating Wine, 100; Nicholas Faith, Victorian Vineyard: Château Loudenne and the Gilbeys (London, 1983).

55 Terence Gourvish and Richard G. Wilson, The British Brewing Industry, 1830–1980 (Cambridge, U.K., 1994); Gómez Urdáñez, El Rioja Histórico; Teresa da Silva Lopes, “Brands and the Evolution of Multinationals in Alcoholic Beverages,” Business History 44, no. 3 (2002): 1–30; Lopes, Global Brands: The Evolution of Multinationals in Alcoholic Beverages (New York, 2007).

56 In 1871 Martini & Rossi exported 1,500 cases per month to Buenos Aires, where distribution was subcontracted to Liebig. Facing competition from Cinzano, Andrea Barberis (Luigi Rossi's brother-in-law) opened a branch in 1884—the company's first outside of Italy. Andrea Goldstein and Andrea Lluch, “The Italian Economic Presence in Argentina: The Contribution of Multinational Corporations” (paper presented at Seminario Permanente del Departamento de Humanidades, Universidad de San Andrés, Buenos Aires, Argentina, 2010). In 1923, Cinzano opened its first industrial facility abroad, aimed at maintaining its market share and the quality of its vermouth. Dinámica Social 74 (Nov./Dec. 1956): 69.

57 A. Guerra Tenreiro, Anais do Instituto do Vinho do Porto (Porto, 1944).

58 Gaspar Martins Pereira, “O Nome do Vinho: Marcas e Denominações dos Vinhos Generosos do Douro, Séculos XVIII–XX” (paper presented at the 29th Conference of the Portuguese Economic and Social History Association, Porto, 2009).

59 Law, 4 June 1883, about manufacturing and commercial trademarks, and decree to regulate the execution of the decree law approved on 23 Oct. 1883, Lisbon, 1883. The Repartição de Comércio e Indústria, integrated into the Ministry of Public Affairs, Commerce and Industry, was in charge of registrations. Registrations were published regularly in Diário do Governo, from 8 Dec. 1883. The following year, the ministry started publication of the Boletim da Propriedade Industrial, which disseminated the trademark registrations filed and accepted as well as other information about industrial property. Portugal was a signatory country of the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property in 1883.

60 J. Mota Maia, “L’Évolution de la Législation Portugaise sur la Propriété Industrielle à la Lumière de la Ratification de la Convention de Paris par le Portugal,” La Propriété lndustrielle 100, no. 11 (1984): 421–26.

61 Sousa, A Questão do Douro.

62 Several amendments followed, in 1900, 1907, 1912, and 1923. Luis Eduardo Bertone and Guillermo Cabanellas de las Cuevas, Derecho de Marcas: Marcas, Designaciones y Nombres Comerciales (Buenos Aires, 1989).

63 The first three court cases dealing with imitation in Argentina are the following: López, Pedro I. v. Parodi, Luis, 1 Jan. 1877, Fallos Corte Suprema de Justicia de la Nación Argentina (1877) 19: 430; E. Meyer y Cía. v. P. Ramella y Cía., 1 Jan. 1879, Fallos Corte Suprema de Justicia de la Nación Argentina (1879) 21: 194; Siegert e Hijos v. Maclean y Feely. J. G. B. Siegert e Hijos v. Etchart, Domingo, J. G. B. Siegert e Hijos v. Cranwell, Guillermo, 1 Jan. 1881, Fallos Corte Suprema de Justicia de la Nación Argentina (1881) 23: 502; in Patentes y Marcas, year 1, no. 1 (Jan.–Mar. 1900): 5, 12, 43.

64 Moreno, Tratado de Marcas de Fábrica y de Comercio, 591–93; Diario de Sesiones, Cámara de Diputados de la Nación, Argentina, 27 June 1917. This law was partially amended by Law no. 13526 in 1949 and, again, by Act 14004 in 1950. Both of these laws were later replaced by Law no. 19982, in 1972, which in turn was replaced by the Fair Trade Act no. 22802 in 1983.

65 Colombia and Mexico applied similar regulations. Harvey, A. S., Merchandise Marks: Laws and Regulations (London, 1934), 189Google Scholar.

66 Ramello, Giovanni B., “What's in a Sign? Trademark Law and Economic Theory,” Journal of Economic Surveys 20, no. 4 (2006): 547–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

67 Obligado & Co., Cincuentenario Obligado y Cía 1889–1939 (Buenos Aires, 1939); G. Breuer, Some Information relating to G. Breuer in their Fifty Years’ Existence, to the Argentine Patent Office and to the Argentine Republic – Patent and Trademarks Laws (Buenos Aires, 1933).

68 See, for example, the case Otard Dupuy Cía. y J. H. Secrestat versus Cao, Turner Cía., in Astigueta, Francisco, Sentencias sobre Marcas de Fábrica y Patentes de Invención (Buenos Aires, 1906), 70Google Scholar.

69 Ricky Wilke and Judith Lynne Zaichkowsky, “Brand Imitation and Its Effects on Innovation, Competition, and Brand Equity,” Business Horizons 42, no. 6 (1949): 9–18.

70 Alcoholic beverages are the third-largest category in trademark registrations, following food (14.2 percent) and textiles (12.8 percent).

71 “Demonstração dos Registros do Vinho do Porto: Marca Adriano de A. Monteiro de Castro Portugal – O Verdadeiro vinho do Porto da marca Adriano, como provam os documentos abaixo tem nesta praça um unico importador directo que é Oliveira Santos,” Estado do Espírito Santo (1904) no. 183: 4; no. 186: 4; no. 221: 4; no. 224: 4.

72 An illustration of an imitated trademark is “In Hoc Vino Veritas,” which seems very similar to Ramos Pinto's trademark, “In Hoc Signo Vinces.” In Portugal it was Ramos Pinto who sued Antonio Monteiro de Castro, but both firms continued to use the trademark “Adriano.”

73 As a result of these litigations carried out in two markets, Adriano Ramos Pinto became one of the leading registrants of alcoholic beverages in both Portugal and Brazil, with fifty-four registrations until 1900 and twenty-two in Brazil until 1913. In 1923 Antonio de Castro Portugal sold all its trademarks to Henry Dagge, who in 1928 resold the trademarks to Adriano Ramos Pinto. Almeida, Graça Nicolau and Guimarães, J. A. Gonçalves, Adriano Ramos Pinto: Vinhos e Arte (Vila Nova de Gaia, 2013), 308Google Scholar.

74 Simpson, Creating Wine, 92.

75 da Silva, António Joaquim Ferreira, Vinhos e Vinagres Artificiais: Relatório Apresentado à Exma Câmara Municipal do Porto Acerca dos Vinhos e Vinagre, Marca M. J. M., Sem Número, Remetidos pela Associação Comercial da Mesma Cidade, e Analisados por Ordem da Mesma Câmara no seu Laboratório Químico Municipal por António Joaquim Ferreira da Silva, Director do Laboratório Químico Municipal do Porto (Porto, 1885)Google Scholar.

76 da Silva, António Joaquim Ferreira, Relance de Vista Sobre a Questão dos Vinhos Portugueses no Brasil, 1900–1901 (Lisboa, 1919)Google Scholar; da Silva, Ferreira, A Suposta Salicilagem dos Vinhos Portugueses no Brasil, 1900-1902: Memórias, Notas e Documentos (Coimbra, 1919)Google Scholar.

77 Degrully, Paul, Essay Historique et Economique sur La Production et le Marche des Vins en France (Paris, 1910)Google Scholar, cited in Simpson, Creating Wine, 60.

78 Simpson, Creating Wine, 96.

79 Briggs, Wine for Sale, 48.

80 Lopes and Casson, “Brand Protection and Globalization.”

81 Lacoste et al., “Burdeos de Talca.”

82 China only started to mass-produce counterfeits during the first quarter of the twentieth century. “Chinese Imitations,” New York Times, 5 Dec. 1915, 28. On imitations from other developed countries during the first wave of globalization, see Lopes and Casson, “Brand Protection and Globalization.”