IP & Copyright

EU Back on IP Watch List After 18 Years, Vietnam Named PFC

The U.S. Trade Representative has slapped the EU back onto its Special 301 Report Watch List, a move not seen since 2006. Vietnam, meanwhile, earns the dreaded Priority Foreign Country designation. The message is clear: IP disputes are far from over.

{# Always render the hero — falls back to the theme OG image when article.image_url is empty (e.g. after the audit's repair_hero_images cleared a blocked Unsplash hot-link). Without this fallback, evergreens with cleared image_url render no hero at all → the JSON-LD ImageObject loses its visual counterpart and LCP attrs go missing. #}
A gavel striking a sound block, symbolizing legal proceedings and trade disputes.

Key Takeaways

  • The EU has been added to the U.S. Special 301 Report Watch List for the first time since 2006, citing concerns over Geographical Indications (GIs) and pharmaceutical legislation.
  • Vietnam has been designated a Priority Foreign Country due to persistent failures to address online piracy and IP enforcement issues.
  • The report highlights global IP challenges including trademark counterfeiting, pharmaceutical counterfeits, and digital piracy of copyrighted content.
  • EU's use of GIs is seen as limiting market access for U.S. food and agricultural producers by granting exclusive rights to common product names.

Is your cheese protected? Apparently, it’s a battlefield.

The U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) dropped its annual Special 301 Report, and wouldn’t you know it, the European Union is back on the Watch List. First time since 2006. That’s nearly two decades. Meanwhile, Vietnam got the full Priority Foreign Country treatment. Because persistent IP failures can’t be ignored forever.

The EU’s Not-So-Sweet Deal on GIs

The report, a yearly survey of global intellectual property protections, usually has some glowing reviews. South Korea tweaked its copyright law. Argentina un-fudged its patent eligibility rules for pharmaceuticals. Good for them. But then there’s the EU.

Their crime? Geographical Indications, or GIs. You know, like ‘Parmesan’ or ‘Feta’. The EU, in its infinite wisdom, has granted exclusive rights to its producers, often overriding pre-existing U.S. trademark rights for common names. Havarti cheese producers, take note. Danbo, you too.

This isn’t just about fancy cheese names. It’s about market access. The EU effectively blocks U.S. food and agricultural goods by claiming ownership over terms Americans have used for ages. The numbers are stark: In 2025, the EU exported $1.2 billion in cheese to the U.S. We sent them a measly $19.4 million. Blame it on strategic GI policies, amplified by WIPO agreements.

Concerningly, many GIs have been granted to provide exclusive rights to European producers despite U.S. trademark rights… that predate the GI grant.

And it’s not just cheese. The EU’s recent provisional agreement on General Pharmaceutical Legislation (GPL) is also raising eyebrows. Reduced protections for commercial data? Conditioning patent term restoration on clinical trials within the EU? Sounds like a clever way to hobble foreign drug makers.

Then there’s the Digital Services Act. While it aims to police online content, its framework for liability under the e-Commerce Directive has stakeholders worried. It’s a complex web, and the USTR is watching.

Vietnam: The New IP Pariah

Vietnam, on the other hand, got the full VIP (Very Infringing Place) treatment as a Priority Foreign Country. Why? Persistent, and frankly, massive online piracy. Cyberlockers and copyright infringement sites operate with impunity. Authorities might shut down one site, like 2Embed, but another, MegaCloud, pops up. It’s an endless game of whack-a-mole.

Even with more criminal prosecutions for copyright infringement, Vietnamese courts apparently slap wrists rather than deliver meaningful penalties. This creates a fertile ground for digital pirates worldwide.

The Broader IP Battlefield

This isn’t just about Europe and Vietnam. The report also flags trademark counterfeiting rampant from China, India, South Korea, and Turkey. Transit hubs like Singapore and the UAE are enabling this flood of fake goods. And let’s not forget pharmaceutical counterfeits peddled by illicit online pharmacies – a staggering 75% of all web-based drug vendors. Stream-ripping software and camcording of movies also continue to plague content creators.

This annual report is more than just a list of grievances. It’s a signal. It’s the USTR drawing lines in the sand. For businesses operating internationally, especially in food, agriculture, and pharmaceuticals, understanding these IP nuances isn’t just good practice. It’s essential for survival.

Why Does This Matter for U.S. Producers?

For U.S. food and agricultural producers, the EU’s aggressive promotion of GIs directly impacts their ability to compete. When common names become exclusive intellectual property, market access shrinks, and trade deficits widen. The U.S. has been proactive, entering into reciprocal trade agreements with nine nations to preserve access for its meat and cheese producers. It’s a workaround, but a necessary one in a trade environment increasingly shaped by IP disputes.

This return to the Watch List for the EU signals a potential escalation of trade friction. It’s a battle fought not with tariffs, but with regulations and claims of intellectual ownership. And it’s a battle that impacts what ends up on your plate, and in your medicine cabinet.


🧬 Related Insights

Written by
Legal AI Beat Editorial Team

Curated insights, explainers, and analysis from the editorial team.

Worth sharing?

Get the best Legal Tech stories of the week in your inbox — no noise, no spam.

Originally reported by IPWatchdog

Stay in the loop

The week's most important stories from Legal AI Beat, delivered once a week.