Jabugo: when the name of a place cannot be registered as

a trademark

In trademark law, a constant tension exists: to what extent can a name that really belongs to everyone be privately appropriated?

Names of geographical locations are the clearest example. They have prestige and evoke quality and tradition; however, that´s simply not enough for them to be a trademark.

A recent decision by the EUIPO regarding “Jabugo,” a Spanish town famous for the quality of its ham, places this question back on the table.

For years, the Authentic Jabugo Association has tried to reserve the exclusive use of the name of this municipality, located in the province of Huelva, with a European Union collective trademark.

In principle, the idea is not far-fetched. The regulation itself allows collective trademarks to include geographical references, of course with a key condition: that the sign serves to distinguish the products of the members of the association from those of other operators. This is where the attempt has failed.

In this regard, the EUIPO´s decision in invalidity proceedings C 65 827 (EU registered trademark 4 468 591 “JABUGO”) concluded that at the time of the trademark application, the Spanish public simply understood “Jabugo” as what it has always been: a place. This municipality is closely linked to an established ham tradition, whose reputation was built long before and outside of any trademark use.

The evidence presented did not indicate that consumers identify “Jabugo” as a collective business origin, but rather as a direct reference to the geographical origin of the product.

Beyond this specific conclusion, the decision proves interesting because of the message it sends. Collective marks are not intended to appropriate well-known place names or substitute specific figures such as appellations of origin. Their function is not to limit access to a name, but to regulate its use when the name truly fulfills a distinct function.

In this regard, the resolution reinforces a fundamental idea: an appellation of origin is not just another company or an economic operator. It is an institution that certifies compliance with certain standards that are linked to a region. It does not seek to monopolize a name, but to protect its significance and ensure that only those who meet these conditions legitimately benefit from it.

The case of Jabugo reminds us that trademark law has clear limits when it comes to signs that make up a collective heritage. In a context where reputation itself is an increasingly valuable asset, the temptation to privatize what belongs to everyone is understandable. But the European industrial property system, at least in this regard, is clear about where the line is drawn.

January 7, 2026