NEW DELHI: India wants to start negotiations on an investment deal with the European Union simultaneously with a trade agreement in a renewed push to boost bilateral ties with the trade bloc.
Keen to accelerate investments, technology and capital flows from the EU, India wants the investment and trade deals to happen parallelly and independently. “Both the investment deal and trade deal will have to happen parallelly and independently,” said an official.

The EU has said it is ready to consider launching negotiations on a standalone investment protection agreement, which would increase legal certainty for investors on both sides.

Negotiations for a broad-based Bilateral Trade and Investment Agreement (BTIA) started in 2007 and were suspended in 2013.

The BTIA talks collapsed over certain EU demands such as greater market access for automobiles, wines and spirits, and further opening up of India’s financial services sector such as banking, insurance and e-commerce.

On the other hand, India is keen to get preferential access for its textile exports to the EU as it faces competition from Bangladesh, Vietnam and Sri Lanka.

The EU also wants labour, environment and government procurement to be included in the talks with its trading partners, and a comprehensive trade and sustainable development chapter in order to deal with the social and environmental impact of trade.

However, experts said the EU’s requirements on labour and environment could be the sticking points in its talks with India.

“Sustainability standards and labour requirements should be our red lines. Moreover, the EU is unlikely to give us the status of a data secure nation,” said an expert.

However, the expert said that to be able to export textiles duty-free or at zero duty to the EU, India could consider concessions to their automobile exports through longterm staging of duty cuts.

According to another expert, the EU is introducing tariffs for products that don’t meet environmental standards as part of the European Green Deal and India would have to be prepared for that.

“It is no longer a simple give and take with the EU anymore. They will look at higher tariffs on exports from countries which do not follow sustainable practices,” the expert said.

India’s exports to the EU in April-October were $20.5 billion, led by organic chemicals, pharmaceutical products, mineral fuels, gems and jewellery, leather products and apparel, while imports were $17.9 billion. Nuclear reactors, electrical machinery and optical/photographic apparatus were the major imports.

MILAN — Italy would have to drop the 75-year-old Alitalia brand if it wants the European Commission to approve plans to relaunch the airline, according to a letter published by L’Espresso magazine.

Loss-making Alitalia has endured 11 years of turbulent private management and three failed restructuring attempts, with the government now seeking to nationalize and relaunch the ailing flag carrier after the coronavirus crisis scuppered plans to sell it.

“The Alitalia brand should not be retained by the NewCo, since it is an emblematic indicator of continuity,” the European Union said in the letter published by L’Espresso.

The letter, dated Jan. 8, also asks Rome to launch an “open, transparent, non-discriminatory and unconditional tender” to shed Alitalia assets, rejecting the idea that the old carrier could sell its belongings to the new company in a private negotiation.

A Commission representative said the EU executive had no comment on the press report and that it is in contact with the Italian authorities on the matter and cannot comment on ongoing discussions.

The EU can block the injection of 3 billion euros ($3.63 billion) earmarked by the Italian government for the new company, thwarting Rome’s ambitions for the airline.

…

BRUSSELS (Reuters) – EU antitrust regulators have sought information from advertisers regarding Google’s advertising technology practices, a European Commission document seen by Reuters shows.

Alphabet-owned Google, the world’s largest online search engine, has been hit with fines totalling 8.25 billion euros ($10 billion) in the last three years for blocking rivals in online shopping, Android smartphones and online advertising.

It now faces two European Union investigations into its advertising practices, focused on technology and data.

Google and Facebook together capture over half of the internet ad sales market globally. Both companies are currently the target of a U.S. lawsuit over their 2018 deal which gives Facebook’s advertiser clients the option to place ads within Google’s network of publishing partners

Google said it was cooperating with the Commission, whose 13-page questionnaire sent to advertisers this month asked about the impact of using the default setting ‘Include Google Display Network’ introduced in 2018 for search campaigns on Google Ads.

“We compete with many others in the industry and give people granular controls over how their information is used to personalize ads and limit the sharing of personal data to safeguard people’s privacy,” a Google spokeswoman said.

The Commission said the questionnaires are part of its investigation into Google’s data usage.

“This investigation covers all services of Google, including digital advertising and the ad tech chain,” the EU competition enforcer said on Wednesday.

The EU also wants to know if advertisers receive rebates when they use Google intermediaries which allow advertisers or media agencies to buy advertising inventory from many sources.

The questionnaire also asks whether the ability to access Google’s YouTube is tied to the selection of an intermediary.

It asked if Google’s integration in 2018 of its online ad delivery unit DoubleClick impacted advertisers as well as any imminent impact from its plan to phase out third-party cookies on the Chrome browser by the end of 2022.

Advertisers have until Friday to reply to the questionnaire, which was first reported on by Politico.

By Trend

Delegation of the European Union to Azerbaijan made a statement in regards to the 31st anniversary of the January 20 tragedy, Trend reports citing the delegation.

“On this day of sorrow, together with the people of Azerbaijan, the EU Delegation is mourning the victims of the “Black January” tragedy. The tragic events underline the need for peace, reconciliation, and humanity for a better future. I express my deepest condolences to the families and loved ones of the victims of the January events,” the delegation said in a statement.

January 20 is a day that went down in the history of Azerbaijan’s fight for independence and territorial integrity.

On January 20, 1990, the Soviet army forces entered Baku to suppress the masses protesting the USSR-supported Armenian aggression based on territorial claims against Azerbaijan.

On the night of January 19-20, 1990, 147 people were killed, 744 were injured and 841 were illegally arrested after Soviet troops entered Baku. The Soviet troops also destroyed 200 apartments and houses, as well as private and public property.

January 20 is immortalized in the memory of the Azerbaijani nation as a Day of the Nationwide Sorrow.

—

Follow us on Twitter @AzerNewsAz         

The EU’s General Court on Wednesday ruled that there was no likelihood of confusion between the collective mark ‘halloumi’ reserved for the members of a Cypriot association, and ‘BBQloumi’ which serves to designate the products of a Bulgarian company.

In March last year, the European Court of Justice overturned a ruling that the Bulgarian cheese called BBQloumi could be registered with an EU trademark after an appeal filed by the Halloumi Foundation in Cyprus.

The court ruled then that the name BBQloumi may be similar enough to halloumi that buyers could be tricked into thinking BBQloumi products come from Cyprus.

The Foundation for the Protection of the Traditional Cheese of Cyprus named halloumi is the proprietor of the EU collective mark ‘HALLOUMI’, registered for cheese. An EU collective mark is a specific type of EU trademark, capable of distinguishing the goods or services of the members of the association which is the proprietor of the mark from those of other undertakings.

The trademark fight is part of a broader campaign by Cyprus to protect its cheese from competitors by getting the EU to give it special status as a geographically protected cheese made only on the island.

Relying on that collective mark, the foundation brought opposition proceedings against the registration as an EU trademark of the figurative sign comprising the word element ‘BBQLOUMI’, which M. J. Dairies EOOD, a Bulgarian company, had applied for in relation to, inter alia, cheese, meat extracts, cheese-flavoured food products and catering services.

This was challenged by the foundation.

The European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), responsible for the examination of applications for registration of EU trademarks, dismissed the opposition on the grounds, in particular, that there was no likelihood of confusion, for consumers, between the figurative sign ‘BBQloumi’ and the earlier collective mark HALLOUMI.

The halloumi protection foundation then brought proceedings against the EUIPO decision before the General Court, which, after having found that the mark HALLOUMI had weak distinctiveness because the term ‘halloumi’ designates a specific type of cheese, also held that there was no likelihood of confusion.

This was then appealed by the foundation at the European Court of Justice, which ruled on March 5, 2020 that the General Court had relied on an incorrect premiss “since the fact that the distinctiveness of an earlier mark” was weak did not preclude the existence of a likelihood of confusion.

Accordingly, it set aside the General Court’s judgment and referred the case back to examine whether there was a likelihood of confusion for consumers as regards the origin of the goods covered by the sign ‘BBQloumi’.

However, on Wednesday, in the latest chapter of the saga, the General Court again dismissed the Cypriot association’s action by holding that EUIPO was correct in finding that there was no likelihood of confusion.

“Concerning the similarity of the signs in question, the General Court states that the signs at issue share the element ‘loumi’ which has weak inherent distinctiveness for a large part of the relevant public who will understand it as a possible reference to halloumi cheese,” the ruling said.

“Given that the attention of the relevant public will be drawn more to the initial part of that word element, namely the part ‘bbq’, owing to its position, rather than to the final part ‘loumi’, that latter part contributes very little to the distinctiveness of the mark applied for.

“Thus, the low degree of similarity of the signs in question is unlikely to contribute to the existence of a likelihood of confusion,” the General Court said.