MoranLaw Blog

Coffee, Cheese and Copyright - the Netherlands through an Intellectual Property lens

Written by Lizzie Harvey | July 2, 2025 12:00:00 AM Z

Over the past few weeks, I have been fortunate to be visiting the Netherlands. In 2023, I lived in Rotterdam while on exchange at Erasmus University and loved being back in the city I called home for 6 months.

Now a qualified lawyer, I’ve started looking at the world with my newly minted IP googles and I thought I’d share some of my highlights.

Sage or Breville?

If you’ve ever browsed for a coffee machine in New Zealand, you’ve probably come across Breville. With their sleek designs and signature dark purple branding, Breville machines are a familiar sight in big box stores across the country.

But in Europe things get a little confusing.

There, the very same style of coffee machine (same design, get-up and branding) is sold under a different name: Sage.

Why the change? It all comes down to trademark rights.

Breville Group Limited, the company behind these popular machines, owns the BREVILLE trademark in most parts of the world. However, in the European Union (EU) and the United Kingdom (UK), they don’t. In those regions, the rights to the Breville name belong to a completely different company: Newell Brands Inc., an American firm that also owns the Sunbeam appliance brand.

So, while you can find products labelled "Breville" in the EU and the UK, they’re actually machines made by Newell and are rebranded Sunbeam models, not the ones made by Breville Group Limited.

To work around this, Breville Group markets its own machines in Europe under the name Sage.

The root of this trademark tangle? According to my research, the rights to the BREVILLE name in Europe were sold-off back in the 1980s, a decision that still causes brand confusion decades later.

The Wonderful World of Cheese

The Netherlands is world-famous for its cheese, and two of its most iconic varieties ‘Edam Holland’ and ‘Gouda Holland’ hold special protection under a system called Geographical Indications (GI).

What exactly is a GI?

A Geographical Indication is a designation used on products that come from a specific place and have qualities, characteristics, or a reputation that are closely linked to that origin. It is a way of protecting traditional products and ensuring authenticity for consumers.

In the case of Edam Holland and Gouda Holland, the GI status means that only cheese made in the Netherlands, using traditional methods and meeting strict standards, can carry those names.

On 1 May 2024, a new free trade agreement between New Zealand and the European Union came into effect — and it brought some important changes for cheese producers.

Under this agreement, New Zealand cheesemakers can no longer label their products as ‘Edam Holland’ or ‘Gouda Holland’ unless the cheese is actually produced in the Netherlands.

However, New Zealand producers can still use the generic names ‘Edam’ and ‘Gouda’, which might not seem like a big difference to many Kiwis. But in the European market, and increasingly around the world, the distinction matters. For European consumers, the addition of "Holland" signals a guarantee of origin, tradition, and quality, something the basic terms "Edam" or "Gouda" no longer fully represent.

Copyright Enforcement in the Netherlands

In a recent Dutch copyright case, Meta (owner of Facebook and Instagram) has been found by the Amsterdam District Court to qualify as an “online content-sharing service” under EU and Dutch laws.

This means Meta must obtain licences to use copyrighted images shared on its platforms. This was a win for the claimant, Pictoright, a Dutch organisation representing visual artists and other creators.

Although negotiations for a collective licence began in 2021, no agreement between the parties could be reached.

The Court ruled in November 2024 that Meta must seek appropriate permission and (and provide compensation) for use of copyrighted works and has requested an explanation of the methods the company plans to calculate the economic value of the use of such works.

For New Zealand, the case underscores the growing importance of copyright enforcement in digital spaces. Kellee Candy discussed in her article earlier this month that just because one platform makes content available, does not mean it is the subject of an open license for others to use or modify. While case law on this subject in New Zealand is limited, it is interesting to look to other jurisdictions to see how technological innovation, and creative rights are being balanced.