There's been a long fight between Cape Breton's Glenora Distillers and the Scotch Whisky Association. The crux of the fight is the name of Glenora's whisky; Glen Breton. The battle began nine years ago when the Scotch Whisky Association, a representative of Scotch Whisky distillers from Scotland, took action against Glenora for using the term "Glen" in its name. The Association is continuing the battle, asking the Supreme Court of Canada for permission to appeal a lower court ruling in favour of Glenora.
First, some background. Whisky can only be referred to as Scotch whisky if it is distilled in Scotland. This is similar to how only sparkling wine from Champagne in France can be referred to as Champagne. Glenora does not refer to its whisky as Scotch whiskey, they refer to it as a Canadian single malt whisky. But the Association fears that including "Glen" in the name of the whisky will mislead potential international buyers into thinking the Whisky is, in fact, Scotch.
This is stupid on many levels. First, the word "glen" has no direct link to Scotch other than the common, and, to be fair, almost specific practice among Scotch whisky distillers to name their product Glen something; Glenmorangie, Glenlivet, Glenfiddich, Glendronach, etc. But a glen has no specific link to Scotch. A glen is a valley. So why should Scottish distillers have a monopoly on the word "glen"? There are glens all around the world. A quick Wikipedia search will show you glens in New York State, Ireland, Canada, and Australia.
Next, the reason they are objecting makes zero sense to me. Scotch drinkers are notoriously snobby. They are the snobbiest drinkers I know. They generally won't buy a bottle of blended Scotch whisky let alone a bottle of whisky that isn't even Scotch. While this may not be true for all Scotch drinkers (and especially the cheap Mills'), most Scotch drinkers take their whisky very seriously. They know exactly what they are buying before they buy it. They can even tell you the difference in flavour and aroma between two Scotches from different regions. It is very unlikely that they'll mistake a bottle of booze from Cape Breton for a bottle from Scotland.
But to make extra sure that a buyer isn't confused, the label on the bottle specifically identifies the contents as Canadian single malt whisky. Caveat emptor anyone? Buyer beware. If you are stupid enough to think a bottle of whisky from Cape Breton is Scotch, then you deserve to buy the crap. I have yet to try Glen Breton, but I assume it's crap, because it's not Scottish.
Is it misleading to call a Canadian single malt whisky Glen Breton? Well, I suppose if you have no idea about Scotch, you may be mislead, but then again, you probably won't be buying Scotch anyway. So I see no harm whatsoever.
3 comments:
I think you hit it on the head and didn't realise it. Whiskey drinkers are particular, they are snobby and only want the best. If the rule states that whiskey can be only named Glen...if it comes from Scotland, then they will stick to it religiously. They wont break the golden rules.
I hear ya. And if the Association wins, then I guess we'll have that rule. But I don't think that only Scotch should be called Glen. They already have the advantage of being the only whisky called Scotch (even though the Japanese make a wicked single malt whisky that some say is better than Scotch).
I've had Glen Breton, and it's crap. I know the owner, and he is a very nice man but the whiskey is still crap. I also had a single malt whiskey in India called "bagpiper" and it was also crap.
I know how to read, and that is how I could tell that both whiskeys were not from scotland. I am assuming that the association is worried that they will lose the market share comprised of scotch drinking illiterates.
Post a Comment