Demeter Certified Winemaking

I was always under the impression that Demeter-certified BioDynamics just told you how to grow your grapes. I assumed that once you harvested your BioDynamic grapes, they didn't care what you did after that. Turns out...that is not the case. They also tell you how to make your wine as well:
DemeterCertifiedWinemakingRules

This was a revelation to me. A few tidbits from their rules:

1. "The wine must be made in a Demeter certified wnry." Curious as to how BobLindquist/Qupe does this inasmuch as he shares space w/ JimClendenen, who is not Demeter-certified?

2. "Concentration of must is not permitted". Wonder how RobSinskey gets away w/ making his saignee VinGris de PinotNoir?

3. "Acid & sugar adjustment is not permitted". Wonder how the BioDynamic estates in Burgundy get away w/ not chaptalizing?

4. "Only oak barrels....are permitted" for aging. Wonder how they get away w/ aging in redwood vats or concrete eggs?

5. "Total maximum measured sulfites at bottling cannot exceed 100 ppm". I can imagine that some of the sweeter Austrian Rieslings/GVs would be at risk at that low level?

6. "Natural corks, screw caps, glass are permitted for closures". Wonder why they permit screwcaps, which have a Mylar (plastic) insert in contact w/ the wine, but plastic containers for the wine is prohibited?? What about the composite corks that have cork crumbs bound w/ a plasticizer??

Anyway....all things that would make SweetAlice go ape-$hit over. My impression is that the Demeter association folks are pretty hard-nosed. They have the name BioDynamic trademarked and if you suggest you farm your grapes according to BioDynamic principles w/o being Demeter-certified (as a number of growers I know do), the Demeter Nazis will be coming after you. Wonder if you can get away by claiming you farm your grapes by "principals of RudolfSteiner" w/o fear of retribution?? Probably not.

Tom

[David M. Bueker]

Be careful, as I think you have oversimplified a few of their rules. Also there are two levels for wine, wine made from BioDynamic grapes and BioDynamic wine.

Be careful, as I think you have oversimplified a few of their rules. Also there are two levels for wine, wine made from BioDynamic grapes and BioDynamic wine.

How so, David?? The quotes are taken directly from their document.
Tom

[David M. Bueker]

Including the elipsis to shorten the text?

You know you are just being delberately provocative.

3. "Acid & sugar adjustment is not permitted". Wonder how the BioDynamic estates in Burgundy get away w/ not chaptalizing?

Simple--they are not Demeter Certified (tm). They use Biodynamic farming techniques, but not the Demeter Certified winemaking techniques.

-Paul W.

3. "Acid & sugar adjustment is not permitted". Wonder how the BioDynamic estates in Burgundy get away w/ not chaptalizing?

Simple--they are not Demeter Certified (tm). They use Biodynamic farming techniques, but not the Demeter Certified winemaking techniques.
-Paul W.

Yup...in Europe you can use Biodynamic on your label even if you're not Demeter-certified. Their
Demeter has not trademarked the Biodynamic name.
Tom

In France and maybe other countries, there exists another biodynamic label, Biodyvin, which is favoured by some top biodynamic producers such as Leflaive, Zind-Humbrecht, Chidaine...... http://www.biodyvin.com/en/home.html .

In the intro, the linked to document says it applies in the United States.

There is another document kicking around that implies there is (or was) variation in the rules between countries. No idea how that works in practice, but it could explain some of the discrepancies
http://organicstandard.com.ua/files/sta ... ne_e08.pdf

In the intro, the linked to document says it applies in the United States.

There is another document kicking around that implies there is (or was) variation in the rules between countries. No idea how that works in practice, but it could explain some of the discrepancies
http://organicstandard.com.ua/files/sta ... ne_e08.pdf

Yup, Steve....that's my understanding that there are (large) differences between Demeter in the US and
Europe. Big difference is that Demeter in the US has trademarked the word "BioDynamic". That's like when
HopKiln trademarked the word "Primitivo" or Smerling trademarked "GrandPere".
You have to be very careful how you use the word "BioDynamic" in the US or they'll come after you. Friggin' Nazis!!
Just like you can get thrown in jail for using the words "Scotch Tape" or "Kleenex" in a generic sense.
Tom

[David M. Bueker]

Tom,

Why do you need to keep invoking the Nazis? To what end?

So they trademarked Biodynamic. Whatever. If our trademark laws allow them to do that why should they defer? Perhaps the trademark laws are problematic.

Tom,
Why do you need to keep invoking the Nazis? To what end?
So they trademarked Biodynamic. Whatever. If our trademark laws allow them to do that why should they defer? Perhaps the trademark laws are problematic.

BioDynamic was a commonly used word throughout the World before Demeter/US even existed, particularly
in Europe. Demeter/US trademarked the name "BioDynamic" to give themselves more control over the use
of BioDynamic term in the wine industry. That's Nazi-behavior if I ever heard of it. Were they wanting to protect the
consumers from abuse of the term BioDynamic?? I sincerely doubt it...it was a pure & simple power grab that was
facilitated by the TM people. In the same vein of the NFL folks and SuperBowl TM.
The people who make trademark decisions are not the best & the brightest. They're gummint bureaucrats, after all.

Way back when, in the late '70's, they allowed HopKilnWnry to trademark the name "Primitivo". It's a friggin' grape variety
name....how could you trademark that?? Bureaucrats didn't have a clue it was a grape variety. They didn't even bother
to Google "Primitivo". What really chapped me off is that HopKiln didn't even have Primitivo planted...it was just very-old
vine Zinfandel like everyone else. Fortunately, the TM didn't hold up in court.
And Smerling TM'd the name GrandPereVnyd because Renwood made Zin from the original GP vnyd. He then planted
a new vnyd from GP cuttings and called it GrandPere Zin, implying that he was using the original GP grapes. The TM
bureaucrats let it pass, not knowing anything about the GP back-story.
Our TM people are not the best & the brightest.

It's just like the Gallo and the Kimberly-Clark and 3M folks are very protective of their trade-marked names and spare
no expense to sic their bulldog lawyers on you if they feel you're abusing their name. Why, I've heard that the 3M Corp
has established several secret rendition camps about the US and if they hear about somebody using improperly the
"Scotch Tape" name, off they go for a water-boarding to cure their bad behavior!!
Tom

Even granted your interpretation of the history, Tom. Even granted the humerous use of the term "Nazi" e.g. "Soup Nazi, I still question the polemical? implication that Demeter are being "Nazis". It's a trademark.

If anything, rather than "Nazi", (and in addition to commercial reasons) they are attempting to define The One True Faith. Not sure this is "Nazi" behavior in any way.

BioDynamic was a commonly used word throughout the World before Demeter/US even existed, particularly in Europe.

It certainly was NOT used before Demeter existed. Demeter was founded in 1924, the same year that Steiner first gave his lectures on his organic farming techniques, as a standards certification body. "Demeter" was trademarked in 1928.

According to the Justia Trademarks website, "Biodynamic" was first used in trade in 1985. It doesn't say by whom. Very possibly by Demeter, as a (tm)-type mark, as opposed to (R). Demeter applied to register it as a trademark in 2003. The registration was granted in 2006.

Demeter is an international standards body that was set up at the get-go to certify that those claiming to practice Steiner's organic farming methodology actually are doing so. I personally don't see anything wrong with them registering Biodynamic (R) as a trademark. This is fairly common trade practice, and it protects the consumer.

Does anyone know who was using the adjective "Biodynamic" in trade during the period 1985-2003? It seems most likely to me that Demeter International was using this as an unregistered trademark, and then decided in 2003 to register the mark that they already were using.

Regarding trademark enforcement, by US law a trademark owner must actively defend their mark or they risk losing the trademark rights. If the owner knows of misuse of the mark and doesn't object, the mark may become generic. "Zipper" and "aspirin" are two such cases.

What would your reaction be if I started going to wine forums and signing my posts TomHill? That essentially is what trademark misuse amounts to.

-Paul W.

Maybe we need a standards body to certify that the term "Nazi" is used properly.

-Paul W.

BioDynamic was a commonly used word throughout the World before Demeter/US even existed, particularly in Europe.

It certainly was NOT used before Demeter existed. Demeter was founded in 1924, the same year that Steiner first gave his lectures on his organic farming techniques, as a standards certification body. "Demeter" was trademarked in 1928.

According to the Justia Trademarks website, "Biodynamic" was first used in trade in 1985. It doesn't say by whom. Very possibly by Demeter, as a (tm)-type mark, as opposed to (R). Demeter applied to register it as a trademark in 2003. The registration was granted in 2006.
Demeter is an international standards body that was set up at the get-go to certify that those claiming to practice Steiner's organic farming methodology actually are doing so. I personally don't see anything wrong with them registering Biodynamic (R) as a trademark. This is fairly common trade practice, and it protects the consumer.
Does anyone know who was using the adjective "Biodynamic" in trade during the period 1985-2003? It seems most likely to me that Demeter International was using this as an unregistered trademark, and then decided in 2003 to register the mark that they already were using.
Regarding trademark enforcement, by US law a trademark owner must actively defend their mark or they risk losing the trademark rights. If the owner knows of misuse of the mark and doesn't object, the mark may become generic. "Zipper" and "aspirin" are two such cases.
What would your reaction be if I started going to wine forums and signing my posts TomHill? That essentially is what trademark misuse amounts to.
-Paul W.

Well, Paul.....I stand corrected, then. I was unaware of this. I guess that when I started reading about BioDynamics, I seldom saw the term "Demeter" being used, just references to Steiner's work, mostly. So I sort of assumed it was a commonly-used term. I gather not.
As for Demeter looking out for the consumer interests.....I have my doubts about this. Like most organizations...they are mostly looking out after their own self-interests. It always gives me the heebie-jeebies when some organization piously proclaims they are looking out for me. I know of a lot of organizations where it's all about the $$'s, not the consumer interests. A Demeter strikes me as one of those.
Tom

[David M. Bueker]

Except that biodynamics is a confusing subject for the general public, and if there was not a true certification body then you would have the charlatans that you likely would rail against even more.

Someone has to check on what these producers are doing, or we get the free for all hodgepodge of organic standards.

Someone has to check on what these producers are doing, or we get the free for all hodgepodge of organic standards.

Um, well...actually, you can chalk up most of those "free for all standards" to the lobbying of big megacorps who wanted to be able to fudge up those standards into a hodgepodge stew so they could claim the organic standard on their heavily processed products. And of course the more-than-willing-to-take-a-buck politicians who took the bribes----er, campaign contributions---and recognized the rights of free speech (money talks) to so screw up the standards as to make most of them meaningless.

But, yeah, I agree with you in principle, David. Still waiting for the "Natural Wine" thing to gel too. (Like that's ever gonna happen.)

[David M. Bueker]

Someone should trademark FeiRing as a NaturalWine certification body.

She prefers "anoint".

Alice is not perfect?

Someone should trademark FeiRing as a NaturalWine certification body.

There you go, David. Great idea.

I was talking w/ a Somm a week ago & she was shaking her head over "natural wines" because there
is no definition of the term. I told her my rule is so simple...if SweetAlice says it's a "natural wine"...then
that's what it is.

I'm perfectly happy w/ the state of natural wines and them having a loosy-goosy definition.
I'm perfectly happy if FredFranzia puts on his label "natural wine" of 2$Chuck. It tastes better,
in not boring, than some of the aurhentix "natural wines". But it would leave SweetAlice frothing
at the mouth.
Tom

During the era of “Industrialization” a lot of people were thinking like Rudolf Steiner. Today Biodynamic farming could be looked at as “extreme organic farming”, “traditional farming” or plain “old-fashion farming”. If you truly think men like Rudolf Steiner and Sir Albert Howard thought alike. They differed only it what they applied to “traditional farming”. Steiner applied a cosmic philosophy, Howard applied “modern” (for his day anyway) scientific knowledge.

Salute

Any thoughts on polyculture vs monoculture (and its effect on winemaking)?