Not sure how I feel about the decision.Oregon and federal labeling rules state that a wine must be produced in Oregon in order for it to display one of Oregon's viticultural areas on the label. Wines produced in neighboring states may only use the broader Oregon designation.
Copper Cane was using grapes from Oregon but trucking them to CA to vinify and bottle.
I think he only referenced the specific Oregon sites on his cases, not on the bottle label. But if the grapes are from those regions, why can't he say so? Whether he made the wine on site or somewhere else, why does that matter? I don't know why it matters that he went to another state because what if his vineyard was on the south border of Oregon and he simply went five miles over into CA? Why would that be bad but if he went to the northern border of Oregon, much farther, it would be OK and he would still qualify?
I get Oregon wanting to protect its image, but really the image is only going to be the brand name. People who buy it are not that likely to care where the grapes came from, just that the wine tastes like the last bottle did. I kind of thought he was silly to ID the source at all, since that's not what his wines were ever about.
https://www.winespectator.com/webfeatur ... ine-Labels