46 The Court has also made clear that the fact that the disputed designation in the case that gave rise to the judgment cited in the preceding paragraph refers to a place of production that is known to consumers in the Member State where the product is made is not relevant for the purpose of assessing the concept of ‘evocation’ within the meaning of Article 16(b) of Regulation No 110/2008, since that provision protects registered geographical indications against any evocation throughout the territory of the European Union and, in view of the need to guarantee effective and uniform protection of those indications in that territory, it covers all European consumers (see, by analogy, judgments of 21 January 2016, Viiniverla, C‐75/15, EU:C:2016:35, paragraphs 27 and 28, and of 7 June 2018, Scotch Whisky Association, C‐44/17, EU:C:2018:415, paragraph 59).
Nämä molemmat ovat merkkejä Itä-Kongon tilanteen paranemisesta.Eurlex2019 Eurlex2019