Then big business and the fashion industry got in on the act.

In the 1980s and 1990s, the odd-looking sheepskin boots began to catch the attention of, first, American surfers, and then the American public at large. The American manufacturing conglomerate Deckers Corporation absorbed the small company that imported them to the U.S., and in 1995 acquired the "Ugg" name, which was trademarked in 25 countries. Soon, only Ugg Australia was allowed to call its sheepskin creations uggs. Everyone else had to use an alternate name, or face litigation.

Ugg Australia sent a series of cease-and-desist letters to Aussie manufacturers back in 1999, but failed to follow through. The manufacturers, who’d been using the term for a good 35 years, ignored their threats. Not too long after, though, Ugg Australia’s ugg boots triggered a fashion boom, due to their popularity among the likes of Oprah Winfrey and Madonna. The rising tide also lifted the fortunes of the other Australian ugg-boot manufacturers, much to their delight and Deckers’ annoyance. Soon, those same manufacturers were using the Internet to market and sell their boots worldwide as the demand swelled. They immediately started butting heads with Deckers, which apparently didn’t mind "ugg" being a generic term in Australia, but wanted to keep control of the term elsewhere.

In 2003, Deckers went to court in Australia and won the right to stop other companies from calling their products uggs. This time, their flurry of cease-and-desist letters was followed up with litigation. They were met with spirited opposition from a coalition of small Australian manufacturers, the Ugg Boot Footwear Association (UFBA), who demanded the right to keep using the generic term for the boots that some of them had been selling for more than three decades.

It was a long, hard struggle, but early in 2006, the UBFA won its case in Australian courts, proving that "ugg" had long been a generic term used for flat-heeled, pull-on sheepskin boots lined with fleece. The ruling applies only to Australia, but the UBFA believes it can get it extended to other countries as well, especially the United States. Similar claims have been rejected previously in U.S. courts because the court remained unconvinced that "ugg" really was a generic term in Australia. Now their Australian equivalents say that it is indeed, and have deregistered the trademark — so it’s back in the public domain.

Ugg Australia and its parent company, Deckers, plan to appeal the ruling. They’ve pointed out that they’ve spent millions building brand awareness, and are unwilling to have others reap the benefits. Meanwhile, they retain control of the trademark in other global markets.

After some protracted legal wrangling, the term "Ugg" has been recognized as generic, and has been returned to the public domain as a term that anyone can use — in Australia , at least. But that doesn’t mean that uggs are out of danger. In fact, unscrupulous manufacturers have begun producing ugg-style boots using what they say are 100% natural materials, when in fact they’re not.

Aussie ugg manufacturers have always prided themselves on the fact that their footwear is made of real Australian sheepskin, and lined with real fleece from Australian sheep. In fact, Deckers even owns the sheep stations where they raise the sheep whose hides and wool are used for its Ugg Australia footwear (one might suspect they enjoy a profitable sideline in fresh mutton, too). Recently, however, two Sydney-based manufacturers have begun lining their ugg boots with artificial fleece made of polyester and polypropylene, and they’ve been slammed for doing so by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC).

It’s not the fact that Rogue Footwear and Coastline Agency were lining their uggs with artificial materials that got them into hot water, according the the ACCC. These materials have been used to make artificial fleece for years, and in fact are quite effective and economical substitutes. The problem is that Rogue and Coastline were labeling their ugg-boot linings as being made of 100% natural Australian merino wool, which was blatantly false.

After the ACCC tested the "wool" linings of the Rogue and Coastline uggs in early 2006, only to find that they were, in fact, not genuine wool, the two companies were forced to admit that their labels were misleading, and promised to change them. Only Coastline, however, offered to give a refund to its misled customers. No mention was made in news reports of any fines being levied against the firms for false advertising. How this subterfuge has affected subsequent sales for the two companies remains uncertain, but the Chairman for the ACCC points out that actions like these "cause damage to Australian consumers and entities," presumably not just Down Under but in the eyes of the wider world.

The moral of the story isn’t necessarily that comfortable ugg-like books can’t be made from artificial materials; other companies have done that. However, consumers depend upon manufacturers to be truthful in their labeling practices; and now it turns out that even if you’ve got an ugg boot that’s supposed to be made of natural materials, and in fact is labeled as such, it may be a lie. This isn’t likely to be a problem with the large, reputable manufacturers, but if you’re considering an "off" brand, then as old saying goes — buyer beware.

For most of their existence, uggs were a homey Aussie secret. Then the word got out to American surfers, who began wearing the warm boots that their Aussie brethren had been wearing for decades. Suddenly, ugg boots hit the big time in the early 2000s, becoming the must-have women’s fashion item. The traditional Australian manufacturers were delighted, and went to great lengths to meet the growing demand for their comfy boots.

By then, the term "ugg" had long since been trademarked in most of the world’s markets. The story of how this came about varies, but surfer Brian Smith is known to have founded Ugg Holdings in the U.S.A. in 1979, immediately trademarking the name in 25 countries. The British firm Celtic Sheepskin claims that it originated the trademark, selling it to Smith’s company later on. Whatever the case, Smith sold out to Deckers in 1995, and his company became Ugg Australia. They began marketing the brand aggressively.

Meanwhile, the Australian firms that made their own versions of uggs begrudged Decker’s appropriation of their generic term, technically legal though it was. Though the law was on Deckers’ side, there were many who felt that the spirit of the law was antithetical to the interests of the people who’d been making what they called uggs for decades. The fact was, Deckers had thought to trademark the name when they hadn’t; but was that fair?

In 2003, Deckers successfully acquired exclusive legal use of the term "ugg," and asserted that right by initiating legal action for trademark infringement against the many small manufacturers who still called their products uggs. The smaller manufacturers were incensed, and some banded together as the Ugg Boot Footwear Association (UFBA) to fight Deckers and Ugg Australia, in court. Their argument was based on fair use of the term "ugg." As they put it, Brian Smith shouldn’t have been able to trademark it in the first place, because of its generic nature. It was like someone trademarking the word "car" or "sedan" and keeping anyone else from using it. The trademark had been awarded in error, they argued, and should be revoked.

Deckers countered that most of the popularity that ugg-style sheepskin boots had enjoyed over the past decade was due to their marketing efforts — and they’ve got a point. Over the years, they’ve spent in excess of US $5 million in an aggressive marketing scheme to keep their boots in the public eye. Arguably their biggest coup was having American daytime TV queen Oprah Winfrey fall in love with them, and announce that they were one of her "favorite things." Millions of women (and men, too) took her advice to heart, and experienced the superior comfort and warmth of uggs for the first time.

Ultimately, however, the Australian courts agreed with the UBFA and deregistered the trademark in Australia, though they warned that the existing Ugg Australia logo, which is essentially a stylized version of the word "UGG," is still legally protected. However, the issue is far from settled, assuming Deckers wants to pursue it. The deregistration applies only to Australia, and Deckers’ arguments may hold water in other jurisdictions. While the American manufacturer is indeed a Goliath compared to the UBFA’s David, they acquired their trademark legally, and are within their rights to try to protect it.

My, how times change.

Fast-forward a few decades to 2003, and the ugg boot was in its heyday. Big-budget advertising and rising popularity among celebrities had pushed the ugg onto high fashion’s center stage, and dozens of companies were selling them online and in shops throughout the world. Companies like Ugg Australia were feverishly applying the ugg concept — i.e., soft, durable sheepskin lined with fleece — to everything they could: other types of footwear, hats, gloves, scarves, etc. Australian manufacturers were cheering the ugg boot’s popularity, and raking in the dough.

Then reality slapped the little guys in the face. It turned out that Deckers Corporation, the parent company of Ugg Australia, had quite legally acquired the trademark to the term "ugg" in 25 countries — including its homeland, Australia. And they were serious about protecting that trademark. They’d sent out warning letters telling other manufacturers not to use the term for their products as early as 1999, but never followed up on the threat. However, the year 2003 saw a second round of letters — and then Deckers started taking people to court when they didn’t take heed.

Unsurprisingly, the Australian manufacturers were outraged at the appropriation of what they justifiably considered a generic term, and formed an association to fight what they perceived as Deckers’ high-handedness. After more than two years’ struggle, they managed to have "ugg" and several related terms deregistered in Australia, winning back the right to call their boots what they’ve always called them. Deckers plans to appeal the ruling, pointing out that it was they who popularized the boots, while the other manufacturers rode to financial success on a coattail effect.

When she heard three years ago that the term "ugg" no longer belonged to Australia, Susan Lambert was intrigued enough to research the subject and begin preparing a documentary, which was ultimate produced in September 2006 as "The Good, The Bad and the Ugg Boot." The film chronicles the battle for the figurative custody of the word "ugg," casting it in a sort of David-and-Goliath mode in which Goliath is the American-owned Deckers Corporation — with, of course, the small manufacturers collectively cast as David. That’s not to say that the roles were necessarily invalid: while they had a legal right to the name "ugg" at the time, Deckers tended to play hardball in dealing with their competitors. Among other things, it had companies thrown off Ebay, and in at least one case convinced Icann (the organization that controls global Internet addresses) to deregister one competitor’s URL. It’s still having small players removed from Ebay whenever it can.

Lambert says her documentary is about more than just an odd looking boot: it’s about how globalization is affecting small businesses everywhere. While the film is strictly an Australian product, made using what Ms. Lambert calls a domestic budget, it’s been garnering significant attention since its recent airing on Australian TV. It’s even being used for educational purposes in Australia and elsewhere, to demonstrate to students the effects of marketplace globalization.

Jessica Alba says the next generation of Ugg boots are “must-have essential item” for fall. She created her own look for shopvogue.com together with Eva Longoria and Debra Messing. Shopvogue.com is an online store affiliated with the fashion magazine Vogue.

ABC News reports, how Imitation Uggs caused huge drop of lambskin prices from Tasmania from $13 to as low as $3 to $5 due to cheap imitations on the market. Other factors contributiong to the price drop are warmer climate in Russia and flood of artificial ugg boots to North American Market.

The Western Australia farmer’s federation (WAFF) has expressed concerns that the local Aussie’s wool producers’ reputation is being ruined by some companies trying to sell their fake uggs as genuine Australian wool. Some manufacturers’ footwear is being labeled as 100% Australian Merino Wool lining, but is nothing more than just 100% polyester. WAFF says that the fake ugg boots damage the credit of world renowned Australian wool and sheepskin products.

PR Web has an interesting article sumaarizing the history of ugg boots. It explains tehre do the uggs come from, their role in history and development from the early days up to now, when they became an international hit. It also focuses on marketing and authenticity of ugg rpoducts in the global competitive economy.