Back into the Public Domain — in Australia, At Least
The clunky, wool-lined sheepskin boots called uggs, ugs, or ughs — a shortening of "ugly," by all accounts — used to be a uniquely Australian phenomenon. They apparently originated in the mid-twentieth century as simple sheepskin wrappings that sheep shearers used to keep their feet warm. Later on, Australian surfers got into the act. And so the situation remained for years, more or less, though the sheepskin creations slowly seeped into other segments of the Australian shoe-wearing public. For quite some time, uggs were considered utilitarian only, the dowdy shoes you wore at home to keep your feet warm — but never, ever out in public.
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.
