The Ugg brand name dispute is almost as ugly as the boots

When you hear the name 'Ugg', chances are you have a pretty good idea what the product in question looks like. You're imagining a pair of soft sheepskin boots that are, let's face it, kind of ugly (we're allowed to say that – apparently the 'Ugg' name originates from comments to that effect from the original designer's wife).

But it turns out there's been a bitter trademark war waging over the boots in recent years, and a heavy blow has just been dealt to an Australian family-run Ugg boot manufacturer by California-based Deckers Outdoor Company, which owns the rights to the Ugg name outside of Australia and New Zealand.

@uggsince1974

♬ original sound - UGG Since 1974

While many won't have realised multiple 'Uggs' brands exist, Deckers' is the one with the giant 'G' in the middle of the logo. For years a debate has raged over whether 'Ugg' is a protected trademark or a generic term to describe the style of boot. There are more than 70 registered trademarks that include the term "ugg" in various logos and designs in Australia and New Zealand, but outside of these two countries, Decker's holds the trademark – and it asserts it over Australian manufacturers who sell overseas.

As a result of a new ruling, Australian brand 'Ugg Since 1974', which has been making boots for five decades and owns the 'Ugg' trademark in Australia, has been forced to drop 'Ugg' from its name everywhere except Australia and New Zealand. In a TikTok video (above), bootmaker Todd Watts announced, “It’s extremely hard to fight a lawsuit against a multi-billion dollar company, especially as a family-owned Australian-made business.” Watts added, “In Australia and New Zealand, we will always, forever, be Ugg Since 1974. But for those boots leaving our borders and heading overseas, we will transition our brand to Since 74. Nothing else changes.”

And judging by the response to the comments on TikTok, Decker's heavy-handed approach isn't going down well with customers. "I’ve never bought Uggs but I’ll looking for Since 74 in Canada just out of spite. SMALL BUSINESSES ARE EVERYTHING," one user comments, while another adds, "Just bought a pair of UGG Australia even though I don’t really need it." And adding to the chorus are plenty of people who simply had no idea there were multiple Ugg brands. "Omg i feel so scammed by uGg I had no idea!" One user laments.

This is by no means the first time we've seen a huge brand come down hard on an independent business over a trademark. From Apple vs Prepear to Starbucks vs Starbuds, there are tons of examples of David and Goliath battles from the past few years. Not that Goliath always wins – as Nintendo found out the hard way just last week.