upvote

points

by RobotToaster1 days ago |
comments
upvoteby _carbyau_22 hours ago|
next
[-]
This feels like it wasn't quite worded well.

But yeah, when Deckers bought the Ugg brand name the quality went down. Similar to Dunlop Volleys which are now crappy quality too. I don't buy either now.

Might as well get any other brands version of the same thing - the quality is unlikely to be any worse. Hell, my kid opted for fluffy crocs instead even though they are yet to truly know the word bogan...

reply
upvoteby defen21 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
So what are the good Australian boot/shoe brands now?
reply
upvoteby _carbyau_20 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
I'm not a fashion guru. I'd argue there isn't any good Australian brand.

Maybe R.M.Williams boots if your wallet is tolerant to something way overpriced.

But they seem to be targeting the exec crowd who want dress-boots-with-aussie-country-cred while this exact marketing ploy is causing the loss of that credibility.

Again with the brand abuse. But the brand wants to exude quality, even if it is way over priced for what you get, so that's something.

reply
upvoteby t0mpr1c31 days ago|
prev|
[-]
They are not knockoffs. Ugg boots are a generic product. The Australian manufacturer does not have exclusive rights to the design either.
reply
upvoteby mjmas1 days ago|
parent|
next
[-]
A generic Australian product. But however Deckers owns Ugg as a trademark everywhere but here and NZ.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ugg_boots_trademark_dispute

reply
upvoteby t0mpr1c31 days ago|
parent|
[-]
Yes. In contrast to Mozzarella, Champagne, and many others which are generic products in the USA, and protected trademarks in their region of origin.

I didn't realise the trademark holder is a US company.

reply
upvoteby mjmas22 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
To clarify, Uggs originated in Australia and are a generic term here. Deckers owns a trademark outside Australia and is enforcing it against people in Australia.

It would be like if a US company registered Champagne as a trademark then enforced it against French companies selling it.

reply
upvoteby tomjakubowski20 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
Only mozzarella di bufala campana has PDO, even in Italy there are non-PDO, generic mozzarella cheeses produced outside the region.
reply
upvoteby t0mpr1c314 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
I see. Similar to Balsamico di Modena / generic balsamic vinegar?

Does non-PDO Parmesan exist in Italy? In the US, "Parmesan" is usually some kind of domestic hard cheese that lacks maturity. The genuine Parmigiano Reggiano costs around 3x.

reply
upvoteby margalabargala1 days ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Champagne is absolutely not a "generic" product in the US.

While some California wines were and still are sold as "California Champagne", there was a court decision back in 2006 which affirmed the same protected trademark for Champagne as in the rest of the world, with the caveat that wineries already using the "Champagne" name would be grandfathered in and permitted to continue doing so.

A bottle of Champagne made in the US will be labeled with its origin, and no one can start a winery and start selling Champagne in the US. That's not the same thing as "generic".

reply
upvoteby free6521 days ago|
parent|
[-]
Champagne isn't a trademark and it's *generic* in US. What happened that in 2006 US signed an agreement with EU. Obviously everything can change.

https://www.ttb.gov/system/files/images/pdfs/rulings/2008-1....

reply
upvoteby rob7421 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
I guess it's "generic" in the sense that everyone calls a sparkling wine "champagne", same as everyone calls a copier a "Xerox machine", but if some other company would try to sell their copier using the Xerox name, they would still be sued by Xerox (the company)?
reply
upvoteby illliillll20 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
At least here in Europe, even children know that “sparkling wine” and “champagne” refer to different things.
reply
upvoteby kakacik17 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
There is a kinder variant for such - prosecco, which can actually mean OK quality (within sparkling stuff bounds, which are not high).

But yeah calling anything Champagne apart from stuff coming from Champagne is a bad form and looked down upon a bit. Small kids do such mistakes and thats fine, adults shouldn't.

reply
upvoteby account4216 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Not all adults care about the origin location nor should they.
reply
upvoteby illliillll7 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
If you’re ordering “sparkling wine”, you are not going to get a wine made using the méthode traditionnelle.

You will get an entirely different style of wine.

The origin location is really secondary. “Franciacorta” gets you something like Champagne, “sparkling wine” does not.

reply
upvoteby margalabargala22 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
The US legal system doesn't have the concept of "trademark" in the way you're using it, that word means something else here.

And no, "trademark" definition aside, it's not "generic" in the US by any definition of "generic" commonly used in the US, legal or otherwise.

reply
upvoteby RobotToaster1 days ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Knockoff may not be quite the right word, my point is they're a copy of inferior quality.
reply