France Has ‘Champagne,’ Portugal Has ‘Port.’ Should Australia Have ‘Uggs?’

France Has ‘Champagne,’ Portugal Has ‘Port.’ Should Australia Have ‘Uggs?’
In a letter dated in July, Mr. Turnbull said he had asked the Australian Embassy in Washington to get information from the United States government about the dispute
and to “reiterate Australia’s view that ‘ugg’ is a generic term.”
The argument may be tough to make in the United States, legal experts say.
“If the French can protect ‘Champagne’, the Portuguese ‘Port’, the Spanish ‘Sherry’ and the Greeks ‘Feta’,” said Nick Xenophon, an Australian senator, in a recent statement, alluding to the brand protections
that some famous names enjoy, “then surely Australia can protect the word ‘Ugg.’” (Mr. Xenophon on Friday said he would resign as a senator.)
Mr. Oygur sold about $2,000 worth of lowercase ugg boots in the United States
over a five-year period, his lawyer said, and believed he had every right to.
“It only cares about the perception of the relevant consumer population,
and in the U. S., the relevant population was not likely and probably still isn’t likely influenced by Australian English.”
Uggs — the generic kind — might seem like an odd place for Australia to plant its cultural flag.
Though Australian by pedigree, the Uggs brand name in the United States is owned by a company based in California — and
that firm is suing an Australian shoemaker for using it.
Mr. Carroll, a famous surfer in the 1960s and ’70s, discovered the boots while hitting the waves
in Australia, where locals used them to keep their feet warm on cold days at the beach.