I wonder if they should hold a competition amongst our indigenous community to design a new flag and then have the community vote on it. This would allow ownership by all indigenous Australian’s, free of encumbrances and for all to use.
2 Likes
On boots, it seems businesses see trade marks as more than just a brand.
Trade marking a shape?
But back in the USA in 2006.
https://sgbonline.com/tecnica-receives-moon-boot-trademark-extension/
Interestingly the extension in the USA was granted on the basis the applicant was the inventor and true owner of the name on the footwear category.
Is NASA not worried? Perhaps ‘space wear’ is a different category of IP.
A great news story regarding a Ducati expert.
What a refreshing change to read that Ducati have actually approved his work.
But Fetta is not Greek, and Champaign [sic] is not French. That’s just EuroBS.
Quite right @person, but champagne is certainly French, from the champagne region. Anything else is just bubbly wine.
I would have liked to have known more. Has the ABC reporter Ellie Honeybone had the opportunity to discuss the arrangements with the other partner in this deal. Audi Germany now own Ducati.
Yes, there is great interest in having something unique and special. Especially if it is a local product. From the report, the product is not an authentic reproduction. It’s an upgraded version based on the original.
There is an assumption the donor bikes are all originally Ducati models to retain the trade marked branding. The following suggests it may not be badged as a Ducati and is news from 2017of a similar project from the same business owner.
Another article regarding Ducati.
0 to 100km/h in 2.5 seconds? Where’s @draughtrider
Now owned by VW? Is nothing sacred?
Not a trademark issue as such, but another case of businesses riding roughshod over Indigenous people trying to make a living from their art and culture.
Bega wins another court case involving a foriegn multi-national.
A foriegn multi-national bully boy trying to stop Bega using their own brand name.
1 Like
You win some, you lose some: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-04-16/aboriginal-fashion-brand-rebrand-after-legal-fight-us-gap/13305336
1 Like
Clive copped a smack down.
2 Likes
The question then to be asked is “Will he actually pay?”
7 Likes
Awkwardly, if he had just agreed to pay in the first place, he could have paid 10 times less! Bad call there, Clive.
I expect so.
2 Likes
The battle continues.
1 Like
It is unfortunate on a number of fronts. Possibly the biggest is the term ‘Ugg boot’ in Australia has moved from a branded or trademarked name to a more generic term for a sheepskin boot (first recorded as such in the Macquarie Dictionary in 1981).
Unfortunately even though in Australia it is a generic term, the name is trademarked and where the issue lies.
There are other similar words which also fall into both or have not become part of common language…possibly another well known one if you are English if 'Hoover". Hoover is a trademarked brand in the UK, but also the name most use to call their vacuum irrespective of the brand (I am going to hoover my carpet with my new Miele). If one tried to sell a vacuum as a Hoover in the UK, they would become unstuck with the Hoover copyright owner.
2 Likes
Eddie Oygur the maker of Australian UGG boots faces ruination over US court verdict . I hope he is successful with his appeal .Read article below taken from ABC News :
A USA court has put the boot into one of Australia’s proudest items - the Ugg Boot.
Aussie Ugg boot maker, Eddie Oygur has suffered a $643,000 loss against a major US footwear and apparel company, California based Deckers Outdoor by selling ugg boots online to customers in the USA.
A Chicago jury found that Oygur’s Sydney based business, wilfully infringed a trademark of the Californian brand.
Oygur was ordered to pay damages of US $ 450,000 and stands to lose millions more in legal costs. He has said quite simply that he will finish him.
Meanwhile Deckers ticks over around $1 billion in its sales of the Ugg boots, which are thought to have originated in Australia as part of the surfing community in Australia.
Buy Aussie Now is the home of Ugg boots in Australia and CEO, Chris White backs Oygur all the way.
“This really is a call to arms to all Aussies to support our own. It’s almost impossible to belive that this is actually happening in the USA,” he says.
“We all have the power in our own fingers to hit click on Aussie-made first every time we buy. Let’s keep jobs here.”
Chris White believes there’s been far too many Aussie brands taken over by foreign entities and this is one way for the money to stay in the country by supporting local brands.
Eddie Oygur has appealed the verdict and is being supported by lawyer and former Australian senator, Nick Xenophon in Chicago.
3 Likes
And his point is right yet most Aussie brands that have gone overseas have only been too happy to sell out to foreign companies for big dollars. Is he proposing to make that illegal? The Aussie brand owners who profited have rarely done more than a quiet ‘tut tut’ when the multinational/foreign owner closes shop here or changes the product, or does whatever they are entitled to do with their purchased brand.
2 Likes
Tilting at windmills stuff this is. Soon as I saw the name Xenophon in the story it reminded me of ‘the castle’ movie.
The maker of ugg boots in this case is free to sell his ugg boots in Australia without any restriction. As can anyone. That name is a generic name, and cannot be trademarked. In Australia.
In the US it has been trademarked, by some Aussie surfers no less. So you can’t sell them as ugg boots. Why not sheepskin boots?
You cannot sell sparkling wine anywhere and call it champagne unless it has been made in the Champagne region of France. Plenty of other examples.
What a ridiculous non-issue.
1 Like
Not to mention the metaphorical usage, as in: The government hoovered up all your metadata.
Another example, which is on the precipice, is “google”.
This example seriously muddies the waters. If Australia were the EU then we would say to the US: if you want a free trade agreement with Australia then you can’t allow ugg boots to be sold in the US unless they are the legitimate Australian item.
That is the only reason for the restriction on use of the word “champagne”. Noone in Australia gives a monkey’s. It has been enforced upon us by the EU (in the sense that the Australian government has decided that the benefits of compliance outweigh the costs, monetary or otherwise).
5 Likes
