This week’s BL Business Branding Newsletter laces up a new legal clash in the ongoing battle between brand protection and “dupe culture.” At the center of the dispute is a lawsuit filed by “luxury for less” retailer Quince against Deckers, the parent company of the well-known footwear brand UGG. The case raises a question facing many consumer brands today – when does aggressive intellectual property enforcement step over the line from protecting a brand to boxing out the competition?
In a complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, Quince accuses Deckers Brands of using a flood of litigation to maintain its dominance in the market for sheepskin and shearling-lined footwear. According to Quince, Deckers has filed hundreds of lawsuits asserting trade dress rights over the visual design of certain UGG footwear products in an effort to prevent competitors from selling lower-priced alternatives.
Companies often rely on trade dress protection to protect themselves against copycat products that could confuse buyers or dilute brand identity. However, Quince argues that the features Deckers has claimed as protectable are not distinctive at all, but instead common design elements widely used throughout the footwear industry.
The lawsuit alleges that Deckers has used these claims as a strategic tool to discourage competitors from entering or staying in the market. By repeatedly filing lawsuits against brands selling lower-priced alternatives, Quince believes that Deckers effectively pressures smaller business competitors to walk away rather than face the steep cost of litigation. In Quince’s view, the result is a market with fewer options for consumers and prices that remain booted up.
The dispute follows an earlier legal battle between the two companies, where a federal court found that certain UGG product designs were generic and therefore not entitled to trade dress protection. Quince claims that, despite the ruling, Deckers continues to file new lawsuits based on similar design descriptions, which Quince characterizes as an effort to extend control over common product features.
What Can Businesses Learn From This?
This case offers a reminder that strong intellectual property rights are the foundation of effective brand protection. Trademarks and trade dress protections can be powerful tools for protecting brand identity, but they work best when those rights are clearly defined, properly secured, and firmly established. Businesses that invest early in protecting their marks and product designs put themselves in a better position to defend their brand and keep competitors from stepping into their shoes.
At the same time, the dispute highlights the role the legal system can play when companies believe enforcement efforts are unfairly aggressive or have gone too far. Businesses that feel they are being unfairly targeted or pushed out of a market by a frivolous opposing party should not be afraid to stand up for themselves and find ways to ensure that they fight back. Sometimes the best response is to stand your ground, lace up for a legal fight, and use the courts to clarify where intellectual property protection ends and competition begins.
Want to know more about how to help your brand be a step above the rest? Contact our BL Trademark Team by reaching out to Seth Berenzweig at sberenzweig@berenzweiglaw.com today.