> When Deckers, the company behind fleece-lined UGG boots, recently took Quince to court over its lookalike boots, it tried to bar Quince from referencing “dupe culture” at trial.<p>> The bid failed, confirming that “dupes” and “dupe culture” — a commercial ecosystem built around providing consumers cheaper alternatives to name-brand products — are cultural phenomena here to stay.<p>> The trial focused on whether Quince’s shearling boots that really, really look like UGGs violated the existing patent for the design. And in a twist, the jury ruled that yes, Quince had copied the UGG design — but the patent over the UGG boot should not have been issued in the first place because the design was too generic to protect. The ruling opened the door for Quince and any other brand to make a similar-looking boot, opening up a new frontier for “dupe culture.”<p>UGG itself is a company that operates by abusing intellectual property laws.<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ugg_boots_trademark_dispute" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ugg_boots_trademark_dispute</a>
Seems wild to me they would be still suing to protect that patent in 2026 (or 'recently') – cheap Primark clones seemed to be the standard footwear of (female) teens & pre-teens in the 00s. (And they absolutely called them 'UGGs'.) That ship has long since sailed.
Came here to say this. Deckers UGGs are cheap Chinese knockoffs of the Australian original.
This feels like it wasn't quite worded well.<p>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.<p>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...
They are not knockoffs. Ugg boots are a generic product. The Australian manufacturer does not have exclusive rights to the design either.
A generic Australian product. But however Deckers owns Ugg as a trademark everywhere but here and NZ.<p><a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ugg_boots_trademark_dispute" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ugg_boots_trademark_dispute</a>
Yes. In contrast to Mozzarella, Champagne, and many others which are generic products in the USA, and protected trademarks in their region of origin.<p>I didn't realise the trademark holder is a US company.
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.<p>It would be like if a US company registered Champagne as a trademark then enforced it against French companies selling it.
Only mozzarella di bufala campana has PDO, even in Italy there are non-PDO, generic mozzarella cheeses produced outside the region.
Champagne is absolutely not a "generic" product in the US.<p>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.<p>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".
Knockoff may not be quite the right word, my point is they're a copy of inferior quality.
With decreasing quality of branded products, there's less to distinguish them from dupes.<p><a href="https://ledger.worseonpurpose.com/" rel="nofollow">https://ledger.worseonpurpose.com/</a>
Sports jerseys are funny- they've gotten to the point where the dupes are cheaper AND higher quality (eg embroidered instead of cheap iron-on patches)
That's because Fanatics took over the jersey manufacture and cut the quality. Fanatics sucks in all sort of dimensions.
But as the Frankfurt School
Famously said about the Mona Lisa that the copies make the original. In other words the copies give the original all the publicity to make it famous.
They said that, but it was already quite famous for centuries. As were other paintings, not copied, and not involved in some high publicity heist like it.
Solvair now make the real Dr Martens (in the UK)! The high street brand that owns the name makes all theirs in the far East. Check out Solvair if you can find them, they are better quality.
This is like a reverse-dupe situation. The people who actually made the boots (NPS, a co-op in the UK) never owned the brand [0]. Then in 2013, the brand was acquired by a PE company [1] who did what PE companies do and got cheap, nasty, versions of the boot made in East Asia.<p>So the "dupe" non-branded version is actually the original, and much, much better quality than the branded official version of the product.<p>[0]<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solovair" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solovair</a>
[1]<a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dr._Martens" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dr._Martens</a>
It’s Solovair, not Solvair.<p>Also if you want legit ones, including vintage, check out the UK Boot Company in Camden Town.
Sad but true, but sometimes the brand itself is responsible for this as they cost optimize production and offshore their products.<p>If the dupe market isn't doing it the wonks inside are busy selling off the brand name as fast as they can.
Seems about the only kitchen things you can trust now are cast iron, carbon steel and sheet pans, because you can’t really do much to cheapen them in terms of materials except take them offshore (and most of the brands like Lodge are proudly domestic). After spending some time in culinary I started buying stuff from restaurant stores. It’s not always pretty but it tends to be a lot more practical. Glad Cambro is on there.<p>I’ve also started to pick up ceramics from local makers as there are a lot of potters lurking around. Often the prices are good, certainly comparable to the luxury consumer brands like Wedgewood.<p>Also we’re a Makita household, not because the usual options are insufficient for home use, but they’re one of the only independent power tool makers left. Most other hand tools I try and buy vintage/restored when I’m in Europe as they’re much cheaper than in the US.<p>Point6 as a successor to IceBreaker I didn’t know about. There are very few good merino companies and apparently their conglomerate also owns Smartwool.
> kitchen things<p>Made in Japan: Gangy 300 can opener. No moving parts, just a handle of heavy stamped steel, with a stainless claw blade riveted on. Last opener I'll ever need. $12 online from the usual suspect.
Yup, need a new term like reputation hacking to use a good reputation to sell lower quality products or increase prices, sometimes from a new owner.
Cool website! Some examples I was aware of before:<p><a href="https://ledger.worseonpurpose.com/brands/dr-martens" rel="nofollow">https://ledger.worseonpurpose.com/brands/dr-martens</a><p><a href="https://ledger.worseonpurpose.com/brands/corningware" rel="nofollow">https://ledger.worseonpurpose.com/brands/corningware</a>
Amazing resource, thanks for posting it.
I remember buying a Nike Tshirt in the early 2000s: good quality, and still looking decent today. Nowadays most of the Nike/Adidas/etc stuff is very low quality fabric and not necessarily cheap (at least in Western Europe)
This kind of leaves out the biggest question imo which is that of quality.<p>Usually, dupe's sacrifice quality for price. The fact that a market exists for this at all indicates a strong consumer acceptance of lower quality items.<p>I do wonder, if the "premium" option were to never exist, would these "dupes" even exist in the first place as they seem to enjoy an "implied" quality that the premium option pays for, whilst cannibalizing sales.
>> Usually, dupe's sacrifice quality for price. The fact that a market exists for this at all indicates a strong consumer acceptance of lower quality items.<p>I think it is the other way around, too many brands lowered their quality enough that general consumers no longer believe (or perceive) the "premium" options to be worth it.<p>Might as well gamble and get the cheapest option that does not hurt the wallet too much, when high-quality is so rare these days.
Style seems to me to be one of those things that shouldn't have IP. Oh no, what happens if it isn't protected? Society spends less money on parasitic fashion?
<a href="https://archive.is/JCEan" rel="nofollow">https://archive.is/JCEan</a>
I asked my wife once, how to tell whether a fashion accessory is a knock-off. She said: “look at the woman”.
For the vast majority of human existence 'dupe culture' was the norm.<p>So far this is just a tiny 200 year abberation.
The real dupes are people without money to burn buying the originals at 10 and 20 times the cost, due to marketing convincing them goods made with the same materials, in similar (or even the same) factories, and often using sweatshop like labor, are somehow hand-crafted objects of luxury.
"Dupe" might need to be more specific. What is copied? Is it design, brand name, quality, parts or functionality? What is not to be copied? and why?<p>Dupe might affect the seller, but customer doesn't care much. In the past, people had to go by brand name as an assurance of quality. We have other means now. Reviews from other buyers, detailed specifications, return policies - all reduced the moat of branding. People can now buy any brand that has specifications they want, use reviews for quality assurance and it's easy to return the product if required. Brand is not playing the same role it used to.
> what is not being copied and why?<p>Most counterfeits goods skimp on manufacturing quality. Like instead of very detailed stitching with intricate design they might just skip that altogether. For instance one of the easiest ways to identify dupes is if the brand name and design on a bag 'flows' to the other side. Obv counterfeits dont really care because they want to save money<p>For counterfeit goods that are so high quality 1) they would only show pictures of it, not the real thing and 2) only cost like 1/3 of the brand price.<p>Aka that $600 bag would still cost $200 if it had identical quality. This is all based on what business owners told me from when I visited counterfeit markets in China
There are entire subreddits these days dedicated to reviewing fashion reps.
For luxury brand bags that cost $2-10k you pay around $300-600 for high quality counterfeits, but they really are almost identical. Sometimes they are higher quality.
Do consumers care? Almost always not. But to say the quality is the same is incorrect
We have nothing of the sort. Reviews are bought and manipulated at scale. Dupe brands come and go month to month. Very few of the electronics I've bought on Amazon in the last 8 years are still for sale, but for most of them there are current listings with the same pictures and a "different" brand name.<p>Most reviews that aren't fake are useless and written within the first few days of ownership anyway .
> In the past, people had to go by brand name as an assurance of quality. We have other means now.<p>Yeah, brand reputation doesn't work as a guide to quality any more.<p>But I don't think we have any other means of reliably identifying quality yet.
And then you have Swatch, making cheaper versions of the Omega Speedmaster Moonwatch, as almost a licensed dupe (though since both are owned by the same parent company, it's almost more of an iPhone SE to an iPhone Pro comparison, in a way).
Fender makes dupes of its iconic instruments. If someone said, making dupes of Fender guitars is Fender's core business, I wouldn't argue.
I started buying dupe frags recently given how ridiculous frag price has become.
Yeah they kind of messed up the in-world economy by making gold worthless. I’m waiting for them to release an update where they finally have a sink in place. The duping problem should resolve itself after that.
Ain't no one got the money to afford the real thing, and influencers keep throwing the real thing into our faces.
[dead]