UFA or Unapproved Trademark is an import ban in the European Union for a wide variety of materials. The term UFA covers all materials that have been imported into the EU and have been identified as containing not only competent intellectual property but also those that are prohibited. These imports include bear fur, furs from endangered species, reptiles and amphibians, and asbestos. Most articles that fall under the UFA regulations are prohibited because their importing into the EU would be incompatible with the EU’s Maastricht criterion. In other words: it is against the rules and traditions of the EU to import furs or materials that are banned.
There are a number of items that fall under this category that are imported into the EU from third countries. Primarily, bear fur has always been popular, particularly in Finland where bear boars are hunted actively. However, in addition to this furs from endangered species are also found in varying degrees. This includes bear bristles, bear claws, woolly mammoth fur, camouflage, bear hide, etc. The materials that are used in the production of these articles of clothing are also often from animals that are considered by nature to be of high value and therefore difficult to obtain.
For animal rights activists, however, this kind of business does not represent the best possible choice when it comes to buying clothing. The main reason is that most of these animal rights activists do not actually care about the animals that the clothing is made out of. Therefore, any claim that these animals are being well cared for is simply an illusion. Therefore, the animal rights activists will end up supporting the animal rights against animal rights. Therefore, any company that supports the concept of animal rights will most likely face a ban on its entry into the EU.
Not all types of animal rights activists are against UFA. Some argue that it is necessary for animal rights activists to be able to lobby against UFA. By banning UFA, they believe that they are sending a message to the rest of the world that is against animal rights. Therefore, if other countries in the world were to start using fur or furs as their standard material for clothing, then they would immediately be seen as supporting animal rights. Therefore, this means that the UFA ban will cause conflict between countries that have different laws regarding this type of material.
However, the other side of this argument states that the fur and furs that people buy in stores are an unnecessary waste. They are aware that it is not useful for anything, but the fact remains that this type of material is used for clothing regardless. Therefore, there is no reason for them to stop using this material just because it is being banned by the EU. Therefore, this type of ban is not effective and is unhelpful. It is true that some countries have banned the production and sale of fur coats, but this is a rather temporary measure.
There is no denying that the animal rights activists do have a point. However, if the ban of fur coats goes into effect, then people will only be able to wear clothes made out of animal rights approved materials. Therefore, this means that clothing will be made from materials that do not allow people the freedom of choice. This scenario is unlikely to help any kind of negotiation between the EU and Turkey.
The real problem is that the animal rights activists actually have a valid point. Fur coats are not useful for anything and should be banned. However, the fact remains that these bans will affect people who only use fur as clothing. Therefore, banning fur coats will not prevent the continuation of animal rights violations.
Turkey and the EU are in an ongoing negotiation process. Under these negotiations, Turkey is seeking stricter regulations on animal rights violations. At the same time, the EU is asking other countries to stop buying the banned wool products. Although the bans on UFA material in the European Union may not directly affect consumers, these strict regulations on other countries will make it harder for Turkey and other countries that do not have fur trade with the EU to continue to sell their own domestic furs to consumers in the EU.