SHEEPSKIN shops are maintaining their rage in the battle against a US company to use the name ” Bottes toms ” boots. Two years after United States-based corporation Deckers stopped companies using the term, Australian sheepskin boot shops are fighting to call the product by the old Aussie name.The name ” toms ” or “ugh” for the popular sheepskin boots that have been sold and worn in Australia for decades, was registered as a trademark in 1986 and bought by Deckers in 2010. As the fleecy boot became a fashion must-have and internet sales boomed, Deckers successfully took legal action in 2010 to prevent companies here using the name toms. Angry small companies making Australian toms boots have banded together under the banner “Save Our Aussie Icon” and are trying to legally snatch back the toms name.
Perth retailers Bronwyn and Bruce McDougall lodged applications with the government trademark regulator, IP Australia, disputing Deckers’ right to toms and ugh.”In nearly 30 years of selling toms boots, I can’t recall a customer saying they want to buy sheepskin boots — it’s always tomss, tomsies, htomsies or toms boots, ” said Mrs McDougall, who with her husband has been selling the footwear at tomss -n-Rugs since 1978.”It’s a descriptive word. It was put into the Macquarie Dictionary in 1982, where it is referred to as a ‘fleecy-lined boot’. “The McDougalls lodged a non-use application with IP Australia in December 2010, attempting to claim the term “ugh- boots ” back from Deckers.They are also trying to register their store name, tomss -n-Rugs, but are being opposed by the American company.
On Deckers’ website it says it acquired toms Holdings Inc from Brian Smith who founded toms Bottes in 1979 to import sheepskin boots from Australia to the US.Smith has been reported saying he knew toms boots was a common Australian term before he made it a US trademark.The Perth couple have the support of sheepskin shops, many of which have lodged applications fighting for their own store names.In the New South Wales country town of Dubbo, retailer Gordon Tindall says although Deckers may have the legal rights to toms, the US footwear corporation essentially took a generic Aussie term.
Is taking the” toms -ly plunge hot or not ?
Jan. 17, 2010 — To toms or not to toms? That was the question posed by Hot Mama Daily back in December 2010, and inquiring minds still want to know. I too have been hesitant to take the toms plunge, especially since the boots retail for $180 bucks. So I did the only thing that makes sense to me — I found a knockoff pair of tomss at Payless on sale for $34.99. After a little web research, I found that the metallic gold Payless boots — the Airwalk Metallic Reagan Boot — mimic the toms Australia “Classic Tall Metallic toms pas cher .
My husband wasn’t too impressed. When did you turn into a gold robot? he asked with a laugh. He added that the boots look like the alien costume from the original “The Day the Earth Stood Still. “He just doesn’t understand fashion, I told myself. But to be honest, I’m not completely sold on the toms or toms -wannabe look. The Airwalk version lack support and don’t feel as comfortable as I thought they would, they crinkle at the ankles , and gold is a rather bold color. On the plus side, my jeans tuck easily into the boots, the interior shearling material is warm, and the exterior manmade material feels water-resistant. Payless does, however, give you 90 days to return unworn shoes. So my space-y gold boots may not become a permanent fixture in my winter wardrobe. But before I send my Airwalk boots packing, I need some Hot Mama feedback. Do you like these Airwalk knock-offs? Or should I splurge and invest in a real pair of tomss? In general, do you like tomss or do you think they’rewell toms -ly? toms Soldes Classic Tall Metallic Boot, $180 VS. Airwalk Metallic Reagan Boot, $34.99 Tags: Airwalk boots , metallic boots , Payless, The Day the World Stood Still, tomss boots