|
Threat to Pringle’s famous
lion rampant emblem
By Iain Harrison
Knitwear giant
Pringle may be forced to ditch its famous lion rampant emblem if bosses press on with plans to move manufacturing overseas.
The warning comes after the 193-year-old firm signalled its intent earlier this month to close its textiles plant in Hawick and relocate abroad.
It’s predicted the loss of up to 80 jobs will have a devastating effect on the fragile Borders economy.
But Pringle could be forced to review its plans after it emerged legislation introduced just eight weeks ago may prevent it from displaying the lion rampant on its garments.
Barred
The firm could also be barred from making reference to Scotland on its marketing material if it doesn’t have a production facility in the country.
SNP MSP Christine Grahame made the discovery after writing to the UK Intellectual Property Office, which is responsible for granting patents and trademarks.
She said, “I received a response on Friday and was effectively told that Pringle could be in breach of new consumer laws if it stops production in Hawick, which we all know is a formality.
“This is an extremely promising step forward because it’s entirely inappropriate for a firm with no manufacturing presence in Scotland to continue using one of the country’s national emblems.
“Their entire business model may be affected if they are stripped of this and if the UK Intellectual Property Office demand they remove the logo it will serve them right as it’s clear they are relocating abroad purely for profit reasons.
“Major implications”
“This law could also have major implications for other foreign-based companies claiming to be Scottish.”
Under the Consumer Protection from Unfair Trading Regulations 2008, a firm may be subject to sanctions if it “uses words and symbols in a manner that might mislead consumers to the geographical origins of its products”.
The law also allows for the cancellation of misleading trademarks and logos.
In a letter to Ms Grahame, the UK IPO’s Ian Fletcher stated, “Ordinary members of the public may report perceived violations of the regulations to their local trading standards officers, while revocation of a trademark may be undertaken by any interested party by application to the UK
IPO.
“However, it’s difficult for me to comment further on the specifics of this case as my officials may be called upon to adjudicate in any future revocation action.”
Established in Hawick in 1815, Pringle insist they will retain their headquarters in the town.
Hope
It has expressed hope that some manufacturing could be outsourced to other local businesses.
A spokesman for the firm said, “If we are forced to close our manufacturing facility due to changing economics and customer demand, we’ll still have our head office, sourcing and customer service departments locally, employing 30 people in
Hawick.
“If the manufacturing operation does cease, we’d also hope to be able to place orders with other local mills.
“As an international business, we’re very well aware of trademark and consumer legislation and are totally confident that we comply fully.”
|
