Branding war: Now charity trademarks historic battlef ields
‘Must strike a careful balance’
THE outcry over so-called ‘battlefield brands’ grew last night after it emerged that the names of key historical sites have been trademarked by the National Trust for Scotland.
The conservation charity came under fire last week for threatening clothing company Hilltrek with legal action over its ‘Glencoe’ waterproof jacket.
The trust said it held the commercial rights to the name – the Highland site of one of the most infamous massacres in Scottish history.
And it emerged last night that the charity has also trademarked ‘Battle of Bannockburn’, ‘Battle of Killiecrankie’ and ‘The Soldier’s Leap’, the spot where a Redcoat soldier leapt 18ft across Perthshire’s River Garry to flee the Jacobites in 1689. The trust has further claimed ‘Culloden’, ‘Glenfinnan’ and ‘St Kilda’. The rights to the latter are shared with Western Isles Council.
‘Stirling Castle’ is the property of Scottish Government quango Historic Environment Scotland.
It means traders need permission from the relevant body to use the names on everything from books and bags to clothing, posters, pamphlets and food.
Last night, SNP Perth and Kinross councillor Mike Williamson – who helped to organise a recent Battle of Killiecrankie re-enactment – said: ‘Where does this leave those people who create these events and are blissfully unaware that the National Trust for Scotland has the trading names? When you look at Scottish history around the Jacobites, the first shots were fired in the Pass of Killiecrankie, which went on to the Battle of the Boyne, Culloden and all that goes with it.
‘Maybe the question is, does any one person have the right to the telling of that story and how they tell it?’
Stuart Mackinnon, of the Federation of Small Businesses in Scotland, said: ‘There is a job to do to protect the reputation of the nation’s most important landmarks.
‘But one would expect that Scottish firms could use the name of local places in products and services, unless there’s an exceptional reason why they shouldn’t. NTS must strike a careful balance.’ Last night, the trust said the trademarks – granted between 2011 and 2015 – were necessary to protect the integrity of the sites.
Mark Bishop, director of customer and cause, said: ‘A trademark simply restricts certain classes of products and services being marketed commercially using that name without the holder’s permission. It’s not just about money [but] if third parties selling dubious products are associated with our properties, this reflects on us.
‘This may lead to problems with any future merchandise we sell to raise funds to pay for the properties’ upkeep.
‘We have been given no choice – very much against our will we have had to take defensive measures and begin registering trademarks for some of the properties we own. These are iconic Scottish locations and names worthy of protection.’
Mr Bishop added: ‘We have never had any intention of undermining businesses trading locally and have gone out of our way to ensure they can continue trading without interruption or cost.
‘We are now in dialogue with Hilltrek with the aim of finding a mutually agreeable solution.’
A trust spokesman said warning letters had been sent to around six companies over the past two years, as far afield as France, over improper use of trademarks.