Iceland Foods’ attempt to trademark its King Prawn Ring, in what it said was a bid to stop other supermarkets copying its “iconic” product, has been rejected.
In September 2024, the supermarket specifically warned Aldi, Tesco, Asda, and Lidl that its lawyers were “more than ready” to act should they launch their own “pretender” versions of its 30-year-old prawn ring over Christmas.
Iceland then lodged two separate trademark applications with the Intellectual Property Office. One was for the phrase King Prawn Ring – the other was a set of design specifications for a prawn ring product.
IP lawyers at the time dismissed the move as a potential marketing stunt. However, Iceland insisted it was genuine attempt to prevent copycat prawn rings.
Both of those applications have subsequently been “refused” by the Intellectual Property Office.
“While we didn’t quite land the trademark, we’re still certain that our Prawn Ring is the undisputed King of the Christmas buffet,” an Iceland spokesman told The Grocer. “We believe it’s the original, the best and the only ring Brits want to say ‘I do’ to during the festive season.
“Our King Prawn Ring been a staple of British buffets for decades, and we’re proud to say that no Christmas spread feels complete without it. Whatever the official ruling, we know there’s only one prawn ring that truly rules the buffet table,” the spokesman said.
While Iceland first introduced the frozen seafood product in 1991, several retailers have since gone on to launch frozen and chilled versions of their own over the decades.
Both Asda and Tesco continue to stock similar “Party” King Prawn Ring with sweet chilli dipping sauce products. Lidl previously stocked two King Prawn Ring lines as part of its Deluxe range, but its sweet chilli dip and garlic dip products are no longer listed online. Aldi has also previously stocked a King Prawn Ring as part of its Let’s Party Range.
‘No surprise’ trademark attempt was unsuccessful
It should come as no surprise that Iceland’s attempts were rejected, lawyers say.
“In order to overcome a descriptiveness objection, they would have needed to satisfy the examiner that the mark had acquired distinctive character through use, ie consumers understood the mark as an indicator of origin rather than just a descriptor,” said Will Haig, lawyer and IA manager at Stobbs.
This would not have been straightforward in the circumstances, as Iceland originally filed the application after complaining that its competitors were also selling their own king prawn rings, Stobbs said.
Lee Curtis, partner and chartered trademark attorney at HGF, agreed it would have been a ”big ask” for Iceland to get approval on the basis that King Prawn Ring is a descriptive term.
“Also, a design registration for the look of the King Prawn Ring product probably would be invalid on the basis of past disclosure by both Iceland Foods itself and presumably others,” Curtis added.
There were further issues in the application process which meant that the result was “not hugely surprising”, Haig said.
“Iceland usually files its trademark applications through a firm of trade mark attorneys, but on this occasion chose not to do so,” Haig said.
“This supports the conclusion that this was only ever a marketing stunt. In the event, it was highly successful, generating a lot of column inches advertising their king prawn ring at the start of the lucrative Christmas trading period, for nothing but the £170 cost of a trademark application,” Haig added.
No comments yet