OLYMPIC LEGISLATION
are worldwide partners of London 2012, while Coca-Cola and McDonald’s are official sponsors of Euro 2012, along with Adidas and Carlsberg.
Sponsors have paid large sums of money for the right to be officially associated with these events (BA reportedly paid £40 million to sponsor London 2012). When Westfield became the official shopping centre developer of London 2012 late in 2011, the London Organising Committee of the Olympic Games and Paralympic Games (LOCOG), the body responsible for organising the Games, achieved its target of raising £700 million in domestic sponsorship. Tese are vast sums of money, but the level of revenue needed to organise and run events such as London 2012, means it is essential.
To justify the high costs of sponsorship, LOCOG and UEFA, the body in charge of European football, have to make it exclusive, and this is why these events are brands in their own right. LOCOG puts it best: “Te London 2012 brand is fundamental to the Games. It is how we identify the Games, how we communicate our ambition, and how we drive excitement and enthusiasm for the Games. Te London 2012 brand is also vital to the funding of the Games and is the London 2012 Organising Committee’s most valuable asset. To ensure we maintain both the emotional and commercial value
“TO ENSURE WE MAINTAIN BOTH THE EMOTIONAL AND COMMERCIAL VALUE OF THE LONDON 2012 BRAND, WE NEED TO CAREFULLY CONTROL ITS USE AND PREVENT ITS UNAUTHORISED EXPLOITATION.”
Ambush marketing isn’t a concept that is set in stone, says Dan Smith, a director and the head of advertising and marketing law at Wragge & Co LLP. “Tere is no settled or statutory definition of what ambush marketing is in the UK,” he explains. “A working definition might be something like: ‘an ambush marketer is a company other than an official sponsor of an event competing with official sponsors to secure a marketing benefit from that event’.”
of the brand, we need to carefully control its use and prevent its unauthorised exploitation.”
Tose who are looking to exploit these events without authorisation come in different shapes and sizes, but ambush marketers have long since been singled out as a particular threat.
Similarly, there is no legal definition of ambush marketing in Poland, where Euro 2012 is being jointly held, says Krzysztof Czyżewski, a partner and advocate at Czyżewscy kancelaria adwokacka SC. He says: “Ambush marketing is described as being parasitic or treacherous marketing. Distinction is made between ambush marketing by association, the aim of which is to create false associations with sports event, and intrusive marketing, when a marketer tries to gain benefit in a manner other than creating false associations with an event.”
Ambush marketing is probably best defined in practice, rather than in theory. At the 2010 FIFA World Cup in South Africa, 36 young women donned orange mini-dresses bearing an unofficial sponsor’s logo during a match between Holland and Denmark. Two of them were arrested under South
14 World Intellectual Property Review May/June 2012
www.worldipreview.com
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84