AMBUSH MARKETING
significant planning and education. Tere was an extensive education campaign to build public awareness about the rules”.
Indeed, Rendle notes that Locog issued a large amount of guidance, well in advance of
the
Games, about what would happen to ambushers. “No-one could say with a straight face ‘we didn’t know about the rules’. Locog produced a 60-page document giving guidance, so it communicated well and committed lots of resources. You have the legislation there but if it is not communicated then it will not have the desired effect.”
While this planning went on behind the scenes, the efforts to protect sponsors were more visible on the ground. Almost 300 trading standards officers, hired by the publicly-funded Olympic Delivery Authority, meticulously patrolled 25 designated zones for ambushes. Wearing purple caps and tops, they monitored advertising and street trading in a radius of up to 200 metres around Olympic venues. Tey had the power to strip down advertising and stop mass giveaways of items. Tere were even reports of police officers having to empty packets of crisps into plastic bags to avoid inadvertently advertising non-sponsors.
Aside from ambiguously-worded legislation and Locog’s robust approach to protecting sponsors, Rendle points to another reason for London 2012’s lack of ambushing. He says there was no shortage of criticism in the build-up to the Games, with some arguing the event had been spoiled by sponsors and become too commercial. “I wonder if there was a sense that ‘well, let’s not try to ambush because if we do we will be criticised for turning the Games into a commercial enterprise’,” says Rendle. “‘If McDonald’s is being criticised over the consequences of its exclusivity then do we also want to be criticised for trying to obtain an advantage?’”
But if the audacious attempts of the past were absent, there was still a background ‘hum’ of adverts that were close to, or over, the line, says Smith. Looking back at some of the ads appearing around London, it is clear some brands were willing to take the chance that Locog’s broad interpretation of
the law may backfire. One
of these was Yorkshire Tea’s use of the word ‘gold’ five times aſter athletes from the English county had won five gold medals. Another was Vodafone’s phrase ‘London’s calling’ against the backdrop of a Union Flag. “Vodafone’s taxi advertising did not create an association with the
Games—it was an association with London as a whole and the campaign started well before the Games,” says Artinian.
How many cease and desist letters Locog sent is not public knowledge. But Artinian says “the majority” of incidents that caused Locog concern were dealt with “quickly and through cooperation”. “Much of the time there was no wrongful intention and, in general, there was a lot of consideration before taking action. Tere will always be examples on the periphery of what creates an association with the Games.”
Perhaps the most interesting ambushing strategies in London involved individual athletes. Previously, one of the most memorable such incidents was back in 1996, when British sprinter Linford Christie wore contact lenses emblazoned with the Puma logo to a press conference, despite Puma’s rival Reebok officially sponsoring the Atlanta Games. Te huge publicity Puma achieved would of course be appealing to unofficial sponsors in London.
In theory, tough, critics say draconian,
regulations prevented non-sponsors from using athletes in Olympics-related advertising and promotion. Te Olympic Charter Rule 40, which stipulates that sanctions would fall on the
AUSTRALIA
Trusted and respected national IP firm, Wrays’ expert patent attorneys, IP lawyers and brand & culture management consultants will build and protect any IP rights in Australia and abroad.
PERTH
56 Ord Street, West Perth, WA 6005, Australia
T: +61 8 9216 5100 F: +61 8 9216 5199
SYDNEY Level 32, Northpoint,
100 Miller Street, North Sydney, NSW 2060, Australia
T: +61 2 8415 6500 F: +61 2 8415 6599
Email:
wrays@wrays.com.au www.worldipreview.com ADELAIDE
Level 30, 91 King William Street, Adelaide, SA 5000, Australia
T: +61 8 8212 1280 F: +61 8 9216 5199
BRISBANE
Level 22, Northbank Plaza, 69 Ann Street, Brisbane, QLD 4000, Australia
T: +61 7 3123 6002 F: +61 8 9216 5199
www.wrays.com.au World Intellectual Property Review September/October 2012 25
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 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128