Home soda machine manufacturer, SodaStream, who recently had its Super Bowl ad rejected by CBS is finding new life. While the company will instead be forced to run an alternate ad that has been shown previously, there is a chance that the press SodaStream is receiving from its rejection will create enough buzz to support
Asda loses a battle in the “Supermarket Wars”
A double page comparative ad which Asda ran in January 2010 was found to be ambiguous and misleading by the ASA in a recent adjudication since it breached clauses 7.1 and 7.2 (Truthfulness), 18.1 and 18.3 (Comparisons with identified competitors and or their products) and 19.1 (Other Comparisons) of the CAP Code. The ad featured
One in the Eye for Specsavers
Last week the Chancery Division dealt a blow to Specsavers when judgment was given in its trade mark infringement claim against Asda. Keen-eyed observers will also see that Specsavers were represented by the aptly named Adrian Speck.
Asda ran an in-store advertising campaign for its optician’s services which featured a logo containing two ovals along
Sorry Starbucks, the ASA agrees with Costa
In the battle of the coffee chains, Costa has edged one step ahead of its biggest rival, Starbucks. The ASA has dismissed complaints from Starbucks over a series of press and outdoor ads run by Costa stating that coffee lovers preferred Costa to Starbucks. The ads, featuring body copy such as “Sorry Starbucks: the people
The L’Oreal Saga – Trademarks and Comparative Advertising
In an extraordinarily frank judgment on 21 May 2010, Lord Justice Jacob handed down the Court of Appeal’s (CA) final decision in the case L’Oreal SA v Bellure NV [2010] EWCA Civ 535, following last summer’s response by the European Court of Justice (ECJ) to a number of trademark questions referred to it by the CA. The judgment deals particularly with the issues of comparative advertising and the use of comparison lists for advertising purposes.
What is fascinating about the judgment is Lord Justice Jacob’s strong disagreement with the ECJ’s decision, and he makes it abundantly clear that he is following their decision extremely reluctantly. For the first 21 paragraphs of a 51 paragraph judgment, he criticises the ECJ’s decision, stating that in his view, it is contrary to the principle of freedom of commercial expression and it disadvantages poorer consumers, whilst favouring luxury brand owners, despite the fact that a brand owner’s business is unlikely to be affected to any significant extent by the sale of the legitimate low-cost imitation products.Continue Reading The L’Oreal Saga – Trademarks and Comparative Advertising
The Study That Never Was – A Lesson in Comparative Advertising
On Jan. 19, 2010, Weight Watchers International Inc. of New York sued its rival, Jenny Craig, Inc., in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The suit alleged that the latter’s ads were misleading and deceptive, claiming they reference a comparison study carried out by Jenny Craig between the