AMBUSH MARKETING

Ambush Marketing is a name given to marketing campaigns that are done around the event, but where no money is paid for the event. It is  basically a promotion tactic designed to associate a company, product, or service with a particular event, or to attract the attention of people attending the event, without payment being made for an official sponsorship.It is also called parasitic marketing For example, a business affiliates itself with a particular athlete or sports team rather than paying to become an official Olympics sponsor. Successful ambush marketing diminishes the value of an official sponsorship.

In the 2010 FIFA World Cup, 2 Dutch women were arrested for ambush advertising and 36 women ejected from the stadium when they were spotted wearing short orange dresses made by the Dutch brewery Bavaria on 14th June 2010. The association between the dresses and the Dutch brewery had been established by Sylvie van der Vaart modeling one of them.

 

Ambush marketing is undeniably effective and some marketing professionals even praise it as the boldest and most creative form of advertising ever. Also, ambush marketing severely deteriorates an event’s integrity as well as its ability to attract future sponsors. Thus, it threatens to erode the fundamental income flow of mega-sporting events such as the Soccer World Cup, Formula 1 Racing or the Olympic Games etc. Whichever stand one may take, the prevalence of ambush marketing raises the question of what legal options are available to organizers and official sponsors of such events to prevent ambushers from “having a free ride” without making any monetary contribution.

Neither Germany nor the United States nor the United Kingdom has any specific law that explicitly addresses the issue of ambush marketing. Sponsors and organizers of major sporting events therefore rely on the more general provisions of trademark and unfair competition laws, contracts and on their rights as lessees of the respective sporting venues in order to protect the exclusivity of official sponsoring.

But as Nations struggle to be the host of major events, they are waking up to the call of sponsors and are making some cruel laws to counter ambush marketing. For example, New Zealand, made an attempt to lure major events to the country. The government introduced The Major Events Management Act (MEMA) in 2007 to provide protection for organisers and sponsors of any major international events being held in New Zealand. Its aim is to prevent ambush marketing by both protecting the use of key event emblems and words, and providing ‘clean zones’ around stadia where unauthorised advertising is prohibited.

But some of us would argue that is raising your sports ware or attracting attention to any other accessory on winning some important game while some other company is sponsoring the event constitute as ambush marketing? For example, Usain Bolt held up his Puma shoes not once but three times in Beijing on winning 100, 200m and 4x100m races. Adidas was of course the main sportswear sponsors in that event. Also, if for example, the event sponsor is Nike and suppose Reebok sponsors one of the high performance teams in that event, does this also come under ambush marketing by Reebok? Such issues have to be addressed to the benefit of sponsors as the lines are very blur between ambush marketing and its other legal variants.

Kushal Lokhande
Marque
IIM Rohtak