A case for comparative advertising
Comparative and competitive advertising is, generally speaking, prohibited in South Africa, by laws on the use of trade marks, unlawful competition, and by the Advertising Standards Authority code. Even parody is, in itself, no defence. Yet some of the best, most clever, and most memorable advertising is often comparative.
The classic case in South Africa, from the early 1990s (if memory serves) is the response by BMW to an advertisement by Mercedes-Benz. The latter was shown on the famous Chapman’s Peak route along the Cape Town coast, whence it left the road and plunged down the cliff. The driver survived, attesting to the safety standards of Mercedes. BMW responded with an advert showing its car along the same route, negotiating it safely. The payoff line was, “Beats the bends”. It was pulled after only a short run, but after many years remains both a well-remembered advertisement and a well-known media catchphrase.
The impact of competitive advertising on price, in particular, would be substantially beneficial to consumers. I’m often mystified by price advertising, since I often don’t have a point of reference that determines whether a price is good or bad. At best, I have a vague idea about which shops are more or less expensive.
I’ll grant that if competitive or comparative advertising is permitted, recourse should be both swift and punitive should the advertiser make demonstrably false claims about their competitor.
All rational arguments aside, however, the sequence below — not new, but made after the 2006 Car of the Year award — makes as eloquent a case as any for competitive advertising.
i can’t understand what the last picture mean.. please teach me
I think that it is very good that comparative advertising approach is relaxed in South Africa.
A good example of such development can be found in the case of the Verimark v/s Bmw case.I think Verimark was absolutely correct in stating that it did not infringe Bmw’s trademark.It is very encouraging that the not only the court of first instance ,but also the appeal court found in favour of Verimark.
I think these cases show a good exaple of what advertising in good taste would be.
We have just had a discussion about comparative advertising with some of my friends involved in the field of intellectual property.Well there might be a valid point that some might think that comparative advertising is attempting to “ride on the back”of a well known and successful product and to use the repute of that product as a platform to generate sales of the lessor known product,i have a different opinion.
I still stand by the comment i made on the 17th of July.I think the product can be parasited BUT this is not always the case.
It’s self-evident that competition breeds excellence and of course structures prices, why have we taken so long to twig onto this abundantly clear fact? Vested interests I guess?