list of contributors - GALA

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The regulations are designed to inform consumers in a more graphic, and perhaps confronting, manner of the health risks associated with smoking and provide them with contact details as to where they can obtain assistance to stop smoking. Failure to adhere to the regulations means that a tobacco manufacturer or importer will contravene s65D (1) of the Trade Practices Act 1974 and be guilty of a criminal offence. 3. Case note: Royal Doulton (UK) Ltd v Ghosen [2004] ATMO 32 Topic: Trade Marks and Brand Extension Where: Australia When: June 2004 What Happened: Brand extension occurs when a well established, familiar brand name is used for new goods or services, sometimes unrelated to the goods or services originally sold under the brand. It provides an approach to leveraging existing consumer perceptions of brands to a new product category, thus reducing the risk and cost of entering that new category. It is also increasingly relevant in the context of trade mark oppositions under s.60 of the Trade Marks Act 1995. S.60 states: The registration of a trade mark in respect of particular goods or services may be opposed on the ground that: (a) it is substantially identical with, or deceptively similar to, a trade mark that, before the priority date for the registration of the first-mentioned trade mark in respect of those goods or services, had acquired a reputation in Australia; and (b) because of the reputation of that other trade mark, the use of the first-mentioned trade mark would be likely to deceive or cause confusion. Royal Doulton (UK) Ltd (Opponent) is the owner in Australia of the trade mark Royal Doulton for ceramic tableware, figurines, vases, glassware and other goods for the home. At the time of the above decision, it did not have the trade mark registered for eyewear nor was there any evidence that it had sold those goods under the trade mark in Australia. However, it successfully opposed the registration of the trade mark by Anthony Ghosen (Applicant) in respect of eyewear under s60. The delegate of the Registrar of Trade Marks (Delegate) was satisfied that the words ROYAL DOULTON were only associated with the Opponent and that the Opponent used and licensed the trade mark for a range of goods in Australia (though not for eyewear) and elsewhere. He referred to the “common commercial phenomenon” of brand extension and found that “the public is well used to the licensing of trade marks such as that of the Opponent on a range of goods.” The fact that the Opponent had in fact sold eyewear in the United States under the trade mark was support for the fact that members of the Australian public might expect the Opponent to extend its mark into the eyewear range. The Delegate was satisfied that there was a real and tangible chance that a substantial number of persons finding the ROYAL DOULTON mark on the Applicant’s goods would be confused or deceived. The s60 ground of opposition was therefore made out. Comments: Even when on the face of it a product may seem like an unlikely brand extension, a strong reputation in a number of products will increase the likelihood of a successful opposition under s.60 of the Trade Marks Act.
4. Regulatory Inappropriate advertisement classification Action Topic: Advertising Standards Board intervention Where: Australia When: October 2004 What Happened: A complaint against Dulux Australia for its ‘Dulux Repel’ TVC was upheld by the Advertising Standards Board on the grounds that it contravened the provisions of their Code relating to violence and was unsuitable for viewing by children. The TVC features a female ghost chasing a man through his house. The man runs through a doorway into another room, and the ghost tries to follow him, by taking the most direct route - through the wall. Instead of passing through the wall, the ghost hits the wall and gets knocked unconscious, illustrating the strength and durability of new paint on the wall. The Board considered that the ghost images and the accompanying “eerie” soundtrack would be frightening and distressing to young viewers. Dulux’s response was to state that the level of complaint was minimal compared to the overwhelming positive reaction to the TVC. Dulux did admit that due to some scheduling issues the TVC had run in some kids’ programs early in its on-air period “that it would have been better to avoid.” The advertisement’s “G” rating was held to be inappropriate. The Board also commented that the images constituted a portrayal of the threat of violence which was not justified in the context of the product being advertised. As a result of the decision, Dulux Australia is required to modify or discontinue the TVC. Comments: The complaint would not have been upheld if the advertisement had been appropriately classified and not shown during time slots where viewing by children was likely. 5. Regulatory Action Misleading or deceptive advertising Topic: Heavy responsibility for bold marketing claims Where: Australia When: January 2005 What Happened: One of Australia's largest travel agencies has taken action, including widespread corrective advertising, as a result of its use of advertising slogans which may have been misleading or deceptive. Flight Centre Limited, which has over 500 retail travel outlets throughout Australia, marketed its services under the slogan "Lowest Airfares Guaranteed". It also made representations that it could use its "Global Buying Power" to get better airfare deals for consumers. A number of consumers made complaints to competition watchdog, the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) about the advertising. The ACCC conducted its own investigations into the accuracy of the slogans and formed the view that: • the "Lowest Airfares Guaranteed" slogan was a representation that
Page 2 and 3: Table of Contents Argentina Page 5
Page 4 and 5: United States Page 130 Uruguay 133
Page 6 and 7: marketing campaigns. The Code provi
Page 8 and 9: AUSTRALIA Peter Le Guay Cowley Hear
Page 12 and 13: Flight Centre's airfares were guara
Page 14 and 15: AUSTRIA Stefan Kofler Greiter Pegge
Page 16 and 17: BOLIVIA Alexandra Blanco Guevara &
Page 18 and 19: BRAZIL Valdir Rocha Veirano Advogad
Page 20 and 21: 5. Title “Faculdades Hélio Rocha
Page 22 and 23: CANADA Wendy Reed Geneviève Marcot
Page 24 and 25: Second, the finding makes clear tha
Page 26 and 27: CHILE Rodrigo Albagli Guillermo Riv
Page 28 and 29: The Council let the claimant know a
Page 30 and 31: COLOMBIA Ricardo Duarte Duarte Duar
Page 32 and 33: 3. Legislation Decision or sentence
Page 34 and 35: advertising and information. Nevert
Page 36 and 37: ody parts. Even if all intimate par
Page 38 and 39: CROATIA Mladen Vukmir Vukmir & Asso
Page 40 and 41: the sentences used in the campaign
Page 42 and 43: DENMARK Johan Løje Hans Flensted -
Page 44 and 45: unsolicited electronic mail in the
Page 46 and 47: FINLAND Bernt Juthström, Mikael Se
Page 48 and 49: on information to be given in respe
Page 50 and 51: practices by marketing COKO buildin
Page 52 and 53: 2. Case Report Topic: The represent
Page 54 and 55: 4. Self-regulation Topic: Can cigar
Page 56 and 57: HUNGARY Matias Vallejos Meana Sall
Page 58 and 59: 4. Title Easyjet Topic: Comparative
Page 60 and 61:
A complaint was also received by th
Page 62 and 63:
Regulator (ComReg). Under the regul
Page 64 and 65:
3. Legislation Topic: Consumer Prot
Page 66 and 67:
Quite clearly the models are posing
Page 68 and 69:
In this context measures taken to p
Page 70 and 71:
models through a clear and illicit
Page 72 and 73:
The Jury found that: - company B’
Page 74 and 75:
Considering that the fidelity card
Page 76 and 77:
JAPAN Wilfred Wakely Aiba & Partner
Page 78 and 79:
cease and desist orders, administra
Page 80 and 81:
The Court held the trademark was us
Page 82 and 83:
2. Title TELEVISION ADVERTISING LES
Page 84 and 85:
NEW ZEALAND Monica Choy Hesketh Hen
Page 86 and 87:
3. Title Credit Card Companies Pros
Page 88 and 89:
6. Title Therapeutic Services Adver
Page 90 and 91:
PERU José Barreda Barreda Moller m
Page 92 and 93:
- When it contains a false name or
Page 94 and 95:
POLAND Ewa Skrzydło-Tefelska SKS L
Page 96 and 97:
3. Issue: Advertising of medicines
Page 98 and 99:
Comments: This decision shows that
Page 100 and 101:
ROMANIA Florentina Dumitrescu Wood
Page 102 and 103:
or services offered by it. Accordin
Page 104 and 105:
following the legislative initiativ
Page 106 and 107:
SOUTH AFRICA Chris Job & Lindsey Ki
Page 108 and 109:
3. Misleading Advertising Topic: Ad
Page 110 and 111:
In the amended advertisement the ph
Page 112 and 113:
8. Offensive Advertising Topic: Sec
Page 114 and 115:
SPAIN Gerhard W. Volz Schiller Abog
Page 116 and 117:
The criticisms made against the Dra
Page 118 and 119:
SWEDEN Michael Plogell Wistrand Adv
Page 120 and 121:
fulfill the requirements of the MPA
Page 122 and 123:
published advertisements aren’t p
Page 124 and 125:
single bill, customer portal, 24-7
Page 126 and 127:
Polo says it all - small but tough.
Page 128 and 129:
6. Case Report Topic: Licensing Int
Page 130 and 131:
UNITED STATES Douglas J. Wood Jenni
Page 132 and 133:
5. Topic: Degrees of Deception: Int
Page 134 and 135:
The court held that the image right
Page 136 and 137:
penalties stipulated in the law. Th
Page 138 and 139:
2. Case Report Topic: Incorporation
Page 140 and 141:
4. Case Report Topic: Fair Competit
Page 142 and 143:
transmission of institutional messa
Page 144 and 145:
make its own determinations, and in
Page 146 and 147:
CHILE Rodrigo Albagli & Guillermo R
Page 148 and 149:
JAPAN Wilf Wakely Aiba & Partners 4
Page 150:
SWITZERLAND Peter Hofer Frick, Hofe
show all

list of contributors - GALA

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?