Legal Implications of Moment Marketing for Non-Sponsors at the Olympics

Legal Implications of Moment Marketing for Non-Sponsors at the Olympics

by | Aug 2, 2024 | IPR, Knowledge Series

Moment marketing, which involves leveraging real-time events to promote a brand, becomes particularly potent and controversial during internationally celebrated events like the Olympics. This is especially true when non-sponsor companies attempt to connect with the global audience by associating themselves with high-profile athletes. A prime example is the case of Manu Bhaker, a 22-year-old Indian shooter who became the first Indian to win two medals in a single edition of the Olympic Games at Paris 2024. Following her success, several brands used her image in congratulatory advertisements without authorization, leading to legal actions for infringing the athlete’s personality rights. This analysis delves into the legality of such practices, which often hover between innovative marketing and potential infringement of intellectual property rights and sponsorship agreements.

Understanding Ambush Marketing

The scenario described is a classic case of “ambush marketing,” where companies that are not official sponsors of an event still try to capitalize on its visibility by creating an indirect association. This tactic allows non-sponsors to leverage the event’s extensive reach without the substantial investment required for official sponsorship. The situation involving Manu Bhaker is indicative of how brands can sometimes overstep legal boundaries in their effort to associate with Olympic glory, infringing on the athlete’s personality rights in the process.

Legal Framework and Implications

  • Intellectual Property Rights: Athletes have exclusive rights to their image and likeness. Unauthorized use of an athlete’s photograph, as seen in the Manu Bhaker case, can lead to infringement of these rights, potentially resulting in claims for damages.
  • Olympic Charter and Rules: The International Olympic Committee (IOC) has strict regulations regarding the association of brands with the Olympics, limited to official sponsors. Violations by non-sponsor entities using Olympic imagery or athlete associations, similar to the misuse of Bhaker’s image, could lead to legal actions.
  • Trademark Law: Utilizing any Olympic trademarks or logos, such as the Olympic rings or specific terms like “Olympic” or “2024 Games,” without authorization, could constitute trademark infringement.
  • Risk of False Endorsement: There is a considerable risk that the public might be misled into believing that the athlete or the IOC endorses the non-sponsor brand, which could qualify as false advertising.
  • Personality Rights: Infringing on an athlete’s personality rights by using their image or name without consent not only violates legal statutes but also raises ethical issues regarding respect for the individual’s autonomy and the unauthorized commercial exploitation of their persona.

Jurisdictional Variations

The enforcement of these rules and the legal repercussions can differ significantly across countries. For instance, the United States enforces the Ted Stevens Olympic and Amateur Sports Act, which grants the United States Olympic Committee extensive rights over Olympic-related marketing. In contrast, other nations may rely more on general intellectual property and advertising laws.

Legal Precedents and Regulatory Oversight

The IOC has actively pursued legal action against non-sponsors who breach its marketing protocols. Moreover, regulatory bodies like the Advertising Standards Council of India (ASCI) play a significant role in enforcing guidelines to prevent brands from leveraging athletes’ victories without proper authorization. The ASCI’s code specifies that advertisements must not contain references to any person, firm, or institution without explicit permission, highlighting the importance of adhering to ethical advertising standards, as demonstrated in the cases involving Manu Bhaker and PV Sindhu.

Ethical and Strategic Considerations

While navigating legal boundaries is crucial, the ethical implications of using an athlete’s success for promotional purposes without consent should also be considered. Furthermore, the potential negative publicity from perceived ambush marketing might outweigh the immediate benefits of such exposure.

Conclusion

The boundary between creative marketing and legal overreach is exceedingly narrow when non-sponsor brands congratulate Olympic athletes through advertisements. Brands must carefully balance their marketing strategies with legal and ethical considerations, and consulting with legal experts before launching such campaigns is strongly recommended to mitigate risks of infringement and avoid potential backlash. The case of Manu Bhaker at the Paris 2024 Olympics serves as a poignant example of the complexities involved in moment marketing within the context of the world’s most prestigious sporting event, particularly concerning the infringement of the athlete’s personality rights.

IP Strategy: A Vital Pillar for Startup Success

IP Strategy: A Vital Pillar for Startup Success

by | Oct 30, 2023 | IPR, Startup

Exit strategies are of paramount importance in the realm of business. For SMEs and start-up’s, a paradigm shift in the consideration of Intellectual Property (IP) is essential, especially when viewed through the lens of investor perspective. The execution of the exit strategy, by which investors and entrepreneurs seek returns, demands particular attention since the realization of these returns is the shared aspiration. As emerging businesses witness peers achieving commendable strides, a substantial share of the credit is attributed to safeguarding interests and assets through intellectual property rights. Contemplating the significance of intellectual property at the nascent stage is pivotal for start-up’s and SMEs to capitalize on every initial opportunity they embark upon.

Intellectual property, typically associated with patents, also encompasses trademarks and trade secrets, and each facet serves a distinct role in safeguarding business interests. Trade secrets protect technical solutions and inventions, copyrights preserve original creative content, and trademarks foster brand development. It is incontrovertible that IP rights empower investors and creators to convert their outputs into tradable commercial assets. The primary objective of Intellectual Property in the realm of start-up’s is to provide the option, for a designated period, either to prevent third-party usage without authorization or to engage in profitable business negotiations. Unauthorized use of protected IP assets is often penalized, thereby bolstering the growth prospects of start-up innovations. Since these creative outputs inherently belong to the start-up’s, they possess significant potential to assert ownership and derive value from their assets. Licensing, a prevalent practice, involves the exchange of royalty fees to deter similarly named companies operating in the same geographical region, which could otherwise cause confusion among prospective customers.

IP assumes a pivotal role in the considerations of investors. Leveraging IP assets for growth becomes feasible when the protective umbrella is established at an early developmental stage. The integration of IP rights into business plans manifests into reality as IP assets frequently drive current and future revenue streams. The prospect of augmented value and lucrative exits, despite the initial costs for start-up’s, offers these ventures an opportunity to reconsider an asset like IP, which bears a substantial price tag. To craft an effective exit strategy, start-up’s and SMEs must assess which intellectual property rights are pertinent to their business and determine when asset protection becomes imperative.

In many respects, entrepreneurs are also investors. They invest their invaluable time and resources in nurturing and expanding their ventures. Concerning intellectual property, all businesses must adopt a holistic approach, integrating intellectual property into their business plans and instituting measures to ensure the effective management of their intellectual property assets by their workforce.

Efforts on the human resource front include enhancing awareness and competence in intellectual property through the engagement of qualified intellectual property advisors or consultants. Often, this process begins with the implementation of rudimentary safeguards for protecting sensitive business information and includes explicit clauses in employment contracts, defining the transfer of intellectual property rights. On the business side, owners must develop a foundational understanding of how diverse intellectual property rights can be harnessed to advance business objectives and the requisite steps for securing them. Specific intellectual property rights may necessitate meticulous procedures before securing them; for example, patent claims depend on factors like novelty and other criteria, making it necessary to maintain confidentiality regarding technical developments before filing a patent application.

Novice investors perceive the acquisition of intellectual property rights as a risk management exercise. Being the first to secure these rights through timely applications is imperative to avoid the risk of forfeiting them. Velocity is of the essence, especially in a competitive market, where securing intellectual property rights minimizes vulnerability to infringement claims. For businesses seeking to capitalize on intellectual property opportunities, the initial steps include identifying and quantifying existing intellectual property assets (e.g., know-how, customer lists, intelligence, website, creative content, etc.), understanding their value, and implementing appropriate protective measures.

These considerations delineate the consequences of heightened competition facing our portfolio companies.