|
|||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
World Intellectual Property Review
Here in London, Olympic fever is starting. If you live in this city, whether you think the Olympics will be a glorious celebration of international cooperation and British achievement, or a complete waste of money that cripples transport for two weeks, no-one will be able to avoid it. The Olympic Games provide an almost unrivalled opportunity to sponsors; predictions of 4 billion television viewers, as well as the millions that will descend on London, mean that any advertiser associated with the Games will be reaching an awful lot of people. And that is what’s so tempting. The UK, like many hosts of international sporting events in the recent past, has enacted legislation expressly to safeguard sponsors’ exclusive rights. While such a move has led to fairly predictable handwringing in sections of the media, worried that it is too far-reaching in the protection it affords to corporations, you can see why the concerned parties think it’s important. The level of money at stake is truly enormous. But that said, there is no guarantee that high-profile and controversial legislation is the most effective way to combat ambush marketing. The aim of the ambusher is typically to secure as much exposure for itself as possible. And what better way to make sure everyone knows who you are than by being prosecuted for ambush marketing for activity during the Games? Interestingly, Poland, which is a co-host of the European Football Championships this year, has not enacted event-specific legislation to deal with the threat. Indeed it is not entirely clear that Polish law offers much protection against ambush marketing at all. It will be very interesting to see how the different events unfold. Of course, differences in IP regimes across countries are not new. One of the main difficulties faced by brands (or at least, one of the major costs), is having to take different approaches in different jurisdictions, whether because of the law, the culture, or the presence of bad actors in the local market. And with the Internet to factor in as well, many brands face an uphill struggle to keep things in check. In this issue, we hear from Industries Group, parent company of outdoor brand Moncler and others, about how it has overhauled its approach to anti-counterfeiting, and the difficulties it has faced in tackling imitators at home and abroad. We also take a look at the people that help in that fight, with a focus on customs efforts around the world, and an interview with Erik Barnett, deputy director of European affairs at US Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s IPR Center, about that agency’s efforts. As ever, we’d welcome your feedback, and please do come and see us at INTA. We’ll be at booth 243. Click here to view the issue or click below to read our latest Annual Reviews for FREE |
|||||||||||||||
|
