Duracell planned an on-pack promotion offering a prize of a trip to the Sydney Olympics this Summer, but they did this without the involvement of the British Olympic Association and without being official sponsors of the Sydney Games.
Who: Dketing
Who: Duracell and the British Olympic Association
When: March 2000
Where:UK
What happened:
Duracell planned an on-pack promotion offering a prize of a trip to the Sydney Olympics this Summer, but they did this without the involvement of the British Olympic Association and without being official sponsors of the Sydney Games.
The Olympic Symbol (Protection) Act 1995 places heavy restrictions on any non editorial use of the five ring symbol or the word “Olympic”. The BOA relied on this statute when it wrote to Duracell complaining about their plans, following a report of the intended promotion in the marketing press.
Duracell did not admit the BOA were necessarily right in their claims, but decided in the event to sidestep any aggravation and withdraw the promotion.
Why this matters:
With the 2000 Olympics not far away, marketers will be thinking of related promotional activity. This story underlines the need for caution before making any use of the word “Olympic” or the Olympic five ring symbol in a marketing context. Some UK legal experts have questioned whether the 1995 statute cann be used in this way, so as to prevent any bona fide, descriptive reference to the Olympic event in marketing material. If the use in no way misleads and does not for example suggest any commercial linkage between the promoter and the event, what possible harm can there be in such practice? Unfortunately for marketers, however, the drafting of the relevant parts of the statute is extremely wordy and its meaning by no means clear on first, second or even third reading, hence our advice that caution should be exercised and advice taken wherever a reference to the Olympics, whether in relation to a competition prize or otherwise, is contemplated.
