|
Comparative advertising or advertising war is an advertisement in which a particular product, or service, specifically mentions a competitor by name for the express purpose of showing why the competitor is inferior to the product naming it. Also referred to as "knocking copy", it is loosely defined as advertising where “the advertised brand is explicitly compared with one or more competing brands and the comparison is obvious to the audience.”〔T.E. Barry & R.L. Tremblay, “Comparative advertising: perspectives and issues”, Journal of Advertising, Vol. 4, No. 4, 1975, pp. 15-20.〕 This should not be confused with parody advertisements, where a fictional product is being advertised for the purpose of poking fun at the particular advertisement, nor should it be confused with the use of a coined brand name for the purpose of comparing the product without actually naming an actual competitor. ("Wikipedia tastes better and is less filling than the Encyclopedia Galactica.") In the United States, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) defined comparative advertising as “advertisement that compares alternative brands on objectively measurable attributes or price, and identifies the alternative brand by name, illustration or other distinctive information.”〔Federal Trade Commission Commercial Practice Rule 16 CFR §14.15 n 1 (2002)〕 This definition was used in the case Gillette Australia Pty Ltd v Energizer Australia Pty Ltd.〔(2002) 193 ALR 629〕 Similarly, the Law Council of Australia recently suggested that comparative advertising refers to “advertising which include reference to a competitor’s trademark in a way which does not impute proprietorship in the mark to the advertiser.”〔P. Armitage in M.A. Murphy, “Legal aspects of comparative advertising and a strategy for its use”, Queensland University of Technology law journal, Vol. 12, 1996, pp. 41-59.〕 Comparative advertisements could be either indirectly or directly comparative, positive or negative, and seeks “to associate or differentiate the two competing brands”.〔B. Mills, “Comparative advertising: should it be allowed?”, European Intellectual Property Review, Vol. 17, No. 9, 1995, pp. 417-430.〕 Different countries apply differing views regarding the laws on comparative advertising. ==History== The earliest case concerning comparative advertising dates back to 1910 in United States – Saxlehner v Wagner.〔16 US 375, 30 S.Ct. 298, 54 L.ED 525 (1910)〕〔B. Mills, “Comparative advertising: should it be allowed?”, European Intellectual Property Review, Vol. 17, No. 9, 1995, pp. 417-430.〕 Prior to the 1970s, comparative advertising was deemed unfeasible due to related risks. For instance, comparative advertising could invite misidentification of products, potential legal issues, and may even win public sympathy for their competitors as victims. In 1972, the FTC began to encourage advertisers to make comparison with named competitors, with the broad, public welfare objective of creating more informative advertising.〔F. Beard, “Comparative advertising wars: an historical analysis of their causes and consequences”, Journal of Macromarketing, Vol. 30, No. 3, 2010, pp. 270-286.〕 The FTC argued that this form of advertising could also stimulate comparison shopping, encourage product improvement and innovation, and foster a positive competitive environment.〔C.L. Beck-Dudley & T.G. Williams, “Legal and public policy implications for the future of comparative advertising: a look at U-Haul v Jartran”, Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, Vol. 8, No. 1, 1989, pp. 124-142.〕 However, studies have shown that while comparative advertisements had increased since 1960, the relative amount of comparative advertising is still small.〔D.W. Jackson Jr., S.W. Brown & R.R. Harmon, “Comparative magazine advertisements”, Journal of Advertising Research, Vol. 19, No. 6, 1979, pp.21-26.〕 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「comparative advertising」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|