Where does intellectual property law enter into it?
Trademark law is not about “a company go[ing] to extreme lengths to protect its (paid for) advertising exclusivity at an event.” It’s about the owner of a mark (that is used as an indicator of the origin of goods and services) in which it has earned rights being able to prevent others from using (an identical or confusingly similar) mark (in commerce) in a manner that would cause confusion among consumers with regard to the origin or goods or services.
Surely this is just a contractual thing. Anheuser-Busch paid FIFA with the agreement that FIFA would not allow any other form of beer advertisement at their events.
Nothing at all to do with intellectual property law and the rest. FIFA followed the rules of the contract. In doing so they gave a competitor to Anheuser-Busch a lot of publicity but they had to do what they did or risk being sued by Anheuser-Busch for breach of contract.
The strictness of the rules however are kinda silly when looked at from this story’s POV. Anheuser-Busch gets its money’s worth from TV and mass marketing. A competitors brand on a pair of trousers means nothing in reality but who said lawyers and corporate heads always see reality
Seriously, does Anheuser-Busch even export their product to Europe at all (and if so, what the hell kind of freaks in Europe drink it, when they have access to far superior products)? And does Bavaria ship to North America? I mean, one would expect that A-B’s reason for sponsoring the tournament was to market to American eyeballs. And why would they are, if the American eyeballs in question are presented with the name of a beer that most Americans can’t even get?
i was appalled when my Irish friend, living in the States at the time preferred to drink Bud Light over anything else. I asked if this was just her or just because she was in the states and she said that no, it was pretty common for folks to drink it on the Emerald Isle.
Yes, they do. In fact, they have been in a long-running battle over the use of the term “Budweiser” with a Czech brewery, whose product is marketed as “Budweiser Budvar” in Europe, and as “Czechvar” in the United States. In some European countries, the Czech brewery has been awarded exclusive use of “Budweiser” and Anheuser-Busch sells its beer under the name “Bud.”
It’s not that big on mainland Europe in my experience but here in Ireland you’d find Bud on tap and bottles in nearing every pub. I’ve seen it in a lot of UK* establishments as well
A surprising amount of people drink the muck
Also remember the World Cup is watched in South America and Asia. Very big markets. If Bud isn’t a major drink in those regions then the exposure to these markets is worth the money.
I would guess the Anheuser-Busch isn’t thinking that much about the US here. The superbowl and the other US specific campaigns cover that region.
ascenray beat me to it. I found this cite that gives some details. The Czech town where the beer is made is known in German as “Budweis”; so “Budweiser” just means it’s from that town (like “Frankfurter” means “of Frankfurt”)." And according to EU law, a locative name can only be registered as a trademark by a manufacturer from that location.
Reminds me a bit of a smaller version the McLibel case. If McDonald’s had let those folks distribute their pamphlets and not done anything about it, then maybe one or two thousand people would ever have known anything about their claims. But by pursuing what turned out to be the longest lawsuit in British history, the company made itself look stupid and gave more publicity to the anti-McDonald’s folks than even their wildest dreams could have prepared them for.
If FIFA had let this alone, i never would have heard of Bavaria beer. Now it’s news all around the world, and FIFA (and, by exntension, its sponsors) look like heavy-handed idiots.
Re: Bavaria. I’ve just come back from three months in Amsterdam. Bavaria is a upcoming beer there. There are some bars that sell it as their main beer i.e. Just ask for a ‘beer’ and you get a Bavaria. Although the vast majority will still give you a Heineken.
It’s selling quite well in Dublin as well. In the pubs that sell it it’s the cheapest beer on tap by almost a Euro(the average pint of lager being ~€4) and it’s not bad. Little actual character but then again Bud, Carlsberg, Heineken and Harp are pretty characterless as well.
Yes, amazingly. Actually the half-time adverts for Budweiser are pretty amusing - they have a pair of American commentators playing out some great spoofs of how we imagine you view football (which are probably pretty accurate for some people).
Not that it’d make me drink the crap, of course; I have no idea why someone would go with Budweiser over actual Budvar, which is all over the place these days. My friend who occasionally indulges has a theory, which (roughly stated) is that even if you got to sleep with supermodels every night of the week, every so often you’d still just want a skanky whore. I’m not sure I agree, but the argument has a certain something to it.
Well, that was certainly enlightening. I still think FIFA and the sponsors got a huge black eye over this. Surely we’d never put up with crap like that in the U.S. of A. If somebody, say, tried to keep someone from attending a public appearance of a political officeholder because the attendee was wearing, say, a T-shirt expressing opposition to a policy position forwarded by the officeholder, why the vast majority of the freedom-loving American public would be so outraged, they would probably revolt right then and there.
And I accept that, to some extent, and have merely pointed out that it’s fucking insulting and counter-productive to do so to this ludicrous extent. They have simultaneously maximised exposure for the “ambush marketer”, while tainting themselves and their official sponsor by their actions. What a great move.
A direct quote from one of the fans, posted earlier, suggests that several were.
Well gosh, that amazes me; who would have thought that after shelling out on tickets to a once-every-four-years event, possibly paying in the hundreds of euros for said tickets, the fans would choose to actually attend. Incredible. That proves … er …
It is not in dispute that, as the holders of a private tournament whose popularity is possibly the greatest of any sporting event in the world, FIFA have both the right and leverage to be absolute cunts to every single attendee in any of a veritable myriad variations. It is my contention that this still does not make it a Good Idea.
