Contemporary Advertising 14th Edition by William Arens ,Michael Weigold ,Christian Arens

تمرين 10

When two companies run strikingly similar ads, is it imitation, plagiarism, or coincidence In December 1999, two beverage companies began running television commercials that closely resembled each other. The commercials, for Miche-lob Light beer and Colombian coffee, were set in supermarkets and shared the same plot: store employees manhandled groceries until the product being advertised came down the conveyer belt. For both Michelob Light and Colombian, the bagger wraps the package in bubble wrap and carefully gives it to the buyers.
Advertisers and media commonly point to "coincidence." Bob Garfield, ad critic for Adverti s ing Age, said, "It's seldom plagiarism, especially if the ads are appearing simultaneously." Both of the agencies representing Michelob Light beer and Colombian coffee agree. Peter le Comte, president of DDB Worldwide Marketing, said, "We have written it off as an incident of coincidence. Besides, I don't think we share the same consumers. They will run their commercial and we will run ours."
Stephen Bergerson, an attorney specializing in advertising and promotion law at Fredrikson Byron, Minneapolis, is skeptical. "When you get four or five words that are so specific, simultaneously used by people in the same category, the nose starts to quiver" But Ron Redfern, senior vice president of sales and marketing for the Orange County Register, calls it "coincidental invention. It's like the automobile being invented in France and in the U.S. within weeks of each other."
Some advertisers try to ignore the problem by convincing themselves that being copied is actually good. FHugh Thrasher, executive VP of marketing for Motel 6, says of his often-imitated Tom Bodett commercials: "We think these copycat ads just remind people of the originality of our concept." Nancy Shalek, president of L.A.'s Shalek Agency, maintains, "If you haven't been ripped off, you're really in trouble."
But Ellen Kozak, a Milwaukee copyright and publishing lawyer, warns against this form of flattery. "There's a fine line between the kind of borrowing that constitutes an admiring bow to a classic work and the kind that's really the theft of another writer's efforts."
Unfortunately, plagiarism is almost impossible to prove, as long as you make a few changes. It's also hard to define, making it tough for advertisers to know just when they cross the line. There is no set number of words that make up a plagiarized effort. And plagiarism covers not only words but ideas, plots, and characters. In 1996, Kendall-Jackson Winery filed a suit against E J Gallo Winery, charging that Gallo's Turning Leaf Vineyards brand infringed on K-J's Colored Leaf brand trademark. The suit said that Gallo intentionally designed the bottle, labeling, and packaging to imitate that of Kendall-Jackson's Colored Leaf mark. More recently, overseas, manufacturers of two brands of potato chips have become embroiled in a similar battle.
Tesco, a supermarket giant in England, recently launched a brand of chips called Temptations that are very reminiscent of competitor Walker's Sensations. The two brands have been placed side by side on the shelves, and the Tesco brand is being sold for 23 pence, approximately $0.40, cheaper than Walker's. Both chips are packaged in white bags that feature black and white pictures, and both are offered in strikingly similar flavors. Although Martin Glenn, a chief executive at Walker, has hinted at legal action, lawyers are divided over the success of such litigation. Nick Johnson, an attorney with Osborne Clark, agrees that "Tesco may have been inspired [by Walker's], but just because you are inspired by another brand doesn't mean you are trying to pass off as it." The fact that the legal criteria to prove "passing off" are so strict in Great Britain, combined with the fact that Walker's itself has been guilty of brand motif plagiarism in the past, diminishes the likelihood of this lawsuit's success.
The crux of the problem is that imitation is an accepted part of the business, at least unofficially. Clients tend to avoid the debate, perhaps because they're more comfortable with well-worn ideas than with bold, original concepts. Many art directors and writers collect competitive ads for inspiration. And advertising is such a highly collaborative process that it's often difficult to determine each individual's creative contribution. With personal responsibility so unclear, ignoring professional ethics is relatively easy
But every so often, someone creates an ad that moves beyond the gray zone of imitation into outright plagiarism. In July 2000, Anheuser-Busch asked Heiser Automotive Group to drop its TV spots with animated frogs croaking, "Buy... Hei... ser" Heiser had manipulated its "Be Wiser... Buy Heiser" slogan to imitate the Budweiser frogs without permission from Anheuser-Busch. Anheuser-Busch lawyer Valerie Benkert Paci wrote Heiser: "We consider Heiser's imitation of the BUDWEISER Frogs commercials to be a violation of our federal and common law rights. Consequently, we must ask that you refrain from all future use of those commercials."
Even flagrant infringement cases are very hard to win because copyright laws don't protect ideas, and creative advertising is an idea business. "There are very few original ideas," according to Philip Circus, an advertising law consultant to the Newspaper Society in London. "Plagiarism is the name of the game in advertising. It's about recycling ideas in a useful way"
That's why some industry leaders are passionate about the need for personal ethics. Jim Golden, executive producer of DMH MacGuffin, says, "All we have in this business are creativity and ideas. The moment someone infringes on that, they're reaching into the very core of the business and ripping it out." Ultimately, advertisers must stop "borrowing" ideas from each other and demand greater creativity from themselves.
Should clients be more concerned about the ethics of copycat advertising What would you do if a client asked you to copy an ad that was already running?