Comparative advertising explicitly or by implication makes reference to a competitor or competing goods or services.
This type of advertising is only permitted when it is not misleading. It can be a legitimate means of informing consumers of what is in their interests. Therefore, in particular, the comparisons should:
- relate to goods or services which meet the same needs or are intended for the same purpose;
- relate to products with the same designation of origin;
- deal objectively with the material, relevant, verifiable and representative features of those goods or services, which may include price;
- avoid creating confusion between traders, and should not discredit, imitate or take advantage of the trade mark or trade names of a competitor."
That is one reason why you will not see such advertising in the EU. Another may be cultural; in some EU countries, all comparative advertising was illegal before this EU directive (yes, you could not even show your product as being inferior in every way)
Finally, some would see this as the offenseless kid attempting to beat the captain of the boxing team.
> This type of advertising is only permitted when it is not misleading
Maybe you missed a bit? It's perfectly legal, you just need to be 100% factual, and if you're not you'll get taken to the cleaners in court. So people are suitably wary of using it, but it does happen.
(Same basic principles apply in New Zealand, fwiw)
I replied to the first line of the post. It reads: "It's only in the US that I have seen advertisements for a product include direct bashing of a competitor's product". In the EU, you cannot get away with 'direct bashing'.
You can bash, as long as it's factual: "X is more expensive, has a lower resolution, smaller area display, shorter battery life, and is heavier than Y. Buy Y!". They're all facts. But you can't say (in the rest of the world outside the US anyway) "X sucks because it's slower than Y. Buy Y!", unless you have big brave lawyers or X is somehow slower on every independent factual measure.
"Bashing is a harsh, gratuitous, prejudicial attack on a person, group, or subject."
Also, I think you are not ever allowed to say "X sucks" in the EU because that is an opinion, even if X is somehow slower on every independent factual measure and if X is 100% equal to Y in every other quality (price, looks, weight, etc)
For example, a slower car might be more appropriate (= suck less) for people with slower reflexes, a slower mobile phone might stay below your data limits easier, a slower restaurant might give you more time to contemplate about the meaning of life, a higher price might make a product more attractive.
"Comparative advertising
Comparative advertising explicitly or by implication makes reference to a competitor or competing goods or services.
This type of advertising is only permitted when it is not misleading. It can be a legitimate means of informing consumers of what is in their interests. Therefore, in particular, the comparisons should:
- relate to goods or services which meet the same needs or are intended for the same purpose;
- relate to products with the same designation of origin;
- deal objectively with the material, relevant, verifiable and representative features of those goods or services, which may include price;
- avoid creating confusion between traders, and should not discredit, imitate or take advantage of the trade mark or trade names of a competitor."
That is one reason why you will not see such advertising in the EU. Another may be cultural; in some EU countries, all comparative advertising was illegal before this EU directive (yes, you could not even show your product as being inferior in every way)
Finally, some would see this as the offenseless kid attempting to beat the captain of the boxing team.