“The Office of Fair Trading is to launch an investigation into Groupon after the daily deals website was found to have broken UK advertising regulations almost 50 times in less than a year.”
The Guardian, 2nd December 2011
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“An internet ad campaign for Lynx deodorant, featuring model and reality TV star Lucy Pinder in a series of provocative poses, has been banned for a range of offences including objectifying women.”
The Guardian, 23rd November 2011
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“A promotion email from Groupon offering discounted cosmetic surgery, including breast enlargement, has been banned for “pressuring” consumers into hurriedly making potentially life-changing decisions in just a few hours.”
The Guardian, 23rd November 2011
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“A Prada ad campaign featuring 14-year-old actor Hailee Steinfeld, star of the Coen brothers film True Grit, in a potentially life-threatening situation has been banned by the advertising regulator.”
The Guardian, 23rd November 2011
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“Two wannabe adult film stars who failed to get work after responding to a job ad seeking new talent have lodged a complaint with the advertising watchdog to find out why they were rejected.”
The Guardian, 16th November 2011
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“Ad watchdog dismisses complaint that dog treats lasted less than a minute despite maker admitting its claims were ‘puffery’.”
The Guardian, 16th November 2011
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“Watchdog rules advert was irresponsible and likely to cause serious offence after complaints that it sexualised children.”
The Guardian, 9th November 2011
Source: www.guardian.co.uk
“Commercial broadcasters will not be able to ‘unduly discriminate’ between advertisers when setting the fees they charge for carrying commercials under proposed new rules set out by the UK’s media regulator.”
OUT-LAW.com, 3rd November 2011
Source: www.out-law.com
“Two brothers jailed after being accused of conning thousands of customers into visiting what they claimed was a Lapland-style theme park had their convictions overturned by appeal judges today.”
The Independent, 26th October 2011
Source: www.independent.co.uk
“The UK’s advertising watchdog may not investigate complaints businesses make about rivals’ adverts if the complaining firms have not tried to resolve the disputes with their competitors first.”
OUT-LAW.com, 17th October 2011
Source: www.out-law.com
“The Government has changed the drafting of proposed new laws on Olympic advertising to prohibit advertising on the human body at events during the 2012 Games in London.”
OUT-LAW.com, 14th October 2011
Source: www.out-law,com
“Provocative billboard adverts are to be banned amid growing fears over the sexualisation of children.”
Daily Telegraph, 8th October 2011
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
“The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has said that it is set to report record annual complaints figures as a result of changes to its responsibilities earlier this year. It said that almost one third of complaints are now about online advertising falling under its extended remit.”
OUT-LAW.com, 5th October 2011
Source: www.out-law.com
“New proposals to regulate how broadband is advertised have been called ‘disappointing’ by Ofcom and ‘a green light to mislead’ by consumer group Which?.”
Daily Telegraph, 30th September 2011
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
Interflora Inc and another v Marks & Spencer plc (Case C-323/09); [2011] WLR (D) 281
“Article 5(1)(a) of First Council Directive 89/104/EEC and article 9(1)(a) of Council Regulation (EC) No 40/94 on the Community trade mark was to be interpreted as meaning that the proprietor of a trade mark was entitled to prevent a competitor from advertising on the basis of a keyword which was identical with the trade mark and which had been selected in an internet referencing service by the competitor without the proprietor’s consent, where that use was liable to have an adverse effect on one of the functions of the trade mark. Article 5(2) of Directive 89/104 and article 9(1)(c) of Regulation No 40/94 was to be interpreted as meaning that the proprietor of a trade mark with a reputation was entitled to prevent a competitor from advertising on the basis of a keyword corresponding to that trade mark, which the competitor had, without the proprietor’s consent, selected in an internet referencing service, where the competitor thereby took unfair advantage of the distinctive character or repute of the trade mark (free-riding) or where the advertising was detrimental to that distinctive character (dilution) or to that repute (tarnishment).”
WLR Daily, 22nd September 2011
Source: www.iclr.co.uk
“The UK’s advertising watchdog has ruled that a BT press advert was misleading and should not appear in its current form again.”
OUT-LAW.com, 23rd September 2011
Source: www.out-law.com
“The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) has banned Tesco from re-broadcasting a television advert that appeared to show pigs roaming freely in a field following complaints by viewers.”
Daily Telegraph, 14th September 2011
Source: www.telegraph.co.uk
“A photo of a horse van was in breach of privacy rules, the UK’s advertising watchdog has ruled.”
OUT-LAW.com, 12th September 2011
Source: www.out-law.com
“The UK’s advertising watchdog has received a surge in the number of complaints it has had to investigate since it was given oversight of digital marketing regulation, it has said.”
OUT-LAW.com, 6th September 2011
Source: www.out-law.com
© Inner Temple Library 2024