Advertising, Marketing & Privacy Law Practice

RSS Feed Email Print
Share
View divider Overview divider Attorneys divider Matters divider a-ampblog.gif divider PDF Version

The five lead attorneys in the group collectively have practiced in this area for more than 100 years.

Practice Areas
Advertising, Marketing & Privacy Law Practice
Advertising and Entertainment Disputes
Advertising & Promotions Counseling
Advertising & Promotions Transactions
Sweepstakes and Promotions
Privacy and Data Security
Technology Transactions, Licensing, and Outsourcing
Copyright Litigation
Trademark Litigation
Resource Center
Topics
advertising   behavioral advertising   cause marketing   CFPB   children   COPPA   copyright   deceptive advertising   domain names   email marketing   false advertising   FDA   FDA regulations   FTC   game of chance   gaming   gift cards   gift certificate   misappropriation   mobile applications   NAD   online behavioral advertising   patent marking   privacy   promotions   public domain   publicity   search engine ads   social media   sweepstakes and contests   telemarketing   text message   trademark   trademark and unfair competition   UDRP  
Other Winston & Strawn Blogs
ADVERTISING, MARKETING & PRIVACY LAW NEWS
Welcome to the blog hosted by Winston & Strawn’s Advertising and Promotions Law practice group. In this blog, we cover news regarding recent developments in advertising, promotions, entertainment, and privacy law, as well as practical implementation tips and lessons learned from the cases discussed. To learn more about any of the cases or issues covered, please don’t hesitate to contact one of us or your regular Winston contact. To subscribe to these updates, please see the RSS icon at the top right of the page.
About the Bloggers
Brian L. Heidelberger
Partner
Chair, Advertising, Marketing and Promotions Practice
Chicago Office
Blog Tools Recent Postings | All Postings | Power Search | Special Alerts | Attorney Login
April 11, 2012
NAD Determines Priceline Did Not Falsely Disparage Travelocity in "Light-Hearted Spoof"

The NAD determined that William Shatner's recurring Priceline Negotiator character did not falsely disparage Travelocity by stating: "So, you've been double crossed by other travel sites and now you want to try the real deal?" In support of its position that this statement is not disparaging, Priceline submitted a consumer perception survey purporting to show that the claim does not actually convey to consumers that Travelocity or other sites "double cross" consumers. In evaluating the advertising, the NAD first noted that an advertiser's right to use humor and hyperbole to tout its product features must be balanced against its obligation to support claims that it may make about the competitor's product, especially when those claims might disparage a competitor. The NAD determined that the survey submitted by Priceline was under inclusive because it failed to consider potential future users of online travel sites, instead focusing entirely on current users. However, the NAD then stepped into the shoes of consumers and determined the claim was not disparaging because it was part of a light-hearted spoof in an overall humorous commercial which did not mention Travelocity by name. The NAD also noted that the reference to being "double crossed" was isolated and the commercial made no reference to how other travel sites double crossed consumers, but instead focused on Priceline's Name Your Own Price service.

TIP: The use of humor and hyperbole in advertising by itself does not relieve an advertiser of the obligation to support claims about a competitor or its products or services, especially when those claims might falsely disparage the competitor.


Topics
advertising, NAD

Sara Skinner Chubb ; Mary Hutchings Reed
Email comments to the authors