Commercial rights management in post-legislative Olympic sponsorship

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to explore the development of preventative counter-ambush marketing initiatives and rights protection strategies, providing an historical view of rights management and the International Olympic Committee’s sponsorship protection initiatives through ambush marketing’s formative years. Design/methodology/approach In examining the antecedents and implications of the Canadian Olympic Committee’s (COC) forward-thinking approach to ambush marketing protection, and to explore the development of preventative counter-ambush initiatives, an historical examination of IOC and COC policies and protocols regarding ambushing and sponsorship protection over a 30-year period was undertaken, informing the development of a proposed model of proactive commercial rights management. Findings The findings indicate that a progressive shift in the counter-ambush activities of major commercial rights holders may be underway: increasingly, the COC has stressed education and communication as key components of their commercial rights protection strategy, in lieu of enforcing the legal protection provided them by the Olympic and Paralympic Marks Act of 2007. The resultant commercial rights management model proposed reflects this proactive approach, and illustrates the need for events and sponsorship stakeholders to Anticipate, (Re)Act and Advocate. Originality/value The study offers a contemporary perspective into counter-ambush strategies within the context of the COC’s brand protection measures and industry practice. The proactive approach to commercial rights management explored represents a significant step in ambush marketing prevention on the part of the COC.

Exploring newsjacking as social media–based ambush marketing

“…Initially decried by events such as the Olympic Games as a parasitic attack on corporate partners, the earliest definitions of ambushing exemplified the predominantly competitive nature of early ambushing (Sandler and Shani, 1989; McKelvey, 1994). Definitions such as that proposed by McKelvey (1994) – who defined ambushing as “a company's intentional efforts to weaken – or ambush – its competitor's official sponsorship” (p. 20) – typified ambush perspectives during its formative years, informed by vocal rights holder condemnations of ambushing practices (Burton and Bradish, 2018). Such definitions were representative of many early examples of direct and explicitly targeted ambush campaigns, including the likes of American Express's “You Don't Need a Visa” ambush of rivals Visa for the 1992 and 1994 Olympic Games.…”