Why ambush marketing is winning

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Why ambush marketing is winning

For now, ambush marketing is winning. Not because the law isn’t strong enough to prevent brands from hijacking physical events, but because the media by which consumers watch those events has broadened so much.

“This is the tip of the iceberg,” said Bruce P. Keller of Debevoise & Plimpton at the session The Evolving Nature of Ambush Marketing yesterday. “In the future everyone will be watching these events on split screens, with streams from the Internet.”

He was referring to the example of ambush marketing that had just been given: Coca-Cola’s campaign of polar bear characters reacting live to the Super Bowl through a dedicated website, CokePolarBowl.com. Pepsi was the official sponsor for the American football game this year, but Coca-Cola’s bears proved so popular that they upstaged their competitor. The two bears, each supporting a different team, reacted in real time to the game—and even left the room when an ad for Pepsi came on. Coke, which has 534,000 Twitter followers, saw a 12% increase in Twitter activity during the game.

That campaign was seen by yesterday’s speakers as something of a retaliation for Pepsi’s successful football advert during the 2010 World Cup in South Africa. The video, in which players such as Messi and Drogba played on a pitch created by hundreds of South Africans, was designed just to play online and became incredibly popular.

With that kind of competition between big brands, strong ambush marketing laws—such as those introduced by the UK ahead of this summer’s Olympic Games—are just one tool for brand owners. Everyone needs their own social media campaign.

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Brian Paul Gearing brings technical depth, litigation expertise, and experience with Japanese business culture to Pillsbury’s IP practice
News of InterDigital suing Amazon in the US and CMS IndusLaw challenging Indian rules on foreign firms were also among the top talking points
IP lawyers at three firms reflect on how courts across Australia have reacted to AI use in litigation, and explain why they support measured use of the technology
AJ Park’s owner, IPH, announced earlier this week that Steve Mitchell will take the reins of the New Zealand-based firm in January
Chris Adamson and Milli Bouri of Adamson & Partners join us to discuss IP market trends and what law firm and in-house clients are looking for
Noemi Parrotta, chair of the European subcommittee within INTA's International Amicus Committee, explains why the General Court’s decision in the Iceland case could make it impossible to protect country names as trademarks
Inès Garlantezec, who became principal of the firm’s Luxembourg office earlier this year, discusses what's been keeping her busy, including settling a long-running case
In the sixth episode of a podcast series celebrating the tenth anniversary of IP Inclusive, we discuss IP Futures, a network for early-career stage IP professionals
Rachel Cohen has reunited with her former colleagues to strengthen Weil’s IP litigation and strategy work
McKool Smith’s Jennifer Truelove explains how a joint effort between her firm and Irell & Manella secured a win for their client against Samsung
Gift this article