Background
Summary of Council decision:
Two issues were investigated, both were Upheld.
Ad description
The website www.dvd-and-media.com featured a link which displayed the 'Epson Exceed Your Vision' logo and stated "Special Offers on all EPSON Cartridges". The link directed consumers to a page which stated "Special Offer this week - Epson Ink FULL sets. Below are our current discounted Epson ink sets by Jetplay ... less than half price - that's less than half of what is already an amazingly low cost for a quality Epson compatible cartridge". The product listings were accompanied by images which showed both the 'Epson' logo and the 'Jetplay' logo.
Issue
Epson Europe BV challenged whether:
1. the link misleadingly implied that the promotion concerned original Epson branded cartridges, when that was not the case; and
2. the continued use of their logo on the second page, along with its overall presentation, was misleading, because it was likely to confuse consumers as to the origin of the products.
Response
DVD-and-Media.com (D&M) said that, as they sold original Epson products as well as compatible cartridges made by other manufacturers, they felt they were entitled to use the Epson logo on their website. They said that compatible print cartridges were clearly marked as such and that this, along with the difference in price between original Epson products and the compatible products, would mean that consumers were fully aware of what they were buying and would not be misled.
Assessment
1. & 2. Upheld
The ASA noted that D&M said they also sold original Epson products on their website, but we considered that the use of the Epson logo on links and pages that purely related to non-Epson products took unfair advantage of the reputation of Epson's trade mark and was likely to mislead consumers by inferring either that the products were manufactured by Epson or that they were endorsed by them in some way, when that was not the case. We further noted that the products were simply referred to as Epson cartridges at some points and we were concerned that it was not sufficiently clear that the products were compatible products rather than original Epson branded products.
The ad breached CAP Code (Edition 12) rules 3.1 3.1 Marketing communications must not materially mislead or be likely to do so. (Misleading advertising) and 3.41 3.41 Marketing communications must not mislead the consumer about who manufactures the product. and 3.43 3.43 Marketing communications must not take unfair advantage of the reputation of a competitor's trade mark, trade name or other distinguishing mark or of the designation of origin of a competing product. (Imitation and denigration).
Action
The ad must not appear again in its current form. We told D&M to take care not to imply that cartridges were manufactured by Epson, if this was not the case.
