Sportswear giants Speedo have taken a break from smuggling budgies and started down the path of smuggling bloggers to court as it’s revealed they’re unhappy with one Australian blogger who’s “using their brand name in vain”.
Speedo are suing Dave Evans, 24, for his website (found here and please note some may find the content offensive/funny) which is said to jeopardise their “substantial and valuable reputation” and “goodwill associated with the name and trademark SPEEDO”. Since its creation in 1914 in Bondi, Australia, Speedo has become a household name and one of the biggest sportswear companies in the world. Their swimwear is so well designed, there have been claims that they’ve offered an ‘unfair advantage’ to Olympic competitors wearing their designs over those of rival brands. And while this wasn’t enough to dent their reputation (mostly because the claims were outlandishly absurd anyway), you have to wonder whether this latest move was particularly well-advised.
Handling negative content online is a dangerous minefield of potential catastrophes in itself, as addressing detrimental media incorrectly almost always exacerbates the situation. Speedo have gone from having a website which features their product in a rather questionable light, to having potentially thousands of websites talking about the original negative content as the story is picked up by newspapers, television, radio, online news sites and other blog based websites as well. So not only have their actions brought an audience to this website which far surpasses anything it would have achieved independently, but they’ve also created a David vs. Goliath perception of corporations picking on the little guy. A position Evans has solidified by insisting he can’t afford to fight the lawsuit. He also says that even though he owns a suit, not a tie and he could not possibly attend Federal Court in Australia improperly dressed.
The internet is what it is, and there’ll always be somebody saying something positive and there’ll also be people airing their opinions that go the other way. How you handle the negative content is a far bigger issue than having the negative content around to begin with.
Speedo are trying to control their brands in the same way that some alcohol companies recoiled from an association with rappers who extolled their products in videos and songs. Remember how upset BMW were when they discovered that aging Beemers were often called “Black Man’s Wheels”! Brand owners are having to learn that in the hyper social world you cannot control how your customers connect with your brand or use your brand. Imagine if Campbells Soup or Brillo had taken Warhol to court for his use of their brands in his art. In the end Cristal celebrated its relationship with black music and built a new and very profitable angle on their business. You cannot help feeling that Speedo’s attitude has more than a little homophobia about it. Would they have done the same if the pictures were of nubile young women?
Were Speedo within their rights to challenge the blogger about the nature of his website (and their trademark/brand)? That’ll be for the courts to decide. If Speedo were within their rights – and if they had a case for legal action – does that necessarily mean it was a good idea?
Generally we advise against court action against bloggers, and the circumstances have to be pretty extreme before you should even consider it. Otherwise, you’ll find yourself with a lot of publicity and attention that doesn’t necessarily agree with your position and, like with Speedo, the content you’re wanting removed will be granted a far larger audience than it’d otherwise be getting.
Check out our top 10 list of things NOT to do in reputation management here.
Related posts:
- Murdoch reputation takes a hit This happens when you don’t handle crisis the way it...
- What can reputation management do for you? Reputation Management services has become a key aspect for almost...
- How ex employee’s can bite back The Internet is definitely another company HR and reputation headache,...
- Corporate Reputation Management – Your business needs it! Your brand is the most essential part of your business....
- Constant monitoring to manage your Online Reputation When talking about Online Reputation Management(ORM) we mean monitoring web...
Speedo Takes Aussie Blogger To Court
Sportswear giants Speedo have taken a break from smuggling budgies and started down the path of smuggling bloggers to court as it’s revealed they’re unhappy with one Australian blogger who’s “using their brand name in vain”.
Speedo are suing Dave Evans, 24, for his website (found here and please note some may find the content offensive/funny) which is said to jeopardise their “substantial and valuable reputation” and “goodwill associated with the name and trademark SPEEDO”. Since its creation in 1914 in Bondi, Australia, Speedo has become a household name and one of the biggest sportswear companies in the world. Their swimwear is so well designed, there have been claims that they’ve offered an ‘unfair advantage’ to Olympic competitors wearing their designs over those of rival brands. And while this wasn’t enough to dent their reputation (mostly because the claims were outlandishly absurd anyway), you have to wonder whether this latest move was particularly well-advised.
Handling negative content online is a dangerous minefield of potential catastrophes in itself, as addressing detrimental media incorrectly almost always exacerbates the situation. Speedo have gone from having a website which features their product in a rather questionable light, to having potentially thousands of websites talking about the original negative content as the story is picked up by newspapers, television, radio, online news sites and other blog based websites as well. So not only have their actions brought an audience to this website which far surpasses anything it would have achieved independently, but they’ve also created a David vs. Goliath perception of corporations picking on the little guy. A position Evans has solidified by insisting he can’t afford to fight the lawsuit. He also says that even though he owns a suit, not a tie and he could not possibly attend Federal Court in Australia improperly dressed.
The internet is what it is, and there’ll always be somebody saying something positive and there’ll also be people airing their opinions that go the other way. How you handle the negative content is a far bigger issue than having the negative content around to begin with.
Speedo are trying to control their brands in the same way that some alcohol companies recoiled from an association with rappers who extolled their products in videos and songs. Remember how upset BMW were when they discovered that aging Beemers were often called “Black Man’s Wheels”! Brand owners are having to learn that in the hyper social world you cannot control how your customers connect with your brand or use your brand. Imagine if Campbells Soup or Brillo had taken Warhol to court for his use of their brands in his art. In the end Cristal celebrated its relationship with black music and built a new and very profitable angle on their business. You cannot help feeling that Speedo’s attitude has more than a little homophobia about it. Would they have done the same if the pictures were of nubile young women?
Were Speedo within their rights to challenge the blogger about the nature of his website (and their trademark/brand)? That’ll be for the courts to decide. If Speedo were within their rights – and if they had a case for legal action – does that necessarily mean it was a good idea?
Generally we advise against court action against bloggers, and the circumstances have to be pretty extreme before you should even consider it. Otherwise, you’ll find yourself with a lot of publicity and attention that doesn’t necessarily agree with your position and, like with Speedo, the content you’re wanting removed will be granted a far larger audience than it’d otherwise be getting.
Check out our top 10 list of things NOT to do in reputation management here.
Related posts: