This Reed Smith Partner Wants to Make Sure You Don't Get Sued for Your Super Bowl Ad
Jason Gordon, a partner in the firm's entertainment and media group, says the Super Bowl advertising frenzy is rife with legal pitfalls that keep his practice busy each year.
January 31, 2020 at 02:22 PM
5 minute read
AB InBev ran a Super Bowl ad last year that said Miller Lite used corn syrup in its beer. Miller Lite sued, and the suit is still ongoing.
A few years ago E-Trade ran an ad that referenced the name "Lindsay" for one of the ad's characters, a baby with a "milk problem." The company was sued by actress Lindsay Lohan, who was dealing with alcohol issues at the time. The case settled.
Super Bowl advertising has become … well, the Super Bowl of TV advertising, with companies vying to launch new products, increase brand awareness and hopefully dominate post-game conversation with their message.
But in their zeal to make a splash, the ads can skirt the line between copyright infringement and parody, or test other legal boundaries. And even the most straightforward ads require negotiation with networks and talent on the back end. That's where Reed Smith partner Jason Gordon comes in.
|Trust the Process
"At the end of the day, the exciting part about advertising and marketing law is that there's a lot of gray area," Gordon said. "You won't go to prison [for violations], but there is the chance of big, federal litigation."
Gordon, based out of Reed Smith's Chicago office and a partner in the firm's entertainment and media group, said that the Super Bowl is one of the busier times of year for his practice, and with good reason: Super Bowl ads often account for a company's most visible and costly single advertising spend during the year, and everything needs to go as planned.
And that plan begins much earlier than some might think.
"The work starts in late summer," Gordon said. "The discussions start with concepts from the ad agencies, which approach companies who have an interest in buying space at the Super Bowl. Some will pitch really splashy ads with celebrities or movie references, others try to stay on an existing theme, while others take a philanthropic approach."
Gordon said that companies tend to accept more conceptual risk in Super Bowl ads, as they have a chance to really connect with an audience and create a narrative that has a long tail.
"Think of the Budweiser Frogs or the 'Wassup?' campaigns," Gordon said.
|Go Deep for Big Money
The price point for a Super Bowl ad this year is between $2 million for an ad before or after the game and around $5 million to $5.6 million for an in-game ad, which can attract close to 100 million viewers, according to Statistica.
With so much money and potential exposure on the line, Gordon says it is key to have legal counsel involved from the outset to help guide the process.
"It can be a situation where a script seems fine," Gordon said. "But once it is put in front of a screen with music and background, it could cause trouble."
On top of advising the client on litigation risk, Gordon said his team is involved in negotiating with the networks that air the content as well as contract negotiations with celebrities who often dominate Super Bowl ad screen time.
"There are two really big work streaks," Gordon said. "The negotiation of the deal is first. So many celebrities are in Super Bowl ads, you have to deal with their agency, manager and lawyers to make sure they are present and ready for the shoot as well as social media spots, banner ads and B-roll."
That work can be thorny.
"From a publicity perspective, the group that is the most litigious is Hollywood, especially if they are doing look-alikes or sound-alikes," Gordon said.
The next challenge, he said, is trying to look through a script and storyboard and trying to imagine what the finished product will look like before it is shot.
"That is where I will be able to point out what to watch for," he said.
After the client has established the project, negotiated with celebrities and produced a final product, there's still the network to deal with.
"The final review is network clearance," Gordon said. "It's their air, and the networks have specific guidelines." He said he tries to keep the networks in the loop throughout the ad creation process to avoid any last minute hiccups.
"There are certain things I've found networks don't like, such as emergency sounds [sirens, tornado alarms] and swearing covered by a 'bleep' among them," he said.
Even if the company, celebrity actor, ad agency, attorneys and the network all come to a consensus that the ad is on the level, other elements can come into play.
Gordon said the NFL once had an ad pulled after reviewing what had already been accepted by the airing network, much to the chagrin of the company that spent a lot of time, money and energy on the project.
He said he's been working hard to make sure that doesn't happen. Now that the ads have been sold (Fox said it sold out the Super Bowl air back in December 2019 for a February broadcast), he jokingly wondered if anyone would see his work.
"Will anyone read my disclaimers at the bottom of the ad?" he joked.
|Read More
Patriots Owner Robert Kraft Offered Plea Deal in Prostitution Case
Without Ed Hochuli, Who Is the Most Recognizable NFL Lawyer-Referee?
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All'Still More to Be Had': New Chicago Law Firm Leaders Have High Growth Aspirations
6 minute readKirkland and Quinn Emanuel Spar Over Disclosure of Litigation Funder Contracts in Patent Suit Against Google
DLA Piper Leads Big Law in Social Media as More Firms Shun Facebook: Report
5 minute readLaw Firms Mentioned
Trending Stories
- 1Norton Rose Lawyers Accused of Accessing Confidential Material in Internal IT Probe
- 2'The Front Line of Regulating AI': Manatt's Brandon Reilly on CPPA's Move to Adopt New Data Broker and AI Rules
- 3Newsmakers: New Trial Attorney David Young Joins Reynolds Frizzell LLP
- 4The Political Rally as Media Genre
- 5Judges Question 9th Circuit’s Unique Binding Dicta Rule. The Criticism Isn't New.
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250