What is it?

The International Olympic Committee (IOC) defines ambush marketing as: “All intentional and unintentional attempts to create a false or unauthorized commercial association with the Olympic Movement or the Olympic Games”.

The IOC has an array of intellectual property rights in their name, the Olympic symbol, ‘London 2012‘ etc., and they make no secret of the fact that they will enforce these if anyone uses them without consent. They do this to protect the enormous revenues that lucrative sponsorship deals will bring.

The British Government, in order to protect its £9.3bn investment, has also enacted a weighty Act of Parliament.

The Olympics is a lean, mean moneymaking machine—and nobody’s going to steal an unfair advantage.

Trevor Beattie, founder of the London-based advertising and PR agency BMB, has a more relaxed attitude toward ambush marketing. “What harm is done if ambush marketing is cheeky and makes people smile?” he asks. “It’s not gate-crashing the party; it’s just pressing its face up against the window”.

No doubt he is thinking of the antics of organizations like Puma. Although Reebok was the official sponsor of the Atlanta Olympics, the British sprinter Linford Christie attended a press conference wearing contact lenses that prominently displayed a Puma logo, thereby generating considerable buzz for the brand, to the chagrin of Reebok.

And in the ‘97 New York Marathon five aeroplanes appeared overhead and wrote MERCEDES BENZ in the sky—despite the fact that Toyota was the event’s official sponsor.

According to London law firm Lewis Silkin LLP, Ambush marketing is “an attempt by an unauthorized party to take advantage of the high media profile of an event at the expense of another business’s (usually a rival) official association without paying any licence or sponsorship fees to the organizers”.

And advertisers beware. Lewis Silkin points out that even a seemingly benign strapline as “Come to London in 2012″ could potentially give rise to criminal liability. The firm therefore advises that brand owners and advertisers should ensure that any advertising that references—even obliquely—the London Games, is given careful consideration.

So, ambush marketing: an insolent but largely harmless attempt to tweak your rival’s nose: or a cynical raid on his marketing investment? A bit of cheek: or downright theft?