Wimax ad slander?

DesperateDan

Hi all, just saw Wimax's new ad in which that guitar strumming singer says he's been "ripped off by eircom" and now he's choosing the better wimax service. Is this not slanderous, as there's no comparisons drawn on the ad or anything, he just says eircom is a rip off. I thought companies were only allowed to heavily imply how poor other companies were without naming names unless there are facts to back up the claim?

dudara

Moved to Legal Discussion

dudara

Our man in Havana

Does he actually say he was ripped off by eircom?

aidan_walsh

Advert in question.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kaF4wuTLVPU

Given that its a year old, if there was anything actionable about it wouldn't it have happened by now?

P_1

Read something in the paper the other week about Wimax getting a rap on the knuckles over that ad.

smelltheglove

I think I read last week that wimax were ordered to stop the advert after legal action taken by eircom.

Either I did or it was a really weird dream.

moceri

Imagine are blanket advertising as Wi-max has been something of a damp squib.
Rollout has stalled and are currently suing Motorola for 90M

http://www.intomobile.com/2011/03/02/irish-isp-sues-motorola-for-90-million-eur-for-failing-to-put-up-over-100-wi/

Our man in Havana

pithater1 wrote: »

Read something in the paper the other week about Wimax getting a rap on the knuckles over that ad.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/0421/1224295160102.html

DesperateDan

Our man in Havana wrote: »

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2011/0421/1224295160102.html

Thats pretty interesting, same ad alright, so it's still on their youtube channel and I've seen it twice tonight on 3e, so what gives?! Naughty, unprofessional Imagine wimax

johnnyskeleton

moceri wrote: »

Imagine are blanket advertising as Wi-max has been something of a damp squib.
Rollout has stalled and are currently suing Motorola for 90M

http://www.intomobile.com/2011/03/02/irish-isp-sues-motorola-for-90-million-eur-for-failing-to-put-up-over-100-wi/

I made the mistake of getting imagine wi-max. I wonder will I get compensation for its poor performance if they successfully recover from Motorola?

DesperateDan

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

I made the mistake of getting imagine wi-max. I wonder will I get compensation for its poor performance if they successfully recover from Motorola?

Yeah me too, I've had nothing but bad experiences with them, like paying for 7mb broadband and never getting higher than 1 mb. Only stuck with them for another 4 months though!

dvpower

DesperateDan wrote: »

Hi all, just saw Wimax's new ad in which that guitar strumming singer says he's been "ripped off by eircom" and now he's choosing the better wimax service. Is this not slanderous, as there's no comparisons drawn on the ad or anything, he just says eircom is a rip off. I thought companies were only allowed to heavily imply how poor other companies were without naming names unless there are facts to back up the claim?

rip-off (rpôf, -f)
n. Slang 1. A product or service that is overpriced or of poor quality.
2. Something, such as a film or story, that is clearly imitative of or based on something else.
3. A theft.
4. An act of exploitation.

I don't think theres anything slanderous about it. Calling something overpriced or of poor quality is pretty subjective.

234

The test for defamation is something that would lower your reputation in the eyes of reasonable members of society. So even if we all came to our own different conclusions on the exact meaning of 'rip off' in context, if the effect was the same then there would still be a defamation.

Carawaystick

DesperateDan wrote: »

Hi all, just saw Wimax's new ad in which that guitar strumming singer says he's been "ripped off by eircom" and now he's choosing the better wimax service. Is this not slanderous, as there's no comparisons drawn on the ad or anything, he just says eircom is a rip off. I thought companies were only allowed to heavily imply how poor other companies were without naming names unless there are facts to back up the claim?

As it's published it wouldn't be slanderous, it'd be libellous ( which is worse)

Our man in Havana

People would already have a low opinion of certain companies, I doubt any ad like this would make their opinion any worse.

MrPudding

234 wrote: »

The test for defamation is something that would lower your reputation in the eyes of reasonable members of society. So even if we all came to our own different conclusions on the exact meaning of 'rip off' in context, if the effect was the same then there would still be a defamation.

The test for if there is a case if answer is what you say above, but even if the comments do lower your reputation that does not necessarily mean you will be successful. There are various defences, fair comment, for example.

MrP

jaybeeveedub

Carawaystick wrote: »

As it's published it wouldn't be slanderous, it'd be libellous ( which is worse)

no such thing.... just defamatory statements now.

libel and slander and the differences between were removed when they were combined into the "tort of defamation"

234

MrPudding wrote: »

The test for if there is a case if answer is what you say above, but even if the comments do lower your reputation that does not necessarily mean you will be successful. There are various defences, fair comment, for example.

MrP

Yeah, I know. I'd love to see Wimax try to plead honest opinion, fair comment, etc.

jaybeeveedub

...or plain old "truth"..!!!

I know it's broadband here, but €200 to flick a switch in a junction box...!!!