Skip to main content
Log in

Exploring the Legality of Consumer Anti-branding Activities in the Digital Age

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The importance of “brand dilution” is changing with the rise in internet-mediated consumer power and increasing consumer involvement in the brand identity and message creation processes. In light of recent legal rulings, this study re-conceptualizes brand dilution as a matter of counter-posed brand meanings and associations in digital markets. Anti-branding dilution cases from both a blurring and a tarnishment dilution basis are examined through consumer interviews. The results show that consumer anti-branding has less potential for brand dilution, and more potential for brand identity collusion. By addressing both legal and marketing views of the meaning systems associated with the dilution versus collusion perspectives, this study provides an approach for understanding anti-branding dilution discussions and a way to develop better functioning branding exchange systems for digital markets. Consequently, possible changes in future branding ownership issues for digital markets are envisioned.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-2nd-circuit/1498342.html.

  2. http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/01-1015.ZO.html.

  3. http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-2nd-circuit/1498342.html.

  4. http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/metaschool/fisher/domain/tmcases/coca.htm.

References

  • Bailey, A. A. (2004). Thiscompanysucks.com: The use of the internet in negative consumer-to-consumer articulations. Journal of Marketing Communications, 10(3), 169–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Balabanis, G., & Craven, S. (1997). Consumer confusion from own brand lookalikes: An exploratory investigation. Journal of Marketing Management, 13, 299–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beebe, B. (2008). The semiotic account of trademark doctrine and trademark culture in trademark law and theory: A handbook of contemporary research. In G. B. Dinwoodie & M. D. Janis (Eds.), Research handbooks in intellectual property (pp. 42–64). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publisher.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brengman, M., & Pelsmacker, P. D. (2001). The impact of consumer characteristics and campaign related factors on brand confusion in print advertising. Journal of Marketing Communications, 7, 231–243.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cherrier, H. (2009). Anti-consumption discourses and consumer-resistant identities. Journal of Business Research, 62(2), 181–190.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Edelman, S., & Ewing, B. R. (1996). The Federal Trademark Dilution Act of 1995: A litigation perspective. Trademark Reporter, 86, 485–513.

    Google Scholar 

  • Firat, A. F., & Venkatesh, A. (1995). Liberatory postmodernism and the reenchantment of consumption. Journal of Consumer Research, 22(3), 239–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foxman, E. R., Berger, P. W., & Cote, J. A. (1992). Consumer brand confusion: A conceptual framework. Psychology & Marketing, 9(2), 123–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foxman, E. R., Muehling, D. D., & Berger, P. W. (1990). An investigation of factors contributing to consumer brand confusion. Journal of Consumer Affairs, 24(1), 170–189.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gregoire, Y., Laufer, D., & Tripp, T. M. (2010). A comprehensive model of costumer direct and indirect revenge: Understanding the effects of perceived greed and customer power. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 38(6), 738–758.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haase, M., & Kleinaltenkamp, M. (2011). Property rights design and market process: Implications for market theory, marketing theory, and S-D logic. Journal of Macromarketing, 31(2), 148–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harold, C. (2004). Pranking rhetoric: “Culture jamming” as media activism. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 21(3), 189–211.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hatch, M. J., & Schultz, M. (2010). Toward a theory of brand co-creation with implications for brand governance. Journal of Brand Management, 17(8), 590–604.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hegel, G. W. F. (1952). Philosophy of Right, trans. T. Knox. London: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hollenbeck, C. R., & Zinkhan, G. M. (2010). Anti-brand communities, negotiation of brand meaning, and the learning process: the case of Wal-Mart. Consumption, Markets & Culture, 13(3), 325–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Holt, D. B. (2002). Why do brands cause trouble? A dialectical theory of consumer culture and branding. Journal of Consumer Research, 29(1), 70–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Horkheimer, M., & Adorno, T. W. (1996). Dialectic of Enlightenment. New York: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, J. (1997). The philosophy of intellectual property. In A. Moore (Ed.), Intellectual property (pp. 107–177). Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jane, R. M. (1982). Property and personhood. Stanford Law Review, 34, 957–1015.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kapferer, J.-N. (1995). Brand confusion: Empirical study of a legal concept. Psychology & Marketing, 12(6), 551–568.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Katyal, K. S. (2006). Semiotic disobedience. Washington University Law Review, 84(2), 489–571.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katyal, S. K. (2010). Stealth marketing and antibranding: The love that dare not speak its name. Buffalo Law Review, 58, 795–849.

    Google Scholar 

  • Katz, J. A., & Carnahan, A. J. (2001). Battling the ‘CompanyNameSucks.com’ cyberactivists. Intellectual Property & Technology Law Journal, 13(3), 1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kay, J. M. (2006). Strong brands and corporate brands. European Journal of Marketing, 40(7/8), 742–760.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein, N. (1999). No logo: Taking aim at the brand bullies. New York: Picador.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kopp, S. W., & Suter, T. A. (2000). Trademark strategies online: Implications for intellectual property protection. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 19(1), 119–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kozinets, R., & Handelman, J. (2004). Adversaries of consumption: Consumer movements, activism, and ideology. Journal of Consumer Research, 31(3), 691–704.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krishnamurthy, S., & Kucuk, S. U. (2009). Anti-branding on the internet. Journal of Business Research, 62(11), 1119–1126.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kucuk, S. U. (2008a). Negative double jeopardy: The role of anti-brand sites on the internet. Journal of Brand Management, 15(3), 209–222.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kucuk, S.U., (2008b) Consumer exit, voice and power on the internet. Journal of Research for Consumers, 15, http://www.jrconsumers.com/academic_articles/issue_15,_2008.

  • Kucuk, S. U. (2010). Negative double jeopardy revisited: A longitudinal analysis. Journal of Brand Management, 18(2), 150–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kucuk, S. U., & Krishnamurthy, S. (2007). An analysis of consumer power on the internet. Technovation, 27(1/2), 47–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lasn, K. (2000). Culture jam: The uncooling of America. New York: Quill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Loken, B., & John, D. R. (1993). Diluting brand beliefs: When do brand extensions have a negative impact? Journal of Marketing, 57(3), 71–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loken, B., Ross, I., & Hinkle, R. L. (1986). Consumer “Confusion” of origin and brand similarity perceptions. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 5, 195–211.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lovejoy, B. N. (2011). Tarnishing the dilution by tarnishment cause of action: Starbucks Corp. v. Wolfe’s Borough Coffee, Inc. and v. Secret Catalogue, Inc. v. Moseley, compared. Berkeley Technology Law Journal, 26(1), 623–655.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lubochinski, E. J. (2003). Hegel’s secret: Personality and housemark cases. Emory Law Journal, 52, 489–514.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lusch, R. L., & Webster, F. E, Jr. (2011). A stakeholder-unifying, cocreation philosophy for marketing. Journal of Macromarketing, 31(2), 129–134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manning, P. (2010). The semiotics of brand. Annual Review of Anthropology, 39, 33–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, V.-W., Walsh, G., & Yamin, M. (2005). Towards a conceptual model of consumer. Advances in Consumer Research, 32, 143–150.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrin, M., & Jacoby, J. (2000). Trademark dilution: Empirical measures for an elusive concept. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 19(2), 265–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morrin, M., Lee, J., & Allenby, G. M. (2006). Determinants of trademark dilution. Journal of Consumer Research, 33(2), 248–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peterson, R. A., Smith, K. H., & Zerrillo, P. C. (1999). Trademark dilution and the practice of marketing. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 27(2), 255–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Petty, D. R. (2010) The world wide web versus national trademark laws—protecting the brand in global commerce. In international trade and academic research conference (ITARC), London.

  • Petty, D. R. (2012). Using the law to protect the brand on social media sites: A three, “M” framework for marketing managers. Management Research Review, 35(9), 758–769.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poiesz, T. B., & Verhallen, T.M. (1989). Brand confusion in advertising. International Journal of Advertising 8(3), 231–244.

  • Prahalad, C. K., & Ramaswamy, Venkat. (2004). Co-creation experiences: The nest practice in value creation. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 18(3), 5–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pullig, C., Simmons, C. J., & Netemeyer, R. G. (2006). Brand dilution: When do new brands hurt existing brands? Journal of Marketing, 70(2), 52–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Spinello, A. R. (2006). Online brands and trademark conflicts: A Hegelian perspective. Business Ethics Quarterly, 6(3), 343–367.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sweetin, V., Knowles, L. L., Summey, J. H., & McQueen, K. S. (2013). Willingness-to-punish the corporate brand for corporate social irresponsibility. Journal of Business Research, 66(10), 1822–1830.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, C. J., Rindfleisch, A., & Arsel, Z. (2006). Emotional branding and the strategic value of the doppelgänger brand image. Journal of Marketing, 70(1), 50–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tynan, C., McKechnie, S., & Chhuon, C. (2010). Co-Creating value for luxury brands. Journal of Business Research, 63(11), 1156–1163.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Noort, G., & Willemsen, L. M. (2012). Online damage control: The effects of proactive versus reactive webcare interventions in consumer-generated and brand-generated platforms. Journal of Interactive Marketing, 26(3), 131–140.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vargo, S. L. (2009). Toward a transcending conceptualization of relationship: A service-dominant logic perspective. Journal of Business and Industrial Marketing, 24(5/6), 373–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Vargo, S. L., & Lusch, R. F. (2004). Evolving to a new dominant logic for marketing. The Journal of Marketing, 68(1), 1–17.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. Umit Kucuk.

Additional information

The author was a post-doctoral fellow at the Darden Graduate School of Business Administration—University of Virginia. His works appear in Antitrust Bulletin, Journal of Brand Management, Journal of Business Research, Journal of International Consumer Marketing, Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, Marketing Theory, Technovation and many others. The author is a winner of the 2010 “Citation of Excellence” award from Emerald Management Reviews. Some of his articles are also ranked in some of these journals’ most popular and most downloaded articles lists.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kucuk, S.U. Exploring the Legality of Consumer Anti-branding Activities in the Digital Age. J Bus Ethics 139, 77–93 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2585-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-015-2585-5

Keywords

Navigation