Words: 1799
Marketing innovations also use testimonials and endorsements to further their reach to the consumer, the use these in the attempt to make there tools ore credible and reliable In the face of the consumer and also improve the desirability of the product. Sellers have also found that many consumers find a product more appealing when there is a “cash prize” involved. Sellers tend to take the most out of this advantage as they can selling , raffle tickets and other ways of winning major prizes to enhance the desirability of their product .
These are usually very useful ways of bringing in a larger range of consumers wishing to buy this product . Shopper dockets are another way of endorsing there product , they usually rent special offers on the back such as a ; two for one deal at a restaurant or watch a movie for half price . This is mainly used to get the consumers attention and further convince them to buy from the sellers store .
By doing this It gives the consumer more of a reason to buy there products over another companies this is one of the main and most effective ways of using * marketing innovations* in sealing your product . Cash back offers are another of these marketing Innovations which target consumers In a way of bringing more consumers to their products . Cash back offers are a type of rewards program where the cardholder receives a cash rebate equal to a specified percentage of the amount charged to the card on an annual basis as defined In (“Cash Back Definition. Credit Cards – Compare Credit Card Offers at Creditor. Web. 17 July 2011 . ) . Cash back offers are usually only supplied with the purchase of major items such as cars or major electronic appliances _ Cash back offers can also be a time consuming and long process where consumers must know all the conditions to qualify for them . The AC (Australian competition and consumer omission ) are we all complaints about cash back offers are referred to usually about deals with suppliers over information technology .
The AC strives to make sure all consumers are made absolutely clear on the terms and conditions associated with cash back offers , they are also pushing to make all cash back and free offers as transparent as possibly to make sure consumers don’t get confused with the conditions and terms of each . In the case of Catbird Cheapest pity Ltd v. Darrell lea chocolate shops pity Its (legal studies has textbook third edition ,peg 235 ) Catbird Cheapest took Darrell lea housecoat to court for breaching Intellectual property law by using shades of purple more like Catbird and would result in the loss of many consumers in the chocolate industry .
Justice Hereby in the Federal court ruled that ‘ the case would no proceed as Catbird does not own the color purple and therefore does not have and type of “exclusive” reputation in purple relation to chocolate ‘ ( Legal studies textbook third edition , Peggy) . He also added “Darrell Lea is entitled to use purple , or any other color as long as it does not convey to the reasonable consumer the idea that its reduces have some connection with that of Catbird . ( Legal studies textbook third edition , Peggy) The legal responses such as the Trade practices act 1974 2008 (amendment ) (cloth) , Sales of goods act 1923 (news) , Evidence Act 1995 (Cloth), the Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cloth) and the Trade practices amendment act (consumer law ) 2009 were all taken into consideration during the course of the trial due to the high standing nature of both companies within consumer law . These allow All fronts had to be checked before making a final verdict because Catbird accused Darrel Lea f breaching intellectual property law by using shades of purple on the packaging of their products .
These legal response also provide a type of place where people or mainly companies can go to fortify there goods as being theirs and make sure no one else decides to use the way the either provide and portray these goods to the consumer in packaging as we saw in the case of, (Catbird vs. Darrell Lea) or in fact any other form of plagiarism to help indorse another’s product as being theirs . There non legal responses were the Advertising Claims board , The national occupational licensing system , The NEWS Department of fair trading and The breach of standard claims office .
All these non- legal responses provide a further haven for large companies looking to take action at other companies for breaching copyright laws or in most cases breaching trade practices by either , Copying some part of their distribution or selling routines to their consumers or packaging copyright – making their product look similar to that of another companies with the idea of putting consumers off the original product and making there product appeal to them as something that it is not .
Non legal response often provide a more adequate and easy accessible way of helping out companies in need of legal advice or Just giving them an insight in to consumer rules and regulations . The equality of legal response in protecting consumers in the case of Catbird vs. Darrell Lea is good due to the fact that the legal system does endorse equality and this sense that everyone is equal which was showed in this case through the case being *adjourned * even though Catbird being the larger company was expected to win .
The positives of this case where that the larger company didn’t win due to its larger merits . Legal response such as the (The trade marks act 1995 (cloth ) was used in this case as a guide to the main problem of Darrell lea using purple within their packaging , as well as non-legal response such as the Advertising claims board .
Although the found Darrell lea chocolate not guilty the negatives of this was that Darrell lea had to endure court over the simple use of a shade of purple , equality was not Justified in the consumers case due to the a major cooperation such as Catbird being able to sue a smaller cooperation such as Darrell lea over a color which leaves consumers confused and mislead on which chocolate to buy and hence for the consumer to find out what’s going on .
The accessibility of the legal and non-legal response to my case were quite easily accessible , sites such as the AC gives a brief overview on its main homepage In how the consumer can find information about legal and non-legal response towards any marketing innovations case as shown in ; The AC promotes competition and fair trade in the market place to benefit consumers, businesses and the community. It also regulates national infrastructure services.
Its primary responsibility is to ensure that individuals and genuineness comply with the Commonwealth competition, fair trading and consumer protection laws(AC Home. Web. 17 July 2011) . This information is on the main page giving the consumer a quick easy and accessible definition to what the AC are trying to do with there website. Non- legal responses such as The News Department of fair trading have went a long way to ensure consumer satisfaction in everything they buy , they do this by providing and easily accessible website ( http:// www. Radiating. news. Gob. AU/default. HTML) that you can go to , to help you find a way of returning or getting Justice when being sold faulty goods . Most of the problems the NEWS department of fair trading has to deal with are mostly ; cars and electrical devices which are sold faulty to the consumer . The advantages of this non legal response is that it provides the best service to consumers when there in need and that it is very easy to get to and has a deep knowledge in laws and legislations .
They mostly deal with marketing innovations or anything sold to the consumer that is found to be breaching trading laws which was shown in the case of (Catbird vs. Darrell Lea ) by Darrell lea apparently breaching color copyright laws against Catbird . The resource efficiency of the non-legal and legal responses in my case were found to be very efficient due to the many laws and guidelines which were followed during the court hearing of (Catbird vs. Darrell lea ) . The positives of the resource efficiency is that we got a none bias ruling which favored the smaller cooperation of the larger one .
Most laws came into play such as Intellectual property law , which was said to be breached by the Darrel Lea Chocolate cooperation . Justice Hereby saw otherwise and granted that the case be adjured and that Catbird didn’t win the color purple in order for Darrell lea to be breaching intellectual property or any other type of law which protects the consumers of the products from false accusations . Protection and recognition of human rights also came into the case through legal and non-legal responses with the law wanting to protect consumers interests in the respected products . He Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cloth) states that the “A trade mark is a sign used, or intended to be used, to distinguish goods or services dealt with or provided in the course of trade by a person from goods or services dealt tit or provided by any other person ” (“Trade Marks Act 1995. ” Australian Law Students’ Association. Web. 17 July 2011. ) Catbird saw that Darrell lea had breach this law of intellectual property when really they did not . The positive was that the protection and recognition of Darrell Lea was protected due to the fact that this law was not breached .
The communities standards where held up in this case because of Justice being served to major cooperation’s that think they can win every major battle . The advertising claim board helped to protect the individual rights of nonusers during the Catbird vs. Darrell lea case by ensuring them after the actual legal and none legal responses that were held up with laws such as the ( Evidence Act 1995 Catch) which allowed a balance of individual rights with laws put in place to protect them this is the positive that came out of this case , the negative however is that the smaller cooperation had gotten victimized throughout over Just a color.
The application of law was integrated into this case very well , Justice Hereby found that intellectual law was not breached on any kinds of grounds meaning ” A trade ark is a sign used to distinguish a persons goods” (“Trade Marks Act 1995. ” Australian Law Students’ Association. Web. 17 July 2011) . Was in fact not breached in any way or form by the Darrell Lea Chocolate company .