Comans, a family-owned Irish wholesale company has had to withdraw stock of its Dutch Gold brand of beer after a legal wrangle with FIFA. Football's governing body contacted the small company in mid-April when it learned the brand was running an on-can promotion offering trips to the World Cup. The brand is brewed for Comans and is sold in all major outlets here including Tesco and Dunnes as well as independent off licences.
Comans also received affidavits from Budweiser, official beer sponsor of the games. The World Cup logo was not used on the cans but a photograph of the trophy was. The words "World Cup" were also used and these are trademark protected by FIFA.
"We simply had no idea they owned the words World Cup so, in the end, we simply had to put our hands up," says Mr Brian Callan, marketing director at Comans. "All the cans were withdrawn in 48 hours and replaced by non-promotional cans - something that I don't think could have been achieved in any other country - because of the incredible support we got from the trade."
The deal struck between FIFA and Comans is that the promotional cans can be put back on the shelves several weeks after the tournament and with the promotion details obliterated. "It's been a huge cost for a small company," says Mr Callan.
This David and Goliath battle is being repeated in other markets, with FIFA employing lawyers in 80 countries to counteract ambush marketing - where a company uses a trademark or associates itself with an event without paying for the official rights to do so.
Individual companies including Budweiser paid sums of €15 million to €30 million to become official sponsors of the 2002 event. After France 1998, FIFA put in place an anti-ambush marketing team, comprising trade mark specialists, commercial lawyers and sports marketing specialists based in Switzerland and in the two host countries, Korea and Japan.
It is not only small, local companies like Comans that are being chased. On June 5th, the team scored a significant victory in an Argentinean court when PepsiCo was ordered to stop using a World Cup-themed advertisement.
The court found that the advertisement would cause confusion among consumers as it suggested a "presumed sponsorship relationship" between PepsiCo and the FIFA World Cup. The advertisement combined the use of the phrase "Tokyo 2002", famous footballers and other football imagery with the logo of PepsiCo, and the court has ordered PepsiCo not to use the advertisement in television, printed media or by any other means.
Particular corporate bugbears during these games have been Pepsi and Nike. Their commercial rivals Coca Cola and Adidas paid in the region of €15 million for the rights to be associated with the World Cup. All four have produced advertising campaigns staring the world's biggest footballing names.
After France 1998, a survey conducted by FIFA found that 66 per cent of people could not remember the names of the sponsors or which of them held official status. This year, according to Sportcal.com, sponsors shelled out an estimated $450 million (€476 million) on the Japan/Korea games and, if that volume of revenue is to be maintained or increased for Germany 2006, likely sponsors will have to be sure that paying FIFA gives them an advantage over competitors.
FIFA's rights protection efforts commenced well ahead of the event, beginning with a worldwide trademark registration programme. The official marks of the event - "FIFA World Cup", the official mascots, the official emblem and the FIFA World Cup Trophy - are now protected by worldwide trademark registration.
FIFA has also implemented an on-site strategy. "On match days, teams monitor specifically targeted locations immediately around the stadia. . . to identify any illegal ambush or counterfeit activity," said Mr Patrick Magyar, FIFA marketing chief executive.
