AT&T's Terrible New TV Branding Confuses Even AT&T

from the DERP dept

AT&T's efforts to dominate the online streaming (and advertising segment) has had a bit of a rocky start. After spending more than $150 billion to acquire both DirecTV and Time Warner in recent years, AT&T's been losing subscribers hand over fist anyway. Part of the problem is that the company acquired so much debt in the course of the deal (AT&T is among the most indebted companies in the world), AT&T's been forced to raise rates on subscribers. Given the rise in streaming competitors, those users are wisely just heading for the exits.

But AT&T's been making some notable missteps on the branding front as well. The company keeps launching, scrapping, and then re-launching so many different TV options it's confusing the hell out of customers. As the company stumbles its way into building one cohesive brand, it has gotten kind of, well, silly:

Apparently AT&T's new TV branding isn't just confusing consumers. It's also confusing AT&T. The company's marketing and support departments appear to have been bungling the names of several new AT&T TV products in marketing and support materials, only compounding consumer confusion. AT&T recently eliminated its DirecTV Now streaming TV brand, and renamed it (quite creatively) "AT&T TV Now." The company also rolled out another completely new service and called it "AT&T TV." The former service is just another streaming app, while the latter service requires a new AT&T set top box and is currently in a glorified beta.

This being the telecom sector, customer support is already kind of an afterthought. But AT&T's confusing branding has taken things to an entirely new level, leaving many AT&T customers in a bizarre, customer service purgatory:

"To make matters even worse, most tech support for AT&T TV Now is labeled AT&T TV on AT&T's website. When you try to contact AT&T TV Now you need to use the contact information for AT&T TV. This has resulted in many of our readers confused about how they contact... AT&T TV Now to ask a question.

AT&T's website does not help. AT&T TV Now is only found if you click on streaming. For a while after the name change, clicking on DirecTV Now in some menus on AT&T's website brought you to AT&T TV [instead of] AT&T TV Now.

Even just this week when AT&T announced a deal with Starz they didn't list AT&T TV Now but listed AT&T TV. When asked about this AT&T said AT&T TV Now was lumped together with AT&T TV.

As we've long noted, telecom companies aren't particularly innovative because they've spent the last few generations as government-protected and pampered monopolies. Fused to the nation's intelligence and law enforcement community, they're the personification of "too big to fail." Their deep lobbying tendrils also mean they enjoy regulatory capture on the state and federal level, making any real accountability for bad behavior a rarity, at best.

Given real competition is alien to them, Verizon and AT&T keep doing face plants as they attempt to erode Google and Facebook online video ad revenues. That's why instead of directly competing or innovating, the telecom sector's first inclination is usually to try and tilt the regulatory playing field or cheat in some fashion. And while these kind of shenanigans have caused plenty of problems in the broader internet and streaming TV ecosystem, those problems would likely be immeasurably worse were the telecom sector actually competent outside of its core competencies (building networks, lobbying to erode competition).

Filed Under: at&t now, branding, hbo, hbo go, streaming, tv
Companies: at&t

Cable Lobbyists Stop Using The Word Cable In Hopes You'll Think Industry Has Evolved

from the song-remains-the-same dept

It often seems like the modern cable industry often goes out of its way to remain decidedly un-modern. Thanks to regulatory capture and limited competition, the sector consistently ranks among the very worst industries in terms of customer satisfaction and support. And whether it's opposing net neutrality or fighting efforts to bring competition to the cable box, you'll often find the industry's top lobbying organization -- the National Cable and Telecommunications Association at the forefront of fighting nearly every pro-consumer initiative that comes down the pike.

That's why it's more than a little amusing to see the NCTA announce this week that it's eliminating the word "cable" from its branding and overall vernacular, apparently as an attempt to modernize the cable sector's image in the Netflix age. According to a statement by the NCTA, the migration away from even using the word cable (despite coaxial very much remaining in use) is a reflection of "how the marketplace is no longer defined by silos of the past." This is how former FCC boss turned top cable lobbyist Michael Powell explained the shift:

"Just as our industry is witnessing an exciting transformation driven by technology and connectivity, NCTA’s brand must reflect the vibrancy and diversity of our members,” Powell said. “While our mission to drive the industry forward remains the same, our look now reflects a renewed proactive and energized spirit."

And by "driving the industry forward," Powell of course means supporting initiatives that do the exact opposite.

Most recently that has included using a massive sound wall of disinformation (including some help from the US Copyright Office and the likes of Jesse Jackson) to demonize attempts to bring competition to the cable box. The NCTA has also been busy working overtime to derail the FCC's attempt to apply some relatively basic privacy protections to the cable sector, has also supported protectionist state laws that hinder broadband competition, and has even fought raising the base definition of broadband to 25 Mbps. "Proactive and energized," indeed.

And while the cable industry is quick to argue it's facing more direct competition than ever before, the reality is notably different. As AT&T and Verizon give up on unwanted DSL customers, it's creating a stronger cable monopoly than ever before in many areas. As cable providers consolidate and their telco competitors crumble, cable is seeing 99% of the broadband net additions each quarter. The end result is a cable industry that intends to take full advantage of this lack of competition to impose draconian usage caps on consumer broadband connections in the hopes of thwarting Internet video competitors like Netflix.

All told it's going to take a lot more than a vernacular change to shift consumer and cross industry perception away from the reality that the cable industry -- and specifically the NCTA -- is an anti-consumer, anti-innovation, antiquated turf protection machine.

Filed Under: branding, cable, lobbyists, marketing, tv
Companies: ncta

Sensible Canadian Trademark Ruling Takes Overall Impression Of Branding Into Account

from the well-done dept

We talk so much here about silly trademark disputes, often times resulting in equally silly court rulings, that, every once in a while, it's probably worth the effort to point out when a court gets things exactly right. For this, we travel up to Canada, where a Federal Court judge presided over a trademark dispute between Pacific Western Brewing and Cerveceria del Pacifico over the branding of their brews. At issue was the labels on packaging for PWB's Pacific Pilsner and Cerveceria's Pacifico Clara. PWB argued at court that the branding and language was too similar and would confuse customers. Here are samples of each beer's branding.

So, yeah, other than roughly similar uses of the word "Pacific", there's not a whole lot of similarity here. Normally, this is about when we'd hold our collective breaths and wait to see if the court comes down with a sensible ruling based on the likelihood of customer confusion, or if the court instead chooses the over-protectionist route, focusing on the common language and nothing else. In this case, Justice Luc Martineau appears to have gotten every last bit of it right.

Martineau said the first impression given by the label Cerveceria uses for its Pacifico brand "is of its obviously foreign origin" and that it's "highly stylized, with many distinctive design elements, including strong and contrasting colours and font in red, gold, blue, green and yellow." He further said the label "differs visually, phonetically, and semantically" from all of the marks PWB uses for its Pacific brands of beers.

Martineau also dismissed as without merit PWB's argument that contrary to a statement on the register, Cerveceria del Pacifico was not first sold in Canada as early as April 1986.He noted that an affidavit from Cerveceria stating the beer was introduced at Expo '86, where it was sold at a Mexican restaurant called Ole Cantina, was not challenged by PWB counsel. By December 1989, Pacifico was listed with the B.C. Liquor Distribution branch and in August 1990, a registration protecting the mark was issued.

"The delay of almost 25 years before attempting to invalidate the registration weighs heavily against a finding of confusion," Martineau said of PWB's action.

Let it all wash over you like a cool breeze on a hot summer day. The court took into account, in its words, the overall impression of the branding, which is another way of assessing the likelihood of customer confusion. Having found none, the judge then moved to dismiss PWB's case, stopping only briefly to ding them for claiming this was an issue after a couple of decade's worth of peaceful coexistance. Add to all of this the fairly common place a word like "Pacific" has in our parlance and it's easy to understand the judge's reasoning.

Still, we've been stung enough to times to make this worth a brief bit of applause.

Filed Under: branding, canada, confusion, pacific, pacifico, trademark
Companies: cerveceria, pwb

How Snowboarders Are Waving Company Logos In The IOC's Face... And There's Nothing It Can Do About It

from the the-corporate-promotion-that-got-away dept

The International Olympics Committee has this "branding" thing down cold. (No pun intended. The IOC is just as obnoxious during the Summer Olympics.) Everything that doesn't belong to an Official Sponsor has its logo covered (including bathroom fixtures!) until the multi-ring circus of sports (and quasi-sports) folds up the last multimillion dollar tent and blows town.

The IOC is the ultimate control freak. This maniacal desire to cleanse the Games of anything not directly related to its corporate sponsors often results in the sort of behavior you'd normally associate with severe misanthropy. Hobbyist knitters get slapped with C&Ds. A 30-year-old restaurant is forced to change its name. A prominent news outlet has to build its own internal Starbucks in order to escape drinking nothing but the Official Coffee of the Olympics, which is crafted each day to the searing hot specifications of hallowed coffee mecca… McDonalds.

Each and every form of IP protection has been abused by the IOC. Bogus takedown notices/C&Ds are as much a part of the Olympic heritage as lighting the torch or channel-surfing during the figure skating events. The IOC's rules even provide strict regulations for wearing the logos of the official sponsors, not to mention the sponsors who actually footed the bill so these athletes could take part in the Games.

But, as the New York Times points out, even a finely-tuned branding machine like the IOC can be defeated with a little creativity.

The International Olympic Committee, leery of spoiling the canvas, has a 33-page book filled with detailed restrictions on logos. It dictates the size and placement of them on everything from team uniforms at the opening ceremony to the emblems on a skier's gloves and the stickers on a bobsledder's helmet. Observers might go the entire Olympics and not notice them.

At least until the snowboarders and skiers go airborne.

The bottom of them may be the most prominent billboards at the Winter Games, a bit of a twist of guerrilla marketing. When someone such as the snowboarder Shaun White flies through the air, cameras often catch the underside of his board, on which Burton, the name of its manufacturer, is spread in large, bold letters. Those images flash across television screens and are published around the world.

Eight of the 12 finalists in the men's halfpipe competition rode Burton boards. All of them went upside down.

The board makers claim this isn't intentional and, indeed, it probably isn't. But what a fortuitous coincidence. Snowboards have normally featured artwork and company logos on the bottom of the board and with riders more technically adept than ever, the chances of a company's airborne logo being splashed across the screen continue to increase.

What can the IOC do about this? Nothing really, unless it wants to rewrite the rulebook. As the New York Times points out, competition snowboards are roughly identical to the ones sold to the public. This makes the company-centric artwork part of the equipment itself, rather than something added especially for Olympic competitors, which would run afoul of the guidelines.

"The identification of the manufacturer may be carried as generally used on products sold through the retail trade during the period of 12 months prior to the Games," the rules read.

So, if Burton makes a board with Burton written across the bottom of it during the preceding year, and a competitor splashes Burton all over during his or her run, there's not much the IOC can do, other than perhaps stare sadly at all of the toilets with covered-up logos and compose takedown letters for crocheting enthusiasts halfway around the world.

Filed Under: branding, cease and decist, olympics, sponsorship
Companies: ioc

Zynga Thinks You Might Confuse Having Casual Sex With Playing A Scrabble Knockoff, Because It's 'With Friends'

from the trademark-with-friends dept

You may recall that Zynga was once a company that made social media games, occasionally by taking games other people had made and repackaging them. You likely also remember them for their Words With Friends app that briefly reminded everyone why they hated Scrabble. Well, things haven't been going so well for the company since its IPO, with share prices falling roughly seventy percent. And now, as we have seen in the past, the relatively aged internet company has decided to go the lawsuit route instead of competing in its own marketplace.

And thank the maker for that, because that's how I get to report to you that Zynga is suing Bang With Friends, the app that lets you bang (BANG!) your social media contacts.

The company “selected the name ‘Bang With Friends’ for its casual sex matchmaking app with Zynga’s game trademarks fully in mind,” according to the complaint. The name infringes a trademark covering games such as “Words With Friends” and “Chess With Friends,” according to the filing.

Zynga seeks a court order barring the company from using the name “Bang With Friends” in connection with any social-networking applications in the U.S. and unspecified damages.

See, while there was once a time when Zynga's games spread across everyone's Facebook pages much like a sexually transmitted disease, it's kind of hard to imagine most people thinking Zynga wanted you to bump uglies with that one girl you passed a couple times in your high school hallway. But even if you want to make the argument of brand confusion, it's somewhat ridiculous for a company that played fast and loose with intellectual property in the past to now be using it as a weapon to get monetary damages.

Filed Under: bang with friends, branding, trademark, with friends, words with friends
Companies: zynga

DailyDirt: Make The Logos Bigger, Better

from the urls-we-dig-up dept

Logos can convey all kinds of messages -- and instill a sense of confidence or demonstrate a lack of attention to detail. Some logos are fun. Others are serious. Some company logos don't change very much over a long period of time, but others seem to change with every passing design fad. Some logo re-designs are more successful than others. Here are just a few interesting logo collections of some branding campaigns that you might recognize.

• SB Nation's network of 300 blogs redesigned all their logos for a re-launch -- with just a single designer, Fraser Davidson, in 7 weeks. Designing 300 logos is hard enough, but add in the complication that none of these logos should in any way infringe upon their related sports teams' official trademarks.... [url]
• Imagine some popular corporate logos redesigned for a hipster blog or startup. You don't have to imagine it, there's a Tumblr blog for it. [url]
• The evolution of corporate logos is kinda fascinating. Apple's first logo in 1976 is really different from its current minimalistic logo. [url]
• Some logos have hidden messages in them. The Big Ten collegiate conference logo has a little nod to the fact that there are actually eleven teams in its organization. [url]

If you'd like to read more awesome and interesting stuff, check out this unrelated (but not entirely random!) Techdirt post.

Filed Under: branding, design, logos, marketing, messaging
Companies: apple, pepsi

DailyDirt: Facebook Facebook Facebook...

from the urls-we-dig-up dept

There's a big IPO coming up that should create a few more Silicon Valley billionaires. Back when Google went public, there were lots of folks joking about how business models were all going to be based on advertising. Just add ads, and your last step would most definitely be "profit." That joke got old, but it doesn't look like business models based on ads have. (At least, not for Facebook.. or Twitter.. or Foursquare...)

• GM hasn't been impressed by the performance of its Facebook ad campaigns. Is it always the poor musician who blames his instrument? [url]
• A bunch of Facebook advertisers say that it can be difficult to pinpoint all the benefits of social networking ads, but getting more "likes" seems to quantify improving brand awareness in an easily-understood way. This is why there will never be a "dislike" button, though. [url]
• Small businesses are still trying to figure out whether or not Facebook ads are worthwhile. Either way, there appears to be more publicity in having a nice story about how Facebook ads don't really have a great return on investment... [url]
• To discover more interesting advertising-related content, check out what's floating around on StumbleUpon. [url]  

By the way, StumbleUpon can recommend some good Techdirt articles, too.

Filed Under: ads, advertising, branding, ipo, roi, social network
Companies: facebook, gm

DailyDirt: Leggo My Logo...

from the urls-we-dig-up dept

Shakespeare wrote: What's in a name? That which we call a rose. By any other name would smell as sweet. -- but how much does a company's name really matter? Here are a few quick links on corporate logos and some branding twists.

• Graham Smith is swapping the names behind various logos in an ongoing project -- that looks a bit confusing at times. Modified logos are fun -- hopefully, though, the artists behind them won't be sued for trademark violations.... [url]
• The ninth annual LogoLounge report on logo trends is out, covering 2011. This year's colors are lighter and seem to include a lot of leaves. [url]
• Graphic designers from 2007 might remember this catchy song with the refrain: "Make The Logo Bigger!" "I don't wanna tell you how to do your job, but could you make the logo bigger?" [url]
• Coca-cola is going to make its Diet Coke logo so big -- that it won't quite fit on the can. Thankfully, they didn't mess with the formula for Diet Coke. [url]
• To discover more interesting advertising-related content, check out what's floating around on StumbleUpon. [url]  

By the way, StumbleUpon can recommend some good Techdirt articles, too.

Filed Under: branding, diet coke, graphic design, logo
Companies: coca-cola, logolounge