Part 4 of AudreyGrey’s IP Series
When the final whistle blew on the 2026 FIFA World Cup, the headlines were not only about Argentina, Messi, or Mbappé. One of the most talked-about stories was the lengths to which FIFA went to remove or conceal branding from companies that had not paid to be there. Stadium names were even temporarily changed or covered to ensure that only paying sponsors got publicity. Levi’s managed to turn its logo cover into a brand identifier, transforming the restrictive rule into a catalyst for a viral online campaign that promoted its brand against all odds. Essentially, a successful ambush marketing campaign.[1]
It sounds almost harmless, even a little admirable. A company that “ambushes” a major event is, after all, just being clever, finding a way to ride the wave of excitement without spending the tens of millions that official sponsors do. But behind that cleverness lies a real commercial and legal problem. Official sponsorship spots for the 2026 World Cup were estimated to cost anywhere from thirty-five million ($35M) to over two hundred million dollars ($200M).[2] When a rival brand manages to create the same impression of association without paying a cent for the privilege, it does not just annoy the official sponsor. It undermines the very reason why sponsorship exists.
This raises a set of questions worth taking seriously: What exactly counts as ambush marketing, and what forms can it take? What happens when ambush marketing occurs outside sports: at concerts, product launches, or elections? When does a clever marketing tip over into something a court would call unfair competition? And, practically, how should a brand run an ambush campaign without crossing the line, protect itself from being ambushed, or respond if it happens to them? This article addresses each of these in turn.
What is Ambush Marketing Actually?
At its core, ambush marketing is about association without authorisation. A business tries to connect itself, in the mind of the consumer, with the goodwill, excitement, and audience of an event it has not paid to sponsor, or with another brand without permission. It is not theft in the everyday sense, and it is not always illegal. It teeters between opportunistic creativity and free riding on someone else’s investment.
Marketing scholars and IP practitioners typically describe several recognizable ambush marketing strategies. We will focus on just five:
- Predatory Ambushing: This is the most aggressive form of ambush marketing where a brand directly targets another brands event or marketing campaign. It is sometimes called “ambush by intrusion”. Here, the predatory brand physically places itself in or near the event space, on billboards outside the event space, on shirts worn by spectators/ attendees, or through stunts staged where cameras are guaranteed to catch them. During the 2010 World Cup in South Africa, Bavaria, a beer brand, procured 36 female spectators to show up in matching bright orange dresses. The women were removed from the stadium, creating controversy about whether the brand colors alone without a logo violated FIFA’s rules. The discourse brought the Bavaria a lot of unpaid world cup related publicity, regardless, much to FIFA’s chagrin.
Predatory ambushes can also take the form of jabs at a competitor as a publicity stunt. Executed properly, it leads to humorous advertising wars. The Audi versus BMW Santa Monica Billboard War in 2009 is a well-known example. Burger King and McDonald’s are also frequently taking jabs at each other. Not to mention Coke versus Pepsi. But when it lands wrongly, it can lead to false advertisement suits or even defamation.
ii. Coattail ambushing: This time, the company sponsors something adjacent to the main event, such as an individual athlete, a team, or a broadcast, in order to imply a broader connection to the event itself. Puma executed this flawlessly in the Rio Olympics in 2016. Usain Bolt had bolted over the finish line in 9.81 seconds, winning gold in the 100m race. He lifted up his golden shoes in his iconic celebratory style. All the cameras scrambled to capture him (and the shoes). Seconds later, Puma’s marketing team flooded the internet with pictures of the same shoes with the tag, #ForeverFastest in line with its #ForeverFaster branding. Puma’s share value grew over 23% by the end of 2016, and it rode that wave for 4 whole years. While we are not saying that was the sole reason for it, it definitely played a role.
iii. Symbolic Allusion: Some brands would use similar images, colors, symbols, or themes associated with the event (anything apart from the logo). A beverage company might run a campaign built around “the beautiful game” during a football tournament without ever saying which tournament it means. The public fills in the gap. This is a slippery slope that often leads to trademark infringement
iv. Promotional Presence: Brands who do this simple set up promotional activities near the event location without explicitly mentioning. In June 2024, Apple launched its first-ever retail store in Malaysia. Apple bought all the advertising rights in The Exchange TRX mall where the shop was located so that no other brands would compete with it. Samsung simply bought the subway station leading to the store and saturated it with Samsung galaxy adverts. On the launch date, every potential purchaser, tech reviewer or journalist was forced to walk through Samsung’s rebranded “TRX Samsung Galaxy Station” to get to the store launch. Naturally, Samsung stole the attention. Sometimes, these play out as humorous advertising wars. At other times, can lead to Intellectual Property Right Infringements, especially when a trademark or brand identifier is used without permission.
v. Self-ambushing: This is when a brand agrees not to distribute branded merchandise at an event and then turns around to do just that. Heinz did it in the 2026 world cup. Heinz was not a sponsor so it could not sell branded ketchup at the games. So, it blacked out its logo, run a social media campaign showing the bottles with the Heinz logo covered with black duct tape with the caption, “It still has to be …” Additionally, Heinz introduced the “penalty packets,” unbranded packets of ketchup and mustard shaped like the referee’s red and yellow cards. These campaigns got everyone talking about Heinz without technically breaking FIFA’s “clean zones” rule. This type of ambushing must be done carefully otherwise it could lead to contractual and regulatory liability.
What unites all of these is that the ambushing brand pays nothing to the event or campaign organizer yet benefits from the audience that the organizer and its official sponsors have built.
Laws Governing Ambush Marketing in Ghana: The Sports Act and Regulations
Very few countries have legislation that specifically targets ambush marketing. Ambush marketing rules are typically designed and enforced by sporting event organizers like FIFA, the Olympics Committee or the NFL (for the Superbowl) because large sporting events experience a disproportionately higher incidence of ambush marketing. Ghana is therefore an outlier with its Sports Act, 2016 (Act 934) and Sports Regulations, 2023 (LI 2477).
Act 934 defines ambush marketing in section 27(5) as
“…connecting a person’s products with a particular sporting event in the minds of potential customers, without the consent or awareness of the organizers of the event, in order to increase sales, gain media attention and publicity and without having to pay sponsorship for the event.”
This definition is broad enough to encompass most of the strategies described above, provided the target is a sporting event. The Act is even more unique because instead of compensating the event organizer, it criminalizes ambush marketing at sporting events. So, as a director of a company, you could end up with a criminal record, spending time in jail (1 month – 5 years), or paying hefty fines (GHS 60,000 – GHS 240,000) because your marketing manager executed a flawed ambush marketing strategy.
With such high stakes, it is important to know what activities are prohibited under the Act and the Regulations. Ambush marketing must happen at a protected event for it to be a crime. A protected event is a sports event which is held in public, of public interest, attracts public attention, is newsworthy, financed by the government, by the private sector, or through a public – private partnership (PPP) or has commercial sponsorship.
For a business planning an ambush marketing campaign at a protected event, here is a comprehensive list of activities to avoid:
1. Publishing, televising, broadcasting, displaying, or communicating a statement, mark or image of a sporting event, or authorizing any of these things to be done without the written authorization of the event organisers.
2. Selling Tickets without a permit
3. Using Tickets as Prizes
4. Donating Tickets for commercial gain
5. Going on to the field of play to during a protected event
6. Setting up an unauthorized booth at the venue
7. Attending the event without authorization. Please note that if discovered, an unauthorized person can be asked to leave, and their personal information may be collected by a security officer or people authorized by the event organisers. If that person refuses to leave, that refusal to leave constitutes a separate offence. Giving false information is also an offence.
8. Flying a drone or otherwise intruding on the airspace one day before the event or on the day of the event.
9. Playing a sound that interferes with the event
10. Setting up any booths or advertisements within the event’s clean zone. (The clean zone is a defined area within the vicinity of the event where only official sponsors are permitted to advertise. Ghana, so far, has not defined the radius of its clean zones. For the Olympics, it can sometimes be as wide as a 5km radius. The event organizer can even remove pre-existing advertisements if that brand is not a sponsor.)
11. Misleading advertisement that incorrectly claims official association with the event.
12. Any publication that tarnishes the integrity of the event organizer
13. Even online campaigns are policed.
“A person shall not behave in a way that adversely affects or interferes with the commercial rights; or the intellectual property rights owned or controlled by the sponsor of the protected sporting event or the event organizer.” (Regulation 38(1)(e).
This includes printing paraphernalia with official logo or other brand identifiers, or making miniature trophies or mascots.
An exception is made for news, panel discussion, or criticism for the benefit of the general public. This is the sweet spot for an ambush marketing campaign.
From the list above, it is clear that most forms of direct ambush marketing are not advisable. Short of news, indirect forms like coat tailing, well executed symbolic allusions, or online friendly banter with the event sponsors are more likely succeed without liability.
Ambush Marketing Laws Beyond Sports: The Role of IP
Act 934 is explicit about its scope. It protects sporting events. A music festival, awards night, product launch, religious convention, or a political rally falls entirely outside its scope. Outside of the Sports Act, Ghana does not have a general law on Ambush Marketing. This does not mean Ghanaian law has nothing to say about it. It simply means that the analysis shifts from a specific statute to general intellectual property rights and competition principles.
On the competition front, the Protection Against Unfair Competition Act, 2000 (Act 589) is instructive. Section 1 of Act 589 makes it an act of unfair competition for any business practice to cause, or be likely to cause, confusion with another person’s enterprise or its activities. It also flags conduct that misleads the public about the characteristics of a business, or that discredits a competitor’s business.
When that confusion or misdirection arises in relation to a trademark, whether registered or not, a trade name, a business identifier, copyrighted material, or product design, it can give rise to actions for intellectual property right infringement.
If a business uses another business’s registered mark, logo, or brand name without permission, the Trademarks Act, 2004 (Act 664) provides a straightforward infringement action. Where the mark is unregistered, the common law tort of passing off applies. It is important to note that passing off is generally harder to prove since the claimant must establish existing goodwill, a misrepresentation, and resulting damage. Distinctive packaging, staging, or visual presentation that an ambushing brand imitates may also attract protection under the Industrial Designs Act, 2003 (Act 660). And where the ambush plays out through misleading digital advertising, a false advertisement claim may be supported under the Electronic Transactions Act, 2008 (Act 772) which requires online advertisements to be accurate.
In addition to these laws and IP rights, and the general principles on consumer protection, and sector regulators such as the Food and Drugs Authority, for regulated products, and the Gaming Commission, for gaming-related promotions, also police the sector for infringing advertisements.
The Litmus Test for Ambush Marketing that Crosses into Unfair Competition
Not every campaign that references an event is unlawful. There is a meaningful difference between a brand that simply times a generic, thematically relevant advert to coincide with a big event, and a brand that actively creates the false impression that it is officially connected to that event. The first is successful ambush/ competitive marketing. The second is where the law starts to take an interest.
After observing the pattern of successfully prosecuted anti-ambush marketing claims, we have put together these four questions that test whether the campaign straddles into unfair competition or not:
1. Would a reasonable consumer believe, even mistakenly, that the brand is an official sponsor or partner? This is the central question under section 1 of Act 589. The test is not whether every consumer is deceived, but whether confusion is a real and likely outcome given how the campaign is presented.
2. Does the campaign directly use the event’s name, logo, mascot, or officially licensed imagery without authorization? This moves a campaign from ambush marketing into straightforward trademark or copyright infringement, which is easier to prove and easier to stop.
3. Are you making an unsubstantiated claim of superiority to a competitor or claims of inferiority of the competitor? This usually leads to false advertisement suits.
4. Are you breaching any contractual obligations or statutory rules?
The Strategy: Running a lawful ambush campaign
A well-run ambush campaign is built around association with the mood of an event, not misrepresentation of a relationship with it. A few practical guardrails help keep a campaign on the right side of the law.
1. Never use protected names, logos or official marks.
2. Speak to the occasion, not the event. Reference the general theme rather than the specific event/ brand. Humour, cultural relevance and timing do far more work than direct reference ever could. A genuinely creative ambush campaign does not need the audience to believe it is officially connected to succeed. If the marketing only works because people think the brand is a sponsor, that is a signal the campaign is relying on implied affiliation rather than creativity.
3. Avoid the physical and digital clean zones. For sporting events, keep clear of the venue’s immediate surroundings if the organizer has published clean zone restrictions, and avoid using official event hashtags or tagging the organizer’s accounts in a way that implies endorsement.
4. Obtain legal advice before you launch. A short review of your marketing campaign against Act 934 (where sports is involved), Act 589, and the Trademarks Act, is far cheaper than an injunction, a fine, imprisonment, a corporate scandal, a damaged relationship with an organizer/ sponsor, or judgment debts.
The Strategy: Preventing an Ambush
For a brand that has paid for official rights, prevention matters more than cure. A few measures consistently make the difference:
1. Negotiate enforcement rights into the sponsorship contract: A sponsorship agreement should expressly obligate the organizer to police clean zones, pursue ambush marketers, and give the sponsor a seat at the table when enforcement decisions are made.
2. Register trademarks early and register broadly: Registered rights under the Trademarks Act are far easier and faster to enforce than passing off claims built on unregistered goodwill.
3. Monitor actively, not reactively: Track social media, physical advertising near the venue, and competitor campaigns in the run-up to the event. Ambush campaigns are usually most damaging in the days immediately before and during an event, when there is little time to respond.
4. Build a rapid response plan: Have counsel and a communications plan ready before the event starts, so that if an ambush does occur, the sponsor can seek an injunction, send a cease and desist, or coordinate with the organizer within hours rather than weeks.
5. Out-engage: Some of the best protection comes from activation, competitions, fan experiences, athlete access, that a non-sponsor simply cannot replicate. A strong activation campaign makes an ambush pointless in the first place.
6. Enforce tactically: Heavy handed enforcement can sometimes generate more attention for the ambushing brand than a lighter touch would have. Weigh the publicity cost of enforcement, not just its legal merits, before acting.
The Strategy: Surviving an Ambush
A sponsor or event organizer who discovers an ambush campaign in Ghana has several possible routes:
1. If you cannot beat them join them.
Some ambushes are so good, it makes sense to lean into it and maximize it for your brand as well. The Audi v BMW Santa Monica Billboard wars benefited both companies, even though it started as predatory ambush by Audi. Same can be said for the British and Norwegian Airways bet during the 2026 World Cup. Other airlines capitalized on the engagement, by posting witty comments on their posts and consequently bought themselves free publicity at the cost of a few well-timed words.
When joining them is not an option…
2. Prosecute them
For protected sporting events, the organizer can report the conduct to the National Sports Authority and have the offender prosecuted criminally under section 27(3) of the Sports Act. A conviction carries the fine and custodial penalties discussed earlier, and each day the ambush continues can be treated as a fresh offence, which gives an organizer real leverage to demand an immediate stop. This however does not provide monetary compensation to the organizer.
3. Issue a cease-and-desist letter.
This is a relatively low-cost warning which sometimes is sufficient to stop the act so that no further action is required.
4. Seek an injunction.
This is available under the Protection Against Unfair Competition Act, the Trademark Act, the Copyright Act, the Patent Act, and the High Court (Civil Procedure) Rules for IP infringement, trespassing, and nearly any other unwanted behaviour.
5. Sue for damages.
This monetary compensation that the court would award for a breach of contract, or IP right infringement, or other unfair business practices.
6. Demand Specific Performance of the Contract.
As a sponsor, if the organizer has failed to protect your exclusivity as promised, you can force them to act under the sponsorship agreement. This does not affect any claim against the ambushing brand directly.
7. False Advertisement Claim
File a false advertisement claim if your brand becomes the target of derogatory/ demeaning remarks from a competitor
8. Involve the Regulator
Depending on the industry involved, a complaint to the relevant regulator, the Food and Drugs Authority for food, beverage and pharmaceutical advertising, or the Gaming Commission for gaming-related promotions, can add pressure alongside a formal legal claim.
9. Issue a Public Communique
Public communication correcting the record with fans and the media, done carefully so as not to amplify the ambush campaign further, can also limit the commercial damage while legal remedies proceed.
Conclusion
Ambush marketing rests at the uncomfortable yet fascinating junction of creativity and law. The 2026 World Cup showed, on a global stage, just how far an organizer like FIFA will go to protect the sponsors who fund its business model, and how that protection can sometimes generate more attention for the brand it was meant to silence. Ghana’s approach is narrower in scope but sharper in its teeth where it applies: Act 934 turns ambush marketing at a sporting event into a criminal offence with real financial and custodial consequences. Outside sports, the protection is less direct but still present. It is built from the general principles of unfair competition, and IP protection, particularly trademark law rather than a single dedicated statute.
For brands, the lesson is not to avoid the space entirely. Clever, well-timed marketing around a major event remains one of the most effective tools available, and the law leaves plenty of room for it. The lesson is to know exactly where to draw the line.
[1]Ambush marketing and the FIFA World Cup. https://www.businessweekly.co.uk/posts/ambush-marketing-and-the-fifa-world-cup-when-covering-up-brands-creates-more-brand-exposure
[2]Playing by the rules. https://www.burges-salmon.com/articles/102n2y7/playing-by-the-rules-ambush-marketing-and-legal-risk-at-the-fifa-world-cup-2026/
Authors: Clara Mettle-Nunoo & Bernard Darkwah
You can download the article here