RSPL Limited - Pro-ease

Recommendation: Not Upheld | Medium: Industry Member

The ASCI had approached the advertiser for its response in addressing the grievances of the complainant and forwarded the details of the complaint, verbatim, to the advertiser with a request to respond to the same. The advertiser was offered an option to seek an Informal Resolution (IR) of the complaint by modifying or withdrawing the claims in the advertisement, or alternately to substantiate the claims with supporting data. The advertiser was also offered an opportunity for a telecon with the ASCI Secretariat, which they did not avail and submitted their response. The advertiser in their response stated that, “The advertisement depicts a scenario where a young woman experiences discomfort and the need to change her regular pad frequently. This scenario is a representation of a possible experience, not a blanket statement about the inadequacy of all regular sanitary napkin(s). Representing different sizes within the same product category is a common and accepted advertising practice, the advertisement clearly identifies the products being shown/ represented (Regular vs. XL) and the criteria for representation (length and absorption). It is pertinent to mention that the Complainant itself has made advertisement on YouTube channel including comparison with ”Regular” pads with “Stayfree Secure Extra-Large” pads (in the regular pads the length of regular/ordinary pads is 230mm as compare to Extra-large). The advertisement does not contain any defamatory statements about the Complainant's product/brand or any other product/brand. Further, as to packaging similarity allegations, it is stated that we have not made any reference to the Complainant’s packaging/ trademark/ trade dress in any manner, it is just a colour of blue packaging with slight yellow in general/ ordinary way, without making any reference of any product/ brand specific.” In support of their response, the advertiser provided snapshots/pictures, YouTube links of the complainant’s advertisement, and snapshots/pictures of packagings of sanitary napkins using blue and yellow colour images. The Consumer Complaints Council (CCC) viewed the YouTube advertisement (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u82PzB018-4) considered the complaint, and the advertiser’s response. The CCC discussed that the advertisement highlights the benefits of XL sanitary napkins for users with heavier menstrual flows, without suggesting that all regular pad users experience leakage or require frequent changes. It does not disparage regular pads but presents the XL pad as a more suitable option for those with specific needs. The CCC further discussed that the advertisement highlights the differences between regular sanitary napkin and XL sanitary napkin, emphasizing that larger pads offer better coverage and absorption. It shows the `Pro-ease Go XL’s’ superior comfort and absorbency, stressing that larger pads are ideal for particular needs. The advertisement uses visual illustrations to show these benefits without targeting any competitor’s brand. The CCC then discussed that the packaging in the advertisement features a blue and yellow color combination that is blurred to prevent direct identification with a specific brand or product. This design is not likely to mislead consumers into believing that the product being compared is of the complainant’s brand. There are similar blue and yellow color packagings commonly available in the market, particularly in the sanitary napkin category, and this color combination cannot be associated with the complainant’s brand. Based on these observations, the CCC concluded that the objections raised - “All Regular Sanitary Napkins are being absolutely and blatantly disparaged”, “Unfair comparison made between our regular sanitary napkin with advertiser’s XL sanitary napkin”, “Slander of our regular sanitary napkin”, are not in contravention of Chapters I and IV of the ASCI Code. This complaint was NOT UPHELD.