There is a growing consensus that comparative advertising has the potential to reduce barriers to entry and increase competition. Nevertheless, in actual practice comparative advertising in most countries, and particularly in those which are the least developed, is either very limited or non-existent. This paper describes the strikingly contrasting regulatory approaches to the problem in Europe, Latin America; especially in Chile; and the United States. This has enabled us to analyze the gap that exists in the fundamental principles as set forth by regulatory theory and practice. The paper describes the causes for the paradox existing in the discourse of Chilean jurisprudence, in that it over emphasizes the benefits of comparative advertising and its practice, but limits it. We identify the elements, which, in our opinion, are excessive to limit comparative advertising, and we put forth the arguments in favor of the need to act so as to attenuate the excessive restrictions currently in place.
Download Info
To download:
If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the
proper application to
view it first. Information about this may be contained
in the File-Format links below. In case of further problems read
the IDEAS help
page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS
site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Publisher Info
Article provided by Escuela de Administracion. Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile. in its journal ABANTE.
References listed on IDEAS Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.: