FINE UPON UAB „EUROINVESTICIJOS” FOR THE PROHIBITED COMPARATIVE ADVERTISING

The Competition Council having in its sitting considered the issue of the compliance of actions of UAB „Euroinvesticijos“ with the requirements of the Law on Advertising, concluded that the company concerned has violated the provisions of Article 6 of the Law on Advertising. UAB „Euroinvesticijos“ was subjected for a pecuniary fine of LTL 15,000 for the use of prohibited advertising.

The advertising statement disseminated by UAB „Euroinvesticijos“ and considered by the Competition Council to constitute prohibited comparative advertising ran as follows: „Most traders in IT products generate surplus profits from the sale of computer hardware to retail buyers. The profits thus generated users are used to built luxurious trade centres (coming as a surprise even to Westerners) or to commission purposeful and extremely costly promotion actions misleading the buyers <...>“. As a complement to this advertising the company was, by using computer graphics comparing the prices of computers of the same specifications marketed in trade centres „Topo centras“, „Sonex“, „BMS“ and „Eurokompiuteriai“ where the prices displayed were, respectively LTL 2199, LTL 2026, LTL 1968, and LTL 1759.

The Competition Council initiated the investigation against the notification of UAB „Topo centras“. The investigation established that UAB “Euroinvesticijos” the owner of the computer trade network “Eurokompiuteriai”, in 2004 published an advertising newsletter “Eurokompiuteriai” (September-October) with a circulation of 100.000. The newsletter was comparing the prices of computers in certain selected trade centres. Having assessed the findings of the investigation, the Competition Council drew up the conclusion that by disseminating the advertising statements and providing some biased comparisons of computer prices UAB „Euroinvesticijos“ was misleading the advertising consumers, discredited and downgraded the names of UAB „Topo centras“, UAB „BMS“ and UAB „Sonex kompiuteriai“, and has, by such actions, committed an infringement of the requirements of the Law on Advertising.