Grounding Nike: Exposing Nike's Quest for a Constitutional Right to Lie

50 Pages Posted: 18 Mar 2011

See all articles by Tamara R. Piety

Tamara R. Piety

University of Tulsa College of Law

Date Written: March 14, 2011

Abstract

Although the Nike v. Kasky case was widely reported to involve Nike's attempt to "defend" itself against its critics, in this article I demonstrate that according to textbook descriptions of the practice Nike was actually engaged in a form of marketing – reactive marketing PR. This marketing was designed to improve sales of its products in the wake of criticism of its labor practices and consumer backlash in response to those criticisms. Kasky claimed in his lawsuit that many of the statements Nike's representatives made in its defense were knowingly and intentionally false and he charged that they constituted fraud. The pleadings in the case reveal (despite widespread reportage to the contrary) that Nike hoped to raise a First Amendment defense to fraud.

Keywords: First Amendment, Nike v. Kasky, Marketing, Fraud, Public Relations, False Advertising, Reactive Marketing PR

Suggested Citation

Piety, Tamara R., Grounding Nike: Exposing Nike's Quest for a Constitutional Right to Lie (March 14, 2011). Temple Law Review, Vol. 78, No. 151, 2005. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1785808

Tamara R. Piety (Contact Author)

University of Tulsa College of Law ( email )

3120 E. Fourth Place
Tulsa, OK 74104
United States

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
74
Abstract Views
532
rank
315,412
PlumX Metrics