COMPLAINT FOR THE COURT IN HAARLEM (Netherlands) AGAINST ASICS
The web site and labels:
After the conviction of Asics by the Dutch Advertising Code Commission
(see: Complaint against Asics for the Dutch
Advertising Code Commission [RCC]), the web site of Asics was changed
in two steps:
First the sentence:
"ASICS doesn't have only attention for the sportmen,
but also for the environment. We are the only sportsmark which doesn't
use harmful PVC in its products."
was changed into:
"ASICS doesn't use PVC in its products."
Later, even that sentence disappeared from their web site.
What remained was the "PVC-free" logo on their web site and
labels. Because the label was explicitely condemned by the RCC,
and Asics refused to remove these, an emergency complaint was filed
against Asics for the court in Haarlem. Just before the final day of the
trial (7 October 2003), Greenpeace jumped on the bandwagon of Asics. On
16 October, the court decided as follows:
The decision
(in short)
According to the court, the "PVC-free" logo is a neutral, factual
announcement, which doesn't suggest that PVC is bad for the environment,
neither harmful. Further, they may use this to inform their consumers
that their products are PVC-free, as it is the wish of several
governments to reduce the use of PVC. The question if PVC is harmful or
not is not at stake and therefore the logo can not be seen as a
misleading advertisement.
Comment:
Based on this decision, Asics may use the logo, but they may not allude
in any way that PVC is harmful or bad for the environment...
Further, while it will be difficult to prove that the simple
announcement "PVC-free" is an environmental claim, the European
environmental advertising explicitely forbids wordings like
"chlorine-free" for paper bleaching, as the environmental burden of
paper manufacturing is from the total process, less from the way it is
bleached (there is near no practical difference between chlorine dioxyde
-ECF- bleaching and peroxyde -TCF- bleaching. For the best quality, ECF
bleaching even needs less wood).
The decision was partly based on papers provided by Asics from the
Dutch government, the EC Eco-label on shoes and the EC Greenbook about
the use of PVC.
The Dutch government has (had) a policy to reduce the amount of PVC
going into incinerators, this was partly based on dioxin formation
(which has nothing to do with the amount of PVC! See: The ASME report about incinerators),
partly about the amount of waste generated by the incineration of PVC.
The latter is true, as the incineration of PVC (and all natural
materials) generates hydrochloric acid (HCl), which must be neutralised.
The neutralizing forms salt, but that is contaminated by heavy metals
from everything that is burned in the incinerator. Nowadays, half the
incinerators in The Netherlands use methods to remove the heavy metals
from the salt, so that the remaining clean salt (solution) can be
discharged on (brackish or salt) waterways, or the salts are reused to
make e.g. soda. Thus the policy of the Dutch government to reduce PVC in
packaging is completely outdated. Anyway that was not about shoes or
other sportsgoods...
Also the Greenbook of the EC was not a policy at all, but a base to see
if a specific policy for or against PVC was necessary. There is no PVC
policy on EC level at this moment at all for PVC. The only exception is
about the use of certain phthalates for (PVC) toys, but PVC toys with
any alternative softeners may be used. For the Greenbook, over 30,000
workers in the PVC-industry have reacted, against a few hundred
Greenpeace members.
Last but not least, the EC ecolabel on shoes is a voluntary agreement,
not a policy of the EC, between producers of shoes (like Asics), NGO's,
the EC environment directorate and consumer organisations. The ecolabel
states that no PVC may be used, except if recycled (without phthalates).
The PVC industry was not involved at all and has protested against the
discrimination of PVC, which is not based on any scientific study. This
can be classified as "self fulfilling prophecies"!
At this moment the complaint is going
to higher appeal. We expect the final decision at the beginning
of June.
Asics free?
The following logo doesn't mean any judgement on their environmental
performance. It only is a factual statement that we (never) ever will
buy any Asics products, as long as they advertise their products with a
PVC-free logo...
You are at level two of the Chlorophiles pages.
Created: 26 October 2003.
Last update: 11 April 2004.
Welcome pagina
Home Page of
the Chlorophiles
Greenpeace and
others about chlorine
Complaint against Asics for the Dutch
Advertising Code Commission.
For any comment on this or other pages::
chlorofielen@pandora.be
