What might change for MSPs?
- Logos can have legal implications: Depending on the context, logos of MSPs may be perceived as sustainability labels. This can also apply when the MSP itself did not design its logo as a label. What matters is how consumers perceive its use.
- The use of logos by member companies is particularly relevant: While the use of a logo by the MSP itself is generally less risky, its use by member companies in their own communication can involve significantly greater risks.
- General environmental claims need to be specific: Claims such as “sustainable” or other general environmental claims may become problematic.
- Communicating membership can also be relevant: For MSPs with an environmental focus, communicating membership may become risky as well. It may therefore be useful to explain more clearly what the specific contribution or impact of the membership is.
- Context is key: Whether a statement or use of a logo is permissible cannot be determined in general terms. Factors such as the specific presentation, the medium used and how the communication is perceived by consumers all matter and thus every case may be assessed differently.
- MSPs should take a strategic look at their communication: The exchange showed that the issue is not only about making individual statements or uses of logos legally compliant. The new requirements can also provide an opportunity to review communication practices more broadly and communicate more clearly what an initiative actually does.
A few questions remain open for MSPs. The new rules are broadly formulated, and their precise scope will only become clearer through further practical application and the development of case law. MSPs affected by the new requirements should therefore continue to follow developments closely and review their communication practices accordingly.
