London 2012 Olympics Go For Gold in the Extreme 'Ambush Marketing' Law Event: 'Guilty Until Proven Innocent' – And No Streaking Allowed

from the bare-faced-cheek dept

The Olympic Games are not just about sporting success, but also legal excess – in particular, taking laws to extremes in order to "protect" sponsors, who are routinely elevated to the level of Greek gods during the games, with similarly superhuman rights over lesser beings like you and me.

Techdirt has already written about the UK police getting special powers to enter homes during the 2012 games, as well as free speech being curtailed. Now there are plans to suspend the presumption of innocence too:
One of the fundamental principles of European justice will be temporarily suspended during next year’s London Olympics to protect the commercial interests of sponsors, if Government proposals are accepted by Parliament later this year.

Under the plans, anyone suspected of so-called “ambush marketing” or unauthorized trading near the Olympic Park during the Games would be presumed guilty until proven innocent – a clear contradiction of the European Convention on Human Rights.

The Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) believes the move is justified to facilitate the staging of the Games, which it describes as a “once-in-a-lifetime occasion”.

Regulations proposed by the DCMS state that an interference with the right to be presumed innocent “will be justified” as long as it is confined within reasonable limits.
So great is the threat of ambush marketing to the 2012 Olympic Games that other basic freedoms are being abrogated – like the right to run around naked in public with advertisements on your body:
Streakers who use their bodies to advertise during the Olympics could face a £20,000 [$32,000] fine under new rules.

The London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games Act 2006 is being tweaked to target people who attempt marketing stunts during the tournament.

A man invaded a diving event at the Athens 2004 Olympics with a brand daubed on his bare chest.
The good news is that the tweaked 2006 Act would not apply to people running around naked without advertisements, although a spokesman said: "there may still be legal ramifications". So please do bear that in mind if you experience a sudden urge to take off your clothes in London during the Olympics next year.

Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter or identi.ca, and on Google+


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Oct 19th, 2011 @ 11:48am

    "The good news is that the tweaked 2006 Act would not apply to people running around naked without advertisements, although a spokesman said: "there may still be legal ramifications". So please do bear that in mind if you experience a sudden urge to take off your clothes in London during the Olympics next year."
    Sreaking has always been against UK law, why should the olympics make any difference?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Chronno S. Trigger (profile), Oct 19th, 2011 @ 1:16pm

      Re:

      There are now two charges. Instead of being charged with streaking, your charged with streaking and unauthorized advertising on Olympic controlled grounds. So you get whatever the standard punishment for streaking is and then another $20,000 on top of that.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    KGWagner (profile), Oct 19th, 2011 @ 11:58am

    Let them eat cake

    I will just make it a point to not watch or buy anything associated with the Olympic games. I mean, they're already tiring to the point of punishment to begin with, so why encourage abusive behavior? Maybe if enough people said "to hell with them", they might get a clue. What if they held a stadium-scale game, and nobody came? And when asked, people could just say "I don't like what's happened to the spirit of the Olympics, so I'm not going to waste any time/money on them." Do you suppose they'd get the message?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    icepick314, Oct 19th, 2011 @ 12:07pm

    Olympics or Global Marketing

    I gave up watching or keeping up with Olympics ever since 1996...

    it's all commercials and IP protection by Olympic "committee"...

    for celebration of athletes from around the globe, they sure try their dammedest to lock down the viewing from "unauthorized" TV station and internet...making almost impossible to let you watch the athletes when you want and how you want...

    you HAVE to watch the commercials (ie mandatory commercial breaks)...you HAVE to watch it on their websites...you HAVE to use certain software...

    why can't I watch the events on the internet openly without restrictions? is it THAT hard to implement webcast in 2012?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Christopher (profile), Oct 19th, 2011 @ 1:21pm

      Re: Olympics or Global Marketing

      No, it isn't that hard to do that. However, companies say (and they have a point here) that it can cost a lot to do that.

      In that case, I am MORE than willing to pay a 5 dollar a month charge for a network online.... but no more than that.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    anonymous, Oct 19th, 2011 @ 12:15pm

    get away with the 'guilty until proven innocent' rule once and then much easier to bring in permanently for whatever reason, ie copyright infringement, file sharing or anything you like. next thing is there will be an emergency of some sort, like when New Zealand had the earthquake, and in it will come again.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    fogbugzd (profile), Oct 19th, 2011 @ 12:16pm

    The Olympics have become a contest to see who is best at using performance enhancing drugs without getting caught. Ridiculous IP shenanigans further reduce any lingering desire I might have to watch.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Capitalist Lion Tamer (profile), Oct 19th, 2011 @ 12:17pm

    Unauthorized Trading

    anyone suspected of so-called “ambush marketing” or unauthorized trading near the Olympic Park during the Games would be presumed guilty until proven innocent

    Well, there goes my plan to take advantage of increased foot traffic to fire up my new hedge fund somewhere near the queues.

    Streakers who use their bodies to advertise during the Olympics could face a £20,000 [$32,000] fine under new rules.

    And there goes my advertising campaign. (Something about "Are your investments leaving you too exposed?". Perhaps contrasted with a person wearing a full-length fur coat and a blingy necklace featuring the name of my fund.)

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Oct 19th, 2011 @ 12:24pm

      Re: Unauthorized Trading

      I'm sure you could find someone to streak with your logo for £40,000, which is still pretty cheap for all the exposure.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Oct 19th, 2011 @ 12:24pm

      Re: Unauthorized Trading

      "Perhaps contrasted with a person wearing a full-length fur coat and a blingy necklace featuring the name of my fund."

      is the name of your fund "Investment Pimps" or Pimp my Investment?

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Jeremy Lyman (profile), Oct 19th, 2011 @ 12:18pm

    There went one now.

    Interesting how once-in-a-lifetime occasions seem to pop up more and more frequently these days.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Chuck Norris' Enemy (deceased) (profile), Oct 19th, 2011 @ 12:41pm

      Re: There went one now.

      London 1908, 1948, 2012. So if your lifetime was less than 40 years...which, I guess there is a sample of those whose lifetime is mere minutes or days. So I guess the "once-in-a-lifetime" holds for their argument.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      freak (profile), Oct 19th, 2011 @ 4:24pm

      Re: There went one now.

      And 1 in a million chances crop up 9 times out of 10

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Allomancer (profile), Oct 19th, 2011 @ 12:20pm

    wtf

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Oct 19th, 2011 @ 12:43pm

    Really?

    11 comments and noone is pointing out how police state-like these actions are?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Chuck Norris' Enemy (deceased) (profile), Oct 19th, 2011 @ 12:44pm

    Innocence

    Why don't they just make it "Raped until proven a virgin"?

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    BentFranklin (profile), Oct 19th, 2011 @ 12:44pm

    Remember, every vote with a dollar counts 100%, as compared to votes in elections, where there are myriad ways they are made meaningless. So, vote those dollars!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    The eejit (profile), Oct 19th, 2011 @ 12:50pm

    We should totally set up a cr4owdfund for advertisers, whereby the plan is to streak along the track during the 100m final.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Christopher (profile), Oct 19th, 2011 @ 1:19pm

    The U.K. is becoming more and more dystopian as time goes on.

    Harassment against people solely for looking at pictures of IMAGINARY children in sexual situations, WHO HAVE NOT TRIED TO TOUCH ANY REAL CHILD.
    Harassment against people for this.
    Harassment against various other people.

    This scapegoating and ignoring settled principles of justice is getting old.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    big al, Oct 19th, 2011 @ 1:44pm

    $ an no sense

    hold a mo.....
    O C (Olympic Committee)hold the 2 Olympics every 4 years(summer and winter)plus special Olympics...and takes bids(money)from the country who hosts them.
    O C Then get each country who precipitates to send there athletes at no charge to the games.
    O C licenses all mdse and keeps the money.
    O C collects all advertising fees and keeps the money.
    O C sells all tv and media rights and keeps the money.
    O C sues everybody in sight and keeps the money.
    O C accounts to no one where the money goes sooooo .....
    as poor as they are we must support them with our $ because we have no sense....

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Strawbear (profile), Oct 20th, 2011 @ 3:11am

    Streakers who use their bodies to advertise during the Olympics could face a £20,000 [$32,000] fine under new rules.


    - but if the streakers female and half decent looking, the Sun will surely give her more than that to show herself in their paper the next day.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    ethorad (profile), Oct 20th, 2011 @ 5:36am

    "ambush" marketing

    Tempting to put up massive billboards advertising the clothes that are being worn by some IOC execs - "Armani suits, as worn by Jacques Rogge"

    And then get him arrested for ambush marketing Armani suits at Olympic events

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This