<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/">
<channel>
<title>Techdirt. Stories about &quot;ioc&quot;</title>
<description>Easily digestible tech news...</description>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/</link>
<language>en-us</language>

<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 19 Oct 2011 11:43:46 PDT</pubDate>
<title></title>
<dc:creator>Glyn Moody</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111019/08145216413/london-2012-olympics-go-gold-extreme-ambush-marketing-law-event-guilty-until-proven-innocent-no-streaking-allowed.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111019/08145216413/london-2012-olympics-go-gold-extreme-ambush-marketing-law-event-guilty-until-proven-innocent-no-streaking-allowed.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ The Olympic Games are not just about sporting success, but also legal excess &ndash; 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.  
<br /><br />
Techdirt has already written about the UK police getting special powers to <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100305/1139058438.shtml">enter homes</a> during the 2012 games, as well as free speech being <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20050816/1937233_F.shtml">curtailed</a>.  Now <a href="http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/olympics/the-olympic-law-guilty-until-proven-innocent-2362691.html">there are plans to suspend the presumption of innocence</a> too:
<blockquote><i>
One of the fundamental principles of European justice will be temporarily suspended during next year&rsquo;s London Olympics to protect the commercial interests of sponsors, if Government proposals are accepted by Parliament later this year.
<br /><br />
Under the plans, anyone suspected of so-called &ldquo;ambush marketing&rdquo; or unauthorized trading near the Olympic Park during the Games would be presumed guilty until proven innocent &ndash; a clear contradiction of the European Convention on Human Rights.
<br /><br />
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 &ldquo;once-in-a-lifetime occasion&rdquo;.
<br /><br />
Regulations proposed by the DCMS state that an interference with the right to be presumed innocent &ldquo;will be justified&rdquo; as long as it is confined within reasonable limits.
</i></blockquote>
So great is the threat of ambush marketing to the 2012 Olympic Games that other basic freedoms are being abrogated &ndash; like <a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-15306322">the right to run around naked in public with advertisements on your body</a>:
<blockquote><i>
Streakers who use their bodies to advertise during the Olympics could face a &pound;20,000 [$32,000] fine under new rules.
<br /><br />
The London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games Act 2006 is being tweaked to target people who attempt marketing stunts during the tournament.
<br /><br />
A man invaded a diving event at the Athens 2004 Olympics with a brand daubed on his bare chest.
</i></blockquote>
The good news is that the tweaked 2006 Act would not apply to people running around naked <b>without</b> 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.
<br /><br />
Follow me @glynmoody on <a href="http://twitter.com/glynmoody">Twitter</a> or <a href="http://identi.ca/glynmoody">identi.ca</a>, and on <a href="https://plus.google.com/100647702320088380533">Google+</a><br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111019/08145216413/london-2012-olympics-go-gold-extreme-ambush-marketing-law-event-guilty-until-proven-innocent-no-streaking-allowed.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111019/08145216413/london-2012-olympics-go-gold-extreme-ambush-marketing-law-event-guilty-until-proven-innocent-no-streaking-allowed.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20111019/08145216413/london-2012-olympics-go-gold-extreme-ambush-marketing-law-event-guilty-until-proven-innocent-no-streaking-allowed.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>bare-faced-cheek</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20111019/08145216413</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
<item>
<pubDate>Wed, 24 Mar 2010 10:13:00 PDT</pubDate>
<title>Olympics Threaten ICANN, Saying Its Trademark Concerns Outweigh Any Benefits From New TLDs</title>
<dc:creator>Mike Masnick</dc:creator>
<link>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100324/0235158688.shtml</link>
<guid>http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100324/0235158688.shtml</guid>
<description><![CDATA[ It's no secret that the Olympics seem to have a massive sense of entitlement when it comes to trademark issues -- getting various governments to pass laws that go <i>way</i> beyond trademark laws in those countries to add special protections for the Olympics, barring pretty much any unauthorized mentions outside of press coverage (and even that's a bit iffy).  This is not <i>at all</i> what trademark law is supposed to do.  Its latest move is to <a href="http://www.domainpulse.com/2010/03/23/icann-threatened-by-olympic-committee-over-intellectual-property-concerns/" target="_blank">complain to ICANN about its new plans for a .sports top level domain</a>, worrying that any benefits "are outweighed by the risks, harms and costs it poses to trademark owners and the public."  The public?  Really?  Furthermore, the IOC warns ICANN that it retains the "right to proceed against ICANN for damages resulting to the IOC or the Olympic Movement from the implementation of an unlimited number of new gTLDs."  Nice of them.
<br /><br />
That article highlights that the IOC already has special deals with a number of big domain registrars blocking any registration that includes an IOC trademark -- which is highly questionable, since registrations including trademarks are very much allowed to non-trademark holders, so long as the sites aren't confusing to the public (for example, with "sucks sites" which are allowed).  Hopefully ICANN stands up to bullying from the IOC which has no real case here, unless gov'ts keep passing special "for the Olympics only" abusive trademark laws.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100324/0235158688.shtml">Permalink</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100324/0235158688.shtml#comments">Comments</a> | <a href="http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20100324/0235158688.shtml?op=sharethis">Email This Story</a><br />
 ]]></description>
<slash:department>sense-of-entitlement-much?</slash:department>
<wfw:commentRss>http://www.techdirt.com/comment_rss.php?sid=20100324/0235158688</wfw:commentRss>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>