Slashdot Mirror
IOC Clamps Down on Athlete Web Diaries
RSevrinsky writes "According to this article in the NYTimes, the non-profit IOC is scared stiff of losing its place as sole mouthpiece for the Games (which helped it get $705M from NBC for the TV rights). Now, even the athletes don't have the right to describe their own experiences for the outside world -- only Bob Costas can. " The IOC has never exactly been "nice" (actually, I would describe them more accurately as "Evil") but this is pretty dang stupid.
IOC To Olympic Athletes: Online Diaries Verboten
-- Don't Tase me, bro!
You think that making a copy of copyrighted material is breaking the law? Well shoot, you'd better shut down your browser right now, or I'll sue your ass. These comments are copyright by me, and your browser just copied them.
Of course that's nonsense, because I implicitly gave you the rights to make a copy of this article and read it when I posted it. But when I buy a DVD, I implicitly (should?) have the right to make a copy of it and view it too. That's what deCSS does. So why should it be illegal?
Another example: DeCSS cannot be illegal just because it could be used to copy a DVD. If that was true, photocopiers would be illegal, because they could be used to copy books.
Enough of this nonsense.
The RIAA, the MPAA, the IOC, and other oppressive organizations are attempting to take away freedom of speech and fair-use rights. Copyright was originally limited, they are trying to make it unlimited through legal and technological means.
These organizations want to create a world where you could be charged for everything you see, hear, and experience - every time. A world where you own nothing and rent everything. An attitude like that tends to polarise people, and push them in the other direction. Despite that, I don't think Slashdot (in general) is becoming anti-IP, although some posters may be.
But most posters here have a greater respect and understanding for the limitations of copyright. I think the original version of the copyright act was, on balance, a good thing.
I think the only "anti-IP" on Slashdot is an "anti-expansion-of-IP". At least, that's the only anti-IP I have.
Torrey Hoffman (Azog)
Torrey Hoffman (Azog)
"HTML needs a rant tag" - Alan Cox
Legality is a matter for the courts and that is still being decided. Regardless, it is not wrong, no matter what you or the courts say. It allows the owner of a DVD to make a copy for space-shifting purposes, a long-recognized application of fair use. It could also be used to pirate DVDs, just like a CD burner can be used to pirate software. The possibility of illegal use does not justify the criminalization of all use.
If it were to pipe an MPEG video player, not logically going to the hard drive (i.e. only possibly going through virtual memory) then it would not be illegal because it would not "copy" the movie!
It would still be copied to RAM, which would probably be sufficient for the MPAA weasels to try to ban it.
Given that it is IP rights that protect GPL'ed code, one must respect others IP rights by not taking illegal actions because one thinks it's okay.
No one has a duty to obey an unjust law. Arguably, one has a duty to break it. Martin Luther King, yada yada yada.
Not to say that it is wrong to oppose oppresive laws and systems, but /. is becoming the "no IP" site.
The /. "official policy" (not that there is one) is not that all IP is bad, but that entities which attempt to abuse IP with bogus patents (Amazon, BT...), post-sale license "agreements" (CueCat, MS...), and purchased legislation (MPAA, RIAA...) should be stopped. (Voting Libertarian would be a good start.)
How to solve most of our problems: 1.Lots of nuclear plants. 2.Cure aging.
I highly recommend the Canadian coverage. Yes, it's live, which is a big plus if there are some events you are really into, or if you're just a fanatic (like my wife).
The real difference is the substance of the coverage. On NBC, you get Oprah/ER type bleeding heart stories about the athletes; interviews with families, coaches, teachers, etc. That's all well and good if you want to sit and get all teary eyed, but if you are actually interested in the sporting events, NBC is awful.
CBC covers the events, and you get fairly decent analysis of them. The commentators (especially track) really know their stuff and explain the nuances of unfamiliar sports quite well. There is the occasional backgrounder on an athlete, but the event itself is the focus.
The other great thing is that they are fairly neutral, at least vis a vis NBC. They'll interview a non-Canadian who wins an event, they'll discuss non-Canadian favourites. NBC is only interested in the American, and only if they have a chance of winning.
Hoorah for CBC. I hope that the US cable providers near the border keep them on their lineup.
A) NBC delays the coverage for multiple hours in order to run it during prime-time. Unfortunately they seem to have forgotten that the one of the big things that makes the sports exciting is that you don't know who won in advance. Given the prevelence of alternative media outlets (*cough* internet *cough*) there is little reason to watch if I already know who won.
B) They only cover a limited number of "popular" sports and even then the coverage is shallow. The sports I'm most interested in are wrestling, taekwondo, and judo. However unless there is an american in a gold medal match, I will never see these sports. (and even then the match usually isn't shown in its entirety) Even for track, swimming and the other more popular sports, the coverage is shallow and very incomplete.
C) Those stupid "Olympic Moments". You know the ones. Where they show some banal feel good piece about how some athlete's parents were run over by a piece of farm equipment, his sister has cancer and his dog ran away but he persevered and made it to the olympics. Or where they waste time on some useless piece of trivia about the host country. No one I have ever spoken to likes these. We watch the olympics for one reason, the sports. I don't really care about the life history of the athletes. Just show me the sports.
D) Overcommercialization. Yes I know companies pay the bills. But that doesn't mean they have to be crass about it or run 15 minutes of commercials for every 3 minutes of athletics.
E) American-centrism. Yes, all us Americans love to see an American win. However believe it or not I still like the sports even if an american isn't involved. Yes, I really do like track if Michael Johnson doesn't win. I will still watch swimming if Jenny Thompson isn't involved. Etc. The olympics provides a rare chance to see a lot of the best athletes in the world at a wide variety of sports all in one place at one time. Whether an american wins or not, is really of very little importance.
And there are other reasons, but I'm tired of thinking about it. If NBC wants me to watch, they should get some people who actually understand sports to schedule their programming. Until then, I have better things to do.
In defense of USA Basketball (and admittedly off topic) the US was one of the few countries that voted against letting pros play basketball in the olympics. Why? Because they knew that it was going to be disgustingly lopsided and thought that it would turn people off. The whole complaint about the US demanding to let pros play so that they could wipe the floor with all of the other countries, which many people make, is 180 degrees off.
There's no point in questioning authority if you aren't going to listen to the answers.
I hope the CBC is telling NBC to go prack themselves. It's bad enough that NBC is "black-holing" results in the USA, just to force people to watch their boring, insipid coverage, but to try and force a broadcasting company from another country to delay their coverage, because it might hurt NBC's ratings is an outrage.
Did I mention that I am an American?
Especially since, in general, the ratings for the Olympic broadcasts have been getting steadily worse for the past two decades. It's quite possible that NBC will not make ANY money off of the Olympic broadcasts this time around. Add to the sheer level of botching they've had with the release of information and the display of the events, and you can see why this is not looking good for their shareholders this time.
Unfortunately, the diaries of the Olympians are just the sort of thing that would bring a lot of interest to the Games. Knowing what some of them were thinking, doing, planning... who in the competition they really thought were tough and who they didn't think were actual competition.
The IOC has, more and more, lost the concept of the fact that the Games are not just national spectacle, but also tales of achievement, and they're cutting off one of the really great ways to show that sort of ethic off.
But this is the same bunch where they fired half of the main committee for bribery a few years back, so I'd bet that the media companies (NBC, et al.) also paid to have a clause in the contract that NO ONE ELSE can have the coverage. With that sort of patronage/corruption in place, the mediots could then dictate that any 'diaries' are violations of that clause, as it takes away from their 'exclusive coverage', as well as taking away from the deep insights of Bob "Jack Handley" Costas.
----
Brazil has decided you're cute.
Just to be able to enter competitions (olympics too) you're going to have to sign a declaration that states that you are going to be in full compliance with the rules and regulations involved. In my sport these mandate you to take part in the interviews and other post-competition activities(medal ceremony, etc..) involved provided you do sufficiently well.
If you don't you might lose your some or all of your price money and definetly get a really bad name for yourself. You might even get banned from entering competitions in future. I can't think of a single athlete who has worked hard and then would just throw it all away because their diaries can't be published.
In order for this to work people doing it would have to be really really famous and those people have the most to lose. All corporate sponsorships etc. The lesser known medaling athletes would be just more than happy to have accomplished what they did and would not jeopardize anything(future corporate sponsorships).
When CBC was showing coverage of the Canadian men in the beach volleyball quarterfinals, the women's marathon was being run. CBC did some switching back and forth, and some split-screens, but what really impressed me was that Brian Williams (a CBC commentator) actually said (when they were switching back to volleyball) that anyone who wanted to watch the marathon could see it live on TSN (Canada's ESPN). Phenomenal.
There have also been reports on how many American's near the border and with satalite have actually been watching CBC coverage because they are showing events live (even at 5am), while NBC is always a day behind.
Well, if the athletes feel strongly about this, they should get together and agree not to participate in any interviews at all. I'll bet that if a few gold medal winners, when presented with a camera and microphone, were to tell the reporter that as a protest against being prohibited from publishing their diary, they were declining to give any interviews at all, I bet that the IOC would get the message pretty quickly.
No... Athletes are not being told that they may not freely express themselves, they are being told that they may not freely express themselves and participate in the games. It's a condition of competition, just like the no-drug requirement (which exists despite the fact that certain steroids, etc. might be legal in an Athlete's country of origin). It's not so much a law as a rule of the game.
--
Behold the Power of Cheese!
"It's very simple," said an IOC spokeswoman. "The IOC has an obligation to fulfill the terms of its contracts. And when these spectators -- or 'coverage pirates' as we like to call them -- go home and talk to people about what they saw at the Games that day, they are providing unlicensed coverage -- coverage that should be coming exclusively from NBC. It's up to us to stop this."
She denied that the ban was overly fascistic. "Actually, we will be erecting giant television screens outside the Olympic Stadium, where people can watch licensed NBC coverage of the events inside. What more could people want?"
Free Software Foundation guru Richard M. Stallman could not be reached for comment. A source close to the programmer said he was "busy watching the 400 metre butterfly."
Carousel is a lie!
I'll keep it short but I was in Atlanta going to school during the games. The committee did a sweep of local venues and closed down anything with a reference to the Olympics, or which had rings in it's logo - even though the city was sponsoring the games and putting lots of money into it. A decades old restaurant - The Olympiad (a pizza joint) was forced to change its name!!! The potential penalty was something ludicrous though I don't remember it now. The mayor was bribed. The schools were shut down to house the athletes so students were kicked out and had to find some place for the summer. (Studying is a pretty noble goal as well.) Several new stadiums were built under the promise (by city govt) that there would be a windfall of profits from the games. Not surpisingly, a follow up story never pointed out just how much was made.
--
This space left intentionally blank.
OK, so here's some IOC US Members Addresses.
If you're displeased enough to actually write
a physical letter, and able to be articulate,
maybe you should use these. Please folks, don't
turn the flame level up high unless you do it
subtly. And nothing so immature as hacking or
death threats, please.
Oh. International slashdot readership. Haven't forgotten you, but I can't duplicate the whole list. Find it here.
---------------------------------
James L. Easton
7855 Haskell Avenue, Suite 202
Van Nuys CA 91406-1999
USA
---------------------------------
Anita L. DeFrantz
c/ o Amateur Athletic Foundation
2141 West Adams Boulevard
Los Angeles California 90018
United States of America.
---------------------------------
Robert Ctvrtlik is a US IOC rep, but
doesn't have an address listed.
Libertarianism is rich wolves and poor sheep playing gambler's ruin for dinner.