Slashdot Mirror
IOC Trademarks Part of Canadian National Anthem
gravis777 sends us to BoingBoing for news that the International Olympic Committee has trademarked a line from the Canadian National Anthem and is threatening to sue anyone who uses it. The line in question is "with glowing hearts." "The committee is so serious about protecting the Olympic brand it managed to get a landmark piece of legislation passed in the House of Commons last year that made using certain phrases related to the Games a violation of law. The list includes the number 2010 and the word 'winter,' phrases that normally couldn't be trademarked because they are so general."
The Canadian National Anthem is copyrighted by the crown. You are speaking about trademarks, such as the Canadian Flag, which is trademarked by the crown also. To use the Canadian Flag you need to obtain a release from the government, or hope you meet the government's preferences.
I thought about registering withglowinghearts.com but someone beat me to it :)
Once I was a four stone apology. Now I am two separate gorillas.
sigh
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Games_(Australian_TV_series)
One of the best comedies to come out of Australia ever. Even better than Shark Bay.
John Clarke, easily one of the great 'straight men' of all time:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Clarke_(satirist)
In the free world the media isn't government run; the government is media run.
An article I read about this last week said that the IOC would only seek to prevent people from using it in Olympic-esque aspects. You could still use the phrase for a knitting store (which there is, apparently, somewhere in Ontario), but there would be a problem if that store tried to sell sweaters with the Olympic rings on it, for example.
I don't agree that it's right, but that summary up there's a little wrong.
Considering they passed a special law, prior art really has nothing to do with it. In the US, the Olympics long ago go a heinous law passed that gave them trademark rights on things you couldn't normally trademark. They didn't go so far as the anthem, but you cannot legally put the name "Olympic" in your business. Who cares of the thousands of years of prior art. This came to my attention when they recently forced the band named the Olympic Hopefuls to change. And it was, unfortunately, all very legal of them to do so.
Here's the law:
http://www.inta.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=187&Itemid=59&getcontent=1
Here's a story on the band:
http://www.mtv.com/news/articles/1507047/20050805/index.jhtml
"Its time for revolution! Viva Quebec!"
"Car ton bras sait porter l'épée", indeed. (But it might be wise to learn to say that in French ... "Vive le Québec", not "viva".)
Canadians take great pride in the fact that we are completely different from the US on many fronts, particularly in the fact that we are much less of a capitalist society and that we ascribe to more socialist ideas. This comment is inane, shortsighted, and clearly indicative of the self-centredness of the US. Maybe it was meant to be funny, but there's really not anything funny about it; in fact, it's rather insulting, and the only possible humour it holds is in its absurdity.
And, I believe it's "Vive la Quebec". (Dropping the accent because Slashcode borks unicode apparently)
Cheers
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
No it doesn't: Vive le Québec libre!
That's HRHILF Queen Elizabeth II, to you!
Her Majesty The Queen.
Did you actually READ the bill? It's intent is to stop free-loaders from slapping "Olympic" and the like on products, and making money without contributing to the Games. All the trademarks expire at the end of 2010, so it's not like they have the rights forever. And, if you have a business like "Olympia Restaurant" and you were in business before March 2007, you can continue to use the "trademarked" term. Any business with a large public profile is fairly vigilant about protecting their name and brands; why should the IOC be any different?
What was once true, is no longer so
FYI: "provence" is a region in France. "Province" is what you're looking for (same as in English). And it's definitely "Le Québec", with no relation with the fact that "province" is a feminine noun. Le Canada, la France, le Japon, la Belgique; I don't think there's any rule saying what country/region names are masculine or feminine, same as with any word in the French language (or German, Spanish, etc for that matter).
From the government of Canada's website re: Bill C-47
Commentary
Bill C-47 enhances the protection for Olympic symbols beyond that normally afforded to trade-marks. Although existing intellectual property law in Canada could arguably be used to protect Olympic symbols and marks, the sheer volume of possible violations, within a short window of time, are presumed to be the justification for the enhanced protection.
There has been substantial debate about tactics used in connection with sporting events to discourage the use of ambush marketing. In the United Kingdom, a statute was recently passed that, among other things, will outlaw ambush marketing for the 2012 Olympics.(10) A coalition of advertisers argued that this legislation was draconian and overly restrictive. Citing one example, the legislation would not allow a business to say "come to London in 2012."(11) Advertisers in Britain viewed these restrictions as potentially damaging to the economic "halo effect" that the Olympics promises to bring, stating that "London businesses in particular will be paying for these Games but they are being deprived of benefiting from them because they will basically have to pretend they are not happening."(12)
There are also accusations that prohibitions against ambush marketing can be carried too far. In one of the more bizarre examples of an attempt to prevent ambush marketing, more than 1,000 Dutch fans at the FIFA 2006 World Cup match in Germany were forced to relinquish their orange lederhosen during a game against the Ivory Coast. The lederhosen were stamped with the name "Bavaria," although Bavaria Brewery (Netherlands) was not an official World Cup sponsor. When Dutch fans tried to enter the stadium, they were required by FIFA officials to abandon their lederhosen, and were forced to watch the game in their underwear.(13) Before this incident, Heineken, an official sponsor of the Dutch football association, had taken legal action against Bavaria Brewery in Holland but lost; the Dutch judge had ruled that fans could wear whatever they wanted.
As proposed, Bill C-47 appears to address some of these concerns. Although it clearly strengthens the ability of the COC, CPC, and Organizing Committee to seek injunctions against any marks presumed to be encroaching on the Olympic brand, it also imposes limits on the legal reach of these powers through the exceptions. Criticism, for example, is protected, as is the use of Olympic symbols in news coverage. Firms whose use of related symbols pre-dates the Games are similarly protected, as are wine and spirit makers who use any of the terms listed in schedules 1, 2, and 3 to describe the origins of their products. Similarly, the interim injunctions in which irreparable harm need not be proved, could be, under Bill C-47, made available only for a short window of time.
What was once true, is no longer so
Canada acceding to this confederation, and adjoining in the measures of the United States, shall be admitted into, and entitled to all the advantages of this Union; but no other colony shall be admitted into the same, unless such admission be agreed to by nine States.
However, the Articles of Confederation are no longer the law of the land, as they were replaced by the Constitution.
Not quite. The IOC is not happy with merely controlling use of what they perceive to be their trademarks in relation to the Olympics; they actually seek to control any use, for any reason. For example, the role-playing/card game(s) "Legend of the Five Rings", which takes its name from a Japanese book on dueling published long before the IOC ever existed, was forced to change its visual-identity branding -- even though it had not one single thing to do with the Olympics -- because that branding included five interlocked circles, something over which the IOC claims control in any form and in any context.
Oh, come on! You expect many people to know (let alone believe) that the original did not have the words under god in it? And that it was written by a baptist minister)? You expect too much from the average person! But, they ought to know it anyway. ;-)
InnerWeb
Freud might say that Intelligent Design is religion's ID.
Why would we do that? The U.S. gave us a whole bunch to point at the Russians.
Folks, quit lambasting the IOC. They didn't do this. VANOC did. Go after them if you want.
Advice to a lynch mob: Get your facts straight before lighting the torches.
"People who do stupid things with hazardous materials often die." -- Jim Davidson on alt.folklore.urban
The CBC wanted to own the theme outright, but made a low-ball offer. Dolores Claman and her publisher offered to instead extend the existing deal, which gave them roughly $500 per three-hour broadcast. The CBC responded by announcing the contest to find a new theme and broke off negotiations.
I think they honestly (arrogantly) believed the rights holders would cave in. They also had their panties in a bunch because of the ongoing suit by Claman alleging the CBC used the song without permission (read without paying for it) on other programs, as well as rebroadcasts of HNIC in other countries.
When they later publicly offered to resume negotiations - to "save the theme for Canadians" - Claman responded by announcing the deal with CTV.
The CBC is welcome to use whatever negotiation tactics they choose. I'm a supporter of public television in general, and specifically the CBC (especially for their news and - yup - hockey broadcasts). But over the years the have shown a spectacular lack of understanding of what attracts viewers to HNIC. They employed similar "hardball" tactics when negotiating Don Cherry's contract last year.
Again, they are welcome to do so, but Don Cherry and the traditional theme were two big attractions for a lot of their viewers. Now they've lost one of those, and if they continue to step on the throat of the "golden goose," they're going to find themselves on the outside looking in. Without the revenue generated by hockey (especially playoff hockey) it's unlikely they would be able to maintain the high standards in their news department.
And that's a damn shame. The CBC belongs to the public. They are showing bad stewardship of a Canadian institution. But that's another rant.
I agree with you in principle about the length of copyright terms, but the CBC benefits from the current copyright laws just as much as Claman is, so I can't really condemn her for seeking fair market value when negotiating a deal.
I don't care why you're posting AC