Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

IOC Claims Olympian Lindsey Vonn's Name As Intellectual Property

Posted by timothy on from the somebody's-got-to-dirty-the-pool dept.

gehrehmee writes "As usual, the International Olympic Committee is coming down on hard on people mentioning things related to the Olympics without permission. This time it's UVEX sporting supplies, which sponsors Olympic skier Lindsey Vonn. Without explaination, their front page was today updated to include a tongue-in-cheek poem about UVEX's interaction with the IOC. Can the IOC really claim an Olypmian's name as their own intellectual property?"

14 of 399 comments (clear)

  1. Sure they can claim it by plover · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Of course they can claim her name as their I.P. They can also claim to be from the planet Xenu, or they can claim to be 2,000-year-old leprechauns. Claiming a thing is their property does not actually make it their property until a court has made the decision.

    For a great example of other lawyers claiming untrue things, look at BoingBoing's laugh at Demi Moore's lawyers' expense. They claimed that BoingBoing was slandering Demi Moore by saying her image was photoshopped, when clearly it was not photoshopped as attested to by the sworn testimony of the photographers.

    So the IOC can claim that Lindsey Vonn is made out of ice cream, milkweed pods, and sandpaper, if they want. Won't make it true. If UVEX wasn't getting such a good laugh out of this stupidity, I hope they'd have the integrity to restore Lindsey's name to their web site.

    --
    John
    1. Re:Sure they can claim it by ShooterNeo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Indeed, and the only way to challenge their claim is that you need lawyers. Good, expensive lawyers able to counter the army of lawyers the IOC undoubtedly has on retainer. Also, you need time...5-10 years for the courts to come to a final, uncontestable decision.

      Nearly all individuals don't have the money or lifespan to do this. That's why big institutions hold all the cards when you deal with them. Only if the institution does something truly egregious do you have a chance of getting compensation.

    2. Re:Sure they can claim it by commodore64_love · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Unfortunately the U.S. DMCA provides no recourse to the victims. The IOC lawyers can just say, "Ooops sorry," and not even mean it. This law is skewed in favor of abuse.

      There was a similar event ~3 weeks ago when the NFL tried to claim copyright over the "Who Dat?" logo. The NFL caused thousands (possibly millions) of dollars in damage to local businesses and all the NFL had to do was say, "Ooops... we were wrong." The victims have no recourse.

      I think if I ever get one of these notices, I'll just ignore it. Fuck the megacorps.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    3. Re:Sure they can claim it by mcvos · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Shouldn't civilised nations just stop hosting the Olympics completely, and people stop watching it? If we really need a high profile sporting event like that, maybe we should set up a new one, but this time with a sensible organisation behind it.

    4. Re:Sure they can claim it by bradley13 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Pournelle's Iron Law

      The IOC no longer promotes sport - it promotes its own interests using sport as a tool

      --
      Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
  2. Tons more complaints this time by get+quad · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Just add this to the MASSIVE list of failures at this Winter Olympics, namely: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/35464927/ns/world_news-vancouver_winter_olympics/

    --
    "To err is human, to mod Funny divine."
  3. It depends... by QuietLagoon · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Can the IOC really claim an Olypmian's name as their own intellectual property?

    .

    It depends upon the contract that the Olympian signed in order to compete in the Olympics. My opinion is that the Olympians have to sign away everything but their first-born in order to be allowed to compete in the Olympics.

    I no longer view the Olympics as an idealistic sporting event. I now view it as a viscous commercial enterprise that exploits the dreams of young athletes.

    1. Re:It depends... by Dunbal · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And I see them as an exercise in creative pharmacology, shaping your body with hormones while trying to stay one step ahead of innovations in screening. Remember it's only wrong if you get caught, right?

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    2. Re:It depends... by QuietLagoon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The measure of a man's true honor is what he would do if he knew he would not be caught.

  4. ISO and IOC are similar in my view by erroneus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Once respected now just trashed. ISO was destroyed in my eyes by the whole Microsoft debacle. (some would say long before that, but I knew nothing of ISO's procedures or problems before Microsoft's involvement.) The IOC's pure greed and nonsense over the past few years had convinced me that the Olympics just ain't cool any more.

  5. Re:IOC is not a U.S. organization by spun · · Score: 3, Insightful

    therefore is immune to any lawsuit originated in the U.S.

    Sheesh. Stop and think for a second. Do they do business in the US? Then they aren't immune. Just think of the ramifications if foreign companies that did business in the US actually were immune from lawsuits like you claim.

    --
    - None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
  6. Re:IOC is not a U.S. organization by thisnamestoolong · · Score: 3, Insightful

    According to ACTA -- the organization which donates the most money to the reelection campaigns of ACTA-supporting politicians gets to declare ownership of anything they damn well please -- so it's hard to tell at the this point, but my money would be on the IOC.

    --
    To the haters: You can't win. If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine
  7. You can copyright facts now? by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Forget right of publicity - since when can the IOC claim copyright on a fact? "Lindsey Vonn won Gold at the Vancouver Olympics" - how can this possibly infringe any copyright or even contract? I would assume that the same way you can't get someone to sign up as a slave, you can't get someone to sign over the rights to have facts distributed about them....

    Is the IOC lawyer on crack? Wait, don't answer that.

    --
    Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
  8. Works how unworkable Intellectual Property is by unity100 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    back 1.5 years ago i made a comment saying if things went at that rate (then and now), in 10 years' time we wouldnt be able to even use common daily words among ourselves because some bastard would own their copyright. you people went out to make a running gag on me, claiming intellectual property on stuff in my post.

    however check it out. just this week, a bastard (or a number of bastards) were able to go as far to claim someone's name as intellectual property. from there to here, since then until now. it wont even take 10 years it seems.

    my point is that, if you allow some mechanism that can be abused, exploited, it WILL be abused, exploited. tangible assets as property is one thing, but once you allow 'owning' intellectual thoughts, concepts, that ends up in hampering mankind's progress because it will eventually prevent free exchange, use and progress of ideas, even very concept of 'thought' itself.

    --
    Read radical news here