Slashdot Mirror


IOC Claims Olympian Lindsey Vonn's Name As Intellectual Property

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?"

25 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 sys.stdout.write · · Score: 4, Informative

      I would try to refute your claims using quotes from the article, BUT THERE ISN'T ONE

    2. 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.

    3. Re:Sure they can claim it by tomhudson · · Score: 4, Interesting

      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.

      False. All you need to do is say "So sue me or FOAD." Then they have to:

      1. weigh if the Streisand effect is worth it
      2. weigh if the costs involved are worth it
      3. see if they have to sue in your jurisdiction
      4. weigh if the chance of winning is worth it (balance of the probabilities, etc)
      5. weigh if the eventual monetary damages, if any, are worth it

      Most lawyers letters are bluffs.

      Most people fold.

      It costs nothing to call their bluff and see if they take the next step, which is ... a demand letter giving you x number of days or else they'll sue.

      ... and again, you can fold or call their bluff ...

      ... because 90% of the time, it's a bluff.

    4. Re:Sure they can claim it by ColdWetDog · · Score: 4, Funny

      Either way, I'm sure they are happy with their site count today.

      Except possibly for the fact that the intersection of "People who purchase women's sporting gear" and "Slashdot readers" is going to be pretty close to a null set.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    5. 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
    6. Re:Sure they can claim it by schon · · Score: 4, Informative

      The article that was removed is available here.

      The mention of Ms. Vonn's name is in the following sentence:

      They just posted a good rundown of the Woman's field disguised as story about the rivalry between top skiers (and best friends!) Lindsey Vonn and Maria Reisch.

      That's it. No claim of her endorsing anything, just a summary of an article on another website.

    7. Re:Sure they can claim it by cthugha · · Score: 4, Informative

      I'll stand as a citation for the GP's statement that "most lawyers' letters are bluffs" where "letters" means initial letters of demand, and yes, IAAL. I'm not aware of whether any relevant data has been collected on the point, but any significant exposure to the practice of law will confirm the truth of the proposition.

    8. Re:Sure they can claim it by orgelspieler · · Score: 4, Funny
      I first read that as "She has legs strong enough to use men as skis as well."

      Dangerous indeed.

    9. Re:Sure they can claim it by QRDeNameland · · Score: 4, Funny

      I think I would just start using the phrases they claim to "own" much more often. Maybe even in court, if it makes it that far, ending everything with one of their phrases.

      Judge: "This claim is not only frivolous, it is devious, unethical, unprincipled, and I even dare say sociopathic!!"

      IP Lawyer: "Your honor, I object!!"

      Judge: "On what grounds?"

      IP Lawyer: "On the grounds that we claim ownership of "devious", "unethical", "unprincipled" and "sociopathic". And not just the words under copyright, but we also claim patents as business processes, and the practice of being "devious", "unethical", "unprincipled" and/or "sociopathic" under trade secret protection."

      Judge: "sigh....I really didn't want to have to do this, but you leave me no choice...I hereby declare martial law!! Bailiff, shoot that piece of shit in the face!!"

      Bailiff: "Gladly."

      Bailiff's Gun: BLAM!!!

      IP Lawyer: THUD!!

      Judge: "Martial law rescinded. Call in the janitor. Next case..."

      ...and they all lived happily ever after. The End

      --
      Momentarily, the need for the construction of new light will no longer exist.
    10. Re:Sure they can claim it by SteveFoerster · · Score: 5, Funny

      Wait, does this mean that you found the rest of the scenario to be realistic?

      --
      Space game using normal deck of cards: http://BattleCards.org
    11. Re:Sure they can claim it by NormalVisual · · Score: 4, Informative

      And not just sports gear. In the years that I spent working for two different laser companies, all of the goggles we had were made by Uvex. They're a *huge* name in industrial safety eyewear.

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    12. Re:Sure they can claim it by avxo · · Score: 5, Informative
      Unfortunately, they can -- whether it's right or wrong is a whole 'nother story. There are a number of treaties that nations that participate in the Olympics must sign. One of them is the Nairobi Treaty on Protection of the Olympic Symbol which basically grants the IOC a sort of super-duper trademark. This is just one of the many relevant treaties related to the Olympics and the "rights" of the IOC! Additionally, athletes who participate in the Olympics also have to sign a rather extensive agreement, which, among other things, prohibit them from making any "side promotion deals" during the run-up to and until the end of the Olympics.

      Again, I'm not suggesting that this is right -- or even sane. But, the way that things are, it seems that the IOC is within its specially crafted legal rights to ask UVEX to not refer to the Athlete formerly known as Lindsay Kildow.

    13. 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.

  2. In a related story... by garyisabusyguy · · Score: 4, Funny

    The IOC has claimed the term 'CANADA' as their exclusive intellectual property

    --
    Wherever You Go, There You Are
  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 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.

    2. Re:It depends... by youngone · · Score: 4, Funny

      Absolutely. I lost interest in the Olympics when the Iron Curtin collapsed. All of a sudden it wasn't those dirty cheating commies using drugs to win, it was our guys.

  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. You're not far off the truth by optimus2861 · · Score: 4, Informative

    VANOC trademarked the line, "With Glowing Hearts", which comes directly out of Canada's national anthem.

    Today's Olympics are all about whoring themselves out to corporate sponsors, being absolute dicks to anyone who isn't one, and stiffing local taxpayers with the bills for years if not decades on end. If you're the type who worships at the altar of the free market, you've got to admire their ruthlessly perfect exploitation of it.

  6. No matter who wins... by gnarlyhotep · · Score: 4, Funny

    we luge.

  7. As an olympian AND slashdot reader... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    Yes olympic athlete + geek is a possible combination...

    I can infact (or at least as far as Australian Olympians are concerned) confirm that you sign MANY papers that sign away the right to your name, image, performance (still dont know how they use that) and other things away to the national olympic body which in turn signs their right to the IOC.
    So they will have jurisdiction via the national olympic committee, and even if the company gives the IOC the bird, they can get back at the company by putting pressure on the athlete.

    Also it is VERY slack on her part. You are given multiple opportunities to inform the relevant bodies about any sponsorship agreements you have (so those guys WONT get hassled). And if she didnt inform them of it, then either she will get into shit (if company gets their lawyers) or the company will.

    If the company is using it without her knowledge, then good on the IOC. Because that means the athlete is being taken advantage of by the company. If the company wants to be associated with the athlete, they should pay!
    Most olympians have to work part time (with large amounts of unpaid holidays), and their sporting pursuit costs them MAJOR money to do. So they NEED every dollar they can get (yes some olympians are cashed up but they are a minority).

  8. View from Vancouver of Olympic hypocrisy by Geof · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.

    I live in Vancouver. I could not agree with you more.

    McDonald's started running an ad before the games. I think it speaks for itself. It shows a big box of golden french fries. Beside them the words "Why Wait? Go For Gold."

    Last weekend, along with my wife and son, I visited one of the "free" events for Chinese New Year. We wanted to see a Chinese dragon, dancing, and so forth. At the entrance, volunteers searched my bag and poured out my bottle of water. This was for the benefit of Coca-Cola Corp., which was selling bottled tap water (Dasani is tap water) for $3.50. I was literally (I don't mean figuratively) spitting mad. You don't go somewhere with a little kid unless you have food and water.

    Keep in mind that this is not a private party: it is funded by billions of public money and staffed with thousands of volunteers. We have shut down major streets, suspended colleges and universities for two weeks, and passed specific laws for the benefit of the Olympics. Or rather for the benefit of its sponsors.

    But of course this is a "green" Olympics. As the Coke booth banner read, "Refresh. Recycle. Repeat." - and you can't recycle if you're already reusing! A sign on the booth said a green light would go on when the booth was running solely on solar power. A spokeswoman had gathered a crowd of children, who were competing in a Jeopardy-style contest to guess just how Green Coca-Cola is.

    So yeah, that's what the Olympics does. It speaks of sport and healthy living, then promotes poison to kids. It exploits athletes who give decades of their lives and sign recording-industry-style contracts for the hope of a few minutes of fame. It exists outside the law (truly: a Canadian court ruled the Olympics violated the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, but did nothing because the IOC is outside Canadian jurisdiction). It goes from city to city, arranging with politicians and business leaders to transfer public money into private pockets.

  9. Re:You can copyright facts now? by wiredlogic · · Score: 4, Informative

    The main source of the problem is that the IOC has gotten special privileges over the use of the name "Olympic" and all variants as well as the interlocked ring motif. In the US this transcends all IP laws by an act of Congress. I'm sure they've accomplished similar things in other countries. Traditional trademark law would have allowed a Greek owned "Olympic Pizza" shop to continue running in Atlanta but it was forced to change its name by the IOC. People with Celtic ring designs have been pressured by the IOC to stop their infringement despite historical precedent that predates the modern Olympics. It should still be fine to say that Vonn won a gold medal in some unspecified international competition. However, as soon as you invoke the magic O-words you pass outside the realm of rationality and into the IOC's autocratic la la land.

    --
    I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
  10. stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Here's a fun one... I work for a web shop, one of our clients is a spa. They have a masseuse on staff who is presently in Vancouver working for Team USA. They indicated as much on their website last week. All they said was "our masseuse, Jane Doe, is in Vancouver working with team USA..."

    Today they get a cease-and-desist phone call from IOC lawyers... WTF?? What's the point? How are they profiting from this kind of stupidity?