6 ms·

My hometown recently hosted the first Youth Olympic Winter games. Despite the fact that you probably never heard of them, they are just as official as the real

by soult 14y ago

My hometown recently hosted the first Youth Olympic Winter games. Despite the fact that you probably never heard of them, they are just as official as the real Olympic games. The organizers demanded that every non-sponsor logo in the venues be removed. Not just advertising, they wanted everything gone. Some poor schmucks had to go around and cover every logo with a piece of tape. On clocks, furniture, faucets and even inside the bidets and toilet bowls. Meanwhile they plastered ads for Coca Cola and Samsung all over our city. Olympic spirit my ass.

jerf 14y ago
"Olympic spirit my ass." Careful where you say that... they might brand that, too.
- mikedmiked 14y ago
  "Summer of sport spirit" actually has a nice ring to it. I wonder about the allowance of typos? Could I sell merchandise with "Olympix" or "London 2k12"?
  - Mankhool 14y ago
    Based on my experience with VANOC well in advance of the Winter Olympics here in Vancouver - NO. I was in the process of making Olympic Anagram T-shirts (Olympian = Palimony) etc. and they threatened to destroy my life if any of my ART was found being sold online, on the street or on Mars. True. Also, given that the Olympics have become a political battering ram to push through, at all levels of government, any project at any cost at any consequence in the future, the answer is still - NO.
    - taligent 14y ago
      Ridiculous argument. 1) You elect your government. 2) Your government CHOOSES to participate in the Olympic bidding process and CHOOSES when and how to build infrastructure.
  - taligent 14y ago
    Can you go in the street and sell Mikrosoft Windows or Apple EyeMacs ? For a website with so many startups you think people would be a little more aware of how copyright and trademarks work.
    - Mankhool 14y ago
      As a Canadian, living in Canada, a country with NO "fair use" provisions because our laws are derived from those of the United Kingdom, I am well aware of how copyright and trademarks work. The Olympics are a rarefied, global, multinational corporation that demand governments bend to their will with respect to their trademarks if they want the games. Governments do so because it brings in revenue and also allows them to undertake mega projects that would otherwise never see the light of day.
    - repsilat 14y ago
      Check Microsoft vs MikeRoweSoft: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_vs._MikeRoweSoft http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_vs._MikeRoweSoft Also: For the 2010 FIFA World Cup the airline Kulula called itself the "Unofficial National Carrier of the You-Know-What". The ad was pulled when a complaint was lodged, though. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8576220.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8576220.stm
      - ktizo 14y ago
        Macrosoft - Where do you want to go tomorrow?
excuse-me 14y ago
The same city where the olympics used a line from the national anthem as it's motto and tried to claim that it had a copyright on it?
patrickk 14y ago
Reminds me of the 2010 World Cup "ambush-marketing" fiasco involving 36 ladies who were detained by South African police for "advertising" a non-FIFA sanctioned beer at the world cup, by daring to wear their countries colour at a game. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/competitions/world-cup-2010/7830319/World-Cup-2010-Police-arrest-women-in-Dutch-orange-dresses.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/competitions/world... Wearing (just) your underwear at a game = OK. Wearing clothing with a non-sanctioned beer label = not ok. Insane.
- fennecfoxen 14y ago
  You know, for all that I hear people complain about "corporations buying our government", I sure don't hear a lot of the same people complaining in this case where they have actually explicitly bought off the government. All for the glory of Visa, Proctor and Gamble, McDonalds, Acer, Samsung, Panasonic, General Electric, and Dow Chemical.
  - taligent 14y ago
    It's because normal people understand that: a) Companies who sponsor an event have a right to not be screwed over. b) Most taxpayers don't want to pay more for the Olympics then they have to.
    - rhizome 14y ago
      a) does that mean the people necessarily have to be screwed over if that's the only way for the company not to be? the desires of commerce necessitate a loss of freedom?
    - mcantelon 14y ago
      >Companies who sponsor an event have a right to not be screwed over. > >Most taxpayers don't want to pay more for the Olympics then they have to. It's stupid to pay to host a branded event that won't let us talk about it. The modern Olympics, at its root, is a scam. A big money party is hosted so local businesses and connected contractors can make a killing and the expenses get charges to taxpayers. It's always justified as economic stimulus but it's the most vague, frivolous possible means of economic stimulus and tax dollars should not be spent on it.
taligent 14y ago
I've never understand the hatred towards sponsors who partly pay for the games. Would you rather have taxpayers pay even more for the Olympics ? Or how about in the case of the Youth Olympics not having it at all.
- gaius 14y ago
  What they get for the relatively trivial amount they pay is massively disproportionate to the benefit the taxpayer sees.
hef19898 14y ago
During the kicking a ball around a green field with a lot of people watching event during a hot season in germany, they almost shut down the ball kickers team busses of the hosting nation down by said logo issue. Since Mercedes (the producer of the team busses) was not a official sponsor (that was Hyundai, ehich didn't produce any busses afaik) they had to remove the mercedes logo. Tough luck was, they had radar sensors in the logo, so covering it would hve shut down the electronic (at least according to the press reports). Whats really rediculous is, that even when a official sponsor can't provide a certain product or service, the other logo has to be removed. Even if you are official supplier to a participating team but not an official sponsor you can't show your logo. I'm wondering when we have the first non-state entities being recognized as souvereign states... Hell, then you could even tax your own employees! :-)

by soult 14y ago

jerf 14y ago

"Olympic spirit my ass." Careful where you say that... they might brand that, too.

mikedmiked 14y ago
"Summer of sport spirit" actually has a nice ring to it. I wonder about the allowance of typos? Could I sell merchandise with "Olympix" or "London 2k12"?
- Mankhool 14y ago
  Based on my experience with VANOC well in advance of the Winter Olympics here in Vancouver - NO. I was in the process of making Olympic Anagram T-shirts (Olympian = Palimony) etc. and they threatened to destroy my life if any of my ART was found being sold online, on the street or on Mars. True. Also, given that the Olympics have become a political battering ram to push through, at all levels of government, any project at any cost at any consequence in the future, the answer is still - NO.
  - taligent 14y ago
    Ridiculous argument. 1) You elect your government. 2) Your government CHOOSES to participate in the Olympic bidding process and CHOOSES when and how to build infrastructure.
- taligent 14y ago
  Can you go in the street and sell Mikrosoft Windows or Apple EyeMacs ? For a website with so many startups you think people would be a little more aware of how copyright and trademarks work.
  - Mankhool 14y ago
    As a Canadian, living in Canada, a country with NO "fair use" provisions because our laws are derived from those of the United Kingdom, I am well aware of how copyright and trademarks work. The Olympics are a rarefied, global, multinational corporation that demand governments bend to their will with respect to their trademarks if they want the games. Governments do so because it brings in revenue and also allows them to undertake mega projects that would otherwise never see the light of day.
  - repsilat 14y ago
    Check Microsoft vs MikeRoweSoft: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_vs._MikeRoweSoft http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_vs._MikeRoweSoft Also: For the 2010 FIFA World Cup the airline Kulula called itself the "Unofficial National Carrier of the You-Know-What". The ad was pulled when a complaint was lodged, though. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8576220.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8576220.stm
    - ktizo 14y ago
      Macrosoft - Where do you want to go tomorrow?

excuse-me 14y ago

The same city where the olympics used a line from the national anthem as it's motto and tried to claim that it had a copyright on it?

patrickk 14y ago

Reminds me of the 2010 World Cup "ambush-marketing" fiasco involving 36 ladies who were detained by South African police for "advertising" a non-FIFA sanctioned beer at the world cup, by daring to wear their countries colour at a game. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/competitions/world-cup-2010/7830319/World-Cup-2010-Police-arrest-women-in-Dutch-orange-dresses.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/football/competitions/world... Wearing (just) your underwear at a game = OK. Wearing clothing with a non-sanctioned beer label = not ok. Insane.

fennecfoxen 14y ago
You know, for all that I hear people complain about "corporations buying our government", I sure don't hear a lot of the same people complaining in this case where they have actually explicitly bought off the government. All for the glory of Visa, Proctor and Gamble, McDonalds, Acer, Samsung, Panasonic, General Electric, and Dow Chemical.
- taligent 14y ago
  It's because normal people understand that: a) Companies who sponsor an event have a right to not be screwed over. b) Most taxpayers don't want to pay more for the Olympics then they have to.
  - rhizome 14y ago
    a) does that mean the people necessarily have to be screwed over if that's the only way for the company not to be? the desires of commerce necessitate a loss of freedom?
  - mcantelon 14y ago
    >Companies who sponsor an event have a right to not be screwed over. > >Most taxpayers don't want to pay more for the Olympics then they have to. It's stupid to pay to host a branded event that won't let us talk about it. The modern Olympics, at its root, is a scam. A big money party is hosted so local businesses and connected contractors can make a killing and the expenses get charges to taxpayers. It's always justified as economic stimulus but it's the most vague, frivolous possible means of economic stimulus and tax dollars should not be spent on it.

taligent 14y ago

I've never understand the hatred towards sponsors who partly pay for the games. Would you rather have taxpayers pay even more for the Olympics ? Or how about in the case of the Youth Olympics not having it at all.

gaius 14y ago
What they get for the relatively trivial amount they pay is massively disproportionate to the benefit the taxpayer sees.

hef19898 14y ago

During the kicking a ball around a green field with a lot of people watching event during a hot season in germany, they almost shut down the ball kickers team busses of the hosting nation down by said logo issue. Since Mercedes (the producer of the team busses) was not a official sponsor (that was Hyundai, ehich didn't produce any busses afaik) they had to remove the mercedes logo. Tough luck was, they had radar sensors in the logo, so covering it would hve shut down the electronic (at least according to the press reports). Whats really rediculous is, that even when a official sponsor can't provide a certain product or service, the other logo has to be removed. Even if you are official supplier to a participating team but not an official sponsor you can't show your logo. I'm wondering when we have the first non-state entities being recognized as souvereign states... Hell, then you could even tax your own employees! :-)