2 ms·

Looks like they were trying to protect their trademark and logo (the rest of section 5a) and they went a little over the top. Probably somebody with an impoveri

by kijin 14y ago

Looks like they were trying to protect their trademark and logo (the rest of section 5a) and they went a little over the top. Probably somebody with an impoverished imagination. ("If anyone creates an image link to our site, the image will probably be our logo. We must stop that! What? Exceptions? But why would anyone create an image link to london2012.com without putting our logo in the image?") The real question is: Does a ToS like this actually have any legal force, either in the UK or anywhere else in the world?

webmonkeyuk 14y ago
I'm not sure but suspect not. The Olympic Committee are very, very hot on usage of the olympic logo and the word "Olympics"
- ktizo 14y ago
  I decided to have a look to see if I could find any details on https://www.london2012.com/brandprotection https://www.london2012.com/brandprotection and found this instead: This Connection is Untrusted You have asked Firefox to connect securely to www.london2012.com, but we can't confirm that your connection is secure. Normally, when you try to connect securely, sites will present trusted identification to prove that you are going to the right place. However, this site's identity can't be verified. ... www.london2012.com uses an invalid security certificate. The certificate is only valid for the following names: a248.e.akamai.net , .akamaihd.net , .akamaihd-staging.net (Error code: ssl_error_bad_cert_domain) Oops.
  - kijin 14y ago
    I see the same error whenever I inadvertently access the SSL version of a non-SSL site that uses Akamai CDN. Either somebody put up the wrong link, or you're using a Firefox add-on that tries too aggressively to use SSL. By the way, http://www.london2012.com/about-us/our-brand/using-the-brand/ http://www.london2012.com/about-us/our-brand/using-the-brand...
    - ktizo 14y ago
      Was the website of The Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea putting up an https link. Still it makes no difference to the fact that the https should have a valid certificate, especially for a site like that.
    - Argorak 14y ago
      Hm. The site links to a very interesting Question 31, which is missing...

by kijin 14y ago

webmonkeyuk 14y ago

I'm not sure but suspect not. The Olympic Committee are very, very hot on usage of the olympic logo and the word "Olympics"

ktizo 14y ago
I decided to have a look to see if I could find any details on https://www.london2012.com/brandprotection https://www.london2012.com/brandprotection and found this instead: This Connection is Untrusted You have asked Firefox to connect securely to www.london2012.com, but we can't confirm that your connection is secure. Normally, when you try to connect securely, sites will present trusted identification to prove that you are going to the right place. However, this site's identity can't be verified. ... www.london2012.com uses an invalid security certificate. The certificate is only valid for the following names: a248.e.akamai.net , .akamaihd.net , .akamaihd-staging.net (Error code: ssl_error_bad_cert_domain) Oops.
- kijin 14y ago
  I see the same error whenever I inadvertently access the SSL version of a non-SSL site that uses Akamai CDN. Either somebody put up the wrong link, or you're using a Firefox add-on that tries too aggressively to use SSL. By the way, http://www.london2012.com/about-us/our-brand/using-the-brand/ http://www.london2012.com/about-us/our-brand/using-the-brand...
  - ktizo 14y ago
    Was the website of The Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea putting up an https link. Still it makes no difference to the fact that the https should have a valid certificate, especially for a site like that.
  - Argorak 14y ago
    Hm. The site links to a very interesting Question 31, which is missing...