(edit title) Olympics ban LONDON and SUMMER! And "Gold, Silver and Bronze"! Options

[Garry Jones]

You could not make this up. You'd have thought this was comedy series 2012 rather than the truth....

-------------------------------------------------------------
Hundreds of uniformed Olympics officers will begin touring the country today enforcing sponsors' multimillion-pound marketing deals.

Wearing purple caps and tops, the experts in trading and advertising working for the Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA) are heading the biggest brand protection operation staged in the UK. Under legislation specially introduced for the London Games, they have the right to enter shops and offices and bring court action with fines of up to £20,000.

Olympics organisers have warned businesses that during London 2012 their advertising should not include a list of banned words, including "gold", "silver" and "bronze", "summer", "sponsors" and "London".

At the 40 Olympics venues, 800 retailers have been banned from serving chips to avoid infringing fast-food rights secured by McDonald's.

"These rights are acquired by companies who invest millions of pounds to help support the staging of the Games," Locog said. "People who seek the same benefits for free – by engaging in ambush marketing or producing counterfeit goods – are effectively depriving the Games of revenue."

Publicans have been advised that blackboards advertising live TV coverage must not refer to beer brands or brewers without an Olympics deal, while caterers and restaurateurs have been told not to advertise dishes that could be construed as having an association with the event.

The scale of the brand enforcement squad is nonetheless likely to intensify criticism that the Olympics has become too corporate. Paul Jordan, an expert in brand protection at Bristows solicitors who advises firms on the rules, said they were almost certainly tougher than at previous Olympics. "No other brands would have people walking the streets being their eyes and ears, protecting their interests," he said.

-------------------------------------------------------------

What about Lonsdale London tops? What about "Gold" outside a jewelers shop?

Is this the Olympics of 2012 or 1984?

Source:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-...rs-7945436.html

[byke]

Rimmel the ladies cosmetic company has the slogan "Get the London look" ... and is usually is related to a whole slew of colors including those that were mentioned ... will be fun to see how they deal with that one LOL.

 

 

[Gamla Hälsingebock]

So, they are not banning the usage of the word "Olympics"?

What about Olympic Fries? Could that work or will Big Brother object?

[AW1]

Golden showers?

[Garry Jones]

That's it.

This is the worst one!

"
Earlier this year grandmother Joy Tomkins, 81, was prevented from entering a doll with a hand-knitted ‘GB 2012’ outfit into a church fundraising sale. Authorities ruled that the doll, which was due to be sold for £1 in May, breached the rules.
"

Top that!

F*ck the OLYMPICS!

[Micardo]

Usuall Gary you write total bull**** but for once I agree with you.

[drubb]

No unfortunately he still writes or copies and pastes bullsh't. The paper as most do talk crap and you swallow it.
The Listed Expressions are:
– any two of the words: Games, Two Thousand and Twelve, 2012, Twenty-Twelve
OR
– any word in the list above with one or more of the words: London, medals, sponsors, summer, gold, silver, bronze
This prevents, for
example, businesses from running any advertising or marketing campaigns which suggest they are associated with
London 2012 without LOCOG's authority

If he took 5 minutes to look it up he could find out the facts.

[Garry Jones]

Drubb. I do not like you attitiude. However - I am all for being as correct and neutral without slanting a story. I am happy for your input even if I think you should have been nicer when you corrected me,

You spent your five minutes googling but I didn't think it was necessary.

I was sent a link. It looked so correct I did not think I needed to check if it was a combination of words. I now realise I - AND THE BRITISH NATION - have been duped. Are some people trying to make out it's worse than it actually is? It appears so. One wonders why...

Full text in link...
(Note, nowhere does it make mention of the facts you found. Forgive me for believing this anti-olympic propaganda)

------------------
Hundreds of uniformed Olympics officers will begin touring the country today enforcing sponsors' multimillion-pound marketing deals, in a highly organised mission that contrasts with the scramble to find enough staff to secure Olympic sites.

Almost 300 enforcement officers will be seen across the country checking firms to ensure they are not staging "ambush marketing" or illegally associating themselves with the Games at the expense of official sponsors such as Adidas, McDonald's, Coca-Cola and BP. The clampdown goes on while 3,500 soldiers on leave are brought in to bail out the security firm G4S which admitted it could not supply the numbers of security staff it had promised.

Yesterday, the Culture Secretary, Jeremy Hunt, refused to rule out that even more soldiers may be called upon to help with security, but dismissed the issue as merely a "hitch". However, as well as the regular Army, the Olympic "brand army" will start its work with a vengeance today.

Wearing purple caps and tops, the experts in trading and advertising working for the Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA) are heading the biggest brand protection operation staged in the UK. Under legislation specially introduced for the London Games, they have the right to enter shops and offices and bring court action with fines of up to £20,000.

Olympics organisers have warned businesses that during London 2012 their advertising should not include a list of banned words, including "gold", "silver" and "bronze", "summer", "sponsors" and "London".

Publicans have been advised that blackboards advertising live TV coverage must not refer to beer brands or brewers without an Olympics deal, while caterers and restaurateurs have been told not to advertise dishes that could be construed as having an association with the event.

At the 40 Olympics venues, 800 retailers have been banned from serving chips to avoid infringing fast-food rights secured by McDonald's.

Marina Palomba, for the McCann Worldgroup agency in London, described the rules as "the most draconian law in advance of an Olympic Games ever". The ODA and Locog (London Organising Committee of the Olympic Games) say the rules are necessary to protect brands.

"These rights are acquired by companies who invest millions of pounds to help support the staging of the Games," Locog said. "People who seek the same benefits for free – by engaging in ambush marketing or producing counterfeit goods – are effectively depriving the Games of revenue."

Some £1.4bn of the Games' £11.4bn budget comes from private sector sponsors. The International Olympic Committee's 11 global partners, including Coca-Cola, Visa and Proctor & Gamble, are contributing £700m while £700m comes from London 2012 partners, including Adidas, BT, EDF, and Lloyds TSB.

The scale of the brand enforcement squad is nonetheless likely to intensify criticism that the Olympics has become too corporate. Paul Jordan, an expert in brand protection at Bristows solicitors who advises firms on the rules, said they were almost certainly tougher than at previous Olympics. "No other brands would have people walking the streets being their eyes and ears, protecting their interests," he said.

A spokesman for the Olympic Delivery Authority, whose team of 286 enforcement officers have been seconded from 30 local councils, said it had a duty to ensure businesses were meeting the rules.

"We are using experienced local authority staff who currently enforce street trading and advertising legislation. They have all been fully trained," the spokesman said.

"Deliberate ambush offences will be dealt with using the full enforcement powers conferred on officers."
-------------------------------------------
Source:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-...rs-7945436.html
------------------------------------------
So, I apologise for spreading the b*llsh*t. I was really surprised - but I did not smell a rat, the story appeared to be genuine. I wonder why the British Public are being lied to... (Ok - more "economical with the truth" than a lie, but why didn't they tell it like it is?).

????

[Yorkshireman]

@drubb is totally correct, the brand protection documentation is quick to find, takes 1 minute search, and if you look at page 24 it shows the flow for deciding if the word combinations are breaching the rules or not:

http://www.london2012.com/documents/brand-...ting-rights.pdf

Of-course the newspapers happened to miss the full rules ... it wasn't sensational enough!

[sometimesinsweden]

Well, it is pretty sensational that certain combinations of normal, non-branded words aren't allowed for usage and that it's enforced by public servants on the behest of private business. Majority of people can see that to fine or close down a small newsagent for writing London Olympics 2012 on its front window is absurd and totalitarian.

It just emphasises more and more the changes in the UK over the past 15 years where the civic services are now controlled by the demand of the private sector.

[Gamla Hälsingebock]

Sounds like the "old west" with it's vigilantes and regulators.

Sounds also like a law suit against free speech to me, eventually.

I don't believe any word that is not copyrighted can be denied public usage.

What if those words were displayed in a language other than English?

Would they also be banned?

Interesting.

[PDX]

http://www.london2012.com/documents/brand-...ting-rights.pdf

That is just ...astonishing (comical beyond belief as well)

~~~PDX~~~

[Yorkshireman]

Sounds also like a law suit against free speech to me, eventually.. I don't believe any word that is not copyrighted can be denied public usage.

The UK Government passed/approved through Parliament a number of laws to protect these commercial aspects.

Does the UK have freedom of speach? Isn't the UK one of the only countries in Europe that does not have a constitution for the people , basically Parliament can do whatever it wants when a majority is in favour.

[sometimesinsweden]

The ongoing prosecutions to certain Twitter users for offering their inane, yet non-violent, thoughts would indicate that we don't.

[drubb]

The problem with you Garry you start these stories then whine about them stating this is bullshit or fuck this without bothering to learn the facts. I am not sure why you would think that a newspaper would tell you the truth.You just believe what you read and to you that is gospel. Didn't cross your mind that maybe there was more to this than simply banning the word gold etc? Reminds me of Trow linking his own stories to back up his theories. The British press is renowned for stretching the truth somewhat, also has a past history of building things/people up only to knock them down. I personally thinking most of this is nonsense but you are the type of person who would link a story of some poor old woman duped into buying dodgy merchandise or losing money in a shop should pertaining to be "official" and probably demand that the olympic committee should have done something about this.
The press write these stories, people think this is shit but where is an actually retailer complaining that their sales will be affected because they cannot advertise themselves with 2012 etc. I am sure they are happy for the extra customers that will come to the olympic village areas regardless.