Strange note from a Sally Jenkins column criticizing for a Bush 2004 ad for exploiting the Olympics:
“In 1972 there were 40 democracies in the world, today 120,” says a narrator as flags of all countries wave over a stadium. “Freedom is spreading throughout the world like a sunrise. And this Olympics, there will be two more free nations. And two fewer terrorist regimes.”
The USOC is reviewing the ad and considering whether to ask the campaign to pull it, as an infringement of its exclusive rights to the Olympics. The IOC charter states that the Olympic word, symbol and concept belong exclusively to the IOC (and to the USOC in the United States) and should not be used for political purposes.
Looks like another case of property rights being stretched too far. I can buy the USOC wanting to protect its symbol–they have too or it will lose exclusive rights to the trademark. But wanting to block someone from using the word “Olympics”? And what’s the “concept” which they supposedly have enforceable property rights over?
If they could get away with it, I suspect the IOC would try to forbid people from talking about the games without permission.
Damn, did the house counsel for the IOC take a job with the RIAA? Did s/he then advise the RIAA to take it’s no-nonsense copyright law interpretation which holds that singing a song in the shower is a violation of the songwriter’s IP rights?
In 1972 there were 40 democracies in the world, today 120
And GWB had what to do with this? The number of new democracies (only counting the ones that have had actual, you know, elections) is the exact same as when GWB came into power as far as I know.