Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

This is a little spun. Certainly "Olympic" in the context of the games (e.g. "Ravelympics", which was clearly related to and synchronized with the summer games) is a plausibly trademarkable term. And the circle logo (which the sub shop was actually displaying!) absolutely is. The difference here is mechanism: instead of a private entity inventing and registering a trademark, congress granted a trademark to a pre-existing mark to the USOC after the fact.

I tend to agree that they'd be better served by not enforcing it so strictly. The games, after all, are a shared party for all of humanity. I think there's a strong case to be made for simple, celebratory use (for things like knitting more than for gyros, I'd say though).

But legally, there's just not much here. Clearly the marks are protectable, and someone needs to manage them. Congress picked the USOC.



> Clearly the marks are protectable, and someone needs to manage them. Congress picked the USOC.

The marks don't need to be protected. Congress could treat them as part of the public domain, just like (say) photographs taken by government employees as part of their job. But unfortunately the Olympics are a money making venture, and the sentiment

> The games... are a shared party for all of humanity

ceased to govern the Olympic committee a long time ago.


I suppose it could be public domain. Would that be better? It seems like that opens an entirely different sort of abuse. Without trademark protection, how do you prevent people from offering "Olympic" tickets to non-official events, for example? No free lunch. Trademark is the tool society has decided to use for this. And the only difference between this and any other trademark dispute (like putting an "i" before a product name or calling a music distribution company "Apple Computer") is in the technicalities of how the mark was awarded.

Sorry, I just don't find that interesting. It's OK to whine about the USOC being jerks, because I agree that they are. But trying to hold this up as an example of the evils of government is just silly.


> "The games, after all, are a shared party for all of humanity."

Are? Or ought to be?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: