Quote:
Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
My post simply pointed out that the Bush campaign pissed off members of the IOC with the ad, and probably torpedoed the already-slim chance that NYC would get the 2012 Olympics. I also pointed out that it'd be impossible to prove one way or another, because the IOC didn't have an official position on the matter. I didn't mention copyright at all.
|
Yes you did and here is what you said:
IOC and Bush Post #2850
Quote:
Originally posted by Replaced_Texan
So there's this brouhaha over an ad that the bush campaign is running about the Olympics, citing the Iraqi and Afghanistan teams as two new* democracies. The United States Olympic Committee has asked the Bush campaign to pull the ad because they have rights to term "Olympics." (I think they've been fairly agressive in defending their copyright.) The campaign told them to fuck off.
|
This is why I attempted to educate you on the difference between protecting a mark and what copyrights protect (i.e., not marks). You were talking about the IOC protecting their copyrights.
http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/sho...598#post118598
