IOC Trademarks Part of Canadian National Anthem 412
gravis777 sends us to BoingBoing for news that the International Olympic Committee has trademarked a line from the Canadian National Anthem and is threatening to sue anyone who uses it. The line in question is "with glowing hearts." "The committee is so serious about protecting the Olympic brand it managed to get a landmark piece of legislation passed in the House of Commons last year that made using certain phrases related to the Games a violation of law. The list includes the number 2010 and the word 'winter,' phrases that normally couldn't be trademarked because they are so general."
Re:2010 with glowing hearts (Score:4, Interesting)
It will stop when passing legislation this stupid can land them in jail, and not a second before.
I sure hope the estate of Callixa Lavalee(author of the anthem) is listening, and has contacted their lawyers...
Sydney Olympic Games (Score:5, Interesting)
Reminds me of when they found that they could not use the phrase "Sydney Olympic Games" because Mr Syd Games -- Mr Sydney *Olympic* Games -- had registered it as his trademark.
Boy was John Clarke pissed about that.
Beat them ... (Score:4, Interesting)
Quick ... need to trademark all even numbers between 2012 and 2100.
Is the IOC really so powerful.. (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:That's ok (Score:1, Interesting)
Which is funny because I'm an American and I do. It's a beautiful song.
Re:Very funny (Score:3, Interesting)
And withglowinghearts.ca [withglowinghearts.ca] is also taken. Looks like a site for a book about paralympic athletes. Wonder when (not if) the sick heartless [expletive deleted] at IOC will try and yank the domain.
I stopped paying attention (Score:5, Interesting)
Glowing hearts? (Score:5, Interesting)
Does that mean that Spielberg is gonna get sued for E.T.? What if I watch E.T. in winter 2010... Will they have to re-release an edited version with glowing heart censored out?
Anyone else wondering if the IOC has strayed so far from the original spirit and intent of the Olympics and become such business-focused greedy rat bastards, that we need to give them the big finger and start over with a governing body that is actually focused on the athletes and the games rather than the money?
Re:What I have to say... (Score:3, Interesting)
Another poster has already pointed out that prior art doesn't apply, but I'll provide a sample nonetheless here [cornell.edu]. ;-)
I move we make these mice honorary Canadian citizens. They might be better than the weasels we have in Parliament.
Cheers
Re:Ok so... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Mod parent troll (Score:3, Interesting)
So what did you expect? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:That's ok (Score:2, Interesting)
Actually, at one time there were people in the US who seriously considered annexing Canada, possibly even by force if necessary. However, that was a while ago. Benedict Arnold was involved with it, and as you may know he later betrayed us in a treasonous fashion and became perhaps the most infamous name in US history, a name still used as a synonym for traitor. I don't think anyone has taken the notion seriously since his day.
On the other hand, it's also true that while most people from the US think of Canada as "another country", a lot of us don't really think of Canada when we think of a *foreign* country. For instance, a conversation like this is not unusual:
Alice: Have you ever been to a foreign country?
Bob: Yeah, actually I have.
Alice: Really? Where?
Bob: My dad and I went up to Ontario on a fishing trip three years ago...
Alice: That's just Canada. That doesn't count!
I think a combination of several factors is at work here.
In the first place, Canada isn't overseas. Everyone knows foreign countries are overseas. (Mexico is foreign despite this, but Mexico is fairly third-world and also fails the other criteria below.)
In the second place, the cultural differences are, in a word, minor. (The biggest one I can think of off the top of my head is that Canadians are comfortable paying absolutely insane amounts of sales tax. Granted, people here have trouble *identifying* with that, but on the other hand it doesn't make you seem incomprehensibly alien, just... complacent. Oh, and your paper money looks weird, but this is becoming less and less of a big deal every time the US Treasury experiments more and more with stranger and stranger designs on our own money. First the enormous portraits, and did you know they're using colors besides green now? What do they think we are, the Republic of Milton Bradley? You get used to that, and Canadian money hardly even seems weird any more.)
Third, most Canadians speak English, with barely even an accent. Discounting the word "eh" and a few Commonwealth-style spellings, you practically speak *American* English. This by itself probably wouldn't by a very big deal, but in combination with the other factors it all starts to add up.
Also, you don't need a passport to go to Canada. You need one (and probably a visa as well) to go to any other country, including Mexico, but you can go to Canada for the weekend and just show your driver's license or birth certificate or something when you cross the border, no big deal.
Finally, there's no significant international tension between the US and Canada. Strong evidence of this is the fact that Canada would easily be capable of creating nuclear weapons but pointedly does not do so, even though (and perhaps partly because) we have them. When there's tension across the border, you see the opposite pattern. When the USSR got the atom bomb, China wanted it; when China got it, India needed it, and when India got it, Pakistan felt they needed it. But you never saw Canada going, "Oh, no, the US has this terrible weapon, what are we going to do? We have to have it too, so they can't use it on us!" But between the US and Canada there's no real tension, so the Canadian government has never been afraid that we're going to nuke them. (Indeed, using a nuke that close to US soil is absolutely unthinkable for us, even if it wouldn't start WWIII, which it might do.)