Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Social Networks Censorship Facebook The Media Twitter United Kingdom Technology Your Rights Online

Posting Photos of Olympics Could Land You In Court 394

Posted by timothy
from the land-you-a-lesson dept.
hypnosec writes "With London's summer 2012 games due to take place in the very near future, you'd think that organizers would make more of an effort and persuade people to show more of an interest — yet it appears the complete opposite has happened, with strict guidelines banning athletes from posting photos of themselves on Twitter with products that aren't official Olympics sponsors, as well as prohibiting videos or photos to be taken from the athlete's village. Oh and just for good measure, fans could find themselves barred from sharing videos and photos on Facebook and YouTube of themselves delighting in said Olympics action."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Posting Photos of Olympics Could Land You In Court

Comments Filter:
  • Another (Score:5, Insightful)

    by geekoid (135745) <dadinportland@@@yahoo...com> on Thursday April 19, 2012 @05:11PM (#39738913) Homepage Journal

    reason not to watch the Olympics

    • Re:Another (Score:4, Insightful)

      by h4rr4r (612664) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @05:14PM (#39738965)

      Mod parent up.

      If the crazy rules about non-professional professionals and what they do to the cities they visit was not enough here is another good reason to ignore them.

      • Can we all just agree it's 1999 again, and have a "do over"?

        • by X0563511 (793323) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @05:40PM (#39739315) Homepage Journal

          Huh, it seems the Rapture really did happen... and we are all the remainders just finally starting to notice we are in Hell :P

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by nebulus4 (799015)

          Can we all just agree it's 1999 again, and have a "do over"?

          Except that year 2000 was still 20st century... you know, 21st century [wikipedia.org] began on January 1, 2001.

          • Stop agreeing with me, pedantically.

          • by jc42 (318812) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @10:12PM (#39741795) Homepage Journal

            Except that year 2000 was still 20st century...

            Oh no! It's the old "There was no year zero in the Western calendar" bugbear appearing to drag yet another discussion into the depths and devour it.

            So far, my favorite comment on that topic [wikipedia.org] is that the years 1 through 524 also didn't exist in our Western calendar. The numbering we use, usually called "A.D." (for Anno Domini" was devised in the year 525, and wasn't used before that time. Actually, it was hardly used by anyone except a few monks for several centuries after that.

            My other favorite comment on the topic is that today is also the start of a century - the century that starts today and ends 19 April 2112. Every day is the start of a century. So arguing against a popular "start of century" year is basically silly.

            Any group of people is free to settle on an arbitrary "epoch" as the start of their calendar, and many of us do just that. Thus, the unix crowd uses the start of 1970-01-01 UTC as the start of their time(1) date/time system, and nobody seems to chide them for missing the first 1969 years of the calendar. Astronomers also have their own favorite zero time, but use only years (with a decimal point and lots more digits to whatever precision they need at the moment).

            But silliness can be fun, so go at it ...

            • by nebulus4 (799015) on Friday April 20, 2012 @01:30AM (#39742765)

              So far, my favorite comment on that topic [wikipedia.org] is that the years 1 through 524 also didn't exist in our Western calendar. The numbering we use, usually called "A.D." (for Anno Domini" was devised in the year 525, and wasn't used before that time. Actually, it was hardly used by anyone except a few monks for several centuries after that.

              What difference does it make if it wasn't used back then? It is used now.

              If you're 5 months old, it's your first year on Earth. If you're 1 year and 3 months old, it's your second year on Earth. Year 2000 is the 2000th year. In order for us to say that two millennia have passed the year must end, thus the new millennium starts in 2001. There's no year 0, because it would mean the 0th year of Christ on Earth. Which means he did not exist, ergo BC.

              My other favorite comment on the topic is that today is also the start of a century - the century that starts today and ends 19 April 2112. Every day is the start of a century. So arguing against a popular "start of century" year is basically silly.

              We are talking about Gregorian calendar here. The year doesn't start at April 19. You are free to create whatever system you like, it wouldn't change the Gregorian calendar though. Therefore, it's a silly argument.

      • Re:Another (Score:5, Interesting)

        by AmiMoJo (196126) <mojoNO@SPAMworld3.net> on Thursday April 19, 2012 @06:14PM (#39739719) Homepage

        Athlete's village [google.com]

        Posted those years ago. I worked on the fire alarm system for the Athlete's village and took those photos on-site. The system itself is a disaster and totally unsafe.

        Go on, sue me.

        • by mug funky (910186)

          The system itself is a disaster and totally unsafe.

          Go on, sue me.

          nice to see someone who takes pride in their work :)

    • Re:Another (Score:5, Informative)

      by poetmatt (793785) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @05:15PM (#39738979) Journal

      I never started missing them until they started these ridiculous rules.

      Now they're more difficult to find online and less valuable to me as a consumer, as their value is being decreased by the IOC.

      Way to go, IOC.

      • Same thing here. I used to follow the Olympics minute by minute. But I didn't even bother watching a single minute of the last winter Olympics (being canadian and all). The magic is gone (it really hasn't helped that they started showing off the "professional" teams. You don't get the same involvement from those guys. It certainly doesn't feel like it's the most important competition to them, and just got me bored.

        I wasn't planning to watch the Olympics anyways, but I'm certainly not moved to changed my min

      • Re:Another (Score:5, Insightful)

        by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 19, 2012 @06:26PM (#39739869)

        What do you expect? The entire thing is about monies from advertising.

        While it's nice to actually watch events, bullshit rules surrounding the events being broadcast, and rules like this restricting the fans and athletes are exactly while I'll likely skip the whole thing.

        Here's a case study: want to see how Capitalism can destroy something? Look at the Olympics.

        • Re:Another (Score:4, Insightful)

          by Darinbob (1142669) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @08:27PM (#39741033)

          Problem is that these sorts of rules diminish advertising revenue. Money comes from external advertisers and they want people to watch the Olympics; it's the whole point of giving advertising dollars to the IOC so that more eyeballs see their ads and see athletes using their products. If the eyeballs stop watching that backfires. If the additional word of mouth about a product dries up then that hurts the product. People won't care about the athletes if they don't do any sort of promotion and only appear for a few minutes during official coverage, and they certainly won't care about what the footwear the athlete prefers this way.

          • Re:Another (Score:4, Interesting)

            by janimal (172428) on Friday April 20, 2012 @04:50AM (#39743639)

            Sounds like the music and film industry. Soon the IOC is going to start complaining that revenues are down, because people in the city see the results for free in newspapers and on the internet and therefore don't feel the need to watch the games with all the adverts. So results will become copyright. Mark my word.

        • Re:Another (Score:4, Interesting)

          by Fjandr (66656) on Friday April 20, 2012 @04:32AM (#39743569) Homepage Journal

          Here's a case study: want to see how Authoritarianism can destroy something? Look at the Olympics.

          The IOC is about as anti-competitive an entity as you can get, which is ironic given that their business is putting on competitions.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          by CheeseyDJ (800272)

          want to see how Capitalism can destroy something? Look at the Olympics.

          Couldn't agree more. If any more evidence was required, just consider the "official Olympic restaurant"...

          You guessed it: McDonald's.

          I can't actually think of a less suitable sponsor for the Olympics.

      • Re:Another (Score:5, Interesting)

        by dwywit (1109409) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @09:46PM (#39741623)

        Want to change things? Write a letter (NOT a tweet or email, or facebook posting) to the sponsors' PR departments. Say something like "I'm aware that you've paid $BIGNUM for sponsorship and associated exclusive marketing rights, but guess what? I'm not going to watch, and I'm not going to buy your products." Make sure you CC a copy to the IOC, and one to the local broadcaster.
         
        There was, IIRC, an estimate from marketing research that went something along the lines of "one person who actually takes the trouble to complain represents x number of people who are unhappy, but don't take the trouble to complain". If enough people made their views known to the sponsors, LOC and broadcasters, they just might take notice and change their ways.
         
        And pigs might fly, I know.

    • I haven't watched the Olympic games .. shit, I don't even remember when I watched them the last time. I vaguely remember watching the games in Moscow.

      I really couldn't get over the corporate crap and the whole irrelevance whether this or that country won. Who really gives a shit?

      • The last time I watched the olympics, it was 1996, I was 16, and Dominique Moceanu was very much a cutie.
      • Re:Another (Score:5, Interesting)

        by Beardo the Bearded (321478) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @05:36PM (#39739281)

        I watched the 2010 Winter Olympics. All of them, as much as I could, in HD on my new TV.

        Why? Because as a BC resident, I was going to be footing the FOUR BILLION DOLLAR bill for the rest of my working life. I figured I damned well should watch the spectacle. From the building of the Canada Line to the dead Romanian; from the the failed moving torch to the helicoptering in of snow from other locales to the demolition of the athlete's housing and their reappearance as low-income housing down the street (which, by the way, I think was one good thing to come out of Those Damned Games.), I saw the entire lifecycle.

        For what it's worth, I don't really understand the obsession people have with sports. It's like I've got a kind of colour blindness or something.

        • Re:Another (Score:5, Insightful)

          by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 19, 2012 @06:28PM (#39739895)

          For what it's worth, I don't really understand the obsession people have with sports. It's like I've got a kind of colour blindness or something.

          It's the same reason why everyone else doesn't really understand our obsessions with cartoons, comic books, cult TV shows, and video games. Well, almost the same reason, in that we know our obsessions are way more importanter!

          • by maugle (1369813)
            Also, we haven't been able to get the government to fork over 4 billion dollars to host the world's biggest video game competition.
    • by ctaylor (160829)

      Like we needed another reason?

    • I don't think I've actually watched an Olympic Games sports* event since I was 12.

      Aside from the ridiculous rules, the insane costs, the fact that the country's representatives are not necessarily their best, the presence of 'team' sports, the use of pools (the competition form, not the bodies-of-water) in some sports events, etc. have long put me off watching.

      * But I still watch the opening and closing ceremonies.
      I guess it's not entirely dissimilar to people who watch the SuperBowl for the commercials/hal

    • Last time the olympics came around, I tried to watch them online. No deal.

      I assume pirate bay will help me if I want to watch them this time around.
      • by cffrost (885375)

        Last time the olympics came around, I tried to watch them online. No deal.

        I assume pirate bay will help me if I want to watch them this time around.

        They will. In 2010, all events and tryouts were available in SD and 720p.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      by DdJ (10790)

      Yeup. The last time I willingly watched the olympics, the year was 1976. I don't see that changing this time around.

    • Re:Another (Score:5, Insightful)

      by thereitis (2355426) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @06:23PM (#39739823) Journal
      Yeah, the Olympics is a bigger crock of shit every year. I feel sorry for the athletes - they need a better venue. Half the sports are about being 1/100th of a second faster than second place which is insignificant, really. You could catch a gust of wind and lose that amount of time. They're all the best in the world - nuff said.
  • by killfixx (148785) * on Thursday April 19, 2012 @05:13PM (#39738947) Journal

    and goodwill...

    Thank you for hosting the Olympics, now please cower in fear of the copyright police.

    I appreciate the Olympics, but I'm not giving up my rights just because my country is hosting them.

    No thanks.

    • by shutdown -p now (807394) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @06:03PM (#39739579) Journal

      What sounds completely insane to me is that UK actually had to create special new laws regarding copyright etc in the context of the Olympics for the benefit of IOC here. Do countries really value their sovereignty so little?

      • The UK has had no problem selling its citizens' rights up the river before, why would this time be any different?

      • by AngryDeuce (2205124) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @06:55PM (#39740217)

        Oh, they value their sovereignty, they're just monetizing [slashdot.org] it.

        You're not one of those freedom hating socialists, are you?

  • by oraclese (1039520) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @05:15PM (#39738973)
    fuck the olympics. It's become exactly what it isn't supposed to be: a corporate circle-jerk to exploit potential for advertising revenue. The athletes come second, if they are lucky.
  • by multiben (1916126) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @05:16PM (#39738981)
    ...was bullshit. That can't be right. Then I RTFA. Holy shit! Way to go London - bring that Orwellian dream to life!
  • Empty Threat? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by alostpacket (1972110) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @05:16PM (#39738993) Homepage

    I'd love to see them try to actually take someone to court over this.

  • by whistlingtony (691548) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @05:16PM (#39738995)

    !@#$ you. No Really. !@#$ you.

    An event dedicated to showcasing the heights of human athleticism, and you've turned it into a cheap money making operation for yourself. You Suck. I will not be watching the olympics.

  • could end land you (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    ...could end land... doesn't make sense. maybe i am too dense.
  • End Land? (Score:2, Funny)

    by thestudio_bob (894258)

    Posting Photos of Olympics Could End Land You In Court

    What's an End Land?

    • Posting Photos of Olympics Could End Land You In Court

      What's an End Land?

      The place where people who have nothing better to do but get worked up over pedestrian typos go to live.

    • It's the place where the Enderdragon exists in Minecraft, right? Right?

  • olympics are passe (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Surt (22457) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @05:17PM (#39739009) Homepage Journal

    No one under 30 cares. It's been xgames where the real athletes compete for more than a decade at this point.

    • Re: (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward

      No one under 30 cares.

      False. We have been following Olympic beach volleyball.

    • by cpu6502 (1960974) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @06:04PM (#39739589)

      The what games?

      I have watched the games ever since 1992 (Barcelona?). Back then I setup a VCR to tape everything and watch it the next day, because I was on night shift. Now I use an analog DVR (replayTV).

      The Olympics are the only form of sport I ever watch, because there's lots of variety, and these are the world's best athletes. Could care less about football, baseball, et cetera. So once every 2 years I watch sports.

  • The courts will be so completely swamped they'll be backed up for years and real criminals will go free due to extreme delays in getting a fair trial.

    My guess is any charges of this sort will be tossed out.

  • by bandy (99800) <andrew.beals+slashdot@gmail.com> on Thursday April 19, 2012 @05:19PM (#39739037) Homepage Journal
    All your images are owned by us. God, I love the Corporatocracy.
    • by cpu6502 (1960974) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @06:09PM (#39739671)

      I thought you were talking about some movie, but then I found this on wikipedia:

      "The terms of the Burning Man ticket require that participants wishing to use video-recording equipment (including, in practice, most digital cameras) sign over copyright in their images to Black Rock City, and forbid them from using their images for anything other than personal and private use. This has been criticized by many, including the Electronic Frontier Foundation.[87][88]

      A Burning Man spokeswoman replied that the policies are not new, were written by a former head of the EFF, were used when suing to block pornographic videos and ultimately arose from participant concerns: "Weâ(TM)re proud that Black Rock City (a private event held on public land) is widely acknowledged as a bastion of creative freedom. [B]ut that protection [of participants' freedoms] does necessitate the acceptance of some general terms of engagement when it comes to cameras... EFF seems to think that anyone attending any event somehow has an absolute right to take photographs, and then to do whatever they want with those images without any effective restriction or manner of enforcement.

      "While we believe that such rights do make sense for any of us taking pictures in purely public spaces, this is not true in the private space of Burning Man â" if it were it would mean that Burning Man couldnâ(TM)t protect participant privacy or prevent commercialization of imagery."

    • by houghi (78078) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @06:16PM (#39739733)

      What has Banksy to say about it? http://thequotesproject.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/brandalism.jpg [wordpress.com]

      People are taking the piss out of you everyday. They butt into your life, take a cheap shot at you and then disapear. They leer at you from tall buildings and make you feel small. They make flippant comments from buses that imply you're not sexy enough and that all the fun is happening somewhere else. They are on tv making your girlfriend feel inadequate.
      They have access to the most sophisticated technology the world has ever seen and they bully you with it.
      They are the advertisers and they are laughing at you.

      You, however are forbidden to touch them. Trademarks, intellectual property and copyright law mean advertisers can say what they like wherever they like with total impunity.

      Fuck that.

      Any advert in a public space that gives you no choice whether you see it or not is yours.
      It's yours yo take, re-arrange and re-use. You can do whatever you like with it. Asking for permission is like asking to keep a rocj someone just threw at your head.

      Your owe the companies nothing.
      Less then nothing, you especially don't owe them any courtesy. They owe you. They have re-arranged the world to put themselves in front of you. They never asked for your permission, don't even start asking for theirs. //Banksy

  • Really? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Fishbulb (32296) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @05:20PM (#39739047)

    Are they completely ignorant of the ubiquity of cameras today? Forget the fact that most of those cameras are attached to something that can easily upload images to the world at large.

    This deserves a flash-mob style constant bombardment of images from the Olympics being uploaded during the games. Even if we get bored to tears of the sheer volume of Olympics photos uploaded, just overwhelm them with the obviousness of their own stupidity.

  • How else will they be able to raise enough money to pay the athletes AND the various big name "non-profit" figures that need to get their cut from these games?
  • Care? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by WillyWanker (1502057) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @05:21PM (#39739065)

    Does anyone even care about the Olympics anymore?

    • Re:Care? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by NonUniqueNickname (1459477) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @06:07PM (#39739633)

      Does anyone even care about the Olympics anymore?

      The athletes? Their families? Friends? Nations? In places where corporate sponsorships and performance-enchancing drugs aren't common, it takes a lot of hard work and dedication to earn a place among the world's best. Hard work and dedication are still admired world-wide.

  • So let's see... (Score:5, Informative)

    by tekrat (242117) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @05:22PM (#39739081) Homepage Journal

    I'm an American. In order to attend the Olympics, I have to be stripped naked and groped in order to get on the airplane. Anything I do during this procedure that is not ordered by the goon squad is likely to have me arrested, where I can be strip searched again in Jail.

    When and if I get on a plane, anything of value in my luggage, such as ipods, cameras, and laptops are likely to be stolen by the baggage handlers, who are not searched and groped by the TSA, apparently.

    When and if I land in London, I'm likely to be searched again, what for, who the hell knows, but apparently it's standard procedure. At this point, I discover I've been robbed, but there's no way to file a claim, and yelling about it is just likely to get me arrested.

    And when I attend the games, I'm going to be sued for using my eyes and brain as a copyright infringement device, assuming I haven't shelled out for a new camera to replace the one that's stolen. And I would have to post the pictures to the internet, because I can't keep them in the flashcard of the camera, because that will be stolen on the return trip (or confiscated by customs).

    Yeah, let me see... Nope, I don't think I will be attending the games, or even watching on TV. Because who knows, they might sue me for watching it on TV. It's going to happen sooner or later, who wants to be the first test case?

    • by multiben (1916126)
      I am going to report this comment to the police. How dare you discuss the olympics without permission!
    • Re:So let's see... (Score:4, Informative)

      by Nidi62 (1525137) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @05:53PM (#39739475)

      When and if I get on a plane, anything of value in my luggage, such as ipods, cameras, and laptops are likely to be stolen by the baggage handlers, who are not searched and groped by the TSA, apparently.

      Fuck you. I am working part time right now as a baggage handler while I finish graduate school, and I can tell you that the last thing any of us want to do is stop and dig through each and every one of the 100 bags we handle at a time to dig through them looking for expensive electronics. Do you like handling other peoples' dirty laundry? Never mind that fact that we are already overworked and barely have time to do our jobs anyway, or that stealing is both wrong and illegal. We're out there in the heat, the rain, the cold, the snow. We couldn't give a shit what's in your bag, we just want to get done and go home. So, again, fuck you. My karma can take a hit.

  • by Animats (122034) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @05:22PM (#39739083) Homepage

    The Olympics are in London this year? I knew there was an Olympics in London coming up, because huge cost overruns have been in the news. But I thought it was years in the future.

  • The British Authorities are just retarded when it comes to taking private photographs in public spaces and doing what you wish with them afterwards. Oh they talk a good game about the right to take pictures in public -- and a lot of photographers have been arrested on trumped up flimsy charges in the process. Truth is, the police can cause you a great deal of trouble, and destroy your pictures and cameras in the process, while being completely in the wrong from the absolute beginning.

  • They do this every fucking two years, and yet people pretend the Olympics and the IOC are still relevant.

  • politics aside, they have always been about making money
  • by dohnut (189348) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @05:44PM (#39739361)

    Does the IOC maintain a list of the "Official ____ of the Olympics" products?

    I want to be on the winning team and buy all of the products that our fine athletes will be pimping non-stop between now and the next Olympics.

    Specifically, I need to know which companies they have chosen for the "official" toilet paper, ball-point pen, aerosol cheese product and galvanized roofing nails.

    TIA!

  • No surprise here (Score:3, Informative)

    by DirkBalognapantz (609779) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @05:45PM (#39739365)
    This doesn’t surprise me based on how over-controlling the International Olympic Committee is. For instance, I used to work for a finance company that had the word “Olympic” in it. Their Lawyers threatened the company, so they had to change it to “Arcadia”. You can not use the word “Olympic” in anything due to their trademark on the word. I have even seen a couple business signs with the word “Olympic” painted over with another name. Before then, I was under the silly impression that the word “Olympic” wasn’t anyone’s property. They will come after you at night wearing togas and carrying torches.
    • Before then, I was under the silly impression that the word âoeOlympicâ wasnâ(TM)t anyoneâ(TM)s property. They will come after you at night wearing togas and carrying torches.

      Believe it or not, congress has written laws that directly grant the Olympics and the Red Cross special intellectual property protections. I don't know why they weren't just asked to register a trademark like everybody else. Both orgs have also asked ICANN for special treatment.

      • by sapphire wyvern (1153271) on Friday April 20, 2012 @12:26AM (#39742421)

        Given that the Red Cross has traditionally had an internationally-recognized and (usually) protected role in theatres of conflict (along with its Islamic counterpart, the Red Crescent) I can understand why that organization's markings are deserving of protection above and beyond that of mere trademarks.

        But screw the Olympics. They can just use trademarks like any other part of the entertainment, media & advertising industrial complex.

  • by dryriver (1010635) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @05:45PM (#39739377)
    London 2012 is going to be a farcical affair for start to finish. London traffic is already heavily congested without a major event taking place. With London 2012, its going to be nearly impossible to get around the Capital without getting stuck, stuck, stuck everywhere. Then, there's going to be a ridiculous amount of security all over the Olympics. Thousands of policemen. Helicopters in the sky. Boats out on the Thames. B-sniffing dogs. Biometric (face-recognizing) CCTV cameras anywhere. Then there's the hullaballoo about taking pictures. London 2012 security has been harrassing anyone who takes pictures of Olympics facilities, even from a far distance away (like a Kilometer or Mile), and from public land. Now there's this whole nonsense about only official Olympic sponsors being able to reference the 2012 Olympics, Olympic athletes being banned from tweeting or commenting about the competitions, people watching the Olympics not being allowed to share pictures or videos online. The whole thing is a big, stinking mess before it has even started. Good luck, London. With organizers like these, you'll need it.
  • Fuck 'em! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Frosty Piss (770223) * on Thursday April 19, 2012 @05:45PM (#39739387)

    They occasionally try to sue business with "Olympic" in their name. It has happened several times here in Washington State, where we have a large chunk of the state called the "Olympic Peninsula", and thus a lot of businesses with "Olympic" in their name. A few years ago they tried to tell some dry cleaner out in Port Angeles (in the Olympic Peninsula) that they could not call themselves the "Olympic Cleaners".

    Fuck 'em.

  • by future assassin (639396) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @05:48PM (#39739415) Homepage

    should post a photo/break the fule. What are they gonna dom ban everyone or even 1/4 of the athletes?

  • by mykos (1627575) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @05:50PM (#39739437)
    This is the craziest shit I ever heard
  • Bribes (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Wowsers (1151731) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @05:58PM (#39739535) Journal

    It's a well known (documented) that the London bid team gave bribes to the IoC to win the bid. Strange how not one person from the IoC or the London politicians are in prison. Better throw people in courts for photographing, that'll show those pesky taxpayers who footed the £10bn ($15bn) and rising bill.

    Just to add some detail to the "London" Olympics, the BBC has gutted their sports presentation for this event. They've lost half the Formula One coverage (with it going completely on contract end), and recently horse racing, and other sports too just to pay for the Olympics coverage. So while people wonder why for the next few years there will be no sports to watch on the BBC, they can reminisce on the 20-ish days of political jerk-off "sport" they didn't watch for the Olympics.

  • by AxeTheMax (1163705) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @06:09PM (#39739661)
    A man was convicted of a minor offence for refusing to obey a police instruction to leave a green space on which an olympic practice pitch was to be built. He was then served a further order banning him from going anywhere near anything connected with the Olympics.

    "The asbo, which will be either confirmed or overturned by magistrates at the start of May, prohibits Moore from going within 100 yards of any Olympic-related venue, "route" or the home of participants, officials or spectators, or approaching any road where the Olympic torch will pass that day."

    That means a pretty large area. Since he lives in London and cannot possibly know where the homes of all these numerous people are, it seems to mean that he can be arrested for leaving his house.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/apr/17/protester-receives-olympic-asbo [guardian.co.uk]
    • by The Rizz (1319)

      Since he lives in London and cannot possibly know where the homes of all these numerous people are, it seems to mean that he can be arrested for leaving his house.

      Possibly even for staying in it...

  • by Trogre (513942) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @09:40PM (#39741573) Homepage

    Another example of the over-commercialization of sport.

    Does anyone remember when sporting events were about, well, sport?

    Me neither, but surely it hasn't always been this bad has it?

  • by FeatherBoa (469218) on Thursday April 19, 2012 @10:20PM (#39741843)

    The IOC and the Olympics has been nothing more than a deeply corrupt, out-of-control marketing engine and ruthless trademark troll for 30 years. I think the Los Angeles games was the turning point.

    They took a paint company on the Olympic Peninsula in Washington to court because they had retail stores in Vancouver in 2010. They lost of course, but it was still a monumental hassle.

    There's a good writeup of how crazy the mess was from Vancouver 2010 here: http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/1777/125/ [michaelgeist.ca]

    I'm sure a summer olympics is 100 times worse.

  • The IOC should be granted their desire for control. News outlets should ignore the event and turn it over to the advertising department. Any publicity about the event should be billed at standard rates.

  • This reminds me of a recent Diamond Geezer post [blogspot.com] lampooning the new legal restrictions on the use of the words "London" and "2012":

    We demand that you change your behaviour and amend your speech. Watch, and learn:

    • Instead of "Today is January 3rd 2012" say "Today is three days after 2011."
    • Instead of signing legal documents "03/01/2012" write "03/01/12"
    • Instead of "My baby is due in June 2012" say "I'm having a baby in a special year, I am very blessed."
    • Instead of "Do you have any 2012 tickets?" say "Do you have any Inspirational National Event tickets?"
    • Instead of "2012 is turning out to be a shit year already" say "I think I'll just pop down to John Lewis and buy a cuddly Mandeville."

    In July, it will also become illegal to mention the word "London" in public. We will issue further instructions at this time.

    He's only half-joking—the British Parliament really did pass a law, the London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games Act 2006 [legislation.gov.uk], which effectively prohibits the use of these words in certain combinations, except by the Olympics organizing committee and its official sponsors.* According to LOCOG's own guidelines [london2012.com], the prohibited 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

    *Technically, the only real crime is creating a false association between a business and the Olympics, regardless of what language is used, but the Act singles out a number of particular words and expressions for special consideration by the courts.

  • by Sosarian Avatar (2509846) on Friday April 20, 2012 @03:47AM (#39743375)

    After reading the above, I was quite amused to see the BBC's cheery comment on Google+ [google.com] that

    The motto of the London Olympics has also been revealed: "Inspire a generation".

    Of course, acting like fascists does tend to inspire people, just not usually in a way the fascists agree with...

The clearest way into the Universe is through a forest wilderness. -- John Muir

Working...