Obama And Romney Each Have An Ad Disappear As The Olympics Gets Snippy About Anyone Referencing The Olympics

from the non-political-because-politics-don't-pay dept

Fri, Jul 27th 2012 9:04am — Mike Masnick

While we've had plenty of stories about the Olympics being overly aggressive in over protecting its (loosely defined) intellectual property rights, it appears that it's now also targeting both major parties' presidential campaigns. Both Obama and Romney apparently launched commercials recently with "Olympic Themes." The Olympics then called out the Obama Super PAC campaign for supposedly infringing on its copyright. The International Olympic Committee (IOC) claims that it does not allow footage to be used for political purposes, though I do wonder how it deals with cases of fair use (which this may or may not be). Either way, soon after that a Romney ad that also had an Olympics theme (both ads used footage of Romney in his role as CEO of the Olympic Organizing Committee for the Salt Lake City Olympics a decade ago) went offline as well.

One would hope that -- yet again -- these stories get the campaigns interested in the ways in which copyright law can restrict certain forms of speech. No matter who you support for President, the idea that neither major candidate can reference the Olympics seems absurd. Yes, the Olympics doesn't want to be associated with politics (for obvious reasons), but that's a moral rights issue, and in the US, such moral rights don't apply to (most) forms of copyright (and definitely don't apply in this case). What's left, then, is that the two campaigns are limited in their ability to express themselves freely. That seems like a serious issue, but one which it's likely the two campaigns will mostly (unfortunately) ignore.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: barack obama, copyright, mitt romney, olympics, politics

36 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

gorehound (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 9:06am

Those who are in charge of this Event have turned it into a Greedfest of Epic Proportions.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2012 @ 10:51am
  
  Re:
  That or the companies behind them are placing more and more ridiculous restrictions on IOC to force any competing brand from having any say in the olympic names use. That includes blocking political and religious uses and if you can get away with stomping on anyone saying anything negative about the olympics in the process it is a bonus. IOC and the olympics are not the underlying problem here, though they certainly are not squeeky clean. In this case the blame should fall back on at least McDonalds, Coca Cola and Samsung since they are the ones with interests in the restrictions.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - John Fenderson (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 3:24pm
    
    Re: Re:
    IOC and the olympics are not the underlying problem here
    
    Of course they are. Advertisers can demand all kinds of insane restrictions, but none of them can force the IOC to go along.
    
    The problem is the unbridled greed and corruption of the IOC. that said, I am making it a point to avoid purchasing any product or service that is an Olympic sponsor. Birds of a feather and all that.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Zakida Paul (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 9:08am

Romney has made no friends in Britain with the way he referred to the country yesterday. I expect the majority if Brits will be rooting for Obama in November.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Yakko Warner (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 9:20am
  
  Re:
  I'm sure ACORN will work hard to get those Brits registered to vote, too.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2012 @ 10:05am
    
    Re: Re:
    "I'm sure ACORN will work hard to get those Brits registered to vote, too."
    The ones with dual-citizenship, of course, boy.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - John Doe, 27 Jul 2012 @ 10:14am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      I don't think ACORN cares about citizenship or if they are alive or even human.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - MrWilson, 27 Jul 2012 @ 10:39am
    
    Re: Re:
    Sorry, Tina Fey does a better Sarah Palin impression than you.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 30 Jul 2012 @ 8:55pm
  
  Re:
  You would like to think so but what about Michelle Obama touching the Queen? Or the Obama's gift of US region DVDs? Lots of gaffs by the Obamas you would like to forget. Maybe you also forgot the Brits don't vote in our elections so it doesn't matter who they root for.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
fogbugzd (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 9:16am

If they didn't want the Olympics associated with politics, then they probably should not have hired a politician to run the Utah games. Yes, he had moved to the private sector at the time, but it was clear to a lot of people that he planned to use the Olympics as a springboard to the national stage.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2012 @ 10:09am
  
  Re:
  "If they didn't want the Olympics associated with politics, then they probably should not have hired a politician to run the Utah games."
  
  And, a politican who had to be bailed out with an infusion of Federal money!
  REAL business skills, at work there, Mittens!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jim O (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 9:17am

The olympics didn't seem to mind when Obama was trying to bring the games to Chicago.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
James Plotkin, 27 Jul 2012 @ 9:22am

Enough is enough!
This Olympic IPR issue has gotten way out of hand! The games haven't even started and I'm sick of hearing the word Olympic...wait, did I just infringe someone's copyright or trade mark.

I'm getting really fed up with this because while I'm a believer in IPR, this type of treatment is insane! It makes those of us who support IP look bad and gives ammunition to the copyright abolitionists...

Just a sorry state of affairs...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Ninja (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 10:12am
  
  Re: Enough is enough!
  This is one example of a pro-copyright person that can actually have a decent discussion.
  
  bob, Yellow AC and all other trolls, please learn with him. Thank you.
  
  And, as a person that believes the middle ground to be the solution (I'm not pro nor anti-copyright) I agree with you.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bas Grasmayer (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 9:26am

Interesting that they say they don't want to be associated with politics, since they had no issue with denying the Belarusian president, and head of Belarus' National Olympic Committee, accreditation. "All NOC heads receive accreditations for the Olympics automatically."

http://en.gazeta.ru/news/2012/07/25/a_4693005.shtml

It's not about not wanting to be associated with politics. It's about corporatism & getting every potential penny they can from their IPR, whether in reasonable manner or unreasonable manner.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
murph, 27 Jul 2012 @ 9:29am

It will probably not turn out as you hope.
_One would hope that -- yet again -- these stories get the campaigns interested in the ways in which copyright law can restrict certain forms of speech._

In all likelihood, the politicians will push for a new law allowing campaigners to not be restricted, not a reform that will apply to all of us.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Haywood (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 10:23am
  
  Re: It will probably not turn out as you hope.
  Kind of like the no call list. Politicians and charities are exempt, so it's just a no business call list. Better by a damn site, but still very short of a total win for consumers.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2012 @ 9:36am

Can't we just work out a deal where the Olympics get all the money, power and special treatment they currently get from politics and government but none of the profit-sapping stygma?

Rest assured, if they weren't so smug and self-confident of their unjustifiable political leverage world-wide, the IOC would be making arguments about this being all about the athletes.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Travis, 27 Jul 2012 @ 9:44am

I hate the olympics
First off, I hate sports. Secondly, I hate it when people use IP and copyright to basically club everyone to death. The Olympics appear to be the most vocal and vigorous offenders. I'd personally LOVE to put an Ad out there of me shitting on the olympic flag just to let them know how much I care about their precious IP.

If they keep this up, I won't be the only one feeling this way.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2012 @ 10:58am
  
  Re: I hate the olympics
  put up 5 toilets in a shape like the olympic rings, sit on the middle toilet and look up to the camera. Nothing close enough for them to sue, but probably enough to make the association. Then call it "The shitty games". You have got parody to boot if some ridiculous judge accepts the case.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2012 @ 4:10pm
  
  Re: I hate the olympics
  doooo iiit.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
gnudist, 27 Jul 2012 @ 9:45am

Yes, so called "IP" rules totally aren't censorship. No speech has ever been taken down because "IP" was a part of it. NOPE.

Fuck the [REDACTED] and their dickhead policies.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2012 @ 9:59am

the whole point of the Olympics is to provide friendly competition between nations that may actually be not so friendly ordinarily. what is happening now and getting worse every time is that copyright is sticking it's ugly snout into the proceedings more and more. there now appears to be absolutely nothing that isn't affected by it and the detrimental side is becoming more obvious. when decades old businesses have to change their name because some pompous, i am from the Olympic Committee, arse hole says so, it is time for a serious rethink on the whole reason for the Games
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- John Fenderson (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 3:27pm
  
  Re:
  the whole point of the Olympics is to provide friendly competition between nations that may actually be not so friendly ordinarily.
  
  I disagree. The whole point of the Olympics is to rake it huge mountains of money. Period.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Paul Alan Levy (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 10:02am

How they deal with fair use
This is the reverse of the Streisand effect; it has little to do with legal rights and obligations.

Both campaigns make the political decision that they don't want to be tangling in public with the Olympic committee, so they grit their teeth and take it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ninja (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 10:03am

That seems like a serious issue, but one which it's likely the two campaigns will mostly (unfortunately) ignore.

Probably, both candidates will be well paid to shut up and follow with their petty campaigns.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Peter Gerdes, 27 Jul 2012 @ 10:06am

Politics Not Copyright
C'mon what do you really think caused these campaigns to pull these ads. These campaigns regularly make use of trademarks, copyrighted speeches and content and all sorts of other protected IP from their opponents. Do you think they would hesitate a second to assert their fair use rights to protect the inclusion of these clips and other IP material. These aren't unsophisticated common citizens who are intimidated by legal letters. If it was in their interest they would fire back the appropriate papers in the blink of an eye.

I suspect the decision is a simple political calculation. Even if you are correct getting into a public fight with the Olympics is just a bad political move. The IOC, especially by talking about other legal systems with moral rights can easily make the fight confusing enough that the average voter only takes away 'that candidate is wrangling with the Olympics.'

I doubt any of the ads are so powerful that it's worth that risk.

----

Also just because the IOC has no remedy in US courts doesn't mean they can't take any action. They could always penalize US athletes, try and bring treaty pressure to bear etc.. etc..

The US can't stand as the loan bastion against this ridiculous institution of moral rights. We need to work to convince the rest of the world that it's a harmful notion that restricts freedom.

The only case for copyright is to IP the creation of intellectual goods. Indeed, if you go back to Locke copyright is in clear tension with the idea of property rights. Our entire culture is based on reuse of ideas in ways their creators disapproved of but if they feel strongly enough they have a simple response, don't sell their works.

(Note, moral rights are different than provisions designed to ensure compensation for authors whose works were sold off before they had bargaining power...that is an economic matter and a different discussion).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2012 @ 10:13am
  
  Re: Politics Not Copyright
  "These campaigns regularly make use of trademarks, copyrighted speeches and content and all sorts of other protected IP from their opponents."
  
  Using snippets of "...copyrighted speeches and content and all sorts of other protected IP from their opponents." is fair use.
  Totally-legal.
  Re-editing it, like the Rom-nuts are doing, is unethical, but not illegal.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Ninja (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 10:17am
    
    Re: Re: Politics Not Copyright
    It's fair use. Sampling, mash ups and the likes. Same issue. And it's not unethical as long as they are not distorting the truth.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2012 @ 10:26am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Politics Not Copyright
      as long as they are not distorting the truth
      
      Did you really put that qualifier on the actions of a political campaign. You sir are a humor ninja!
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Wally, 27 Jul 2012 @ 10:38am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Politics Not Copyright
      "it's not unethical as long as they are not distorting the truth."
      
      Distorting the truth is what all American campaign ads are all about now a days. Fair use or not, it would make the rest of the US look bad, not our stupid leaders.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2012 @ 2:56pm
  
  Re: Politics Not Copyright
  Are you suggesting that Locke viewed copyright (whether held by an author of his assign) with disfavor?
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 27 Jul 2012 @ 10:14am

What "Olympics"?

Surely you don't mean that giant commercially sponsored B.S.-fest going on in England.

Does anyone actually give a damn about them?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wally (profile), 27 Jul 2012 @ 10:30am

Ads
On any normal circumstance I would agree that the Olympic Committee pulling ads "referencing" the Olympics outside of their sponsors is out of line. Given the nature of the usual American campaign ad, I can see the valid point in pulling those ads mentioned above. The way I see it, the Olympic Games are supposed to be a global affair, not a source for political ad campaigns.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Hidden Force, 27 Jul 2012 @ 3:12pm

Them's the Rules!
The first rule of Olympic Games is: You do not talk about Olympic Games. The second rule of Olympic Games is: You do not talk about Olympic Games!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Jul 2012 @ 9:10am

Fuck the Olympics.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]