The International Olympic Committee Has Already Staked A Trademark Claim On The Number '2014'

from the 2015-still-entertaining-offers... dept

Mon, Jan 28th 2013 8:28am — Tim Cushing

Man, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) sure loves its trademarks. Many, many, many, many, many, many, many cases of the IOC's fierce brand protection have been detailed here, including taping over non-sponsor logos and seeking the power to enter homes to remove "unapproved signage." This has also rubbed off on a few Olympians, triggering trademark office filings to protect made-up words stolen from middling hip hop artists and self-given nicknames.

Via the IPKat we learn that the IOC has already locked down next year in preparation for the Winter Olympics. No, seriously. A trademark on the number "2014," which non-coincidentally happens to be a (lesser) Olympic year, has been granted by the UK's Intellectual Property Office.

The IPKat's attention has been drawn to Community Trade Mark E3307444. The mark in question consists of the number "2014", which no-one would ever imagine to be the appellation by which next year might just be known. Applied for in 2003 and registered in 2005, this mark is owned by none other than the Comité International Olympique of Château de Vidy, Lausanne.

So, with the kind of efficiency you only find in the most brutal of trademark bullies, the IOC has trademarked a number many people were planning to use starting next January, nine years in advance. And the IOC isn't leaving anything to chance. It has staked a claim on all 45 of the possible registration classes, including (but good god, certainly not limited to) chemicals, pharmaceuticals, metals/alloys, machines, tools, scientific equipment, surgical instruments, lighting, heating, vehicles, firearms, musical instruments, furniture, ropes, tarps, string, textiles, toys, coffee, fresh fruits and vegetables, beer, other alcoholic beverages, tobacco, insurance, conferences and seminars, design and development of computer programs, restaurant services, asbestos and security.

Anything and everything possibly covered by a registered trademark has been nailed down by the Committee, making it very possible that anyone using the number "2014" in the year 2014 might find themselves dealing with the IOC's trademark cops. IPKat suggests a workaround:

The IPKat doesn't feel he can safely use 2014 in the course of trade, so he has decided to call it "2013+1". Merpel isn't sure that this will work. The first three digits of 2014 also begin "2013" and, as is well known in decisions of the General Court and the Boards of Appeal of OHIM, consumers are likely to pay more attention to the beginning of a mark than to its end unless there's a good reason why they won't …

Does this mean that the IOC now has the power to go after anyone in an industry simply for using "2014?" Probably not, but the IOC certainly hasn't shown any willingness to curtail its overreach either. So it will probably be a mixture of the standard IOC branding aggressiveness coupled with a few instances of IOC branding WTF-ness, much of which we'll probably see covered here.

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: 2014, olympics, trademark

67 Comments

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

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 28 Jan 2013 @ 6:55am

"surgical instruments"

'The official surgical instrument sponsor of the 2014 Olympics' just rolls off the tongue, doesn't it?

"firearms"

In the UK? Gonna be some issues with that, I think...

"asbestos"

...
...
...wait, what? You have got to be kidding, right? I'd make a witty remark, but 1) my brain is now broken and 2) that is absurd enough to not even need one.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Gothenem (profile), 28 Jan 2013 @ 7:26am

Just wow.
Honestly, this seems so incredibly moronic, that I actually hope that they try to enforce that trademarked number, only to have their trademark completely rendered invalid by a court. I assume that any judge with more than 0 brain cells can figure out that trademarking a NUMBER which coincides with the YEAR is a blatant overreach of the trademark system. Perhaps it can lead to trademark reform...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- out_of_the_blue, 28 Jan 2013 @ 8:36am
  
  Re: Just wow.
  omg just suck it up, their rich and powerful they can trademark whatever they want if they want to trademark mike's ass tomorrow you need to just go along with it, learn your place peasant
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 28 Jan 2013 @ 9:01am
    
    Out of the blue
    Is this the real out_of_the_blue? Seems too obvious a troll for the real out_of_the_blue. I smell a trademark infringement lawsuit coming from Out Of The Blue 2014�
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 28 Jan 2013 @ 9:42am
      
      Re: Out of the blue
      Actually I am pretty sure that this comment falls in line with most of his other comments. The guy has got some very progressive standpoints. Normally they are just hidden behind his sass and derogatory statements about someone called Mike.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - out_of_the_blue (profile), 28 Jan 2013 @ 10:18am
      
      Re: Out of the blue
      I'm the /real/ out_of_the_blue. That bastard freetard stole my screen name. Pirate Mike is so busy pushing his pirate agenda that he can't even put proper security measures in place on the forms.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - no_one_important, 28 Jan 2013 @ 12:15pm
        
        Re: Re: Out of the blue
        For reference (or until the aforementioned "security measures" are put in place), note the "(profile)" link after the nick of the /real/ out_of_the_blue and lack there of after the fake one.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        out_of_the_blue, 28 Jan 2013 @ 2:46pm
        
        Re: Re: Re: Out of the blue
        For more reference, note that the real out_of_the_blue never had a profile. In fact, that was the profile's very first comment. For all you know, it could be yet another different person who registered the name. It's almost like you can sign any name you want to your comments!
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Anonymous Coward, 28 Jan 2013 @ 9:17am
    
    When rich people piss off other rich people
    Isn't GM supposed to come out with a new corvette in 2014? I can't wait for that ad campaign to roll out.
    
    Who has more clout, or more likely more iron workers
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
crade (profile), 28 Jan 2013 @ 8:36am

I'm not sure how much they will be able to screw people with this trademark, but as usual you can be sure they will use it to screw people as much as they possibly can.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Atkray (profile), 28 Jan 2013 @ 9:57am
  
  Re:
  "I'm not sure how much they will be able to screw people with this trademark"
  
  Answer: Plenty.
  
  Any company without a stable of lawyers will fold when confronted by the guaranteed mountain of paperwork the IOC will drop at their doorstep.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Jan 2013 @ 8:37am

Getyou sweet juicy 2014 olympic asbestos.

Gold award winning 2014 Olympic asbestos
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Jan 2013 @ 8:38am

I thought trademarks were supposed to be for a brand or specific picture/representation of something in order to protect the consumer from confusing it with another product. How could anyone possibly a) connect "2014" to the Olympics and b) confuse someone's use of "2014" as them trying to piggyback off the Olympics?

I should really look into Trademarking as many english words as possible and start licensing them to people to use on an everyday basis. I could hire Prenda Law to represent me and sit back and let the cash flow in!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- out_of_the_blue, 28 Jan 2013 @ 8:44am
  
  Re:
  i already trademarked mike�
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Mike C. (profile), 28 Jan 2013 @ 8:48am
    
    Re: Re:
    Yeah, but I already trademarked using the word "their" for situations when used in place of "they're" and based on your previous post, you need to pay up... peasant :-)
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - weneedhelp (profile), 28 Jan 2013 @ 9:35am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      I already Trademarked� Trademark�. Pay up suckas.
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - McCrea (profile), 28 Jan 2013 @ 10:19am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re:
        I own the mark of whitespace in the contexts of text and lack of (con)text.
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - out_of_the_blue (profile), 28 Jan 2013 @ 10:23am
    
    Re: Re:
    Stop using my screen name, freetard. If you persist, I have retained average_joe as my legal counsel and will take appropriate legal action.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Niall (profile), 29 Jan 2013 @ 7:14am
      
      Re: Re: Re:
      I don't think flinging monkey poo is going to be terribly effective :)
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- jackn, 28 Jan 2013 @ 2:06pm
  
  Re:
  Me too. In fact I have done it. In the usa, for products, you have to submit a pic of the product with the trademark. Cant trademark a 'proposed' product.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
John Fenderson (profile), 28 Jan 2013 @ 8:47am

I'm confused
I thought that a mark had to be actively used in commerce in order to qualify as a trademark in a particular category. Does this mean there are, in fact, Olympic-branded surgical tools on the market?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- New Mexico Mark, 28 Jan 2013 @ 9:33am
  
  Re: I'm confused
  You betcha! I can see the ad copy now... "Emasculation of all rights to free expression performed in record time using IOCs patented (and of course trademarked) 2014 Olympics Surgical Tool Kit(tm). Anyone who passes up this opportunity would have to be nuts!!"
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Michael, 28 Jan 2013 @ 9:36am
  
  Re: I'm confused
  Our Anastomosis Clamp will clamp down as hard as we do on trademark infringement!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- McCrea (profile), 28 Jan 2013 @ 10:22am
  
  Re: I'm confused
  Well, if there are not any, then they won't be challenged, so it's moot.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - John Fenderson (profile), 28 Jan 2013 @ 12:05pm
    
    Re: Re: I'm confused
    No, the other way around. If the Olympic Committee doesn't have any (for example) surgical tools using the mark, then the mark isn't valid, unless I'm mistaken.
    
    But this is unlikely to ever be ruled on, as it would take a pretty large warchest to be able bring the challenge to court regardless of its validity.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Michael, 28 Jan 2013 @ 9:03am

MPAA
The MPAA is going to be pissed when they find themselves infringing on the IOC's trademark by labeling something with:

"Copyright 2014"
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Jessie (profile), 28 Jan 2013 @ 9:14am

Happy new year
Happy e^7.60787807
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- DannyB (profile), 28 Jan 2013 @ 9:31am
  
  Re: Happy new year
  Happy 2012+2
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - weneedhelp (profile), 28 Jan 2013 @ 9:37am
    
    Re: Re: Happy new year
    MMXIV�
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
    - Anonymous Coward, 28 Jan 2013 @ 9:48am
      
      Re: Re: Re: Happy new year
      11111100000(tm)
      [ link to this | view in chronology ]
      - Anonymous Coward, 28 Jan 2013 @ 9:53am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Happy new year
        it is 11111011110(tm). 2016 is another olympic year though...
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
        
        Not an Electronic Rodent (profile), 28 Jan 2013 @ 10:24am
        
        Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Happy new year
        0x7DE surely? Rolls off the tongue so much easier...
        [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Gumnos (profile), 28 Jan 2013 @ 12:44pm
  
  Re: Happy new year
  If the IOC had been smart, they would have also trademarked the factorization (2 * 19 * 53) to ensure than any year derived from any of those was also kept in check. Heck, just trademark the number "1"�
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Beech, 28 Jan 2013 @ 9:16am

I think the publishers of calendars may have a rough time next year...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Anonymous Coward, 28 Jan 2013 @ 9:17am

Welcome to year [CENSORED], the year of [CENSORED] in the Olympics.

Other major events occurring in [CENSORED] include the following.
-[CENSORED] midterm elections in the US
-[CENSORED] report cards for students
-[CENSORED] annual earning reports by every business in the world
-[CENSORED] causing [CENSORED + 1] to be applied for and accepted by the UK's Intellectual Property Office
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Michael, 28 Jan 2013 @ 9:19am
  
  Re:
  Welcome to year [CENSORED], the year of [CENSORED] in the [CENSORED].
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- DannyB (profile), 28 Jan 2013 @ 9:33am
  
  Re:
  Despite your liberal use of the word "censored", your post is a trademark infringement because it uses that accursed word starting with Oly and ending with "pics" separated by an "m".
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Michael, 28 Jan 2013 @ 9:44am
    
    Re: Re:
    Despite your liberal use of the word "censored", your post is a trademark infringement because it uses that accursed word starting with [CENSORED] and ending with "pics" separated by an "m"
    
    Once again, the courts have established that people tend to pay more attention to the beginning of a mark, so the use of those three letters is questionable. Please send your check to the IOC immediately.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Jeff (profile), 28 Jan 2013 @ 11:16am
    
    Re: Re:
    Wasn't the letter 'm' withheld because of orgasmic contents or something like that???1/!?
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Yakko Warner (profile), 28 Jan 2013 @ 9:22am

No more Quicken nag screens?
Now Quicken will be unable to try to coerce me into upgrading to Quicken 2014. A year reprieve from having to click "No Thanks" and "Do not remind me again (today)" before I can pay my bills.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Richard (profile), 28 Jan 2013 @ 9:30am

Microsoft Office, Visual Studio etc
So - no new version in 2 years - it's an ill wind....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
drewdad (profile), 28 Jan 2013 @ 9:35am

Let's just trademark "TM"
Yo, dawg. I heard you like trademarks, so I put a trademark in your trademark so that I can brand while you brand.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Titania Bonham-Smythe, 28 Jan 2013 @ 9:43am

Time for a brand new calendar?
What would really piss those Olympic people off is if everyone else decided to change to a new calendar system just to spite them.

The simplest thing would be to just switch to hexadecimal but retain the 2014, which would make it 7de.

Or we could convert to binary: 11111011110

Or how about just starting again and make 2014 be the year 0 TYTOCFEO (The Year The Olympic Committee Fucked Everyone Off). I realise it doesn't have the brevity of BC or AD but it would make us all feel better about ourselves.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Michael, 28 Jan 2013 @ 9:46am
  
  Re: Time for a brand new calendar?
  Don't use Roman numerals or the NFL will come after you.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 28 Jan 2013 @ 4:41pm
  
  Re: Time for a brand new calendar?
  No, I think that you should spite them by gifting them custom calendars and use the aforementioned funny number systems, leaving a note saying that we really respect their decision and are not giving them proper numbers for fear of being sued.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Mr. Applegate, 28 Jan 2013 @ 9:45am

So is MMXIV ok? I knew there was a reason the movie industry continued to use Roman Numerals.

I wonder how the bank will feel when I complete the date on a check as April 15, MMXIV.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Michael, 28 Jan 2013 @ 9:47am
  
  Re:
  The NFL probably already took that for the superbowl.
  
  Sorry.
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
  - Mr. Applegate, 28 Jan 2013 @ 10:32am
    
    Re: Re:
    Fine I will use:
    
    0x7DE (2014 in Hex)
    3736 (2014 in Octal)
    11011110 (2014 in Binary)
    
    I will also trademark all sequences between 1388534400 and 1420070399 (Unix Timestamp)
    
    Then I can go after anyone who stores computer logs (on a unix or linux machine), or the number 2014 in a computer.
    
    Come to think of it I will just TM 0 and 1, that will cast a wider net.
    [ link to this | view in chronology ]
McCrea (profile), 28 Jan 2013 @ 9:52am

Mount Olympia
Well, I sure hope they had the foresight to copyright "Caucasian" for the coming events.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
johnny canada, 28 Jan 2013 @ 10:05am

I am going out and Trademark/Copyright all even years for the next century just to screw with the IOC
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
McCrea (profile), 28 Jan 2013 @ 10:27am

2014 Fireworks
Owning the rights to all the 2014 Fireworks is a big hit. Both New Years around Dec 31, 2013 and Jan 1, 2015 will be infringing, and other such event's just as Cinco de Mayo, Independence Day, et al.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Chronno S. Trigger (profile), 28 Jan 2013 @ 10:32am

Party like it's 1999
"The first three digits of 2014 also begin "2013"..."

1999+15

Can I fill out my checks that way?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Richard (profile), 28 Jan 2013 @ 11:07am

FIFA (World Cup 2010+4)
Haven't they already got it???
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
matt C, 28 Jan 2013 @ 11:22am

short memories
umm...you cant copyright a number, at least not in the U.S just ask Intel. (remember that whole 586/pentium thing?)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
2014, 28 Jan 2013 @ 12:59pm

2014 Year of the pedophile
I see the UK government is now completely under the control of corporations. What a fucking shithole, and the Olympics are simply the future of corporate interests taking over and trampling our personal rights. Enjoy mother fuckers
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
gorehound (profile), 28 Jan 2013 @ 1:48pm

Simple Reply.............

FUCK YOU COPYRIGHT MAXIMALISTS !
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Zeissmann (profile), 28 Jan 2013 @ 2:43pm

I guess MMXIV will see our return to good old trusty Roman numerals.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Trevor (profile), 28 Jan 2013 @ 3:28pm

Stig
Will any European car makers be able to label their vehicles as 2014 models?

THINK OF THE RAMIFICATIONS
...oh wait, I just saw a 2014 BMW 750li drive down the street, so by then the 2015 car of the year should already be topping sales...

Does this mean car companies have even BETTER efficiency than the IOC?

Have you ever driven a Ford or Peugeot?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Bergman (profile), 28 Jan 2013 @ 4:55pm

Oddly prescient Simpsons episode...
I recall seeing a Simpsons episode where Grandpa Simpson is giving and example of how old farts distract younger folks with stories that don't go anywhere.

In particular the phrase "Now my story begins in 19-dickety-two. We had to say 'dickety' cause the Kaiser had stolen our word 'twenty'. I chased that rascal to get it back, but gave up after dickety-six miles."

In 1996 it was absurdist comedy. In 17 years later it's horrifying reality.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Niall (profile), 29 Jan 2013 @ 7:18am
  
  Re: Oddly prescient Simpsons episode...
  I didn't think there was even a Kaiser since 1918...
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Alana (profile), 28 Jan 2013 @ 6:53pm

NO, MY PRECIOUS TRAIN SIMULATOR 2014! /s
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Anonymous Coward, 29 Jan 2013 @ 3:22am
  
  Re:
  NOOOOOO, MY FARM SIMULATOR TOO!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]
Isaac the K (profile), 29 Jan 2013 @ 6:17am

DANG IT!
including (but good god, certainly not limited to) chemicals, pharmaceuticals, metals/alloys, machines, tools, scientific equipment, surgical instruments, lighting, heating, vehicles, firearms, musical instruments, furniture, ropes, tarps, string, textiles, toys, coffee, fresh fruits and vegetables, beer, other alcoholic beverages, tobacco, insurance, conferences and seminars, design and development of computer programs, restaurant services, asbestos and security.

Damn. Now I have to figure out a different number to market my new invention: a surgical grade, titanium, liquor firing gun with an attached micro/telescope (for precision in the operating room AND on the battle field).

Sigh.

Clearly, people might get confused between the Beer Boomstick 2014 and an Alpine skiing event.
Understandable, really.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Dave, 29 Jan 2013 @ 11:59am

Hogwash
In Dawkins' name, how on earth did they get a trademark on a f*****g number? This is total madness. So anyone bringing out a product in 2014 cannot use the year it was first produced as part of a name for it? Words fail me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
McCrea (profile), 4 Feb 2013 @ 11:59pm

Watch your language
If you read the case, it's only trademarked in French and English.

I don't always write "2014", but when I do, I do it in Spanish. http://shar.es/YnExL
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rouse, 14 Apr 2013 @ 4:54pm

London 2012 Olympic & Paralympics logo infringed on my iZ rouse logo!!!
In Feb of 2011 we were contacted via email by a iZ rouse consumer, asking if we had seen the London 2012 Olympic Logo? Looks like your iZ (R) rouse logo, infringement...Wolf Olins the design firm who sold the 2012 logo to LOCOG was exposed to our logo in New York back in 2006...We have brought this to the IOC and LOCOG attention and they deny the similarities. See it for yourself at twitter.com/rouse or www.rockrouse.com. People all over the world see the R" and someone kneeling, which is the substance of our logo, a prayer symbol, and the iZ (R) for rouse, not 2012 they claim it to be...It's a serious deal when they do what they don't want others to do to them, and take extreme measures and money to inforce protection, but out right alter my design and pass it off as theirs..You reap what you sow! God Bless, God has the power to give the people the TRUTH
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
- Rouse, 14 Apr 2013 @ 5:03pm
  
  Re: London 2012 Olympic & Paralympics logo infringed on my iZ rouse logo!!!
  PLEASE CHECK OUT twitter.com/rousewear TO SEE THE 2012 London Olympic & Paralympic Games logo / iZ rouse LOGO SIMILARITIES...THIS IS THE TRUTH!!!
  [ link to this | view in chronology ]