Now That The NSA Has Made It The Norm, Total Surveillance During The Sochi Olympic Games Is No Longer Noteworthy

from the welcome-to-the-(permanent)-olympics dept

In addition to being an opportunity to stretch copyright and trademark rules way beyond the law, over the years, the Olympics has also become an occasion when the feeble "because terrorism" excuse is deployed to justify all kinds of additional restrictions on personal freedoms. It will come as no surprise to learn that the Winter Olympics in Sochi, Vladimir Putin's pet project, will continue the tradition:

every phone call, every email, every social media message in Sochi will be accessible, traceable by Russia's Federal Security Service -- the FSB -- the organization in charge of securing the Olympics.

The CBC News report quoted above goes on:

it's the extent of all the surveillance the FSB is planning that has deepened much of the disquiet, at home and abroad, over the coming games.

For Russia, surveillance measures may be something of a force of habit.

If this piece had been written a year ago, those paragraphs could have been read unironically. But today, in the post-Snowden world, it is impossible not to replace "FSB" with "NSA" or "GCHQ". Since we now know that practically "every phone call, every email, every social media message" in the world -- not just in Sochi -- is accessible to the US authorities, it's as if we find ourselves in a global Olympics lockdown. But unlike the quadrennial Olympics, this particular circus shows no sign of moving on.

Follow me @glynmoody on Twitter or identi.ca, and +glynmoody on Google+

Filed Under: olympics, russia, sochi, surveillance, vladimir putin

NSA & FBI Spied On All Emails In Salt Lake City Before & After The Olympics

from the minimization? dept

We've already written about the latest NSA bombshell, which came via an article in the Wall Street Journal (which they stupidly put behind their paywall) by reporters Siobhan Gorman and Jennifer Valentino-Devries. But I wanted to focus in on one aspect that hasn't received very much attention -- the revelation that the NSA and the FBI teamed up to read every email and text communication in the Salt Lake City area before and after the Olympics there in 2002:

For the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City, officials say, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and NSA arranged with Qwest Communications International Inc. to use intercept equipment for a period of less than six months around the time of the event. It monitored the content of all email and text communications in the Salt Lake City area.

At the time, Michael Hayden was in charge of the NSA, and today he remains one of the staunchest supporters of the NSA's surveillance, calling its opponents losers who can't get laid for daring to question the level of unconstitutional surveillance of our communications. Perhaps -- just perhaps -- he'd like to explain the legal rationale for spying on every digital communication. Sure, sure, this happened soon after September 11th, and I'm sure US officials were worried about the possibility of a terrorist attack on the winter Olympics. But, I don't recall us turning off the Constitution or ripping out the 4th Amendment just for the Olympics. Perhaps General Hayden, rather than random name calling, could share with us how such a project was possibly anywhere in the vicinity of legal at the time?

Filed Under: email, fbi, michael hayden, nsa, nsa surveillance, olympics, privacy, salt lake city, utah

Lindsey Graham: Boycott The Olympics Because Snowden, Putin, Hitler And Stalin (Oh My?)!

from the buckets-of-stupid dept

Senator Lindsey Graham has made little secret about his feelings on the NSA's more controversial domestic and international spying programs. When asked about the concern over NSA spying, Graham went with the Monty Python method for discourse known as talking about something completely different. He's also on the record as being quite pleased that Verizon is helping make his life the open book none of us want to read. Couple all this with his disinterest in first amendment principles and you're left with a southern-tongued windbag.

"Welcome to Afghanistan, Senator. And might I say that's some mighty idiotic camouflage you're wearing."
Image source: CC BY 2.0

But bluster is a process, not a single undertaking, which is why Senator Graham is back at it, this time making his case for the United States boycotting the upcoming Olympics in Russia.

"I love the Olympics, but I hate what the Russian government is doing throughout the world," Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., told NBC News on Tuesday. "If they give asylum to a person who I believe has committed treason against the United States, that's taking it to a new level." Graham even suggested that Putin's actions should raise the specter of the pre-World War II Berlin games hosted by Adolf Hitler's regime.

"If you could go back in time, would you have allowed Adolf Hitler to host the Olympics in Germany? To have the propaganda coup of inviting the world into Nazi Germany and putting on a false front?" Graham said of the Games.

Sort of takes your breath away, doesn't it? Snowden, arguably a whistleblower, could get asylum in Russia and suddenly Putin is on par with murdering millions of people? Whoo boy. Now, to be fair, Graham does say it isn't only the Snowden issue that earns Putin his Hitler status. There's also their support of Iran, the Syrian government, and some supposed threats to Israel. Still, boycotting the Olympics on the grounds that Snowden's potential asylum is the straw that breaks the camel's back is a level of insanity I haven't seen out of Graham before.

"What I'm trying to do is let the Russians know enough is enough. How much more are we going to let them get away with before we make it real to them?" Graham said.

And apparently the best method for making that "real" to Russia is boycotting the olympic games? The only time we've ever boycotted the Olympics was back in 1980, when the United States was mad at the Soviet Union for invading -- you guessed it -- Afghanistan. Yay, synergy! Unfortunately for Graham and any band of merry idiots that would like to join him, Olympic boycotts are not for the government to decide. That's up to the USOC, who has decidedly no interest in any boycott.

In response, U.S. Olympic Committee spokesman Patrick Sandusky tweeted Wednesday, "While we acknowledge the seriousness of the issues at hand, we strongly oppose the notion that a boycott of the Olympic and Paralympic Games is in our country's best interests."

He couldn't be more correct. Why? Well, let's start with American hypocrisy when it comes to offering asylum to whistleblowers and end with the fact that the Olympics barely matter on the world stage. But keep shaking those fists, Senator. Maybe some day someone will think you have something serious to offer.

Filed Under: ed snowden, hitler, lindsey graham, olympics, putin, russia

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

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

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.

Filed Under: 2014, olympics, trademark

Another Olympian Lines Up At The Trademark Office: Ryan Lochte Files Trademark App For 'Jeah'

from the i-don't-want-to-live-in-this-IP-regime-anymore dept

Olympic swimmer Ryan Lochte has decided that a word like "Jeah" is better off attached to "swim goggles, sunglasses, workout videos, gift cards, jewelry, mugs, etc." rather than being allowed to peacefully live out its brief existence as something that will never, ever make us forget the actual comic genius that was Sean Penn's portrayal of Jeff Spicoli in Fast Times at Ridgemont High. 

Here's video almost explaining what "Jeah" means.
 

je•ah (Adjective)

1. Everything or almost everything
2. Happy
3. (To have a) good swim
4. Good
5. Good

[Possibly quite definitely derived from exclamation ("Chea!") popularized by recording artist Jay Wayne Jenkins ("Young Jeezy").] 

Linsanity. Fear the Brow. Clown question, bro. Fierce five. Jeah. All coming soon to an article of clothing hopefully nowhere near you.

Here's the trademark application in all its four-letter glory.

Filed Under: jeah, olympics, ryan lochte, trademark

Olympic Buzzkills Take Down Viewer Commentary

from the you-will-not-have-fun-at-the-olympics dept

We are all very much aware that it is an Olympic tradition to make sure that no one enjoys watching the games. The IOC and its sponsors take additional steps to avoid commentary that is not completely controlled by them, even if its own commentary is completely ignorant. With that in mind, it shouldn't come as any surprise to hear that the IOC has taken it upon itself to seek and destroy any viewer sourced commentary that brings laughter and greater exposure to the Olympic games.

This is where one amatuer commentator, Francis Higgins, finds himself. Francis had taken the time to watch the Olympic Radial event and provide a play by play commentary of his own as he tried to make sense of it all. His commentary is pretty funny and introduced me to a sport that I did not know existed. Apparently that is not something that the IOC wants anyone to experience. It has decided to takedown the video in an effort to kill everyone's buzz.

Of course this being the internet where nothing ever disappears, the video has made it back online in various places. You can watch it embedded here.

No one really understands the state of mind behind those sending the takedown. This video is actually bringing in new viewers and interest in an event that doesn't get as much attention as events like Gymnastics, Soccer (Football for those outside the US) and Dressage. But, since it isn't "official" commentary it simply can't be allowed. Or it could just be that the IOC has no sense of humor and felt humiliated and/or offended that someone would have anything but the nicest flattery to say about one of its events. 

Either way, the fact remains that such remixing and satire is a very powerful tool in promoting the original product. Francis's video had received 500,000 views prior to being taken down. That is a lot of people who may have not known about the Radial event. If the IOC really wanted to spread the message of the Olympics and bring in new viewers, this is the type of video that would accomplish that goal. Sadly, I don't see it changing its policies anytime soon.

Filed Under: commentary, olympics, takedown

US Women's Gymnastics Team Decides Self-Chosen Nickname 'Fierce Five' Needs Trademark Protection

from the because,-these-days,-NOT-filing-is-never-an-option dept

Is anyone else out there excited to hear about athletes trademarking nicknames? Anyone? Or is it just another one of those things that seems to go hand-in-hand with buying defensive patents by the bucket-load and fending off onerous members of artists' estates? These IP land grabs seem to be a sign of the times, a brave new world of preemptive protectionism that leads people to believe that they have to quickly lock down everything pertaining to them, even if it's a spur of the moment nickname handed out by an enthusiastic sportscaster.

From the (L)insanity of last year to the trademarked unibrow of a few months ago, athletes are seemingly becoming their own marketing force, rushing off to the trademark office in order to nail down rights to anything remotely catchy/marketable. The latest trademark grab comes on the heels of the Greatest Trademark Show on Earth, the 2012 Olympics. 

USA Gymnastics is preparing a trademark filing for the term “Fierce Five,” which was attached to the gold medal-winning women’s gymnastics team at the London Olympics, spokeswoman Luan Peszek said in an e-mail.

Peszek has said the team, including Gabby Douglas, the first black gymnast to win the all-around, preferred Fierce Five to Fab Five.

Good thing, too. The article points out that, preference or no, Fab Five is already taken, secured by Jalen Rose a mere 19 years after University of Michigan's 1991 draft class was given that nickname. I'm not sure what the opportunities are to capitalize on a catch phrase two decades down the road, but if any exist, it's probably in the "undergarments" and "pajamas" field.

The road to "Fierce Five" isn't entirely bump-free, however. Someone has beaten the Olympic medalists to the Trademark Office:

A California man, Paolo Mazza, filed for a “Fierce Five” trademark on Aug. 8, according to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office website. No attorney was listed on the filing, which provided only a post-office box in Millbrae, California, as an address. There is no telephone listing available.*

*(There is. You just have to dig a little deeper.)

Mazza is no stranger to the trademark field, having filed one for the phrase "Lin-sational" back in February. Wisely deciding to avoid the rush on the more popular phrase "Lin-sanity," Mazza instead attempted to nail down his uncontested phrase only to find it very much contested by the USPTO, which has asked him to provide proof that Jeremy Lin is totally cool with this (orig. wording slightly paraphrased). No doubt Mazza will find himself 0-for-2 in the near future, as no one is allowed to fuck with any Olympics-related IP as it's likely the USPTO will view this new attempt as just another trademark squat, something that is becoming somewhat of a "trademark" for Paola Mazza.

So, it's a little bit of everything that's ridiculous about IP "ownership." Sportscasters use the term "Fab Five" to refer to a gymnastics team, which it can freely do as long as it doesn't slap the phrase on some pajamas, thus violating Jalen Rose's 20-years-from-the-point-of-impact trademark, which has recently been extended. The gymnastics team grants itself its own nickname, the "Fierce Five," and rushes to the USPTO to find itself second in line behind another person who thought he might capitalize on something somehow by swiftly locking the phrase down. (The whole "choose your own nickname" part of this seems a bit disingenuous. I mean, I'd like to be known as "The Impossibly Photogenic Writer" but it's more likely I'll be known as "Pirate Mike's B-Lister," among other things. Just like you don't get to choose your family members or parole officers, you just don't get to choose your own nickname.) 

If the granting of trademark protection is supposed to protect consumers from bad actors and allow enforcement by the rights holders to prevent dilution, how does jumping all over a catch-phrase do any of the above? Are consumers really going to be "damaged" if they purchase a counterfeit "Furious Five" unitard? Are we really in need of a bunch of catch-phrases with a (TM) attached in order to dispel the confused haze that surely must surround us at all times? Would it be a lost opportunity if a mildly viral quote went unregistered? 

I would think that a key move towards cutting down abuse of this system (trademark trolling/trademark bullying) would be to trim down on the number of, for lack of a better term, "frivolous" filings. I realize the USPTO isn't in any position to try to gauge the level of post-championship, post-interview, post-viral quote atmosphere in which the application was filed (especially months down the road when it gets reviewed), but as it stands now, the system does absolutely nothing to discourage these sorts of actions -- either the quick-fire trademark squatting or the equally-fast attempts to monetize fleeting moments.

Filed Under: fab five, fierce five, gymnastics, olympics, sports, trademark

Now NBC Execs Are Just Trolling: Claim They Regret Not Tape Delaying More Of The Olympics

from the are-they-serious? dept

By far, the biggest complaint heard about Olympics coverage by NBC in the US was about just how stupidly annoying the tape delay was. The excuses they gave didn't make any sense, but NBC still insists that it was the right thing to do. Hell, they're now arguing that perhaps they should have done even more tape delay, because the ratings were so good.

Though NBC drew criticism for not airing more of the games live, showcasing taped events in prime time "undeniably" helped ratings, NBC Sports Chairman Mark Lazarus said. He said he wondered if NBC should have tape-delayed more events, such as the U.S. men's gold-medal basketball game and the men's tennis finals between Andy Murray and Roger Federer, which were live.

"It's undeniable we hurt our ratings by doing that," Mr. Lazarus said in a phone interview. "We have to balance what we're trying to do for viewers across the country and our business model."

Of course, all of that assumes something that isn't necessarily true: that the high ratings were due to the tape delays. One could just as easily claim that if they hadn't tape delayed key events, that they would have received even more viewers. There's no reason that they couldn't both display stuff live and then rebroadcast the key events in prime time, and satisfy both audiences. But, that kind of thinking doesn't work inside NBC Universal, where the default mindset seems to be "gee, how can we 'exclude' people?"

Either way, the fact that they now regret not tape delaying more content shows the de facto position of NBC Universal -- and it's not about how to best serve their users.

Filed Under: mark lazarus, olympics, tape delay
Companies: nbc universal

Even The Sex At The Olympics Is Sponsored

from the don't-f**k-without-the-official-olympic-rubber dept

We've had plenty of stories about the insane lengths the Olympics goes to in order to block out any appearance of a non-sponsor brand, including taping over the brands of non-sponsors on bathroom fixtures and urinals. And, apparently, the Olympics obsession with deleting all non-sponsorship brands extends almost to the point of contact when athletes decide to get down and dirty with each other.

Every couple years, when the Olympics roll around, there are stories like this one, about the volume of sexual activity in the Olympic Village among the athletes. And, if we go by condom count, the volume keeps on growing:

At the 2000 Olympics in Sydney, the Australian organizing committee distributed 45,000 free condoms in the village. Eight years later in Beijing, 70,000 condoms—labeled with the phrase ‘Faster, Higher, Stronger’—were exhausted and 20,000 more were ordered. This year in London, the Olympic organizing committee is providing 150,000, using special dispensers which contain a message promoting sexual health. Averaged among 10,490 athletes, that’s enough condoms for every athlete to have sex 15 times over the Olympics’ three weeks

And, of course, the Olympics found a sponsor to pay up for the privilege of being where the rubber meets the... well, you know. Durex is the official condom of the games. But... uh oh, call in the brand police! BMX cyclist Caroline Buchanan tweeted a photo of free condoms available in the Olympic Village which (*gasp*!) were not made by Durex! And, indeed, the response from the Olympics was swift, as they began an investigation into this illicit behavior, because just think of all the problems if these athletes had sex with a non-sponsored condom! That cannot be allowed at all.

Filed Under: brand police, condoms, london 2012, olympics, sponsorship

DailyDirt: More Olympic Trivia

from the urls-we-dig-up dept

The technology used behind the scenes at the Olympics is getting better all the time. It's not an easy task to measure people moving with extreme accuracy, but it can be done. There are some other tasks that aren't so easy to do as well, and the judges are relying on robots and lasers to get these jobs done. Here are just a few examples of more technology creeping into the games.

• The speed of sound is apparently too slow for the Olympics now, so the starting pistols have been replaced by electronic beeps. Perhaps there shouldn't be a starting pistol at all, and the judges should simply measure when the athletes start and finish? [url]
• Robotic cameras are catching more action at the Olympics. Not too surprising that cameramen can't run alongside Olympic athletes and keep up.... [url]
• The modern pentathlon is using laser pistols instead of real guns this year. No sound effects like "pew pew pew!" will be tolerated from the audience. [url]
• While the testing for performance enhancing drugs has generated some controversy, the testing of athlete gender seems a bit trickier to handle. Does a person with XXY compete in the male or female events? [url]

If you'd like to read more awesome and interesting stuff, check out this unrelated (but not entirely random!) Techdirt post.

Filed Under: accuracy, gender, olympics, robots, testing