LawTalkers  

Go Back   LawTalkers

» Site Navigation
 > FAQ
» Online Users: 146
0 members and 146 guests
No Members online
Most users ever online was 9,654, 05-18-2025 at 05:16 AM.
View Single Post
Old 08-27-2004, 09:57 PM   #2900
Hank Chinaski
Proud Holder-Post 200,000
 
Hank Chinaski's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Corner Office
Posts: 86,149
IOC and Bush

Quote:
Originally posted by Not Me
Nice try, but no cigar* for you. All that statute does is prevent someone from selling a T-shirt or other goods with the Olympic rings on it or calling their sporting event the Olympics.

It certainly doesn't prevent non-commercial speech about the Olympics. If it did, the IOC could go after a newspaper for discussing the Olympics. Or even go after us for talking about the Olympics here. That of course would be unconstitutional.

The statute in no way affects the copyrights to a film. If you took a video tape of an event and tried to sell it commercially labeling it with the Olmpic rings or even entitiling it with the name Olympics, that statute would apply, but not under copyright law; it would be a mark issue.



*I am sure you can get a cigar from your buddy Clinton, though. It might be a bit stinky, though.
Copyrights are the new polygamy
__________________
I will not suffer a fool- but I do seem to read a lot of their posts
Hank Chinaski is offline  
 
Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.0.1

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:50 PM.