BUSH CAMP SAYS OLYMPIC AD WILL STAY UP

ABC News ^ | 8/26/04 | Ann Compton

[SuziQ]

Perhaps you, also, should learn the difference between an ad and an interview

Thank you, your snideness! I DO happen to know the difference between an ad and an interview, and my opinion stays the same. 'The Olympic Games' is an accepted common usage term, whether mentioned in an ad OR an interview. If a travel agency, in an ad, mentioned a package to travel to see 'The Olympic Games', would that be a copyright violation? The USOC might want to SAY it's copyrighted, and try to bully folks into not using the term, but as far as I know, that contention has never been held up in a court of law.

[xzins]

The Olympic Committee has no grounds.

They have the same legal ground as if the president said, "I flew over the Heinz Ketchup Factory yesterday."

(And he's flyin' high over those characters at this moment...)

[Peach]

You are cracking me up!

[xzins]

Very firm legal ground.

What part of that don't you understand?

Waiting....

Waiting....

LOL!

[xzins]

The IOC has a copyright on any mention of its name

Actually, that's not correct.

There are whole books written on "fair use" of another's copyright.

Mentioning them is not a violation and more than my mentioning the olympics is a violation.

[lugsoul]

I asked you to stop sending this moronic crap to me. Go play with Peach. She says she enjoys your posts.

[zook]

Not tolerated? You don't seem to have been silenced in any way.

[lugsoul]

No. Nor did I say I was. I have, however, been bombarded with repetitive idiocy.

[Lancey Howard]

I don't know if they're ALL liberal Democrats, but I'm sure there are at least a couple on that committee who would take a call from the Kerry camp and try to embarass Dubya on Kerry's behalf.

[xzins]

You ping and I respond, dude.

I've got you calling my citation of the 2 sentence thread on which this discussion is based "moronic crap."

I'd say you are the one in meltdown status at the moment.

What's that old adage about "heat" and "kitchen?"

LOL!

[SirAllen]

The ADVERTISEMENT makes not claim that Bush is supported by or affiliated in any way with the Olympics. The examples you gave like "Olympic Pizza" on the other hand do falsely imply official endorsement.

Bingo! We have a winner! There is no attempt to portray W or the war on terror as supported by and/or affiliated in any way with the Olympics.

[lugsoul]

No. It is moronic crap to hoot and crow about that sentence referencing a lawsuit because it has the word "legal" in it.

I've asked you several times. Unlike others who are on this thread, I don't run to the mods whining and crying at the drop of a hat. But I have no use for your posts, and I am tired of having them show up as pings. Stop it.

[Peach]

Meltdown is right. It's sort of sad actually.

[OldFriend]

The President has made it clear that he believes he is on safe legal grounds here.

As for the Olympic committee, they can kiss my grits.

[On the Road to Serfdom]

You falsly accuse people of not knowing the difference between an advertisement and a book, as if that somehow proves your point. You did not refute the Tropicana example, or the example given about an add saying "see the Olympics".

Do you see the difference beteen "Stay in our hotel located walking distance from the Olympics" vs. "Buy our Olympic hotel package"? If you beleive both are equally in violation then cite case law and prove your point.

[xzins]

Listen, mr/ms lugsoul. You ping me and I respond. That's the way the game is played.

If you can't figure out that "very firm legal ground" from this 2 sentence thread is a legal statement, then you probably need to file a suit right now against your 4th grade reading comprehension teacher...she's guilty of gross malpractice.

How long before the IOC files suit?

waiting....

waiting....

LOL!

[On the Road to Serfdom]

Note to self: Next time correct your typo's before posting.

[lugsoul]

First off, I haven't "falsely accused" anyone. Your post, unfortunately, follows the trend on this thread of equating all used of the word. For any trademarked or copyrighted material, there is a fair use, and coming along and citing a fair use as an example of why an ad is okay is absolutely meaningless. If someone wants to argue that an ad is a fair use, have at it. But it is just plain dumb to equate that with a historical reference or a casual conversation and somehow think that proves a point. Your example was a good one - obviously, there was a reason for the name of the store. If the sign had "Tropicana" and a bunch of oranges on it, it becomes less clear. Just like a store in Forks, WA can probably call themselves the "Olympic convenience store" - with the park there and all. But the fact that your brother can use the word "Tropicana" for his use does not mean anyone can use it for any use.

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

I can't believe ALL of their atheletes can have that opinion.

They don't. The original story was based on a quote from the captain of the team and the news-whores just ran with it, throttle wide open, embellishing as needed along the way.

[xzins]

The guy is weird. He pings, talks a lot of trash, and then says "don't ping me."

Sounds a whole lot like, "Make the Swiftees..stooooopppp...I weally, weally was in Cambodia on a 007 Secret Agent mission...."