It is the entire basis of the story. The IOC and, within the US, the USOC own the rights to the use of the phrases "Olympic Games" and "Olympics" and "Olympiad" - which is why just about every four years you see stories about a crackdown on unauthorized merchandise and the use of the name to promote this business or that one. The entire basis for the request to pull the ad is that the campaign does not have authorization to use the name or depictions of the Games.
You haven't seen the ads, have you.
I guess the committee will just have to sign up a couple of trial lawyers and sue Bush over copyright--or accept payment for "privileges"?
That's a trademark, not a copyright. A trademark can only be infringed if the alleged infringment is meant to confuse or mislead consumers.
You are using the word "olympics" right now. Are you infringing on the copyright. Of course not.
The word "olympics" is in the dictionary and has existed for some time. To say that one sign of an improved situation in Afghan and Iraq is their participation in the "olympics" is not to infringe on anyone's copyright/trademark.
It is a statement of fact.
Similar to saying, "the plane flew over the Rose Bowl Parade."
Which sounds ridiculous on its face.
To say that to observe the fact that the Olympics are taking place is a copyright infringement.
Obviously if there were a legal issue they would not have done it and it is why they will continue to do so.