Skip to content
Join our Newsletter

Swifter, higher, stronger trademark law

“See you in Vancouver,” I scream into the phone to my friend. I’m on the Sea to Sky Highway, on the road to Vancouver, driven by dreams to celebrate the impossible.
maxbyline

“See you in Vancouver,” I scream into the phone to my friend. I’m on the Sea to Sky Highway, on the road to Vancouver, driven by dreams to celebrate the impossible. I’d let the dreams begin back in ’02 when it became clear it was our time to shine because the International Olympic Committee had bought into the Canadian Olympic Committee and the Vancouver Organizing Committee’s game plan to be the host country for the Vancouver 2010 Winter Olympic Games.

The organizers had put on a gold medal performance, faster, higher, stronger than all the other countries tripping over themselves to proudly proclaim, “We’re next!” Driven by nature, — and needing only to upgrade the road to Whistler — the bid boosters, bearing bumper stickers touting “I’m Backing the Bid” were already lining up sponsors, for the fire within burned brightly and there was no doubt the Sea to Sky Games would make the road to Beijing and beyond seem paved with gold… silver or, at worst, bronze.

Now it may seem, at first blush, those opening paragraphs make even less sense than usual, which is saying a lot considering how little sense this page often makes. But within those admittedly tortured 160 or so words, most of them fall under the protection of one or another trademark belonging to one or another of the various Canadian Olympic committees.

Following my normal practice, I would raise the visible notation “™” on each and every one of them. But I don’t have to any more. At least I hope I don’t have to. I’m uncertain. But then, that’s why Pique bought insurance in the first place. Not that we want to find out whether it works or not, given the slippery nature of insurance carriers and their hired guns, both of whom conspire together to find and/or create loopholes to avoid paying out for exactly the kind of perils you thought you bought insurance to protect you from in the first place.

No, I think I’m safe because the federal government is going to protect me. Stop laughing; I’m serious. It’s not that I have any drag with Stevie Hapless’s Conservative minority government. Clearly nobody outside Quebec — okay, maybe the vast hinterland of Ontario with the notable exceptions of Toronto and Ottawa but certainly nobody in B.C. — has much drag with those guys as they pander for votes by acting like, well, like Liberals, spending money like drunken sailors. As usual, that’s being grossly unfair and quite possibly slanderous towards drunken sailors everywhere. Sorry guys. But it’s not like you haven’t gone out of you way to earn that particular cliché.

The Feds are going to protect me because they want to protect all the companies who’ve ponied up the money to become official sponsors, partners, hangers-on and very close personal friends of the extended Olympic Family. So anxious are they to protect the very meaningful and potentially lucrative commercial relationships between the Olympic Family and the sponsors of the Family Games, they were concerned the protections afforded under existing trademark legislation weren’t strong enough.

So they’ve tabled a piece of legislation — Bill C-47 if you’re one of those people who really care — designed to strengthen the protections afforded by the Trademarks Act to further strengthen, at least until December 31, 2010, special Olympic marks, the shorthand word for all those things officially associated with the Olympics.

Not surprisingly, words like the “2010 Olympic Games” and “faster, higher, stronger,” — or, in there more mellifluous Latin, “ citius, altius, fortius ” are protected marks. Everyone knows that. More surprisingly, words like “winter” and “Vancouver”, when they’re paired with words like “twenty-ten” or “games” are also protected. At least they’re protected when they’re used in a commercial way, one likely to cause confusion that the user is trying to horn in on the action in an unofficial, unpaid, freerider kind of way.

Which is why I’m protected. Maybe. Ever mindful of the need for a free and vigorous press, the legislation specifically exempts scribblers who use the protected words in the course of writing “… a news report relating to Olympic Games or Paralympic Games, or for the purposes of criticism relating to Olympic Games or Paralympic Games….” Actually, I have no reason to believe the current government gives a hang about a free and vigorous press. But in Olympicspeak, all press is good press and I’m certain I’ll write some very complimentary, yea, even promotional things about the Vancouver-Whistler 2010 Olympic Games and so, I bask in the glorious warmth of legal protection… or at least I will once the law is passed.

But I’ll probably miss tossing in the gratuitous ™ along the way.

Such laws are not unusual and Canada is breaking no new ground in bending over backwards to protect Olympic sponsors. All recent Olympic host countries have enacted similar legislation. After all, what would the Olympics be without sponsors willing to pony up billions of dollars? Some kind of amateur sporting event?

And being a direct beneficiary of the Olympic money tree, not to mention being over-the-top excited about the sweeping Olympic legacies that’ll be left behind for me to enjoy — sliding centre, ski jump and a way faster Sea to Sky highway — I want to afford the organizers, sponsors and extended Olympic family all the protection possible. After all, without the 2010 Games, we’d still just be a sleepy, world-class resort municipality with a tatty muni hall, no Olympic Plaza, and a functioning landfill.

I think the list of protected words — and the protection afforded — doesn’t go nearly far enough. There are words so dastardly they simply shouldn’t be uttered or written in the faintest Olympic context. Those words should become forbidden marks, marks not to be spoken, written or even implied to have any connection, in fact or fancy, with the 2010 Games.

“Rain to the top” should be high on the list. So should “large bills, random serial numbers, in a plain brown wrapper.”   “Fog, cloud, variable visibility, killer highway, housing not games, cost overruns, overzealous security and transportation problems” should all be marked if they’re used in any way with the already protected words, “Vancouver, Whistler, 2010 Games, etc.”

I’m sure there are thoughtful additions you’d like to see on the list. Feel free to submit them to Pique. It’s the right thing to do. After all, we’re all in this together so let’s show some spirit out there people.