Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum

Britain Flooded With 'brand Police' To Protect Sponsors


Recommended Posts

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/britain-flooded-with-brand-police-to-protect-sponsors-7945436.html

Hundreds of uniformed Olympics officers will begin touring the country today enforcing sponsors' multimillion-pound marketing deals, in a highly organised mission that contrasts with the scramble to find enough staff to secure Olympic sites.

Almost 300 enforcement officers will be seen across the country checking firms to ensure they are not staging "ambush marketing" or illegally associating themselves with the Games at the expense of official sponsors such as Adidas, McDonald's, Coca-Cola and BP. The clampdown goes on while 3,500 soldiers on leave are brought in to bail out the security firm G4S which admitted it could not supply the numbers of security staff it had promised.

The Olympic spirit is alive and well. 300 people providing a productive role for the greater economy.

What people should do is offer an Olympic Burger celebrating the achievements of the RMS Olympic.

26_olympic_ww1.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 52
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

This is the future for outsourced Britain. Taxpayer funded private monopolies where large corporations who are too big to fail have taken over taxpayer funded services for the benefit of their own profit margins and where services are continually reduced in quantity and quality to keep ceo's in double digit pay rises each year.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the future for outsourced Britain. Taxpayer funded private monopolies where large corporations who are too big to fail have taken over taxpayer funded services for the benefit of their own profit margins and where services are continually reduced in quantity and quality to keep ceo's in double digit pay rises each year.

+1...no risk high rewards for managers..no competition

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the future for outsourced Britain. Taxpayer funded private monopolies where large corporations who are too big to fail have taken over taxpayer funded services for the benefit of their own profit margins and where services are continually reduced in quantity and quality to keep ceo's in double digit pay rises each year.

Sadly true. But who will stop it?

The Tories... No chance, a corporate state is their wet dream.

Labour... Pull the other one, they took it further than any previous administration

The Lib Dems... A party who change their minds more often than the wind, and have no principles.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I heard the biggest Olympic sponsor was FUBRA

Thats the Olympic website down for the duration of the games then :lol:

The BBC is one of them "the Olympic broadcaster" which means us. We will have to boycott ourselves then.

Edited by Socially Housed
Link to post
Share on other sites

Anybody like to post a full list of sponsors so that I can have a handy blacklist of companies never to patronise again.

The big ones are Kraft, McDonalds, Coca-Cola, Proctor & Gamble and Adidas and their subsidiaries.

From now on, I'm only eating Nestlé and Burger King, drinking Irn Bru washing myself with Unilever products and wearing Nike.

The olympics don't actually have any sponsors but they do have a lot of partners.

Edited by Diver Dan
Link to post
Share on other sites

The big ones are Kraft, McDonalds, Coca-Cola, Proctor & Gamble and Adidas and their subsidiaries.

From now on, I'm only eating Nestlé and Burger King, drinking Irn Bru washing myself with Unilever products and wearing Nike.

The olympics don't actually have any sponsors but they do have a lot of partners.

my personal favourite...http://www.rapiscansystems.com/en/products/ps

Have these guys EVER detected anything from a serious contender?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Olympics organisers have warned businesses that during London 2012 their advertising should not include a list of banned words, including "gold", "silver" and "bronze", "summer", "sponsors" and "London".

At the 40 Olympics venues, 800 retailers have been banned from serving chips to avoid infringing fast-food rights secured by McDonald's.

I wonder if this could - or rather should - be challenged?

These companies do not have any rights to everyday words in the English language. And it is not against the law, since as far as I know, no 'Olympic Law' has been passed by an Act of Parliament. So how can anyone be fined?

Moreover, it is completely illogical. Every hotel is advertising accommodation using the banned words . . . increased tourism and employment was supposed to be the benefit of the games to the taxpayer. But only for some, apparently. You can't have a 'law' that only applies to some people. How can they close down chip shops? Cadbury is the 'official treat provider'. Will they close down a few sweetshops too? So much for Tessa Jowell's 'a 6bn boost for jobs'.

I do believe there is however a law somewhere against private armies with uniforms. Councils use 'enforcement officers' to collect parking fines, but I believe that dispensation was achieved legally under the Road Traffic Act and the decriminalisation of parking offences. I don't believe the brand police have any such raison d'etre in law. And the idea of kangaroo courts imposing 'think of a number' fines is simply reprehensible.

Companies around the world do protect their copyrights of course. But it is done using very expensive patent lawyers. The companies do not have a patent on 'summer' or '2012'.

Anyway, I think the banned chippies should take their case to the EU. This is simply a 'protection racket' clearing people off some gang's turf.

I do think this is as dangerous as it is scandalous. What will private armies enforce next?

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the future for outsourced Britain. Taxpayer funded private monopolies where large corporations who are too big to fail have taken over taxpayer funded services for the benefit of their own profit margins and where services are continually reduced in quantity and quality to keep ceo's in double digit pay rises each year.

It's all just too depressing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if this could - or rather should - be challenged?

These companies do not have any rights to everyday words in the English language. And it is not against the law, since as far as I know, no 'Olympic Law' has been passed by an Act of Parliament. So how can anyone be fined?

Moreover, it is completely illogical. Every hotel is advertising accommodation using the banned words . . . increased tourism and employment was supposed to be the benefit of the games to the taxpayer. But only for some, apparently. You can't have a 'law' that only applies to some people. How can they close down chip shops? Cadbury is the 'official treat provider'. Will they close down a few sweetshops too? So much for Tessa Jowell's 'a 6bn boost for jobs'.

I do believe there is however a law somewhere against private armies with uniforms. Councils use 'enforcement officers' to collect parking fines, but I believe that dispensation was achieved legally under the Road Traffic Act and the decriminalisation of parking offences. I don't believe the brand police have any such raison d'etre in law. And the idea of kangaroo courts imposing 'think of a number' fines is simply reprehensible.

Companies around the world do protect their copyrights of course. But it is done using very expensive patent lawyers. The companies do not have a patent on 'summer' or '2012'.

Anyway, I think the banned chippies should take their case to the EU. This is simply a 'protection racket' clearing people off some gang's turf.

I do think this is as dangerous as it is scandalous. What will private armies enforce next?

The thing is, you can do whatever people will let you get away with. One problem we have as a society is the number of people who when they encounter this sort of shite will pay up is large and the amount of people who when they encounter this sort of shit will say "****** off" on the spot and then sue is a handful.

And by the time that handful of people who won't put up with this sort of shit have finished going through the courts (where ofc they will win, eventually and expensively) the olympics will be over, the profits collected and the coporate bandwagon will have moved on to the next piss taking venture.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its disgusting. Local TV had on a few weeks ago a granny who knitted some 'olympic dolls' for charity. Seb Coes nazis and the IOC got their legal team involved and got her to stop. They almost give sep blatter a run for his money at being utter scumbags.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2148081/Charity-knitting-group-fundraiser-81-banned-selling-1-doll-GB-2012-logo-breaches-Olympic-copyright-laws.html

In contrast i remember the shelves of every poundworld being full of knock off chinese will and kate wedding paraphranalia last year...

Cant see our police going after the chinese though. Persecuting british people is their only interest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if this could - or rather should - be challenged?

These companies do not have any rights to everyday words in the English language. And it is not against the law, since as far as I know, no 'Olympic Law' has been passed by an Act of Parliament. So how can anyone be fined?

Like this perhaps...

London Olympic and Paralympic Games Act 2006

There was an interesting piece on the Spectator blog about how copyright legislation could be used to prevent journalists saying rude things about the games. Unfortunately, it appears to have been taken down.

Edited by Nuggets Mahoney
Link to post
Share on other sites

Its disgusting. Local TV had on a few weeks ago a granny who knitted some 'olympic dolls' for charity. Seb Coes nazis and the IOC got their legal team involved and got her to stop. They almost give sep blatter a run for his money at being utter scumbags.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2148081/Charity-knitting-group-fundraiser-81-banned-selling-1-doll-GB-2012-logo-breaches-Olympic-copyright-laws.html

In contrast i remember the shelves of every poundworld being full of knock off chinese will and kate wedding paraphranalia last year...

Cant see our police going after the chinese though. Persecuting british people is their only interest.

If you read the story, she (for ****** knows what reason) rang them up to ask if she could have permission.

Rather obviously they told her she couldn't have permission.

81 and stupid.

Link to post
Share on other sites

David Starkey, Any Questions....."I hope the whole thing is BUGGERED" to rapturous applause. Apparently, according to Dimblebum, 80% of that applause was for the entertainment value provided by Starkey rather than the audience agreeing. But Dimblebum would say that wouldn't he.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've been planning my own personal boycott of firms supporting this dreadful fiasco. Reading through the list I was thinking this is getting ridiculously easy because I don't buy any of their 5hit anyway.

Then - shock! Horror! - John Lewis. Argh! I'm really going to have to deny myself for a month or two without JL and Waitrose shopping.

Olympic partners

Link to post
Share on other sites

Like this perhaps...

London Olympic and Paralympic Games Act 2006

There was an interesting piece on the Spectator blog about how copyright legislation could be used to prevent journalists saying rude things about the games. Unfortunately, it appears to have been taken down.

Oh, right. Thanks for the link. So carte blanche to do what they like. Hmmmmm . . . Labour Gov of course.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Like this perhaps...

London Olympic and Paralympic Games Act 2006

There was an interesting piece on the Spectator blog about how copyright legislation could be used to prevent journalists saying rude things about the games. Unfortunately, it appears to have been taken down.

Is this a normal requirement to get the games? Does the statute expire after the games or will be find someone in 2015 getting prosecuted for something under this act?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.