Rechercher dans :

 
Lex Hebdo

um-anciens-numeros

um-anciens-numeros


Home / Vol.16, n°2 / Post-mortem des jeux de Vancouver de 2010 : retour sur la loi sur les marques olympiques et paralympiques

Post-mortem des jeux de Vancouver de 2010 : retour sur la loi sur les marques olympiques et paralympiques

LADOUCEUR Geneviève

Download PDF text Download PDF text

The news surrounding the Vancouver Olympics in 2010 has been a subject of much interest. Highly desirable economic benefits provided by the exclusivity of Olympics sponsorship instigate envy among many commercial competitors. Faced with the growing phenomenon of trademark infringement and Olympic ambush marketing, the International Olympic Committee and host countries of the Games have provided an extra layer of protection for the Olympic brand. In Canada, the Olympic and Paralympic Marks Act (OPMA) was sanctioned by the General Governor government on June 22, 2007. The key sections of the Act expired on December 31, 2010, while other aspects are permanent.
 
The first part of this article is intended to situate the issues related to intellectual property protection at the Vancouver Games, define and determine the boundaries of Olympic property, as well as the role of each player in the Olympic field. We will study the actions that were taken by the Vancouver Organizing Committee for the 2010 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games (VANOC), and other levels of Olympic committees, to ensure ownership of the Olympic image in Canada and the importance of OPMA in these actions.
 
In the second part of the article, we will discuss the implementation of the Olympic brand protection. During the Games, VANOC had to confront the adoption or use of the Olympic brand through non-authorized third parties and unauthorized commercial association with the Olympic image. Other infractions also took place on the Internet.
 
This article is an overview of the Canadian situation following the Vancouver Olympics of 2010. Has the OPMA been invoked before Canadian courts? Was this law actually the only bulwark between protecting the Olympic image and businesses or individuals wishing to take unfair advantage of the event? And finally, has this initiative been instrumental in the fight against ambush marketing and other attacks against the Olympic image?



© copyright 2009-2014 Lex Electronica
All Rights Reserved
ISSN 1480-1787
Regroupement droit et changement Faculté de droit de l'Université de Montréal Centre de recherche en droit public