

Olympic organisers shut down “Space hijackers” protest Twitter account - kmfrk
http://blog.indexoncensorship.org/2012/05/23/olympic-organisers-shut-down-space-hijackers-protest-twitter-account/

======
nodata
Related: <http://www.protestlondon2012.com/10reasons.html>

~~~
excuse-me
Simple solution - here is a list of London 2012 sponsors, just avoid them and
their products. [http://www.london2012.com/about-us/the-people-delivering-
the...](http://www.london2012.com/about-us/the-people-delivering-the-
games/olympic-partners/index.html)

If you are a business customer just tell them that you aren't buying from them
because you don't like the olympics attitude. Then wherever-the-f __* 2016
will have a little more difficulty finding suckers.

~~~
smsm42
> Then wherever-the-f* 2016 will have a little more difficulty finding
> suckers.

You think? Somehow I don't imagine BP or P&G or Cisco saying 2016 Olymipcs
committee: "sorry, we couldn't sponsor you anymore, that excuse-me guy from
Hacker News really got us in the tough spot, so we have to choose between
being associated one of most watched and admired events in the world and his
business, so we can't really do anything here. Maybe in 2020..." Olympics are
popular, probably vastly more popular than the Hijackers bunch, that describe
themselves as "We're a bunch of fuck-wits". I have nothing against them having
their fun, provided they don't hurt anybody, but given the existing trademark
laws, it is hard to expect a different outcome. And if you plan to boycott
every business that defends their trademark, you have a lot of boycotting to
do...

~~~
excuse-me
Companies are extremely sensitive to their public image and want the sports
they sponsor to match that.

Formula 1's image used to be exclusive/glamour/rich and so had Rolex type
sponsors. Then when tobacco adverts were banned it went after
young/adventure/excitement types. But do RedBull really want their
cool/hip/trendy young customers in Seattle to picture RedBull with police
shooting democracy protesters at the Bahrain GP?

For example, IBM sponsor golf - Apple don't. IBM's customers don't care that
the golf tournament is being held at a course that doesn't let women in -
Apple's certainly would!

BP - frankly they could put baby seals into a wood chipper on national
television without damaging their public image!

But CISCO are the most vulnerable to image. Up to now they sold to big
business who just bought on a salesman's word. But now they are trying to be
the face of the internet to regular buyers. Having their name plastered across
news reports about visitors to the olympics being banned from posting
twitter/youtube/facebook doesn't look so good.

~~~
smsm42
Nobody was banned from posting to twitter. What was banned is the use of
specific image - similar to registered trademark. And somebody like Cisco has
nothing to do with it, so you are trying to build a chain starting with event
that did not happen and going to the people that had no connection.

~~~
nodata
You're playing with words. An _account_ definitely was
banned/blocked/suspended/whatever due to "the use of a specific image". But
it's the account that was blocked, not the image as you imply.

~~~
smsm42
No I am not. "Banned from twitter" means that person/organisation was
prohibited from using Twitter. That is not what happened - account was
temporarily suspended because of the usage of trademarked image (not because
of its ownership or content) and if they stop using the trademarked image they
could post to twitter as much as they wish. Nobody censors them because they
offended the mighty 1% (these constant knee-jerk allegations really are
getting tiresome). Their account is suspended for using trademark that doesn't
belong to them - that would happen with any trademark in any situation. Try
using Coca-Cola logo in your twitter account and if Coca-Cola learns about it
your account most probably will be suspended. Not because Coca-Cola hates you
but because you're using their trademark.

------
omh
Why disable the account rather than just notifying them and asking them to
change the logo?

I had a parody twitter account which was accused of trademark infringement
last year. Twitter just asked me to change the logo to make it more clear that
it wasn't the official one (I changed the shape of it rather than just one of
the words), and everything carried on as normal. The whole thing was over in a
couple of days and my account stayed online the whole time.

------
sparknlaunch12
The rules around the olympics branding extends further than normal laws. There
are guidelines even on referring to the games and athletes. The fact they are
using a variation of the official logo is rights for a challenge. However
shutting the account is a bit far. Is this in breach of twitter terms and
conditions?

Edit: Their account is temporarily suspended and not shutdown. If they change
the branding and verify their account they will be reinstated.

~~~
DanBC
Combinations of "summer" and "2012" can cause problems. See the BBC 3 tv
programme needing to be called "Twenty Twelve" to avoid trouble.

------
eli
Nice article on the behind the scenes of the London Games in Vanity Fair:
[http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/2012/06/international-
olym...](http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/2012/06/international-olympic-
committee-london-summer-olympics#?currentPage=all)

 _As Livingstone prepared to sign, he paused for a moment. Then he looked up
at the I.O.C.’s executive director, Gilbert Felli, who was standing by his
side, and said, “My lawyers advised me not to sign this contract. But I don’t
suppose I’ve got any choice, have I?”

“No,” Felli answered, “you haven’t, really.”_

------
alsothings
The heavy handed enforcement of trademark and brand around the olympics is
insane. Though on the other hand, this
[http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/apr/22/olympics...](http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/apr/22/olympics-
thank-god-for-sponsors)

------
samarudge
I believe unless you are officially a sponsor for the games, or have recieved
permission to use branding, you may not use the phrases "2012 Olympics",
"Olympic Games" or "London 2012". There was a hotel had to change it's
advertising to "Need rooms for the big event this summer" or something allong
the lines because they weren't an official sponsor. And a Cafe had to change
it's name from "Cafe Olympic" to "Cafe Lympic" [1]

From the 2012 Olympics "Using The Brand FAQ" [2]

>4\. Who is allowed to use the Games' Marks? Official commercial partners,
sponsors, suppliers and licensees are allowed to use the Games' Marks in
accordance with the terms of their agreements with LOCOG or the IOC. See our
current partners. > >We have also granted a number of non-commercial partners
helping to deliver the Games the right to use our brand. This includes central
government departments, the Greater London Authority and boroughs hosting
various events for the Games.

So it's more likely than anything they were taken down just for using the
Olympic name and modified logo

[1] <http://www.businessweek.com/ap/2012-05/D9UTL52G0.htm> [2]
[http://www.london2012.com/about-us/our-brand/using-the-
brand...](http://www.london2012.com/about-us/our-brand/using-the-
brand/index.html#who%20allowed%20to%20use%20Games%20Marks)

~~~
excuse-me
So no political reason at all then?

A bit like the Anti-Nazi league, presumably Nazi is a registered trademark of
"3rd Reich inc" and so they should be banned for copyright infringement.

~~~
samarudge
I'm sure there is/would be a political reason, but it's most likely some
marketing person refreshing a Google alert feed then (metaphorically)
hammering anything that isn't one of their official sponsors. Just a theory

~~~
excuse-me
So no reason to push through amazing legislation that bans the use of phrases
like London / Summer / 2012 / Games to such a ridiculous degree?

"This legislation offers a special level of protection to the Games and their
sponsors over and above that already promised by existing copyright or
contract law. A breach of these acts will not only give rise to a civil
grievance, but is a criminal offence."

------
alsothings
This twitter account <https://twitter.com/#!/london20l2> may be of interest to
people reading this thread. It appears to have been setup by people involved
with Space Hijackers, though that is not totally clear...

~~~
JonnieCache
Also <https://twitter.com/#!/charltonbrooker> has been trolling them for some
time now. He's a very popular figure so if they send him a takedown notice
then it will suddenly become a big issue.

------
Mordor
Well, I'm just hoping they arrest Lisa Simpson for 'acting like a logo' lol

------
gouranga
Bow to the O-word overlords or we'll chunk you in jail.

I live in London and the city has turned to shit since it was announced.
Everything is literally broken and being fixed up and convered in turd polish.

The last 5 times I've bothered to commute in rather than sitting on my arse at
home, the public transport is screwed.

------
TazeTSchnitzel
You mean the 2012™ London™ Summer™ Olympic™ Games™?

~~~
zerostar07
Sir, you are going to have to come with us.

------
smsm42
Their logo looks pretty close to the Olympics one. So twitter really doesn't
have much choice unless they want to risk a lawsuit - which they do not.
Olympics guys probably don't have much choice too - TM laws require the owner
to defend the trademark or lose it. The SJ guys would have to create their own
logo.

~~~
zerostar07
Comeon, the IOC is by far the most aggressive ip owner in the world, even
counting all other sports events. It s more Like "protecting the rights of
Adidas to say I sponsor Olympics" than protecting the ancient Olympia

~~~
smsm42
Any data that support this claim that they are the most agressive IP owner
among all?

~~~
zerostar07
[http://www.blogherald.com/2008/08/25/the-most-aggressive-
cop...](http://www.blogherald.com/2008/08/25/the-most-aggressive-copyright-
holders/)
[http://www.cpaglobal.com/newlegalreview/4909/marketers_warne...](http://www.cpaglobal.com/newlegalreview/4909/marketers_warned_don_t_play_ga)
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympic_symbols>
[http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/apr/13/olympics-2012-br...](http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/apr/13/olympics-2012-branding-
police-sponsors)

------
kmfrk
_Update:_ The account has been reinstated.
<https://twitter.com/spacehijackers>.

The protestors couldn't have asked for a better aid to their cause than the
suspension.

------
zerostar07
It is universally known that the members of the Olympic (tm) (r) (truly sorry)
Commitees would gladly kill their mother to protect their intellectual
property (which the ancient Greeks built but who cares).

------
mkr-hn
I could see changing the logo, but shutting the account down was too much. I
doubt the account itself had any content related to the Olympics aside from
the logo.

------
Joeboy
Does anybody know which logo it was? The five rings one or the Lisa Simpson
one? I want to change my Twitter theme.

~~~
alsothings
these are the logo files they're using
<http://www.protestlondon2012.com/images/banner_ads.png> it's a parody of the
main crazy rave rendering of 2012 that is used by all the olympic related
things.

------
rwmj
Why are they not selling those t-shirts?!

------
taligent
It's an act of petty, vindictive censorship because the Olympic Committee are
legitimately defending their trademark ?

Wow. Way to give the legitimate and serious issues around censorship a bad
name.

~~~
idiot
You can be a good legal citizen and a huge jerk at the same time. These are
just different domains. There is no causation that if you are acting within
your legal rights you're exempt from moral responsibility.

