Last time I checked you didn't have the liberty of infringing a trademark.

Sadly they way trademark protection works is you have to chase anyone infringing, if you don't you stand to lose any protection you have, that means chasing the small business as well as the big counterfeiting operations.

It's hardly just about protecting trademarks from infringement, is it?

These laws will allow entirely different names, logos, brands, adverts etc to be removed.

And given the way in which anti-terrorism laws have been used in recent years, how much faith do you really have that such laws would not be used to stop anti-Games sentiments? After all, one Twitter account has already been removed because of objections from Logoc.

We already have the total stupidity of such things as roadsigns near Coventry City's ground having to be changed so that they don't read 'Ricoh Stadium' because – oh my god, what damage that would do to other corporate bodies, while people are bustling around putting tape over brand names on hand driers in public toilets and elsewhere.

We have (or will have) anti-aircraft guns stationed on the top of people's homes.

We have people being told they can't open their workplaces because it would represent "unnecessary traffic", on roads where entire lanes have been designated as for use by VIPs only, with ordinary people told that they can't use certain road crossings either.

It's pathetic.

The article you linked to dealt with trademark infringement and protecting those who have paid a small fortune to sponsor the event from having their efforts hijacked by those who have contributed zip.

Many of the powers set out in the bill are powers that various authorities have in other aspects of counterfeiting, the bill just allows then to act quicker.

The other lunacy is just that lunacy. Mind we still don't know how they are preventing people opening their workshops, there is nothing in the bill that gives anyone any powers to do that.

I admire the dedication of the likes of Jessica Ennis, Tom Daley etc, but have no interest whatsoever when it comes to overpaid tennis and football players turning up at the games and declaring themselves 'Olympians'. Athletes, amateur boxers etc dedicate themselves for these events as a prime event in their lives while tennis and football have it way down the list of priorities.

The olympic ideal is long dead, even the torch bearers are flogging off the torches.

As soon as the torchbearers were charged for their torches, that argument was dead in the water

Never said I objected, just a point to emphasise the Olympic ideal is dead and buried.

You're right. The businessman who has been told he can't have his business called the 'Olympic Cafe' is bang out of order. How dare a small business want to benefit from the Games?



Was that the one about only allowing amateurs to compete, so the hoi polloi could be kept out?

Including by advertising completely different products.

Heaven forfend – we couldn't upset Coke or McingcrappyDonalds, could we? What an irony that, on the one hand, we've apparently got a rising obesity problem – and on the other, we let these health food producers buy out the Games? Great for 'the legacy'.

[url=http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/olympics/london-2012/8310475/Cafe-Olympic-greasy-spoon-ordered-to-change-name.htmlWe can't have small businesses enjoying even a hint of a benefit, can we?[/url

Well the Torch relay went through Chester on the 29th and thousands of people turned out with 25K on the racecourse where the relay stopped for the night. I went along with one of my sons to watch it go past and it was a really nice atmosphere.

Jessica Ennis ran the torch into England from Wales at the south side of Chester into Saltney near to where I live which is where she grew up. She was interviewed on North West tonight and was clearly quite emotional and very proud and I have no problems with her being in the relay.

They also interviewed three people chosen to run with the torch. Only one of the three was from Chester and even then he was from Blacon which is outside of the City so I was a bit surprised at that but they were all worthy torch barer's.

The thing is though the one who ran past me was none of those three and I have no idea who he was!

The guy from Blacon was in a wheelchair and a bit of his stint was also on Northwest tonight and given what I saw it was clear he only got about 500m from the landmarks I spotted so yes this is a bit naff. One of the others was in here 70's so perhaps that was about right for her!

Here are some photos taken in Hough Green which is just up the road from Saltney to give you an idea of the level of interest:

[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/79586797@N00/7307595108/[/url

[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/79586797@N00/7307599390/[/url

and here is the mystery man with the torch:

[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/79586797@N00/7307602670/[/url

I was chatting with someone a while ago. He and his teenage son follow one of the martial arts. They are club members, go to events all over the place, attend championships etc.

They can't get tickets for the Olympic versions – even though they can buy a ticket on the door of any other major championship, due to lack of interest.

In the meantime, the Lottery has been tweeting that it's got tickets for grabs: all you need to do is retweet. Well, that's obviously been a good way to spend the money raised for 'good causes' – and indeed to raise more.

Benefit by infringing a trademark? No.

What? You're defending this?

Olympic – of Olympus. Olympic Games – not trademarked when invented or even re-invented.

It's not like calling your cafe 'McDonalds'.

He knew he was on shakey ground three years ago when he asked trading standards about it.

He asked about it. He was given an answer (apparently) and he complied with that.

And you're defending this?

I can't believe you are defending someone who is seeking to gain financially out of trademark infringement.

The torch came through Warrington earlier, with hundreds lining the way. Majority of which were school children who were bussed in from all over the town (council tax money?). The rest were mainly the elderly.

Oh and there was a 15 minute coca cola break for everyone at the large Tesco store.

Could'nt exactly say it was a resounding success, just a hindrance for everyday commuters. God knows what the policing bill was.

So if, say, the Vatican trademarked the cross, you'd consider that perfectly acceptable?

From the link he only changed the name to try to cash in on the "Olympic" brand after London was awarded the games. Accordingly, he should receive no sympathy. If he wanted legal advice, the last place he should have gone to is a Local Authority!

You are still defending someone who seeks to make money from infringing a trademark.

And you're still defending idiocy.

I note you aren't answering the question about the church etc.



The Olympic 'brand' managed perfectly well for millennia without being trademarked. The current situation is doing more damage to it than anything that went before. And it illustrates just where we are a society – or perhaps that should be, as a corporatocracy?

Well as you can see from the photos I posted the crowd in Chester was made up of all ages and it certainly wasn't bussed in. The 25K crowd at the racecourse even paid to get in.

I reckon so far the majority are pretty happy to see the torch procession come through their locality.



They were handing out small bottles of coke from one of the floats when it went past. My son didn't get one. I think he has forgotten he just turned 18 and isn't a little kid any more!



People actually came to Chester to see it so as the city has a large tourist economy I think the council will have been pleased especially given the extended coverage it got on North West Tonight.

Millennia?
There were no Olympics during the time between the Ancient Greeks and Victorian times.
Hence, I think decades would be more appropriate.

Continue ...

I wonder when [url=http://www.wenlock-olympian-society.org.uk/this lot[/url will start proceedings against the Olympic Organisation for nicking their original idea?

Do you think he'll sell more healthy fried breakfasts, pasties or fizzy pop if he can call his cafe Olympic as opposed to soemthing else? Do you think people will not walk in his door if it's not called Olympic Cafe?

How about they let this guy call his cafe "Olympic", and then in a fair world anyone can call whatever they like Olympic as well. Would you be complaining that every single shop, beverage, boiled sweet, toilet roll etc...etc...etc... was branded "Olympic"? Because I'm guessing that's what would happen. Then FatDonalds and co. would be branding everything they sell Olympic as well, only they wouldn't have to pay a penny for it.

Just out of curiosity, is Olympic no longer a generic geographical adjective? If not, how do you refer to something from or pertaining to the area of Mt Olympus?