Olympic Rings and Legal Strings: The notorious I.O.C.
With a record number of global broadcasters lining up to deliver 11,000 hours of coverage across all 33 disciplines at Paris 2024, the Olympics are shaping up to be the ultimate playing field for advertising and visibility. However, as the Olympic torch approaches Paris, so does the International Olympic Committee’s relentless vigilance over unauthorised use of the ‘Olympic Properties’. Athletes and sponsors alike must be well-versed in navigating these regulations to avoid penalties and ensure a smooth performance both on and off the field.
Foul Play: Ambush Marketing
For non-Olympic sponsors, the legal landscape during the Games requires a strategic game plan. “Ambush marketing”, where non-official sponsors try to associate themselves with the Olympics without paying for the rights, is a legal foul that the IOC is committed to penalizing. The IOC’s ‘Olympic Properties’ encompass a broad range of intellectual property rights, including logos, trademarks, emblems and Olympic symbols. In a notable French case (TGI Paris, 1996), a company producing bottles of wine was condemned for attempting to usurp the notoriety attached to the Olympic Games by including a photo of Pierre de Coubertin, the colors of the Olympic rings, the Olympic Flame, and the words "centenary of Olympism." “Ambush marketing” can also include indirect references, or strategic placements during high-visibility moments. For instance, during the 1992 Winter Games in Albertville, a company was reprehended for using the term "OLYMPRIX" in reduced-price campaigns, deemed a deterioration in the image of the "OLYMPIC" Trademark. The Olympic Games are fraught with legal minefields for unofficial sponsors, where missteps can lead to sanctions from cease-and-desist orders to redress through traditional forms of intellectual property protection, and torts such as passing off.
Digital Defensive Line: Blackout Period
During the Games, from the Olympic Village's opening to two days after the closing ceremony inclusive, athletes and “accredited individuals” (coaches, team officials, entourage and volunteers) must navigate the social media field with caution. Known as the blackout period, social media restrictions complicate their ability to leverage their Olympic status for personal gain and constrain them to sideline their personal sponsors. Athletes are prohibited from mentioning unofficial sponsors or brands in any social media content that is commercial in nature. This includes but is not limited to promoting third parties or products/services, paid advertisements, endorsement or marketing, likely to result in Take Down action by the IOC. Star sprinter Elaine Thompson-Herah was temporarily blocked on Instagram after posting clips of her gold medal-winning races at the 2020 Tokyo Olympics, due to an automatic process that enforces the Rights Holding Broadcasters’ (RHBs) exclusive rights to broadcast the Games, including on social media. These restrictions, beyond securing substantial financial returns from broadcasting rights, also enforce Rule 40 of the Olympic Charter.
Sponsorship Hurdles: Rule 40
Bye Law 3 to Rule 40: ‘Competitors, team officials and other team personnel who participate in the Olympic Games may allow their person, name, picture or sports performances to be used for advertising purposes during the Olympic Games in accordance with the principles determined by the IOC Executive Board’
The origins of Olympic advertising regulation trace back to the early 1960s, initially aimed at maintaining athletes’ amateur status. By 1991, Rule 40 was incorporated into the Olympic Charter to safeguard the financial stability of the Games by curbing excessive commercialization and managing the use of Olympic intellectual property. While the intent was to maintain the focus on athletic performance, it has increasingly restricted association between athletes and the non-paying sponsors and their ability to fully capitalize on their personal image. In the lead-up to Rio 2016, controversy surged as athletes protested Rule 40. The debate intensified after a 2019 German Bundeskartellamt ruling deemed the IOC’s rules anticompetitive, resulting in relaxed restrictions for German athletes. British Olympians also contested the British Olympic Association (BOA) over blackout rules, arguing that these regulations unfairly limited their earning potential during crucial peak career periods. In response, the IOC relaxed Rule 40 for the Paris 2024 Games, and introduced Key Principles, which include restrictions on the presence of advertising on the market at least 90 days prior to the Games and limiting athlete engagement with personal sponsors to one thank-you message.
While some applaud the IOC’s efforts to preserve the uniqueness of official Olympic marketing and support global athlete funding, enforcing Rule 40 often imposes undue financial strain on lesser-known or emerging competitors, curtailing significant revenue opportunities. Critics contend that these adjustments fall short of fully addressing athletes' concerns, notably considering the severity of repercussions for violations of Rule 40 such as losing accreditation, facing legal action, and, under Rule 59, even disqualification and forfeiture of medals.
Carla Tabarie, 2024
