Olympics in London 2012, no thanks to LOCOG

If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to our RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!

Now we’ve marvelled at the spectacular closing ceremony for Beijing 2008 we can all start focusing on the Olympics for London 2012. But a post by Neville Hobson has made me wonder if LOCOG (London Organising Committee) will really be able to cope with the fundamental shifts in society that are occurring. By 2012 change will have accelerated even further.

Neville has used the London 2012 logo on his blog, even explaining “I couldn’t find a logo file for download from the image library or anywhere else on the 2012 website. What’s at the top of this page is a screen capture from the 2012 home page.”

The reason Neville couldn’t find the logo in the image library is that he’s breaking the law by using it. The draconian LOCOG ‘Using the Brand’ guidelines make it clear that:

“For example, without the London 2012 Organising Committee’s written consent, it is unlawful to use the Olympic symbol, the London 2012 logo or the mark ‘London 2012’ in the course of trade.”

Neville’s blog is definitely used in “the course of trade”. But wait, the guidelines also say:

“The words protected by OSPA can, however, be used in editorial news pieces without our authorisation and journalists are, in certain circumstances, able to use our emblem etc to illustrate an editorial piece about the Games.”

You could easily argue that Neville’s blog is an “editorial news piece.” Unfortunately, LOCOG also say:

“This exception does not however apply to businesses which produce newsletters, client bulletins or other marketing collateral.”

But that’s very wooly wording. I’ve produced lots of newsletters for clients that I would argue are nothing to do with ‘marketing’ and it clearly says “other marketing collateral” therefore implying the first part of the sentence only applies to marketing newsletters.

What you are allowed to do is use this logo to “Link to the London 2012 website.” But it’s hidden right at the end of some very long and dull FAQs. Don’t bother following the link as it just takes you to a bunch of rather pointless, brightly coloured text boxes.

The site also has links to a series of big PDF documents detailing all the different ways that you aren’t allowed to do anything to support London 2012.

I fully understand and agree with the need to protect the sponsorship and investment in the 2012 games, but this is not the way to do it. It is 1995 thinking (The Olympic Symbol etc. (Protection) Act 1995 (OSPA)), added to in 2006 (London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games Act 2006) by people who don’t understand how society is changing. Personally I can’t see this old school ‘command and control’ dictatorship lasting until 2012.

This is not the way to motivate the nation to get behind 2012 (and at the moment the whole nation is not behind it, many questioning the expense and the disproportionate focus on London, ignoring most of the UK.) Can you just begin to imagine the damage to the 2012 image as LOCOG brings the full force of its legal might down on a tiny local business or community group that is just trying to support its local sporting heroes?

The intelligent solution would surely to have two versions of the London 2012 logo – one for official sponsors and one for enthusiastic supporters.

UPDATE: I wrote most of this post last night, but didn’t post it. There is already a comment about this and Neville’s response on the post.