Seventeen page analysis of the Olympics mark bill here.
Post Tagged with: "c-47"
Members of Parliament devoted nearly two hours on Wednesday to debating Bill C-47, the Olympic Marks bill. While much of the discussion predictably veered toward completely unrelated issues (child obesity, French language coverage of the Olympics, the "world class" status of Vancouver, camcording), the core elements of the discussion were encouraging. With one notable exception (BC Liberal MP Sukh Dhaliwal, who urged the government to push foward on the bill without any committee hearings), most of the MPs engaged in the debate recognized that the bill grants the Vancouver Olympic Organizing committee (VANOC) enormous power that should be carefully analyzed and should not be permitted to chill free speech, parody, or other legitimate activities. There were strong calls for committee hearings from Liberal Hedy Fry (who referenced some of my comments) and the NDP's Charlie Angus.
The free speech issue in particular was raised by several MPs.
Bill C-47, the Olympics marks bill demanded by the IOC, was back in the House of Commons yesterday as the Government moved that the bill be read a second time and be referred to committee. James Moore, the MP who spoke on behalf of the government, ran on too long, […]
The New York Times covers Bill C-47, including comments from Liberal MP Scott Brison, who says that he will work to amend the bill's protection of generic words.
I have covered Bill C-47, the Olympic Corporate Sponsor Protection Act, in several postings (here and here). The Vancouver Sun has fascinating article that demonstrates how C-47 is really just the tip of the iceberg. It uncovered the list of official marks controlled by the various Canadian Olympic committees. The list, which some IP lawyers argue represents a misuse of Section 9 of the Trademark Act, includes: