Who is LOCOG?
KovacsC wrote:
Who is LOCOG?
London Organsiing Comittee Olympic games, I think.
I could have googled it 
Doctor Glyndwr wrote:
You appalling bastards. A single license to sell chips, what the fuck? What a ludicrous, I am not sure who is worse, McDonalds for actually asking for it, or LOCOG for selling their soul for two beans and a McFlurry.
Bobbyaro wrote:
LOCOG for selling their soul for two beans and a McFlurry.
Heh. nice mashup.
Doesn't appear to be LOCOG so much in this instance as the IOC. It's the IOC that appear to have set the sponsorship exclusivity rules.
BUT WE HAD THE TORCH RELAY AROUND THE COUNTRY WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU PEOPLE IT WAS AWESOME?!
One of the most ridiculous things I've heard is that there won't be any London Bike Hire points at the Olympic Park, because the bikes are sponsored by Barclays and the Games are sponsored by Lloyds.
I wrote a short play to commemorate London 2012:
<scene: a spaceship>
"Klart! What is this place?"
"DooDingzy! This is Earth and that is the UK"
"Klart! Any interstellar contact?"
"DooDingzy! No, only a probe about to leave the system"
"Klart! Backwards people, what holds them back"
"DooDingzy! Our agents has discovered that rather than fuel research, the government has spent the entire years allcoated resources on a party"
"Klart! A party for their citizens?"
"DooDingzy! No, a party for their friends"
"Klart! Then we are safe to use this workld as hyperspace fuel with no risk of reprisals?"
"DooDingzy! We are safe, they should be flying like us now, but they won't be going faster higher stronger anytime soon!"
"Klart! A hahaha. I like what you did there!"
"DooDingzy! To the planet pumps, we ned to stop off at the shop on the way home!"
<Nikachu mentions he is in Sweden.>
FIN
<scene: a spaceship>
"Klart! What is this place?"
"DooDingzy! This is Earth and that is the UK"
"Klart! Any interstellar contact?"
"DooDingzy! No, only a probe about to leave the system"
"Klart! Backwards people, what holds them back"
"DooDingzy! Our agents has discovered that rather than fuel research, the government has spent the entire years allcoated resources on a party"
"Klart! A party for their citizens?"
"DooDingzy! No, a party for their friends"
"Klart! Then we are safe to use this workld as hyperspace fuel with no risk of reprisals?"
"DooDingzy! We are safe, they should be flying like us now, but they won't be going faster higher stronger anytime soon!"
"Klart! A hahaha. I like what you did there!"
"DooDingzy! To the planet pumps, we ned to stop off at the shop on the way home!"
<Nikachu mentions he is in Sweden.>
FIN
... At this rate, I wouldn't be too surprised to learn that non-McDonalds' chips and Co-Op own brand Cola are to be temporarily classified as Class C substances? What an absolute farce.
Still, one bit of good news. It's looking as though the 'fake rain clouds' mooted as a contingency measure for the Opening Ceremony, in the event of actual Summer conditions, won't be needed: it's going to be an absolute washout from start to finish. Which astute organisations secured the coughsweet and hot soup rights for the Olympics, I wonder?
(Btw, I read that they'll be no refunds either, in the event of bad weather cancellations - I believe punters will only be offered 'alternative tickets' in exchange)
Still, one bit of good news. It's looking as though the 'fake rain clouds' mooted as a contingency measure for the Opening Ceremony, in the event of actual Summer conditions, won't be needed: it's going to be an absolute washout from start to finish. Which astute organisations secured the coughsweet and hot soup rights for the Olympics, I wonder?
(Btw, I read that they'll be no refunds either, in the event of bad weather cancellations - I believe punters will only be offered 'alternative tickets' in exchange)
Actually, I wonder what the comparative sentences would be between selling a Class C drug like valium or xanax in the Olympic Park and a trader selling the wrong type of beer or cola.
Squirt wrote:
Actually, I wonder what the comparative sentences would be between selling a Class C drug like valium or xanax in the Olympic Park and a trader selling the wrong type of beer or cola.
Maximums:
Quote:
1)A person commits an offence if he contravenes regulations under section 25. .
(2)A person guilty of an offence under subsection (1) shall be liable— .
(a)on conviction on indictment, to a fine, or .
(b)on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding £20,000.
(2)A person guilty of an offence under subsection (1) shall be liable— .
(a)on conviction on indictment, to a fine, or .
(b)on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding £20,000.
Quote:
•up to 14 years in prison or an unlimited fine (or both)
Which is which?
It's a quiz!
ZOMG Spoiler! Click here to view!
Lower as in position on the page, or in severity of the fine? If the latter, does that mean I could be fined £20,000 for selling Class C drugs, but if I sell "unlicensed" cola I could get 14 years in prison?
Position. I'm fairly sure I've gotten the handle on that part of the legislation, but I cba to look much further.
Wow, I didn't think supplying class c's was anywhere near that level of sentencing. 14 years for dealing in Class C drugs? I'd imagine you'd have to have a *lot* of valium to get that sentence though.
Squirt wrote:
Wow, I didn't think supplying class c's was anywhere near that level of sentencing. 14 years for dealing in Class C drugs? I'd imagine you'd have to have a *lot* of valium to get that sentence though.
And have previous. And be outside a school. In term time. In daylight. Selling to kids.
EDIT: Off topic, it feels like there's a shooting about every third day up in Bradford at the moment, due to drug dealing.
The flags they put up in stupid places along Salford Quays... are being removed. Presumably now the torch has been through?
I wonder if the bit of garden they put in at huge expense (loads of polished concrete edging and tree core benches) will be left to rot now too.
I wonder if the bit of garden they put in at huge expense (loads of polished concrete edging and tree core benches) will be left to rot now too.
Can you imagine the mither you'd be in if you were caught with a tin of Pepsi and a cone of chips within the 'Olympic Village', as paid for with a MasterCard, *and* were skinning up a joint at the same time, whilst sat atop of a Barclays-sponsored pushbike...? Sans a portion of beer-battered fish as partial mitigation to boot?
...Feck me, I presume the beak would have little option but to get the black cap out on that one.
...Feck me, I presume the beak would have little option but to get the black cap out on that one.
Captain Caveman wrote:
whilst sat atop of a Barclays-sponsored pushbike...?
Good, isn't it. I hope that Boris Bikes see their heaviest use yet, by misanthropes riding them through the Olympic site.
Crimes committed inside the Olympic Park are not subject to UK law. IOC Enforcers are authorised to carry out summary punishments, up to and including execution, without the need for judicial review. The IOC are not bound by any international treaty or oversight.
Squirt wrote:
Crimes committed inside the Olympic Park are not subject to UK law. IOC Enforcers are authorised to carry out summary punishments, up to and including execution, without the need for judicial review. The IOC are not bound by any international treaty or oversight.
That's actually entirely credible.
Squirt wrote:
One of the most ridiculous things I've heard is that there won't be any London Bike Hire points at the Olympic Park, because the bikes are sponsored by Barclays and the Games are sponsored by Lloyds.
I'm fairly sure the most ridiculous thing is the renaming of The O2.
Grim... wrote:
Squirt wrote:
One of the most ridiculous things I've heard is that there won't be any London Bike Hire points at the Olympic Park, because the bikes are sponsored by Barclays and the Games are sponsored by Lloyds.
I'm fairly sure the most ridiculous thing is the renaming of The O2.
I would have thought the amount of money we've wasted on the games would be THE most ridiculous but, there you go.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-18182541
So can anyone come up with a paragraph using all words and not being about the olympics (i see thats not included in the banned lists)
Quote:
Protected words
Use of two words in Group A, or one word in Group A and one in Group B, could see you falling foul of Olympics sponsorship rules:
Group A
Games
Two Thousand and Twelve
2012
Twenty-Twelve
Group B
London
Medals
Sponsors
Summer
Gold
Silver
Bronze
Use of two words in Group A, or one word in Group A and one in Group B, could see you falling foul of Olympics sponsorship rules:
Group A
Games
Two Thousand and Twelve
2012
Twenty-Twelve
Group B
London
Medals
Sponsors
Summer
Gold
Silver
Bronze
So can anyone come up with a paragraph using all words and not being about the olympics (i see thats not included in the banned lists)
I also find it somewhat rum that a petro-chemicals company responsible for the deaths and maiming of thousands of Indians is a sponsor. Be ironic if they're name appears on the Paraolympic stuff since they, y'know, crippled a goodsize town full of people.
Actually, y'know what? Fuck the Olympics. I feel sorry for the athletes caught up in this bedlam, I really do, and nothing but contempt for everyone else involved.
Humbug.
Actually, y'know what? Fuck the Olympics. I feel sorry for the athletes caught up in this bedlam, I really do, and nothing but contempt for everyone else involved.
Humbug.
Wow. So an EA advert saying "Look at all the great games we've released in 2012" could be a violation, could it?
This summer of 2012 is proving to be a bit rainy, isn't it?
Ooops, sorry Olympic dudes!
Ooops, sorry Olympic dudes!
zaphod79 wrote:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-18182541
So can anyone come up with a paragraph using all words and not being about the olympics (i see thats not included in the banned lists)
Quote:
Protected words
Use of two words in Group A, or one word in Group A and one in Group B, could see you falling foul of Olympics sponsorship rules:
Group A
Games
Two Thousand and Twelve
2012
Twenty-Twelve
Group B
London
Medals
Sponsors
Summerl
Gold
Silver
Bronze
Use of two words in Group A, or one word in Group A and one in Group B, could see you falling foul of Olympics sponsorship rules:
Group A
Games
Two Thousand and Twelve
2012
Twenty-Twelve
Group B
London
Medals
Sponsors
Summerl
Gold
Silver
Bronze
So can anyone come up with a paragraph using all words and not being about the olympics (i see thats not included in the banned lists)
Whilst supping some Oxford Gold,
I suddenly felt very old.
For it's Twenty Twelve
And no sponsors were shelved
And London's soul had been sold.
Whilst thinking of NWA,
That rap group from back in the day,
I remembered Ice Cube,
E-Zee E's now worm food,
But I sadly forgot about Dre.
Re: the Olympics, it's sad but not entirely surprising that we've effectively set up privatised criminal offences. Of course this all started with the Atlanta Olympics, so blame the bloody Yanks. We're never going to move away from sponsorship now, as it also makes too much money and bribes perks for the IOC freeloaders.
That rap group from back in the day,
I remembered Ice Cube,
E-Zee E's now worm food,
But I sadly forgot about Dre.
Re: the Olympics, it's sad but not entirely surprising that we've effectively set up privatised criminal offences. Of course this all started with the Atlanta Olympics, so blame the bloody Yanks. We're never going to move away from sponsorship now, as it also makes too much money and bribes perks for the IOC freeloaders.
I'm not sorry for the athletes until one of them speaks out.
Pundabaya wrote:
I'm not sorry for the athletes until one of them kills his own career.
FeeX
Pundabaya wrote:
I'm not sorry for the athletes until one of them speaks out.
Maybe they will. Maybe it will be the Black Panther thing all over again. Maybe they'll take their places and then start cramming their faces obscenely with Big Macs before running feebly and collapsing, feigning gasping fits and grabbing their hearts and then giving the crowd the finger.
I'd like to think they would. At the very least stand on the podium and hold aloft a Burger King product, heads bowed.
Good point though, reevaluating opinion.
Quote:
Protected words
Use of two words in Group A, or one word in Group A and one in Group B, could see you falling foul of Olympics sponsorship rules:
Group A
Games
Two Thousand and Twelve
2012
Twenty-Twelve
Group B
London
Medals
Sponsors
Summer
Gold
Silver
Bronze
Use of two words in Group A, or one word in Group A and one in Group B, could see you falling foul of Olympics sponsorship rules:
Group A
Games
Two Thousand and Twelve
2012
Twenty-Twelve
Group B
London
Medals
Sponsors
Summer
Gold
Silver
Bronze
It's not quite as black and white as it is implied here. For example, if you wanted to set up a jewellery company called "London Gold Jewellery Ltd", you could do as long you got permission from the Olympic people. And you would definitely get it (although it may take a while). Trying to get a name like "Olympic Security Ltd" would be bloody impossible though.
I know this as I experience it every day in work (Companies House).
I'm still not entirely sure how the word "olympic", which has been around for centuries, ended up being owned as a trademark by a load of faceless freeloading twats.
Am I the only one who finds the whole G4S farce deeply, deeply hilarious?
It's not as if the start of the Olympics was a closely guarded secret! This is taking 'the dog ate my homework' or the always trusty 'I left my exercise book at home'* to new levels of uselessness.
Hint: you had plenty of time to hire those guards, but you chose to leave it to the last minute. So here's £14 million for your trouble.
* including making a show of having a quick rummage through the satchel whilst trying not to stare right at it
It's not as if the start of the Olympics was a closely guarded secret! This is taking 'the dog ate my homework' or the always trusty 'I left my exercise book at home'* to new levels of uselessness.
Hint: you had plenty of time to hire those guards, but you chose to leave it to the last minute. So here's £14 million for your trouble.
* including making a show of having a quick rummage through the satchel whilst trying not to stare right at it
In fairness, their argument was that they had to leave it until the last minute, as if they hired people too early they'd drop out, or something.
I met one of the lawyers from LOCOG who was responsible for the G4S contract today. I laughed at her a lot.
I met one of the lawyers from LOCOG who was responsible for the G4S contract today. I laughed at her a lot.
Mr Kissyfur wrote:
I'm still not entirely sure how the word "olympic", which has been around for centuries, ended up being owned as a trademark by a load of faceless freeloading twats.
You'd be amazed at which words are restricted in Company Names. "Sheffield" is restricted due to a 400 year old law which is still enforced and using a seemingly innocuous word like "British" is very tricky.
"Olympic" being restricted is not all that surprising, but the way they enforce it is pretty brutal. Even words that sound a bit like it, like "Olympus" are restricted.
Lord Rixondale wrote:
Mr Kissyfur wrote:
I'm still not entirely sure how the word "olympic", which has been around for centuries, ended up being owned as a trademark by a load of faceless freeloading twats.
You'd be amazed at which words are restricted in Company Names. "Sheffield" is restricted due to a 400 year old law which is still enforced and using a seemingly innocuous word like "British" is very tricky.
My company law is a little hazy, but I do recall that there are indeed loads of things you have problems with in company names, including things that are a bit rude. The problem with the Olympic bollocks is that it covers everything, including anti-olympics protest posters put up in the windows of private homes - it covers the use of those two lists of words in anything at all that can be deemed as "advertising".
Quote:
"Olympic" being restricted is not all that surprising,
Well, I still think it is, to be honest. It's a little odd that a literally ancient word for an ancient event has been appropriated by a self-appointed committee
Quote:
but the way they enforce it is pretty brutal. Even words that sound a bit like it, like "Olympus" are restricted.
As was "Ravelympics", which was some sort of knitting compo.
Mr Kissyfur wrote:
. It's a little odd that a literally ancient word for an ancient event has been appropriated by a self-appointed committee
...who won't even make the athletes compete in the nude. Farbs.
Mr Kissyfur wrote:
Lord Rixondale wrote:
Mr Kissyfur wrote:
I'm still not entirely sure how the word "olympic", which has been around for centuries, ended up being owned as a trademark by a load of faceless freeloading twats.
You'd be amazed at which words are restricted in Company Names. "Sheffield" is restricted due to a 400 year old law which is still enforced and using a seemingly innocuous word like "British" is very tricky.
My company law is a little hazy, but I do recall that there are indeed loads of things you have problems with in company names, including things that are a bit rude. The problem with the Olympic bollocks is that it covers everything, including anti-olympics protest posters put up in the windows of private homes - it covers the use of those two lists of words in anything at all that can be deemed as "advertising".
Quote:
"Olympic" being restricted is not all that surprising,
Well, I still think it is, to be honest. It's a little odd that a literally ancient word for an ancient event has been appropriated by a self-appointed committee
Quote:
but the way they enforce it is pretty brutal. Even words that sound a bit like it, like "Olympus" are restricted.
As was "Ravelympics", which was some sort of knitting compo.
Ravelympics = Ravelry Olympics.
It's not even a competition. People form teams and challenge themselves to spin the finest yarn they can or knit the longest scarf they can whilst the limpicks are on. There are no prizes or competition.
Apparently this denigrates all the hard work of the American athletes and the spirit of the games in a way that 'olympic themed diapers' do not.
Importantly, it is the AMERICAN Olympic Association that brought this action against Ravelry, though. It didn't stem from the London Olympics and the initial complaint was raised four years ago at the last Olympics.
Kern wrote:
Mr Kissyfur wrote:
. It's a little odd that a literally ancient word for an ancient event has been appropriated by a self-appointed committee
...who won't even make the athletes compete in the nude. Farbs.
INORITE?
And no one bums each other at the end, either.
Mimi wrote:
Mr Kissyfur wrote:
Lord Rixondale wrote:
Mr Kissyfur wrote:
I'm still not entirely sure how the word "olympic", which has been around for centuries, ended up being owned as a trademark by a load of faceless freeloading twats.
You'd be amazed at which words are restricted in Company Names. "Sheffield" is restricted due to a 400 year old law which is still enforced and using a seemingly innocuous word like "British" is very tricky.
My company law is a little hazy, but I do recall that there are indeed loads of things you have problems with in company names, including things that are a bit rude. The problem with the Olympic bollocks is that it covers everything, including anti-olympics protest posters put up in the windows of private homes - it covers the use of those two lists of words in anything at all that can be deemed as "advertising".
Quote:
"Olympic" being restricted is not all that surprising,
Well, I still think it is, to be honest. It's a little odd that a literally ancient word for an ancient event has been appropriated by a self-appointed committee
Quote:
but the way they enforce it is pretty brutal. Even words that sound a bit like it, like "Olympus" are restricted.
As was "Ravelympics", which was some sort of knitting compo.
Ravelympics = Ravelry Olympics.
It's not even a competition. People form teams and challenge themselves to spin the finest yarn they can or knit the longest scarf they can whilst the limpicks are on. There are no prizes or competition.
Apparently this denigrates all the hard work of the American athletes and the spirit of the games in a way that 'olympic themed diapers' do not.
Importantly, it is the AMERICAN Olympic Association that brought this action against Ravelry, though. It didn't stem from the London Olympics and the initial complaint was raised four years ago at the last Olympics.
Heh, yes - I read the story here this afternoon. They don't mention dates, so I assumed it was recent.
Either way, it's feckin' bonkers.
The USOC, I mean, rather than Ravelry
Either way, didn't Ravelry win and force them to apologise? I'm not reading one link, etc.
I don't think that there will be many actual lawsuits as a result of this. It reminds me mostly of medicines that lost serious side effects. This hayfever remedy may cause coma or death, but chances are it's there to cover themselves. The Olympics is a theme park, and if McBurger Emporium paid a wedge of cash to be the only burger sellers in the theme park then fair enough.
Once the show starts, hopefully everyone will forget all this nonsense and a good time will be had by all.
I don't think that there will be many actual lawsuits as a result of this. It reminds me mostly of medicines that lost serious side effects. This hayfever remedy may cause coma or death, but chances are it's there to cover themselves. The Olympics is a theme park, and if McBurger Emporium paid a wedge of cash to be the only burger sellers in the theme park then fair enough.
Once the show starts, hopefully everyone will forget all this nonsense and a good time will be had by all.
I think they should let competitors jack themselves up on drugs, for the good of mankind.
Think about how many good things are now in new cars that came from trying to build the best F1 car. If someone tried to build the perfect athlete, who knows what they would discover?
Think about how many good things are now in new cars that came from trying to build the best F1 car. If someone tried to build the perfect athlete, who knows what they would discover?
Curiosity wrote:
Either way, didn't Ravelry win and force them to apologise? I'm not reading one link, etc.
I don't think that there will be many actual lawsuits as a result of this. It reminds me mostly of medicines that lost serious side effects. This hayfever remedy may cause coma or death, but chances are it's there to cover themselves. The Olympics is a theme park, and if McBurger Emporium paid a wedge of cash to be the only burger sellers in the theme park then fair enough.
Once the show starts, hopefully everyone will forget all this nonsense and a good time will be had by all.
I don't think that there will be many actual lawsuits as a result of this. It reminds me mostly of medicines that lost serious side effects. This hayfever remedy may cause coma or death, but chances are it's there to cover themselves. The Olympics is a theme park, and if McBurger Emporium paid a wedge of cash to be the only burger sellers in the theme park then fair enough.
Once the show starts, hopefully everyone will forget all this nonsense and a good time will be had by all.
the point is, there's no defence by which one can push a defence to a cease and desist letter form LOCOG. People have been forced to pull down posters from the front windows of their houses campaigning about e.g. the Olympics driving people out of Stratford. Which it has. It's privatised fucking criminal law. It's actual proper awful.
Craster wrote:
Pundabaya wrote:
I'm not sorry for the athletes until one of them kills his own career.
FeeX
I don't think thats true. How would it affect Usain Bolt's career if he won the gold medal in the men's 100m, set a World Record, then said ' Y'know, I think its pretty shitty that Dow Chemical have never even accepted responsibility for the Bhopal Disaster, oh and Adidas trainers suck ass, buy Nikes, they're brilliant!'. Other than earning a big payday from Nike.
They wouldn't dare strip him of his medal, the shitstorm would be devestating. Ban him from the next Olympics? He's one of athletics biggest stars.
