< Back to latest news & events

Blogs

IP Ingredients, Part 19: Biting into the Olympic Games

August 2024

The Olympic Games, currently ongoing in Paris as I write, is one of the most prestigious global sporting events and a prime marketing opportunity, one which food and drink brands have frequently taken advantage of.

However, with the opportunity comes a level of risk that companies need to navigate to avoid falling foul of the legal protection afforded to the Olympic Games and laws around ambush marketing.

Protection afforded to the Olympic Games

The UK Trade Mark Act 1994 provides a special provision under Section 4(5) ‘Specially Protected Emblems’ which states that a trade mark that consists of or contains a controlled representation within the meaning of the Olympic Symbol etc. (Protection) Act 1995 shall not be registered unless it has been applied for by someone authorised by the relevant Olympic association or with their consent.

Further rights conferred by the Olympic Symbol etc. (Protection) Act 1995, amongst others, include exclusive rights in relation to the use of the Olympic symbol, the Olympic motto and the protected words, which include “Olympic”, “Olympian”, and “Olympiad”.

The International Olympic Committee (Comité International Olympique) also own various trade mark registrations in the UK for other brands, including those that get repeated across each event such as OLYMPIC TORCH RELAY and the Olympic Rings Logo , as well as those that are event specific such as the Paris 2024 Olympic Games Logo.

UK Trade Mark No. UK00801026242 and UK Trade Mark No. UK00801527944

Anyone attempting to include one of the protected words or symbols in their brand will encounter issues in obtaining a trade mark registration before the UK Intellectual Property Office and could potentially face trade mark infringement proceedings.

Sponsorship and Official Partners

One way food and drink brands can legally associate themselves with the Olympics is through official sponsorship.  Becoming an official sponsor allows brands to use Olympic trade marks in their marketing, as well as enjoying their brand being shown at the games.  For example, Coca-Cola is one of this year’s Worldwide Partners for the Paris Olympic Games, with others like the retailer Carrefour and Danone being a premium partner and official partner respectively.

Being long time partners for the Olympic Games, as the Coca-Cola brand has been for decades, allows them to leverage this status to run extensive marketing campaigns that can potentially reach billions of people around the world, thereby significantly enhancing the brands visibility and consumer trust.

Ambush Marketing

However, with the cost of becoming an official sponsor reportedly being in the several millions of pounds, it is understandable that some brands are not willing or able to secure official sponsorship.  For such brands, the temptation to engage in ambush marketing can be high.

Ambush marketing is the creation of an unofficial association between an organisation/brand and a particular event, thereby reaping the recognition and benefit of an official sponsor without having paid for the privilege[1].  This tactic, while appealing, can lead to severe repercussions.  The International Olympic Committee is known to actively monitor and enforce its trade marks and other legal rights, and brands caught violating these regulations can face lawsuits, fines and the impact of a rebrand or loss of marketing campaign investments, as well as damage to their reputation.

The IOC has successfully taken legal action against several companies for such practices, emphasizing the importance of adhering to trade mark.

In one incident during the London 2012 Olympic Games, a butcher in Weymouth (Devon) where the sailing was held, who had put up a sign featuring the Olympic rings logo made of sausages, was instructed to take this down or potentially face a significant fine[2].

Navigating Trade Mark Regulations

To avoid legal pitfalls, food and drink brand owners must carefully navigate the trade mark landscape associated with the Olympics.  Here are some key considerations:

  1. Understanding the Rules: Brand owners should familiarise themselves with the IOC’s trade mark rules and guidelines.  This includes knowing what symbols, phrases and imagery are protected and understanding the limits of fair use.
  2. Creative Campaigns: Non-sponsoring brands need to develop creative marketing strategies that do not infringe on Olympic trade marks.  Instead, these could focus on other themes relating to athletes, such as competition or athleticism.
  3. Legal Consultation: Consulting with trade mark attorneys or experts in ambush marketing can help brands ensure their campaigns comply with all regulations.  This proactive approach can prevent costly legal disputes and protect the brand’s reputation.
Conclusion

The allure of the Olympic Games for food and drink brands is undeniable, but the stringent trade mark regulations require careful navigation.  By understanding the rules, seeking creative and compliant marketing solutions, companies and their brands can effectively leverage the Olympic spirit without falling into the trap of trade mark infringement or ambush marketing.


This article was prepared by Trade Mark Director Tanya Waller.

[1] https://www.lexisnexis.co.uk/legal/glossary/ambush-marketing

[2] http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/dorset/6972224.stm

Latest updates

Njoy v Juul finds the patent's underlying problem despite no mention of the problem in the specification

In Njoy v Juul (UPC CFI 315 /2023), the Paris Division of the Central Division provides further insight into the UPC’s approach to inventive step. Of critical importance in assessing …

Read article

The IP Lawyer’s Cheat Sheet: Lucy Johnson on Innovation, Legislation, and Strategy

The world of intellectual property is on the brink of significant transformation. From navigating the use of AI technology to staying ahead of increasingly sophisticated bad actors, IP professionals must …

Read article

Edwards v Meril confirms UPC’s jurisdiction over acts of infringement before the court came into force

In Edwards v Meril (UPC_CGI_15/2023), the UPC’s Munich local division refused to stay infringement proceedings pending an appeal on the central division’s finding of validity of the patent in amended …

Read article

Success of the Gilette Defence fizzles out in SodaStream v Aarke

In SodaStream v Aarke (UPC_CFI_373/2023), the UPC’s Dusseldorf local division has given us further insight into the UPC’s approach to claim interpretation. The court held that, if the patent distinguishes …

Read article

IP Ingredients: How the trademark landscape is adapting to the NoLo trend

Beverage producer and brand owner? This article may be for you, as changes in how EU trademark authorities compare alcoholic and non-alcoholic products make it easier for brand owners to …

Read article

HGF ranked as a top tier firm in Legal 500 UK 2025

HGF has been recommended as a top-tier firm in UK PATMA Trade Mark Attorneys – Tier 1. We also continue to be highly ranked in Tier 2 in the regions …

Read article
Event - 18th November 2024

Innovate Oxford: Healthcare Investor Networking Reception

HGF are proud to be attending the Innovate Oxford: Healthcare Investor Networking Reception in London. The Networking Reception will be held at the National Theatre, Southbank, London on 18th November. …

Event details