On 24 March 2008, the Olympic torch began a 136,800km, 130-day journey from ancient Olympia in Greece to Beijing for the opening ceremony of the 2008 Olympic Games on 8 August. But what was the ideal opportunity for the Games' sponsors to capitalise on the association between their brands and one of the world's biggest sporting events is not likely to be free of controversy.
The disruption of a Chinese official's address during the Olympic torchlighting ceremonies in Greece was just the beginning of a string of protests planned to coincide with the torch's trip around the globe. Groups are protesting against China's humanitarian policies, particularly in Tibet and Darfur, and key figures, such as Steven Spielberg, have already begun to pull out of their roles in staging the Games. That is likely to be troubling news for the sponsors of the Beijing Olympics, some of whom are estimated to have paid as much as US$100m for a four-year affiliation with the Beijing Organising Committee for the Games of the XXIX Olympiad (BOCOG).
But with more than half a million visitors and four billion viewers from around the world expected to tune in to the Olympic broadcasts – not to mention the potential offered by China's booming economy – the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games remains a lucrative business opportunity for the affiliated brands. This is clearly evident in the eagerness of companies such as Coca-Cola, McDonald's, Kodak and Budweiser to sponsor the event.
Rights for a price
The BOCOG Sponsorship Programme consists of three tiers of support: Beijing 2008 Partners, Beijing 2008 Sponsors and Beijing 2008 suppliers. Partners include Adidas, Johnson & Johnson, Volkswagen and Air China. 'There are going to be over 4.5 billion people looking at Beijing and China with amazement,' Brian Perkins, vice president of corporate affairs for Johnson & Johnson, said after signing a global deal with the International Olympic Committee (IOC). 'It's going to go beyond a sporting event. I think it will be a cultural, social and economic event, the likes of which we won’t see again.'
Given the amount of investment at stake, it is no surprise that the IOC is vigilant about these rights. A commitmentto drafting appropriate IP legislation is now a precondition of a nation being awarded the Games. Within a year of being awarded the Games in mid-2001, China and the BOCOG issued special regulations on Olympic IP, including legislation protecting the ring symbol and the IP rights of its sponsors.
A series of Olympics-specific IP decrees and regulations, such as the Beijing Regulations on the Intellectual Property Protection of Olympics-related IP Rights and the Regulations on the Protection of Olympic Symbols, have been specifically designed to protect the Games' image. These regulations strictly outlaw any activities that might deceive the public into thinking that there is an existing sponsorship or other supportive relationship between the 'ambush' marketers and the owners of the Olympic symbols.
Partnership and sponsorship agreements allow companies an exclusive right to market their products or services in connection with the images, symbols and names associated with the Beijing 2008 Olympic Games and the Beijing 2008 Paralympic Games.
Previous Games have already seen a rise in ambush marketing, as non-affiliated companies seek to misappropriate or capitalise on the goodwill and popularity associated with such events without paying for the right to do so.
Despite China's much-maligned record in protecting foreign companies' brands, the BOCOG has to date pursued infringers, large and small, across the country. Recent high-profile examples include one Beijing restaurant manager, who made the mistake of printing the words 'we wish the 2008 Beijing Olympics success' on his restaurant napkins, a use which is not authorized by the BOCOG. The committee has also banned the unauthorised use of phrases such as 'Olympiad' and 'Beijing 2008' and the motto 'Faster, Higher, Stronger'.
But despite such stringent attempts at protection, it is inevitable that non-affiliated companies will try to find ways to associate themselves with the event. Previous Games have already seen a rise in ambush marketing, as non-affiliated companies seek to misappropriate or capitalise on the goodwill and popularity associated with such events without paying for the right to do so.
Celebrated examples range from the Nike-sponsored Michael Jordan draping himself in the American flag to obscure the official Reebok logo on his kit when receiving the basketball gold medal at Barcelona in 1992; Kodak's sponsorship of TV broadcasts of the 1984 Olympics, as well as the US track team, eclipsing the presence of the official sponsor Fuji; and Amex running advertisements during the Lillehammer Winter Games that correctly, but mischievously, reminded US visitors that they didn’t need 'Visas' to travel to Norway.
Targeting infringement
Keen to showcase its commitment to countering such IP offences, the BOCOG pledged to get tough on ambush marketing. Under new rules, the Chinese Administration of Industry and Commerce has been given a significant amount of discretion to deal with ambushers. It has also launched educational campaigns to enlighten the public about the fundamentals of IP and the risks of ambush marketing. It is hoped that Chinese people will, for the first time, appreciate what IP infringement means on a national scale, which in turn should pay dividends for IP enforcement in China as a whole.
It appears to be working. The BOCOG transferred 700 ambush marketing cases to the Administration of Industry and Commerce and other public security departments in 2007 alone. In order to control illegal marketing, it is also implementing stringent restrictions on advertisements in Beijing during the Games. These include: a ban on all non-Olympic national and international conferences in the city from 1 August to 23 September and restrictions on outdoor advertising for the duration of the Games.
Beijing is set to be the most lucrative Games ever and with the stakes this high, it is little surprise that both the BOCOG and the Chinese government are working hard to protect the sponsorship agreements they have so carefully put in place. But with increasing calls by humanitarian groups for sponsors to use their influence to pressure China into changing its policy on Tibet and Darfur or risk damage to their reputation, it remains to be seen how successful the sponsorship will be for the brands of the affiliated companies.
Win an iPod touch
What do you think is the most powerful sporting brand?
To enter in the free prize draw for an iPod touch, visit CPA at INTA at booth 201 and submit your answer to the above question, visit the INTA iPod Competition page. The winner will be chosen at random from all entries received. The results of the poll will be featured in the next issue of IP Review (summer 2008). Closing date: 18 June 2008. The winner will be notified by email. Search this site for full terms and conditions.
