Re: Olympics : Thu May 31, 2012 3:55 pm  

Mintball wrote:

You're right. The businessman who has been told he can't have his business called the 'Olympic Cafe' is bang out of order. How dare a small business want to benefit from the Games?

Do you think he'll sell more healthy fried breakfasts, pasties or fizzy pop if he can call his cafe Olympic as opposed to soemthing else? Do you think people will not walk in his door if it's not called Olympic Cafe?

How about they let this guy call his cafe "Olympic", and then in a fair world anyone can call whatever they like Olympic as well. Would you be complaining that every single shop, beverage, boiled sweet, toilet roll etc...etc...etc... was branded "Olympic"? Because I'm guessing that's what would happen. Then FatDonalds and co. would be branding everything they sell Olympic as well, only they wouldn't have to pay a penny for it.

[tb]

Re: Olympics : Thu May 31, 2012 3:57 pm  

Just out of curiosity, is Olympic no longer a generic geographical adjective? If not, how do you refer to something from or pertaining to the area of Mt Olympus?

Re: Olympics : Thu May 31, 2012 4:04 pm  

tb wrote:

Just out of curiosity, is Olympic no longer a generic geographical adjective? If not, how do you refer to something from or pertaining to the area of Mt Olympus?

Mt McDonald Olympus, its getting painted yellow soon

I once went to Mount Olive, but she was having none of it

Re: Olympics : Thu May 31, 2012 4:04 pm  

DHM wrote:

How about they let this guy call his cafe "Olympic", and then in a fair world anyone can call whatever they like Olympic as well. Would you be complaining that every single shop, beverage, boiled sweet, toilet roll etc...etc...etc... was branded "Olympic"? Because I'm guessing that's what would happen. Then FatDonalds and co. would be branding everything they sell Olympic as well, only they wouldn't have to pay a penny for it.

No one seemed bothered that Little Chef had been calling one of their breakfasts "Olympic" for decades

Re: Olympics : Thu May 31, 2012 4:04 pm  

rover49 wrote:

I admire the dedication of the likes of Jessica Ennis, Tom Daley etc, but have no interest whatsoever when it comes to overpaid tennis and football players turning up at the games and declaring themselves 'Olympians'. Athletes, amateur boxers etc dedicate themselves for these events as a prime event in their lives while tennis and football have it way down the list of priorities.

The olympic ideal is long dead, even the torch bearers are flogging off the torches.

I couldn't tell you without looking it up who won the football or the tennis in Beijing, but I can tell you where I was and who I was with when Michael Phelps won his 8th gold medal in the pool.

Re: Olympics : Thu May 31, 2012 4:12 pm  

cod'ead wrote:

No one seemed bothered that Little Chef had been calling one of their breakfasts "Olympic" for decades

1. Do you know they don't pay royalties?
2. As you say "decades". If the cafe in discussion had been named The Olypmic Cafe for decades there would be no issue, he'd be able to continue to use the name.

Re: Olympics : Thu May 31, 2012 5:10 pm  

El Barbudo wrote:

Millennia?
There were no Olympics during the time between the Ancient Greeks and Victorian times.
Hence, I think decades would be more appropriate.

Continue ...

Well, they started in the old BC times.

DHM wrote:

... How about they let this guy call his cafe "Olympic"...

You do realise that 'Olympic' is a very, very old word. And even the idea of the Games being 'Olympic' is very, very, very old? Yes?

You tell me – how the hell did anyone cope before MaccyD and Coke decided it was theirs.

cod'ead wrote:

No one seemed bothered that Little Chef had been calling one of their breakfasts "Olympic" for decades

I notice that DHM has posted on this thread since, but not answered your post.

Re: Olympics : Thu May 31, 2012 6:35 pm  

Mintball wrote:

I note you aren't answering the question about the church etc.

Because it is one of your red herrings.

Carry on defending trademark infringement if you want I don't care.

Re: Olympics : Thu May 31, 2012 7:58 pm  

Big Graeme wrote:

Because it is one of your red herrings.

Carry on defending trademark infringement if you want I don't care.

No. You just can't stop defending big business.

Re: Olympics : Thu May 31, 2012 10:14 pm  

Mintball wrote:

No. You just can't stop defending big business.

If he'd been trading for donkeys years the I'd have some sympathy, he has changed the name purely to exploit the name, if a trademark holder doesn't enforce their trademark in a situation like this then they have no defence against the big players ripping off their trademark.

Now if you think the award of the trademark is wrong (and I have some sympathy there) then that is a different matter altogether.