On June 28, 2011, I was one of the first to analyze the new International Olympic Committee's social media regulations. When the regulations initially were released, I immediately noticed that there may some major challenges with the policies. At that time I stated, "In general, the IOC's Social Media Policy appears to be a good starting point for discussion. However, the points I mention above need to be addressed before the Games begin to lessen the likeliehood that social media compliance misunderstandings may occur."
During a conversation I had with ReadWriteWeb that was published on June 26, 2012, I stated that the "IOC’s social media policy is, at best, a work in progress, and that both official Olympic sponsors and the IOC will likely learn some hard lessons as the 2012 games progress." For example, under the IOC's Rule 40 (their social media regulations) Michael Phelps could be stripped of all of his medals because during the Olympics some photographs were leaked online of him that also contained Louis Vuitton merchandise and Louis Vuitton was not an official Olympic sponsor.
I highly doubt that Michael Phelps will be stripped of his 2012 Olympic medals because the negative press would create a huge black mark on a highly successful Olympic Games. However, as our world becomes more digitized the IOC must prepare for the possibility that similar situations may occur in the future and adjust their social media regulations accordingly before the 2014 Winter Olympics.
To learn more about these issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com
Copyright 2012 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Showing posts with label Olympic Social Media Policy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Olympic Social Media Policy. Show all posts
Friday, August 17, 2012
Tuesday, June 28, 2011
The International Olympic Committee's Social Media Guidelines for the 2012 London Olympic Games Need Clarification
The International Olympic Committee (IOC) recently published its Social Media Policy for the 2012 London Olympic Games. According to the just released policy, "the IOC encourages all social media and blogging activity at the Olympic Games as long as it is not for commercial and/or advertising purposes."
At first glance, the policy appears to be straight forward. It clearly states that its main goal is to protect the intellectual property rights of its commercial and/or advertising partners. I have no problem with the IOC trying to protect its intellectual property interests and the interests of its business partners since billions of dollars are paid for broadcast rights and millions are paid by worldwide partners to be associated with each Olympics.
Some of the sections I thought may be worth more discussion include:
Section 2 of the policy needs to be clarified because it states, "any such postings, blogs or tweets should be in a first-person, diary type format and should not be in the role of a journalist - i.e. they must not report on competition or comment on the activities of other participants or accredited persons..." If a participant makes comments about the competition or the activities of other participants to an accredited member of the media is this within the guidelines? Will the IOC allow this type of information only to be provided to the accredited media but not on a personal social media account? How closely will the IOC enforce this policy?
Section 4 of the Policy appears to try to protect the exclusivity and value of the Olympic broadcasting rights. It states, "Participants and other accredited persons cannot post any video and/or audio of the events, competitions or any other activities which occur at Olympic Venues. Such video and/or audio must only be for personal use and must not be uploaded and/or shared to a posting, blog or tweet on any social media platforms, or to a website." I understand the need to try to protect Olympic broadcasting rights. However, I think it will be difficult for the IOC to permanently ban personal video/audio taken by participants and accredited persons from ever being uploaded onto a social media platform.
Sections 7, 9, and 13 focuses on protecting the IOC's intellectual property. As I stated above, since Olympic partners have paid millions or billions to be associated with the Games they should be provided some type of protection for their investments.
Section 8 discusses social media advertising and sponsorships. Participants and accredited persons may need to have their legal counsel review all of their social media accounts to ensure compliance. Before the Olympics start a thorough review of all active and inactive social media profiles should be completed.
Section 11 discusses liability for social media posts. It states, "they [participants] can be held personally liable for any commentary and/or material deemed to be defamatory, obscene or proprietary." Who is to decide the definition of obscene? As I previously posted, the United States Supreme Court just reaffirmed that in the United States "disgust is not a valid basis for restricting expression." What is the definition of obscene? At the 2010 Winter Olympics, snowboarder Scotty Lago was kicked out of the Games due to photos of him that others had uploaded. Therefore, I believe it should be left up to each National Olympic Committee to determine the definition of obscene since each country may have slightly different standards.
In general, the IOC's Social Media Policy appears to be a good starting point for discussion. However, the points I mention above need to be addressed before the Games begin to lessen the likeliehood that social media compliance misunderstandings may occur.
To learn more about the IOC's Social Media Policy you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
At first glance, the policy appears to be straight forward. It clearly states that its main goal is to protect the intellectual property rights of its commercial and/or advertising partners. I have no problem with the IOC trying to protect its intellectual property interests and the interests of its business partners since billions of dollars are paid for broadcast rights and millions are paid by worldwide partners to be associated with each Olympics.
Some of the sections I thought may be worth more discussion include:
Section 2 of the policy needs to be clarified because it states, "any such postings, blogs or tweets should be in a first-person, diary type format and should not be in the role of a journalist - i.e. they must not report on competition or comment on the activities of other participants or accredited persons..." If a participant makes comments about the competition or the activities of other participants to an accredited member of the media is this within the guidelines? Will the IOC allow this type of information only to be provided to the accredited media but not on a personal social media account? How closely will the IOC enforce this policy?
Section 4 of the Policy appears to try to protect the exclusivity and value of the Olympic broadcasting rights. It states, "Participants and other accredited persons cannot post any video and/or audio of the events, competitions or any other activities which occur at Olympic Venues. Such video and/or audio must only be for personal use and must not be uploaded and/or shared to a posting, blog or tweet on any social media platforms, or to a website." I understand the need to try to protect Olympic broadcasting rights. However, I think it will be difficult for the IOC to permanently ban personal video/audio taken by participants and accredited persons from ever being uploaded onto a social media platform.
Sections 7, 9, and 13 focuses on protecting the IOC's intellectual property. As I stated above, since Olympic partners have paid millions or billions to be associated with the Games they should be provided some type of protection for their investments.
Section 8 discusses social media advertising and sponsorships. Participants and accredited persons may need to have their legal counsel review all of their social media accounts to ensure compliance. Before the Olympics start a thorough review of all active and inactive social media profiles should be completed.
Section 11 discusses liability for social media posts. It states, "they [participants] can be held personally liable for any commentary and/or material deemed to be defamatory, obscene or proprietary." Who is to decide the definition of obscene? As I previously posted, the United States Supreme Court just reaffirmed that in the United States "disgust is not a valid basis for restricting expression." What is the definition of obscene? At the 2010 Winter Olympics, snowboarder Scotty Lago was kicked out of the Games due to photos of him that others had uploaded. Therefore, I believe it should be left up to each National Olympic Committee to determine the definition of obscene since each country may have slightly different standards.
In general, the IOC's Social Media Policy appears to be a good starting point for discussion. However, the points I mention above need to be addressed before the Games begin to lessen the likeliehood that social media compliance misunderstandings may occur.
To learn more about the IOC's Social Media Policy you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2011 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)