Assessing the Legacy of the Vancouver Olympics, Examining the Modern Games

The 2010 Vancouver Winter Olympics will sadly be remembered for more than the amazing athletic achievements that have been and will be accomplished during these Games.

On the day of the opening ceremonies, Georgia luger Nodar Kumaritashvili was killed during a training run. It marks the first death of an Olympic competitor since the 1992 Albertville Games, and is believed to be just the sixth death of an Olympic athlete during competition or practice since 1912.

Questions immediately arose about the safety of the luge course, in addition to the International Olympic Committee’s (IOC) response that the death was based on human error. Still, Vancouver quickly implemented a plan to memorialize Kumaritashvili hours after his death during the opening ceremonies, and the Games, despite a few weather delays, have provided some memorable athletic performances.

In order to get more perspective into what the death of Kumaritashvili may mean to the legacy of the Vancouver Games, Fitness Information Technology (FiT) contacted Robert Barney, an authority of Olympic history. Barney, founder of the International Centre for Olympic Studies and professor emeritus at the University of Western Ontario, recently published an edited work with FiT titled Rethinking the Olympics: Cultural Histories of the Modern Games. Barney also recently returned from attending the Vancouver Olympics.

Q: The Vancouver Olympics got off to a somber start with the death of luger Nodar Kumaritashvili. How may that tragedy shape the way the Vancouver Olympics are remembered in the future?

Barney: “Indeed it was a somber start for Vancouver’s 2010 Olympic Winter Games. Everyone felt it, not the least of whom were Nodar’s family, his teammates, all of Georgia, VANOC (Vancouver Organizing Committee), and his fellow Olympians irrespective of what country they were from. That tragedy, in my opinion, at least in the case of Georgia and its Olympic memories, will perhaps remain as the defining moment of the Vancouver Games. But, given the extreme nationalism attached to ‘winning and losing,’ the remembrance of the 2010 Games by most nations and their Olympic fans/national citizenry will be how their own particular athletes fared, either gloriously or disappointingly. I feel sure that will be the case in the US and Canada.”

Q: The host cities of the Olympics invest years of planning, construction, and finances to play host to a three-week athletic festival but most often the end result is debt and empty, unused sporting venues for the host city after the Olympics have concluded. What changes can be made to ensure that future Olympic Games become more environmentally friendly and economically viable for the host cities?

Barney: “The most important facilities built or promised to be built as part of an Olympic Games bid for and execution of the Games are those that will greatly impact the lives of urban citizens. Thus, improvements in mass transportation, telecommunications, municipal security measures, and environmental enhancements, to name some of the major considerations, are all sound and perfectly defendable Olympic investments. But, huge sports venues whose post-Games disuse and continuing cost to maintain and operate, and which impact severely on urban financial budgets, do not make sense; in fact, they are grossly problematic. And yet, prospective bid cities ignore history—they must have them. A better approach, I think, is the plan that Chicago put forth in its unsuccessful bid for the 2016 Games. Its ‘Olympic Stadium’ was to be dismantled after the Games and all materials recycled.”

Q: In your newly edited book Rethinking the Olympics, many of the topics, such as performance enhancement, commercialism, and the politics of the Games, will most likely continue to be hot-button issues in the future. What do you hope Olympic organizers and the International Olympic Committee can glean from these historical essays that may make future Games more successful?

Barney: “This is extremely difficult to determine, given the fact that the somewhat cynical belief that ‘what we learn from history is we don’t learn from history’ continues to persist with both the IOC and Olympic Games Organizing Committees. Having said that, it might be that a return to the original and worthwhile ideals of Pierre de Coubertin for establishing the Games in the first place, as their fundamental motif for existing, remains appropriate, especially in this increasingly globalized world. Despite all, peace, tolerance, brotherhood, education, and culture remain as worthy ideals.”

Expert Talks About NFL’s Decision To Back Down From “Who Dat”

The National Football League earlier this week backed off from its threat to sue vendors who sold T-shirts containing the phrase “Who Dat,” citing trademark infringement.

New Orleans Saints fans have used the “Who Dat” phrase as a rally cry for years. It’s a shortened version of “Who dat say dey gonna beat dem Saints?” The Saints’ fans are even referred to as Who Dat Nation. And with the once-mocked organization making its first-ever appearance in the Super Bowl, various T-shirt designs with the “Who Dat” phrase have been in high demand.

The NFL initially took issue with the phrase being included on T-shirts along with the use of black and gold colors (which the Saints use) and/or the fleur-de-lis. But days before the New Orleans Saints play the Indianapolis Colts in Super Bowl XLIV on Sunday in Miami, the NFL (referred to by some as the “No Fun League”) backed off, or clarified, its stance.

League spokesman Brian McCarthy was quoted in a USA Today story as saying the league “emphasized that people can use ‘Who Dat’ all they want if it doesn’t include NFL and Saints trademarks. We explained that we would contact merchants only if a ‘Who Dat’ item also contained NFL or Saints trademarks or if it is falsely claimed that an unauthorized item is affiliated with the Saints or NFL.”

Fitness Information Technology contacted Dr. John Grady to get his thoughts on the NFL’s position. Grady is an assistant professor at the University of South Carolina who specializes in intellectual property protection by professional and collegiate sport properties. Grady has published several articles on the subject in Sport Marketing Quarterly.

Q: What was your initial reaction when you heard that the NFL was sending letters to vendors telling them to stop selling T-shirts that included the “Who Dat” phrase?

Grady: “The league has to be seen as taking a proactive stance in fulfilling its obligation to vigorously protect the league’s intellectual property from which it derives substantial revenues. However, sending out cease and desist letters seems like an over-zealous attempt to control fan content that may really backfire on the league in the court of public opinion.”

Q: You’ve written about this in SMQ, but where can a league like the NFL or an organization like the Saints draw the line regarding trademark infringement, specifically with regard to popular phrases, symbols, or the use of team colors?

Grady: “With trademarked logos, the league and its respective teams have very clear rights which they have every right to enforce.  When a slogan like “Who Dat” is used on merchandise, the legal rights become more tenuous, assuming the slogan is not owned by the team or any other person.

“However, the phrase is rarely used in isolation on plain merchandise, such as black and white lettering on a white T-shirt. The merchandise typically uses the team’s color scheme in some fashion, which may be subject to trademark protection depending on the legal precedent in that jurisdiction. 

“What becomes much more of a slam dunk, legally speaking, for the league is when a manufacturer uses the team’s trademarked logos in addition to well-recognized marks such as fleur-de-lis in the team’s colors. This scenario is much more likely to raise eyebrows in the league office as potentially infringing the team’s marks in multiple ways.”

Q: The NFL received a lot of bad press due to its initial stance in the “Who Dat” situation. In past years, the NFL has taken similar PR hits by trying to control the use of “the Big Game” as it related to the Super Bowl or prohibiting churches from hosting Super Bowl watch parties. Is the league’s perceived image of being overly aggressive in terms of controlling trademarks deserving, or is the NFL often justified in taking such stances?

Grady: “The NFL, much like the upcoming Olympics in Vancouver, finds themselves in sort of a Catch 22.  One on hand, they must please their official sponsors who pay handsomely for the right to use the league or property’s intellectual property as part of their sponsorship packages. If they did not take such a proactive stance, sponsors would perhaps be unwilling to renew their sponsorship arrangements, citing the failure of the league to deliver category exclusivity that they were contractually obligated to provide.

“At the same time, they must make the event accessible to every day fans in addition to the corporate hospitality folks who often fill most of the seats at mega sports events. Therefore, it seems a little ridiculous for the NFL and others to be overly aggressive in trying to stop fans from trying to access their event, such as having a viewing party at a church. 

“For example, the phrase “the Big Game” is on every other commercial I’ve seen the past week, from sports bars to electronics stores selling HD TVs.  Clearly, if the NFL had hoped to control the use of that phrase, they missed their chance.  It has become almost a generic shorthand for the Super Bowl, and therefore unlikely to now qualify for trademark protection.”

Q: Finally, who will you be cheering for in the Super Bowl, the Saints or Colts?

Grady: “Having lived near the Gulf Coast for almost eight years and with family still living in Louisiana, I’ll go Saints.”

“Stay Strong, Play On”

FiT Supports National Girls and Women in Sports Day

Thousands of supporters will ascend on Capitol Hill Feb. 3 to voice their support for girls and women in sports during the annual celebration of National Girls and Women in Sports Day (NGWSD). This year’s theme “Stay Strong, Play On” reflects the progress made by girls and women in sports and encourages female athletes of all ages to serve as roles models for future generations.

Fitness Information Technology (FiT) supports that message by featuring female role models in sports in 100 Trailblazers: Great Women Athletes Who Opened Doors for Future Generations. The book, by author and human rights activist Richard Lapchick, highlights the achievements of athletes, coaches and administrators who broke down barriers and, as a result, provided opportunities for future generations of women in sports.

One of those women is Lyn St. James, a former professional auto racing driver who in 1992 became the first woman to win the Indianapolis 500 Rookie of the Year award.

“When I was growing up in the ‘50s and ‘60s, there were really no role models in sports for me to even think about being a professional athlete,” said St. James, as quoted in 100 Trailblazers. “Now there are so many women out there competing, coaching, managing, organizing and leading everywhere in every way. I’m proud to be included in this collection of women who’ve led the way and who continue to show girls that the opportunities are limitless.”

Now in its 24th year, NGWSD was started by the National Association for Girls and Women in Sports (NAGWS) to advance the efforts of Title IX and other historic accomplishments that are aimed toward achieving gender equity in sport. To assist with the sponsorship of NGWSD events across the country, NAGWS relies on the support of Girls, Inc., the Girls Scouts of America, the Women’s Sports Foundation and the National Women’s Law Center.

To learn more about how to support NGWSD, visit www.aahperd.org/nagws/programs/ngwsd/. For more information on 100 Trailblazers visit www.fitinfotech.com.