i would guess it's more money than that ... what they get is exclusive concessionary rights at many olympic venues ... where they sell their "food" at inflated prices ... they also get marketing and brand awareness
You said it yourself then, they are paying for brand awareness. And they obviously feel that there brand awareness is being hurt by someone else at an olympic venue selling burgers. And if they feel that way, and with the amount of money that they are paying for that awareness, I think they have everyright to ask the Olympic orginizers to ask the chef to change the menu.
how are they losing out one iota by having this chef call his dish bison burgers instead of bison sliders!?? ...
By the same logic how is the chef losing out by having the name of his dish changed? He still gets to have his chef skills on display at a huge international event.
i would guess it's more money than that ... what they get is exclusive concessionary rights at many olympic venues ... where they sell their "food" at inflated prices ... they also get marketing and brand awareness
You said it yourself then, they are paying for brand awareness. And they obviously feel that there brand awareness is being hurt by someone else at an olympic venue selling burgers. And if they feel that way, and with the amount of money that they are paying for that awareness, I think they have everyright to ask the Olympic orginizers to ask the chef to change the menu.
how are they losing out one iota by having this chef call his dish bison burgers instead of bison sliders!?? ...
By the same logic how is the chef losing out by having the name of his dish changed? He still gets to have his chef skills on display at a huge international event.
if mcdonalds thinks water should be removed from all menus, or chicken, or fish ... does it make it reasonable?
the chef doesn't lose anything hence why he so readily changed it ... again, if you THINK that mcdonalds is hurt by someone offering "burgers" on their menu - that is your perogative ... i personally think it lacks any reasoning ... but you apparently don't ...
i would guess it's more money than that ... what they get is exclusive concessionary rights at many olympic venues ... where they sell their "food" at inflated prices ... they also get marketing and brand awareness
You said it yourself then, they are paying for brand awareness. And they obviously feel that there brand awareness is being hurt by someone else at an olympic venue selling burgers. And if they feel that way, and with the amount of money that they are paying for that awareness, I think they have everyright to ask the Olympic orginizers to ask the chef to change the menu.
how are they losing out one iota by having this chef call his dish bison burgers instead of bison sliders!?? ...
By the same logic how is the chef losing out by having the name of his dish changed? He still gets to have his chef skills on display at a huge international event.
if mcdonalds thinks water should be removed from all menus, or chicken, or fish ... does it make it reasonable?
the chef doesn't lose anything hence why he so readily changed it ... again, if you THINK that mcdonalds is hurt by someone offering "burgers" on their menu - that is your perogative ... i personally think it lacks any reasoning ... but you apparently don't ...
I don't think it hurts McDonalds, but McDonalds thinks it hurts McDonalds. That is what matters and I think that if they feel that way, with the amount of money they are putting up they should be allowed to ask for a change.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
I'm not even saying that it's right for the change of a word (which is stupid imho), and by the sounds of this article, a paranoid olympic corporate sales guy told them to change, not McDonalds.
But, it's all about protecting the sponsor... if Pizza Hut was a huge global sponsor, I'm sure no other vendors could sell pizza.
If you want to argue that corporate sponsors shouldn't be a part of the games, then that's a whole other issue. But since they are, like sponsorships everywhere, things get restricted to protect the companies spending money.
My whole life
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
I don't think it hurts McDonalds, but McDonalds thinks it hurts McDonalds. That is what matters and I think that if they feel that way, with the amount of money they are putting up they should be allowed to ask for a change.
It doesn't matter whether McDonalds thinks it hurts McDonalds. If they don't own the copyright to the word they can't stop others using it. No matter how much they have paid.
I don't think it hurts McDonalds, but McDonalds thinks it hurts McDonalds. That is what matters and I think that if they feel that way, with the amount of money they are putting up they should be allowed to ask for a change.
it is obvious mcdonalds thinks its being hurt ... but that's not the point - the discussion here is whether you think it's reasonable ... which in this thread you have indicated it is up until now ...
but like i asked previously ... what if they wanted chicken, beef or fish off all menus ... just because mcdonalds paid money - does it make it ok?
I don't think it hurts McDonalds, but McDonalds thinks it hurts McDonalds. That is what matters and I think that if they feel that way, with the amount of money they are putting up they should be allowed to ask for a change.
It doesn't matter whether McDonalds thinks it hurts McDonalds. If they don't own the copyright to the word they can't stop others using it. No matter how much they have paid.
They don't need a copyright. The guy can still sell Bison Burgers in his own resturant. But if he wants to sell them on an Olympic Venue on someone else's property where there are other food service contracts in place, then he has to abide by the rules of the people managing that property.
I'm not even saying that it's right for the change of a word (which is stupid imho), and by the sounds of this article, a paranoid olympic corporate sales guy told them to change, not McDonalds.
But, it's all about protecting the sponsor... if Pizza Hut was a huge global sponsor, I'm sure no other vendors could sell pizza.
If you want to argue that corporate sponsors shouldn't be a part of the games, then that's a whole other issue. But since they are, like sponsorships everywhere, things get restricted to protect the companies spending money.
the larger discussion is how much power should corporate sponsors have on an event like this ... but this topic is about the ownership of the word "burger" ...
i can appreciate the role of corporate sponsors in any event and most definitely am not saying they shouldn't be protected from their investment ... but does sponsoring an event exclude them from reason and allow them to dictate all the rules?
I don't think it hurts McDonalds, but McDonalds thinks it hurts McDonalds. That is what matters and I think that if they feel that way, with the amount of money they are putting up they should be allowed to ask for a change.
It doesn't matter whether McDonalds thinks it hurts McDonalds. If they don't own the copyright to the word they can't stop others using it. No matter how much they have paid.
They don't need a copyright. The guy can still sell Bison Burgers in his own resturant. But if he wants to sell them on an Olympic Venue on someone else's property where there are other food service contracts in place, then he has to abide by the rules of the people managing that property.
It would make a very interesting court case. I think McD would lose. If this sort of thing is allowed they could demand anything. No mentioning menu, drinks, fries etc etc.
I don't think it hurts McDonalds, but McDonalds thinks it hurts McDonalds. That is what matters and I think that if they feel that way, with the amount of money they are putting up they should be allowed to ask for a change.
it is obvious mcdonalds thinks its being hurt ... but that's not the point - the discussion here is whether you think it's reasonable ... which in this thread you have indicated it is up until now ...
but like i asked previously ... what if they wanted chicken, beef or fish off all menus ... just because mcdonalds paid money - does it make it ok?
Of course that is the point. McDonalds and the IOC are the ones that signed the contracts they are the ones that get to decide what goes. And as far as chicken on beef or fish if McDonald's wanted that in their sponsorship contract and the IOC said that they were ok with that provided that McDonalds gave them enough money then I wouldn't have a problem with it.
I'm not even saying that it's right for the change of a word (which is stupid imho), and by the sounds of this article, a paranoid olympic corporate sales guy told them to change, not McDonalds.
But, it's all about protecting the sponsor... if Pizza Hut was a huge global sponsor, I'm sure no other vendors could sell pizza.
If you want to argue that corporate sponsors shouldn't be a part of the games, then that's a whole other issue. But since they are, like sponsorships everywhere, things get restricted to protect the companies spending money.
the larger discussion is how much power should corporate sponsors have on an event like this ... but this topic is about the ownership of the word "burger" ...
i can appreciate the role of corporate sponsors in any event and most definitely am not saying they shouldn't be protected from their investment ... but does sponsoring an event exclude them from reason and allow them to dictate all the rules?
Yeah, that's why in this case I'd have to hear more of the story... from the article, the McDonalds spokesperson basically ducked the question and referred it back to the olympics organizer. If McDonalds really had a problem with someone using the word "burger", I'd be a little surprised. Working in an arena with sales guys who sell sponsorships for events, it's usually those guys who are paranoid about pissing off a sponsor than the sponsor themselves.
My whole life
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
I don't think it hurts McDonalds, but McDonalds thinks it hurts McDonalds. That is what matters and I think that if they feel that way, with the amount of money they are putting up they should be allowed to ask for a change.
It doesn't matter whether McDonalds thinks it hurts McDonalds. If they don't own the copyright to the word they can't stop others using it. No matter how much they have paid.
They don't need a copyright. The guy can still sell Bison Burgers in his own resturant. But if he wants to sell them on an Olympic Venue on someone else's property where there are other food service contracts in place, then he has to abide by the rules of the people managing that property.[/quote]
It would make a very interesting court case. I think McD would lose. If this sort of thing is allowed they could demand anything. No mentioning menu, drinks, fries etc etc.[/quote]
How would Mcdonald's lose? If I walked into an Olympic venue and started selling anything without having permission of the Olympic Organizers and agreeing to their terms and conditions, I would have my ass thrown out. If this guy wants to sell his burgers at an Olympic venue he has to agree to terms and conditions. It is as simple as that. If he wants to sell his bison burgers as burgers he can open up his own resturant and no one can force him to change.
Of course that is the point. McDonalds and the IOC are the ones that signed the contracts they are the ones that get to decide what goes. And as far as chicken on beef or fish if McDonald's wanted that in their sponsorship contract and the IOC said that they were ok with that provided that McDonalds gave them enough money then I wouldn't have a problem with it.
And therein lies the problem with what ails much of the world ... because corporations give money (whether via sponsorship or lobbying or political contributions) - they can dictate everything ... money should not deteremine who gets to make the rules ...
I don't think it hurts McDonalds, but McDonalds thinks it hurts McDonalds. That is what matters and I think that if they feel that way, with the amount of money they are putting up they should be allowed to ask for a change.
It doesn't matter whether McDonalds thinks it hurts McDonalds. If they don't own the copyright to the word they can't stop others using it. No matter how much they have paid.
They don't need a copyright. The guy can still sell Bison Burgers in his own resturant. But if he wants to sell them on an Olympic Venue on someone else's property where there are other food service contracts in place, then he has to abide by the rules of the people managing that property.
It would make a very interesting court case. I think McD would lose. If this sort of thing is allowed they could demand anything. No mentioning menu, drinks, fries etc etc.[/quote]
How would Mcdonald's lose? If I walked into an Olympic venue and started selling anything without having permission of the Olympic Organizers and agreeing to their terms and conditions, I would have my ass thrown out. If this guy wants to sell his burgers at an Olympic venue he has to agree to terms and conditions. It is as simple as that. If he wants to sell his bison burgers as burgers he can open up his own resturant and no one can force him to change.[/quote]
And the way I read he did and or was doing that. However VANOC came to him with this "request" after their agreement was signed.
I sincerly hope this has given the Chef enough press to attract people to his place there. Expose the worlds people to some variations on local Native food.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
I'd take issue if McD's tried to claim the copyright, but in this case, right or wrong, they are simply invoking the rights granted them in their sponsorship deal.
If the Bison fella wasn't previously notified of McD's rights, the Olympic organizers should compensate him somehow.
Yah, that's the whole point. They didn't invent it.. they didn't even make them bigger or better. If anything they made them worse!
Like I said on my facebook status, I'll start to wonder when will Samsung copyright the word PHONE and every telephone in the city will have to be called numerated talking machine... Or Coke with ice cubes. So stupid!!
i am in no way siding with mcd's here...but this issue is NOT about 'copyright' at all. it is about rules for those at the olympics, and specifically about corporate sponsors for the olympics. i guess they make a pretty hefty investment, and thus get to call some shots towards other vendors in general, and...specifically.....against vendors who sell similar products. obviously, this is only occurring at the olympic games so seems aimed only at a specific time/place. silly? sure. however, again, just about i guess keeping focus on the sponsors who actually cough up dough in support?
aha, i see joe got to the point, and a lot more succinctly too of course:
I'd take issue if McD's tried to claim the copyright, but in this case, right or wrong, they are simply invoking the rights granted them in their sponsorship deal.
If the Bison fella wasn't previously notified of McD's rights, the Olympic organizers should compensate him somehow.
Interesting replies!
They didn't copyright it, maybe, but regardless VANOC still made them take it off the menu.
I'm curious if anyone lives in Vancouver, or has lived in an Olympic city...
After the arrogant premier promised naive people that the Olympics would make over 10 Billion dollars in revenue, its easy to see that many places don't benefit from the games when VANOC and the IOC control who makes the money. VANOC won't even let you use the words "Vancouver" or "2010"... "gold" "silver" etc. While it was ridiculous enough you can't even use the year, the YEAR, let alone the city name... the burger thing really takes the cake I think. (This is why I applaud Lululemon's cheeky clothing line
polaris_x has it right when he talks about taxpayers paying the money. Imagine picking up the paper and the front page says 800 teachers in the Vancouver area are going to be advised of future layoffs, and then turning the page and reading about Olympic budget overruns, and how much taxpayers money has been used to bailout the games. I can assure you that I read the paper every morning on the way to school and this is a common occurrence, whether its surgery rooms being closed, post secondary funding cut, arts and culture budgets slashed... the list goes on.
Basically its the people of BC (the province - who didn't get to vote, by the way) who get to pay for these games, and now they are being dictated by large corporations that get their demands met. Yes, they pay a LOT of money... but that's pennies to them. Who else has that kind of money? You think Lululemon - a local company by the way - has the means to sponsor the games if they wanted to?
Anyways, enough of me ranting : ).
The point is, it is ridiculous to complain about the word BURGER. The cafe at Robson Square (official venue) still sells hot chocolate and coffee and water, McDonalds has these things at their restaurants too.
I'm not sure if McDonalds will lose any profit by First Nations making a Bison Burger.
The whole point being, the common citizen being dictated by large corporations and VANOC is systematic by these games, its the taxpayers who are sacrificing the most while big corporations see their needs being met. The burger thing may not be a copyright issue but it definitely symbolizes the bigger situation here.
PS... I'm sure McDicks is making enough money telling people, in a nut shell, that you can eat a Big Mac and become an olympic athlete too! :roll:
on another note - i love how they keep referring to each games as the "greenest" ever ... they put brand new LCD's and DVD players in the rooms, lots of volunteers are getting new temporary cell phones, everything is brand spanking new ... what a load of crock ...
having said that - i hope canada wins gold in hockey! ...
I think this about sums up my point on who's interests are being attended to:
"The spectacle has created a cruel irony: as the Olympic athletes enjoy the good life — free food, spacious rooms — in a taxpayer-financed housing complex, just a few blocks away sits Vancouver's Downtown Eastside neighborhood, site of some of the most acute poverty in North America. Homeless people and drug addicts hole up in back alleys; one church alone shelters 300 people on any given night."
What happens at events for vendors is that they make deals that no one else will be selling what they are selling, so for the other place to use the word "burger" infringes on the contract McDonalds has with the Olympics. I worked for a vendor for many years and we did things like ethinic festivals and fairs. The ethnic festivals is where we got exclusive rights to what we were selling and no one else could sell the same thing. Vendors pay big bucks to sell things at these events. Its a fair deal to have exclusive rights. Like, to be at a small fair and ten people be selling elephant ears, yet no one selling soda pop is screwed. So, this way, a variety of stuff is being sold and no competition. I wouldn't wnat the people next to me to be selling what I am selling. Even cities do this. They only allow so many bars, restaurants etc, so the area doesn't become saturated. Yep, we think we live in a capitalistic society, yet read zoning laws in your city. You will see that they only allow so much competition.
What happens at events for vendors is that they make deals that no one else will be selling what they are selling, so for the other place to use the word "burger" infringes on the contract McDonalds has with the Olympics. I worked for a vendor for many years and we did things like ethinic festivals and fairs. The ethnic festivals is where we got exclusive rights to what we were selling and no one else could sell the same thing. Vendors pay big bucks to sell things at these events. Its a fair deal to have exclusive rights. Like, to be at a small fair and ten people be selling elephant ears, yet no one selling soda pop is screwed. So, this way, a variety of stuff is being sold and no competition. I wouldn't wnat the people next to me to be selling what I am selling. Even cities do this. They only allow so many bars, restaurants etc, so the area doesn't become saturated. Yep, we think we live in a capitalistic society, yet read zoning laws in your city. You will see that they only allow so much competition.
But they're not changing the food. They're changing the name.
What happens at events for vendors is that they make deals that no one else will be selling what they are selling, so for the other place to use the word "burger" infringes on the contract McDonalds has with the Olympics. I worked for a vendor for many years and we did things like ethinic festivals and fairs. The ethnic festivals is where we got exclusive rights to what we were selling and no one else could sell the same thing. Vendors pay big bucks to sell things at these events. Its a fair deal to have exclusive rights. Like, to be at a small fair and ten people be selling elephant ears, yet no one selling soda pop is screwed. So, this way, a variety of stuff is being sold and no competition. I wouldn't wnat the people next to me to be selling what I am selling. Even cities do this. They only allow so many bars, restaurants etc, so the area doesn't become saturated. Yep, we think we live in a capitalistic society, yet read zoning laws in your city. You will see that they only allow so much competition.
But they're not changing the food. They're changing the name.
I know, they got away with it! I am surprised McDonalds is letting it slide.
And I agree with someone earlier who said this has nothing to do with copyright.
What happens at events for vendors is that they make deals that no one else will be selling what they are selling, so for the other place to use the word "burger" infringes on the contract McDonalds has with the Olympics. I worked for a vendor for many years and we did things like ethinic festivals and fairs. The ethnic festivals is where we got exclusive rights to what we were selling and no one else could sell the same thing. Vendors pay big bucks to sell things at these events. Its a fair deal to have exclusive rights. Like, to be at a small fair and ten people be selling elephant ears, yet no one selling soda pop is screwed. So, this way, a variety of stuff is being sold and no competition. I wouldn't wnat the people next to me to be selling what I am selling. Even cities do this. They only allow so many bars, restaurants etc, so the area doesn't become saturated. Yep, we think we live in a capitalistic society, yet read zoning laws in your city. You will see that they only allow so much competition.
But they're not changing the food. They're changing the name.
I know, they got away with it! I am surprised McDonalds is letting it slide.
And I agree with someone earlier who said this has nothing to do with copyright.
Yeah and i had said in my last couple posts i know that, even though there really isn't much difference between copyrighting and what they have requested except for the legality - and as the article said the chef doesn'tw ant to push it given the circumstances (there have been many First Nations people who are upset with the games, different bands for different reasons.) But it IS frustrating that the only people catered to in the Olympics is the corporations. This isn't a small town fair... And you would think that of all pavillions, the First Nations one would be allowed to show off their culture freely.
Agreed, but that is an entire different issue. It is a big event, thus inviting big vendors (corporations). I agree that the Olympics didn't think this one through by these actions. Its quite crappy. The local area should be who is profiting from the event. I guess the area should had put their demands down before accepting being host.
And copyright is hugely different than being exclusive at one event.
Agreed, but that is an entire different issue. It is a big event, thus inviting big vendors (corporations). I agree that the Olympics didn't think this one through by these actions. Its quite crappy. The local area should be who is profiting from the event. I guess the area should had put their demands down before accepting being host.
And copyright is hugely different than being exclusive at one event.
Well I guess the problem is that the City of Vancouver gets the vote on the games.
The entire province, including close surrounding areas of Vancouver, will be affected...
Agreed, but that is an entire different issue. It is a big event, thus inviting big vendors (corporations). I agree that the Olympics didn't think this one through by these actions. Its quite crappy. The local area should be who is profiting from the event. I guess the area should had put their demands down before accepting being host.
And copyright is hugely different than being exclusive at one event.
Well I guess the problem is that the City of Vancouver gets the vote on the games.
The entire province, including close surrounding areas of Vancouver, will be affected...
Yep, and if the money goes out of the area, that would be a shame, but lots of money will come into the area, to the local people, just not exactly how they want it. The guy is still getting to sell his burgers. So, after all is said and done, in 4 years no one will care. I wish they would have more of the locals showing off their culture for me to learn, but it just isn't going to happen.
Agreed, but that is an entire different issue. It is a big event, thus inviting big vendors (corporations). I agree that the Olympics didn't think this one through by these actions. Its quite crappy. The local area should be who is profiting from the event. I guess the area should had put their demands down before accepting being host.
And copyright is hugely different than being exclusive at one event.
Well I guess the problem is that the City of Vancouver gets the vote on the games.
The entire province, including close surrounding areas of Vancouver, will be affected...
This is such a silly argument, my tax dollars, living in Richmond, are most likely going to things like for instance, the renos on the Port Mann Bridge. Do I then say "well, I dont drive over the PM bridge every day so why should I pay taxes to have it fixed?" Should they just expect people who use the Port Mann brdige to pay all the taxes to have it fixed?
{if (work != 0) {
work = work + 1;
sleep = sleep - work * 10;}
else if (work >= 0) {
reality.equals(false);
work = work +1;
}system("pause");
return 0;}
Comments
You said it yourself then, they are paying for brand awareness. And they obviously feel that there brand awareness is being hurt by someone else at an olympic venue selling burgers. And if they feel that way, and with the amount of money that they are paying for that awareness, I think they have everyright to ask the Olympic orginizers to ask the chef to change the menu.
By the same logic how is the chef losing out by having the name of his dish changed? He still gets to have his chef skills on display at a huge international event.
if mcdonalds thinks water should be removed from all menus, or chicken, or fish ... does it make it reasonable?
the chef doesn't lose anything hence why he so readily changed it ... again, if you THINK that mcdonalds is hurt by someone offering "burgers" on their menu - that is your perogative ... i personally think it lacks any reasoning ... but you apparently don't ...
I don't think it hurts McDonalds, but McDonalds thinks it hurts McDonalds. That is what matters and I think that if they feel that way, with the amount of money they are putting up they should be allowed to ask for a change.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
But, it's all about protecting the sponsor... if Pizza Hut was a huge global sponsor, I'm sure no other vendors could sell pizza.
If you want to argue that corporate sponsors shouldn't be a part of the games, then that's a whole other issue. But since they are, like sponsorships everywhere, things get restricted to protect the companies spending money.
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
it is obvious mcdonalds thinks its being hurt ... but that's not the point - the discussion here is whether you think it's reasonable ... which in this thread you have indicated it is up until now ...
but like i asked previously ... what if they wanted chicken, beef or fish off all menus ... just because mcdonalds paid money - does it make it ok?
They don't need a copyright. The guy can still sell Bison Burgers in his own resturant. But if he wants to sell them on an Olympic Venue on someone else's property where there are other food service contracts in place, then he has to abide by the rules of the people managing that property.
the larger discussion is how much power should corporate sponsors have on an event like this ... but this topic is about the ownership of the word "burger" ...
i can appreciate the role of corporate sponsors in any event and most definitely am not saying they shouldn't be protected from their investment ... but does sponsoring an event exclude them from reason and allow them to dictate all the rules?
Of course that is the point. McDonalds and the IOC are the ones that signed the contracts they are the ones that get to decide what goes. And as far as chicken on beef or fish if McDonald's wanted that in their sponsorship contract and the IOC said that they were ok with that provided that McDonalds gave them enough money then I wouldn't have a problem with it.
Yeah, that's why in this case I'd have to hear more of the story... from the article, the McDonalds spokesperson basically ducked the question and referred it back to the olympics organizer. If McDonalds really had a problem with someone using the word "burger", I'd be a little surprised. Working in an arena with sales guys who sell sponsorships for events, it's usually those guys who are paranoid about pissing off a sponsor than the sponsor themselves.
was like a picture
of a sunny day
“We can complain because rose bushes have thorns, or rejoice because thorn bushes have roses.”
― Abraham Lincoln
They don't need a copyright. The guy can still sell Bison Burgers in his own resturant. But if he wants to sell them on an Olympic Venue on someone else's property where there are other food service contracts in place, then he has to abide by the rules of the people managing that property.[/quote]
It would make a very interesting court case. I think McD would lose. If this sort of thing is allowed they could demand anything. No mentioning menu, drinks, fries etc etc.[/quote]
How would Mcdonald's lose? If I walked into an Olympic venue and started selling anything without having permission of the Olympic Organizers and agreeing to their terms and conditions, I would have my ass thrown out. If this guy wants to sell his burgers at an Olympic venue he has to agree to terms and conditions. It is as simple as that. If he wants to sell his bison burgers as burgers he can open up his own resturant and no one can force him to change.
And therein lies the problem with what ails much of the world ... because corporations give money (whether via sponsorship or lobbying or political contributions) - they can dictate everything ... money should not deteremine who gets to make the rules ...
How would Mcdonald's lose? If I walked into an Olympic venue and started selling anything without having permission of the Olympic Organizers and agreeing to their terms and conditions, I would have my ass thrown out. If this guy wants to sell his burgers at an Olympic venue he has to agree to terms and conditions. It is as simple as that. If he wants to sell his bison burgers as burgers he can open up his own resturant and no one can force him to change.[/quote]
And the way I read he did and or was doing that. However VANOC came to him with this "request" after their agreement was signed.
I sincerly hope this has given the Chef enough press to attract people to his place there. Expose the worlds people to some variations on local Native food.
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '14
If the Bison fella wasn't previously notified of McD's rights, the Olympic organizers should compensate him somehow.
good one!
"what a long, strange trip it's been"
someone should rub their balls on mcdonald's.
sorry.
that's what came to mind.
"Hear me, my chiefs!
I am tired; my heart is
sick and sad. From where
the sun stands I will fight
no more forever."
Chief Joseph - Nez Perce
i am in no way siding with mcd's here...but this issue is NOT about 'copyright' at all. it is about rules for those at the olympics, and specifically about corporate sponsors for the olympics. i guess they make a pretty hefty investment, and thus get to call some shots towards other vendors in general, and...specifically.....against vendors who sell similar products. obviously, this is only occurring at the olympic games so seems aimed only at a specific time/place. silly? sure. however, again, just about i guess keeping focus on the sponsors who actually cough up dough in support?
aha, i see joe got to the point, and a lot more succinctly too of course:
Let's just breathe...
I am myself like you somehow
They didn't copyright it, maybe, but regardless VANOC still made them take it off the menu.
I'm curious if anyone lives in Vancouver, or has lived in an Olympic city...
After the arrogant premier promised naive people that the Olympics would make over 10 Billion dollars in revenue, its easy to see that many places don't benefit from the games when VANOC and the IOC control who makes the money. VANOC won't even let you use the words "Vancouver" or "2010"... "gold" "silver" etc. While it was ridiculous enough you can't even use the year, the YEAR, let alone the city name... the burger thing really takes the cake I think. (This is why I applaud Lululemon's cheeky clothing line
polaris_x has it right when he talks about taxpayers paying the money.
Imagine picking up the paper and the front page says 800 teachers in the Vancouver area are going to be advised of future layoffs, and then turning the page and reading about Olympic budget overruns, and how much taxpayers money has been used to bailout the games. I can assure you that I read the paper every morning on the way to school and this is a common occurrence, whether its surgery rooms being closed, post secondary funding cut, arts and culture budgets slashed... the list goes on.
Basically its the people of BC (the province - who didn't get to vote, by the way) who get to pay for these games, and now they are being dictated by large corporations that get their demands met. Yes, they pay a LOT of money... but that's pennies to them. Who else has that kind of money? You think Lululemon - a local company by the way - has the means to sponsor the games if they wanted to?
Anyways, enough of me ranting : ).
The point is, it is ridiculous to complain about the word BURGER. The cafe at Robson Square (official venue) still sells hot chocolate and coffee and water, McDonalds has these things at their restaurants too.
I'm not sure if McDonalds will lose any profit by First Nations making a Bison Burger.
The whole point being, the common citizen being dictated by large corporations and VANOC is systematic by these games, its the taxpayers who are sacrificing the most while big corporations see their needs being met. The burger thing may not be a copyright issue but it definitely symbolizes the bigger situation here.
PS... I'm sure McDicks is making enough money telling people, in a nut shell, that you can eat a Big Mac and become an olympic athlete too! :roll:
I think this about sums up my point on who's interests are being attended to:
"The spectacle has created a cruel irony: as the Olympic athletes enjoy the good life — free food, spacious rooms — in a taxpayer-financed housing complex, just a few blocks away sits Vancouver's Downtown Eastside neighborhood, site of some of the most acute poverty in North America. Homeless people and drug addicts hole up in back alleys; one church alone shelters 300 people on any given night."
And I agree with someone earlier who said this has nothing to do with copyright.
And copyright is hugely different than being exclusive at one event.
The entire province, including close surrounding areas of Vancouver, will be affected...
This is such a silly argument, my tax dollars, living in Richmond, are most likely going to things like for instance, the renos on the Port Mann Bridge. Do I then say "well, I dont drive over the PM bridge every day so why should I pay taxes to have it fixed?" Should they just expect people who use the Port Mann brdige to pay all the taxes to have it fixed?
work = work + 1;
sleep = sleep - work * 10;}
else if (work >= 0) {
reality.equals(false);
work = work +1;
}system("pause");
return 0;}