SlartyBartFast wrote:I think that you are either creating a strawman. Seeing as the bike wasn't taped, I'll assume the taping of the firearm was because of the shooting event rules, not the team GB sponsorship deal.
No, it's the team deal. there are photos of other athletes with manufacturer logos clearly visible. For instance, Nico Campriani's rifle was untaped with the Bleiker logo clearly visible, whilst Sergey Kaminski's rifle was taped up similar to Jen's.
SlartyBartFast wrote:But what if it was the team sponsorship deal? How is it "retarded" to follow the wishes of the main sponsor?
...
As a manufacturer, do you think that other manufacturers should get a free ride with logo visibility just because no immediate competitor signed a deal
Well, yes and no. That's basically how trademark law works (which is related, though this is not a trademark issue) . You can share a name with another company provided you operate in different markets and no confusion is likely.
And this is the crux of my point. Adidas want people to see TeamGB in Adidas gear in order to promote the idea that if it's good enough for TeamGB it's good enough for you.
Adidas paid good money because Nike and Underarmour would also dearly love to have their logo on the podium. Something like teamwear has massive value.
By contrast if I signed a deal to be firearm supplier to GB Shooting, I would not expect to pay a whole lot for the privilege - lower profile, firearms don't appear on the podium, etc.
By contrast, not only is the use of a Grunig rifle unlikely to conflict with Adidas (because Adidas don't make rifles.... or jackets), but we're not even talking podium-wear. It's in-competition, and any and every shooter knows exactly what they're looking at even if you do tape over the Grunig and R2 logos (or put an Omega sticker over the Sius logo).
My point is... it's pointless. It's a meaningless, nonsensical effort. You're not protecting your own brand. If an athlete was dead set on wearing a pair of Nike trainers because that's the model they perform best with, then yes, absolutely tape those suckers up. But Adidas's sponsorship status would not be infringed, nor their advertising efforts impeded by someone having Grunig written on the side of their rifle.
This is my point. No, we don't want athletes becoming billboards. Equally, once you start worrying about small manufacturer logos on specialist kit, you've passed the point from sponsor protection to farce - because anyone who cares knows
exactly what they're looking at and you're well out the realms of actually doing something useful into pointless pedantry.
Of course yes, you have to do it because the contract says so. It's still stupid though. You're literally wasting people's heartbeats that they could be doing something useful with.
