Dick and Rick Hoyt comprise the simply inspirational Team Hoyt – these guys have tackled some amazing challenges that have to be seen to be believed.
On YouTube there was a video of Dick and Rick competing an Ironman Triathlon (amongst other things). Sounds tough.
But it’s even tougher when you see the 50+ year old Dick tow his son’s boat in the 3.8 km swim, tie Rick into a special seat on the front of his bike and then cycle 180 gruelling kms and then place Rick into a pram/mobile chair and push him for the full marathon.
That video has been taken down.
Seems that the World Triathlon Corporation has complained of a copyright violation in the video. I assume, but haven’t had it confirmed, that the video of them in the actual race itself would be the copyright violation.
Protecting Your Brand At All Costs
Is that protecting your brand? Not sure.
What I do know is the Team Hoyt video was inspirational to millions of people.
And I have no doubt it has inspired thousands of people to take up triathlons or some other exercise. That’s not such a bad thing.
But the World Triathlon Corporation don’t like a bit of vision or a logo or whatever being used without permission. So they get the video pulled.
Maybe a blanket policy isn’t always the best policy. Maybe if something helps your event, inspires people and helps the obesity crisis then maybe, just maybe, you need to let it be.
I’ll try and find out more.
Cheers
A really good question indeed. I’ve worked a lot with lawyers in an aspect of law well removed from trademark and copyright law, but I know a couple things about them and their advice. First, they are going to advise you, in almost every case, to the letter of the law, contract, etc. Second, the greatest strength in law anywhere is legal precedent, no matter how obscure or untenable a case appears, if you can come up with a case substantially the same that “went your way” you hold tremendous power going into court. So I can certainly see a motivation to protect the brand … once you ignore one infringement you virtually have no case in the future against further infringements.
All that talk is along way to say I can see why an organization who is trying to develop and build the brand of Triathalons might feel they had to take action … but I also feel that even if legally correct it might be a very stupid action to take.
The publicity gained from a hugely popular YouTube video is hard to calculate but there is no doubt the cost to gain such publicity buy conventional means would be huge. Secondly, if the removal action triggers a negative response in the YouTube community the “down costs” will be huge too … Hell hath no fury like a video surfer denied his fav video.
A tough call indeed, and in my mind the WTC may have really stubbed their toe. I didn’t even know there was such a corporation before this incident and now, regardless of the legalities at play, I already have a distinctly negative opinion of them.
OK – maybe I am a bit late on this post, but I just tried to find the original Hoyt video with the original Mercy Me music and found a “video no longer available” message.
To be clear, there is another version of the video on YouTube with all the corporate pre-video stuff, so I don’t want to take away from their story, which is amazing, and should be viewed by all.
The problem I have with the new video is that it has lost all its punch, and has been glossed over. They use a different version of the music that does not match the clips as well, and it just has lost all its life. Hell, the lead singer doesn’t even go for the high notes he did in the original version I heard. From a technical perspective, I used to watch this clip and tear up every time. Now, it is still good, but just not as great as before.
My 2 cents…pretty disappointing.
Who knows…
SELFISH!