The development of the FAPL v YouTube litigation and some recent examples of ambush marketing based on Vancouver 2010 and South Africa 2010

1. C5 Sports Law & Business Conference Nick White Tel: 020 7611 9660 Email: [email_address] 20-22 Bedford Row London WC1R 4EB Tel: +44 (0) 20 7611 9660 Fax: +44 (0) 20 7611 9661 www.couchmansllp.com Couchmans LLP The Sports Business Lawyers

6. South Africa 2010: Kulula.com “ For the period during which an event is protected, no person may use a trade mark in relation to such event in a manner which is calculated to achieve publicity for that trade mark and thereby to derive special promotional benefit from the event, without the prior authority of the organiser of such event. ” (South Africa: Section 15A of the Merchandise Marks Act 17 of 1941, as amended)

7. Vancouver 2010: Lululemon “ We expected better sportsmanship from a local Canadian company than to produce a clothing line that attempts to profit from the Games but doesn’t support the Games or the success of the Canadian Olympic team ” (Bill Cooper, VANOC’s director of commercial rights management)

8. South Africa 2010: Pepsi

9. South Africa 2010: Walkers

11. C5 Sports Law & Business Conference Nick White Tel: 020 7611 9660 Email: [email_address] 20-22 Bedford Row London WC1R 4EB Tel: +44 (0) 20 7611 9660 Fax: +44 (0) 20 7611 9661 www.couchmansllp.com Couchmans LLP The Sports Business Lawyers