The Telegraph
 
 
IN TODAY'S PAPER
CITY NEWSLINES
 
 
ARCHIVES
Since 1st March, 1999
 
THE TELEGRAPH
 
 
Email This PagePrint This Page
Basic text same, add-ons aplenty

Calcutta: Though it was widely believed the controversial Player Terms (for the ongoing Champions Trophy) will be rewritten, after strong objections by the Indian cricketers, the basic text remains the same.

However, concessions have been specifically listed — as is evident from a copy made available to The Telegraph — and ambush marketing spelt out. The latter bit has taken the form of an additional clause (No.21).

Moreover, International Cricket Council (ICC) chief executive Malcolm Speed has signed an “attachment,” placing on record that sponsors of the September 12-30 tournament will not enforce Clause 10.

The Indians’ principal objection, it may be recalled, was to Clauses 10 and 13.

Clause 10 includes: “The Squad Member hereby grants to IDI (business arm of the ICC) the irrevocable right during the Term and for six months following the conclusion of the Event to use and/or sub-license the use by other persons of the Squad Member’s name(s), photograph(s), likeness(es), performance(s), autograph and biographical material in connection with the promotion of the Event and exploiting the Commercial Rights…”

The India-specific concession reads: “For the Indian players, an assurance has been obtained from the IDI’s sponsors — Pepsi, LG Electronics, Hero Honda and South African Airways — that they will not seek to enforce the provisions of Clause 10 for the Champions Trophy 2002. Annexure A, a side letter to these Player Terms, sets out the details of this assurance.” [The “side letter” actually states “this forms an attachment to the Player Terms.”]

Clause 13 includes: “The Squad Member shall not (from 30 days before the first match until 30 days after the last match in the Event) directly or indirectly, allow his name, voice, image, likeness or other representation to be used either: (a) In any advertising or endorsement or (b) for any commercial purpose in any Media whatsoever by or on behalf of a competitor of, or any product of any competitor of, any Official Sponsor, Global Partner or Official Supplier…”

The India-specific concession reads: “For the Indian players, in respect of existing contractual obligations with any competitor of, any Official Sponsor, Global Partner or Official Supplier, the time frame in Clause 13 shall be amended so that the players may fulfill prior existing obligations from midnight on the 15th October 2002 onwards, provided it is strictly understood that existing obligations will not amount to ambush marketing as defined below.”

Ambush marketing, as spelt out by the ICC is: “An attempt, whether intentional or unintentonal, by a third party not affiliated with the Champions Trophy 2002, to commercially profit from the ICC Champions Trophy 2002 by falsely associating itself or its products with the ICC Champions Trophy 2002, the ICC Champions Trophy 2002 trademarks or the ICC logos or by falsely suggesting that it or its products are endorsed by or are in association with the ICC Champions Trophy 2002 or the ICC or any of its group companies.”

Now, of course, the focus is on the ICC’s Executive Board meeting on September 30, where the shape of the Terms for the World Cup should become clear. If a lesson has been learnt, nothing short of a complete overhaul will do.

Top
Email This PagePrint This Page