Where is Abkhazia and what does it have to do with unauthorized NOC pins? Can you guess? First, beside being the answers to a National Geographic trivia question, the Republic of Abkhazia and the Republic of South Ossetia are disputed territories along the border between Georgia and Russia in the vicinity of Sochi, site of the 2014 Winter Olympics. I won’t go too deeply into the history, but both of these areas were semiautonomous regions within Georgia before and after the end of the Soviet Union. You may recall that Russia and Georgia fought a short, very one-sided war in 2008 when both republics broke away from Georgia and Russia prevented the Georgian military from reasserting control.

What, you might ask, does this have to do with unauthorized NOC pins? There are two parts to the answer. First, this week, the IOC reacted strongly to news that the Russian NOC had listed both territories in a database of countries eligible to take part in the Sochi Winter Olympics. Here is what they said:

“The IOC currently recognizes 204 National Olympic Committees,” an IOC official told      Insidethegames.

“As stated in the Olympic Charter, ‘they have the exclusive authority for the representation of their respective countries at the Olympic Games and at the regional, continental or world multi-sports competitions patronized by the IOC’.

“To be eligible for participation in the Olympic Games a competitor must be entered by his NOC as recognized by the IOC.

“The IOC does recognize an NOC for Georgia (which has jurisdiction over the whole territory of Georgia) but does not recognize an NOC for Abkhazia or South Ossetia.”

The recognition of a new NOC requires, among other things, that it be recognized as a country by the international community. To date, these territories have been recognized by five countries: Russia, Nicaragua, Venezuela, Nauru and Tuvalu – a very interesting list, but only about 2.5% of the international community.

The second part of the answer is that “new” NOCs are a frequent target for producers of unauthorized NOC pins. Why? Because if you are a collector of NOC pins, wouldn’t you want the first pin produced by a new NOC? From the pin producer’s point-of-view, if there is no actual NOC, then there is no one except the IOC to hassle them about their pins. Here is an example from a few years ago:

Eritrea, in East Africa along the Red Sea, won independence from Ethiopia in 1993 after more than 30 years of struggle. The Eritrean NOC was founded in 1996 and was recognized by the IOC in 1999. Shortly after that, this pin started appearing. There was only one problem: there are only a handful of NOCs that have their national flag as the NOC logo, and Eritrea was not one of them. Flags are common vehicles for these bogus “first NOC” pins because their designs are widely distributed.

Another of these “new NOC” pins appeared in London:

to take advantage of the fact that the IOC allowed marathon runner Guor Marial from the new country of South Sudan to take part in the Summer Olympics under the Olympic flag. There was just one small problem: as of the start of the London Olympic, there was no South Sudan NOC. This is why Guor marched into the Olympic Stadium under the Olympic Flag and not the flag of South Sudan. The story from people trading or selling this pin was that it was to publicize the new country and Guor’s attendance in London. That might even be true. However, as we have mentioned earlier, only the IOC and the NOCs are permitted to use the Olympic rings logo. That makes this pin illegal no matter who produced it.

So don’t be surprised if someone turns up selling or trading a new NOC pin from Abkhazia during the Sochi Winter Olympic Games. It will just be the latest in a long line of similar bogus pins.

Stay tuned until next time.

Steve

Stay tuned until next time.

Steve

Outlaw. It is a term that conjures up images of the American Wild West. A single person against society. In a sense, this is appropriate because an outlaw NOC pin is a pin produced by someone with no connection with the NOC in question. It also implies someone who is breaking the law for personal gain. The NOC logos are the intellectual property of the NOC, the Olympic rings are the intellectual property of the International Olympic Committee and the Games marks of a particular Olympics are the intellectual property of the Olympic Organizing Committee in question. This use of any or all of these items is clearly against international law.

Unlike the counterfeit pins discussed previously, there is no attempt by the producer of outlaw pins to copy an existing legitimate pin.  These are completely new designs. At one point, we considered calling these fantasy pins, but this term seems to imply someone who is indulging their artistic skills, not a person who is breaking the law for personal gain.

Here is an example from the recent London Olympic Games:

King Kong NOC pins from Tanzania have been showing up since the Atlanta Olympics in 1996. Identifying outlaw pins is often more difficult than identifying counterfeits because there are no legitimate pins to compare them to. The reverse side of the pin is often of no help either. Some outlaw pins have a backstamp while others don’t. The only case where the reverse side might help is when the legitimate pins from the NOC have a completely different reverse side design from the outlaw pins. Careful examination of the colors used on the pin (logo, rings) as well as the quality of the printing may also separate an outlaw pin from a legitimate pin.

But often the best clues come from the design. Going back to King Kong, why was this design selected? Primarily, because it is cute – one imagines that King Kong would have climbed Big Ben if he were in London rather than New York. And that is the point. Whether the fraudster plans to trade his outlaw pins for legitimate ones or sell the outlaw pins, either on the street or at an online auction site, the design has to be something that people would want. But if you think a little bit, there are all kinds of problems with this design. First, Wikipedia indicates that the original King Kong from the 1933 movie came from the mythical Skull Island in the Pacific Ocean, not from Tanzania or even from Africa. In addition, while gorillas do live in about 10 central African nations, they are not indigenous to Tanzania. So it is unlikely that anyone from Tanzania would come up with a design like this to publicize their team. It would be like putting a penguin on an American pin.

Here is another outlaw pin from London:

Flags are a common target for outlaw pin producers because “everyone knows what a country’s flag looks like”. Likewise, Jamaica was a likely target for outlaw producers because of all of the buzz about Usain Bolt. Again, just like legitimate pin producers, outlaw pin producers try to make designs that people want. But as in the case of King Kong, there are a couple details that point to this being an outlaw NOC pin. First, the United Kingdom flag is not quite right: the central red areas are too wide compared to the white borders. In addition, a “sister” pin with exactly the same design appeared for Pakistan; something that legitimate pin producers try to avoid doing.

All of this is not to say that NOCs only produce legitimate pins with designs that make sense. There are plenty of legitimate pins with nonsensical designs. However, by carefully examining a pin first rather than immediately jumping to “I want it”, you’ll be more likely to avoid the outlaws. And while we our committee is not volunteering to mount up and hunt down the outlaw pin producers, you can think of our website as a source for “Not Wanted” posters for outlaw pins.

Tune in next time for a discussion of Renegade NOC pins.

Steve