Still better than that first wrote:I have no problem with the rule from a brand/company perspective. The Olympics are a valuable entity and you pay to play. If a company wants to shell out $20-50 million to advertise during the Olympics then they should have exclusive rights.
This is question begging. An official sponsor can only purchase the rights that the IOC or other entities actually have to sell. The IOC has rights to Olympic trademarks and copyright in the live broadcasts (though not in the events themselves). But Rule 40 is overbroad in that it purports to prevent companies from doing things that would almost certainly not infringe any IP rights. Using the word "Olympic" in a factual statement about an athlete that you sponsor is not trademark infringement.