Arsenal unwittingly embrace hooligan past (26/10)

[gooner.ed]

http://www.onlinegooner.com/exclusive/index.php?id=447

usual thread starter… I think those that decided to try and trademark gooner simply saw gear on sale outside the stadium with the word on, without having any idea of the term's origins. Doubtless the fanzine has played a part in the word becoming synonymous with Arsenal fans of all types, but there is no disputing that the original Gooners evolved from the hooligan culture of the 1970s and 80s. I doubt in reality that anything with the word on will ever be sold in the club shop. This is purely about stopping matchday traders producing their own gear to sell at prices more reasonable than those found in The Armoury.

[timao]

Anyway I was at this wedding in a village in Kent and after the party cabs were coming at a rate of about one every half hour and I didn't even have a phone on me. So this mini-cab pulls up and everyone tries to rush it, so the driver yells out: "Is there a Gooner here?" I could hardly believe my ears but quick as a flash I piped up, "Yes, I'm a Gooner". Cabby says: "In you get then." Just as me and my young lady were settling in this Swedish bloke comes pushing forward. "I am Gunnar!" And I suddenly thought maybe the cab wasn't there just to pick up any random Arsenal fan that happened to be present. So I said "So am I, what a coincidence." And off we poppped. Many times since I have regretted not offering young Gunnar a lift, but well, the car was rolling and there was an angry mob. But Gunnar, if you are reading this, sorry mate, I hope you got home OK.

[Wayno]

Anyway I was at this wedding in a village in Kent and after the party cabs were coming at a rate of about one every half hour and I didn't even have a phone on me. So this mini-cab pulls up and everyone tries to rush it, so the driver yells out: "Is there a Gooner here?" I could hardly believe my ears but quick as a flash I piped up, "Yes, I'm a Gooner". Cabby says: "In you get then." Just as me and my young lady were settling in this Swedish bloke comes pushing forward. "I am Gunnar!" And I suddenly thought maybe the cab wasn't there just to pick up any random Arsenal fan that happened to be present. So I said "So am I, what a coincidence." And off we poppped. Many times since I have regretted not offering young Gunnar a lift, but well, the car was rolling and there was an angry mob. But Gunnar, if you are reading this, sorry mate, I hope you got home OK.

Excellent story

[Cus Geezer]

I actually have a degree and an A' Level in Law, which in itself doesn't show a great depth of practical knowledge, but I'd guess the club are doomed to fail in their bid to copyright a word they had no part in creating.

[Justin-the-Gooner]

The most important thing is that yes that is how is started, but Gooners are noticed as every Arsenal fan now. I look at myself as a Gooner. I know the word Gooner may have come from the legendary "Herd" but nowadays "the Herd" and EVERY Arsenal fan is looked at as a Gooner.

[Cus Geezer]

The most important thing is that yes that is how is started, but Gooners are noticed as every Arsenal fan now. I look at myself as a Gooner. I know the word Gooner may have come from the legendary "Herd" but nowadays "the Herd" and EVERY Arsenal fan is looked at as a Gooner.

yeah but it still doesn't mean that the club has the legal right to claim a copyright over the word.

[into the red]

I wasn't particularly aware of the origin of the word, but I always liked it, because it implied a sense of humour, a self-mocking and witty epithet. Strangely, given its origin, it is about as threatening as a Fozzy bear, which is another reason for liking it. But I don't see how the club can copyright a word in common usage not originated by them. Otherwise the implication would be that they could claim any word associated with them (red?) was their property and they could stop people using it. Really it is a joke, but sadly the corporate world these people inhabit is under the impression that they have the right to appropriate public property for their own profit. We already saw how they trashed the fine Arsenal crest, and replaced it by a horrible cheap version just in order that they could claim copyright and clamp down on 'illegal' traders around the ground. Now they would like to 'own' public words and punish these traders for using them. Perhaps they would be better employed using the free market they affect to admire by competing with these traders, and offering better value and more imaginative products from their store, instead of their Stalinist view that you must only buy overpriced shoddy tat from them. Coming from a club which has been boasting about the millions it is making, it is unnecessary to attempt to drive out a few small-time traders, in a move which will hardly affect the club's finances, but will affect the traders. Personally I would welcome an approach to the stadium which was full of stalls and diverse goods related to the club. Even if I buy nothing I like that kind of atmosphere. Of course we could then exercise our freedom to choose what memoribilia we might like, a concept which the club seems to think might threaten its very existence. Really, you want to love the club, then they take a stupid stance which makes you realise you are just a 'consumer', and must be herded into the trough where your wallet will be fleeced. All for your own good, of course.

[Cus Geezer]

I know exactly what you mean ITR

The stalls selling fanzines, old programmes, old photos, cheap T-shirts and hotdogs that line the well trodden path to the ground from surrounding stations are actually part of the aura that surrounds going to a match.

It gives the feel that the whole of the local vacinity geared up for and psychologically effecting what's going on on the pitch, gives Arsenal a sense of geographical significance. It's yet another example of the people running the game being obsessed with profit margins and the bottom line, oblivious to the fact that they're once again throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

But when it comes to copyrighting words and clamping down on local business using the words for their own benefit why have they not made a beeline for say the Arsenal Tavern, the Arsenal fish and chip shop, the Arsenal Cafe, the Arsenal Laundrette?

Not that I want to make a rod for their backs - the Arsenal cafe gives better grub at a better value for money than the overpriced shit in the stadium.

[Redbull]

I wasn't particularly aware of the origin of the word, but I always liked it, because it implied a sense of humour, a self-mocking and witty epithet. Strangely, given its origin, it is about as threatening as a Fozzy bear, which is another reason for liking it. But I don't see how the club can copyright a word in common usage not originated by them. how they trashed the fine Arsenal crest, and replaced it by a horrible cheap version just in order that they could claim copyright and clamp down on 'illegal' traders around the ground. Now they would like to 'own' public words and punish these traders for using them. Perhaps they would be better employed using the free market they affect to admire by competing with these traders, and offering better value and more imaginative products from their store, instead of their Stalinist view that you must only buy overpriced shoddy tat from them. Coming from a club which has been boasting about the millions it is making, it is unnecessary to attempt to drive out a few small-time traders, in a move which will hardly affect the club's finances, but will affect the traders. Personally I would welcome an approach to the stadium which was full of stalls and diverse goods related to the club. Even if I buy nothing I like that kind of atmosphere. Of course we could then exercise our freedom to choose what memoribilia we might like, a concept which the club seems to think might threaten its very existence. Really, you want to love the club, then they take a stupid stance which makes you realise you are just a 'consumer', and must be herded into the trough where your wallet will be fleeced. All for your own good, of course.

Though I agree with your views on our esteemed boards avarice and Stalinist attempts to stifle the small entrepreneurs attempts to make a living out of selling AFC merchandise, and from which shock horror, Diamond Danny and co do not get a a piece of the action from! None the the less the crest thing (dare I say it) is a red herring. The previous crest was not the original either, and tbh looks a little old fashioned anyway these days. It belongs in the glorious past, and that's where it should stay...
The modern one is a 21st century concoction , Internet friendly, important this - with AFC Brodadband being set loose WW. And it allows the current, and future sides, to add an history of their own on to it's image. The Invincibles wore it on their shirts - so that's already begun.

The words 'goon' 'goons - are old ones, Nazi guards at Colditz - and such like - were called 'goons' by Bristish POW's.
The Goons' were a comedy pre-Monty Python act, Spike Milligan and co.
I also recall the gang of hooligans that called themselves 'The Gooners' back in the 70s.
I always thought that that it it was just a play on 'Gunners' that spuds supporters thought up, and threw at us, in a parody of The Goons , in fact the goons was the way the spuds used the name normally, and then some of our supporters adopted it for themselves - in the same way that some of theirs did with the '****' and 'Yido' taunts that a few of our lame brained aficionado's hurled at them. Tottenham's **** Army, etc. All nonsense of course, but however the club could attempt to claim that gunners is an established AFC sobriquet, and that gooners is an adoption of it! Tenuous I admit, but no doubt some hot-shot lawyer could make a case of it. For the right fee of course...

[Cus Geezer]

The previous crest was not the original either, and tbh looks a little old fashioned anyway these days. It belongs in the glorious past, and that's where it should stay...
The modern one is a 21st century concoction , Internet friendly, important this - with AFC Brodadband being set loose WW. And it allows the current, and future sides, to add an history of their own on to it's image. The Invincibles wore it on their shirts - so that's already begun.

I don't buy that argument. The Houses of Parliament and St. Paul's Cathedral are an architechtural design that look old fashioned and belong in the past. The buildings around the Elephant & Castle are a modern design from the 60s that at the time people thought epitomised all about the age. What would you rather look at? Newer doesn't of itself imply better, the word modern in its original context didn't just refer to something that was contemporary but implied that there was also progress.

All nonsense of course, but however the club could attempt to claim that gunners is an established AFC sobriquet, and that gooners is an adoption of it! Tenuous I admit, but no doubt some hot-shot lawyer could make a case of it. For the right fee of course

Gunners refers to the club, Gooners refers to the fans. The context of the two words are entirely different.

[Redbull]

The previous crest was not the original either, and tbh looks a little old fashioned anyway these days. It belongs in the glorious past, and that's where it should stay...
The modern one is a 21st century concoction , Internet friendly, important this - with AFC Brodadband being set loose WW. And it allows the current, and future sides, to add an history of their own on to it's image. The Invincibles wore it on their shirts - so that's already begun.

I don't buy that argument. The Houses of Parliament and St. Paul's Cathedral are an architechtural design that look old fashioned and belong in the past. The buildings around the Elephant & Castle are a modern design from the 60s that at the time people thought epitomised all about the age. What would you rather look at? Newer doesn't of itself imply better, the word modern in its original context didn't just refer to something that was contemporary but implied that there was also progress.



Gunners refers to the club, Gooners refers to the fans. The context of the two words are entirely different.

We are not talking about buildings, which anyway do invoke the past and it's history - but a marketable image that those who deal in these matters deemed the old crest not to be. Personally I prefer the Chapman era crest to the previous one out of the golden oldies , which , with it's Latin motto beneath, looks like a school badge! Of course being able to take out a patent on the current crest also played it's part. That's the price ,among others that you pay when you go corporate.

Your comments on gooners is a nonsense , the word is a play on gunners, and that was the point I was making - actually I have heard other clubs supporters, and people in the media also , frequently refer to the team as the gooners, the gooners are usually quick out the blocks, etc, Arsenal are 'goners' when things have gone pearshaped, being a play on gooners .,The clubs lawyers would have already looked at the 'gooner-gunners' thing anyway - and they obviously do not agree with your views. But hey, what's new there !

[stats]

The Arsenal are the Gunners, we (fans) are Gooners
Tottenham are Spurs & there fans are ****
It's simple really & Arsenal can't get it into there thick money making heads that it's a fans name
I've always prefered Gooner to a Gunner
Just leaveing school in June my old headteacher would see me & would start singing his fav song
OH TO OH TO BE OH TO BE AH GOONER & he was amazed how it was sung when he went to his one & only match at Highbury (against Liverpool) he told me about, in the box i might add

[Cus Geezer]

We are not talking about buildings

That's just an example

which anyway do invoke the past and it's history - but a marketable image that those who deal in these matters deemed the old crest not to be.

But history is marketable, if you don't believe me just ask the London tourist board. And as pointed out being 'marketable' wasn't the case, stopping those around the ground selling merchandise with the club's badge was the point.

Your comments on gooners is a nonsense , the word is a play on gunners, and that was the point I was making - actually I have heard other clubs supporters, and people in the media also , frequently refer to the team as the gooners, the gooners are usually quick out the blocks, etc, Arsenal are 'goners' when things have gone pearshaped, being a play on gooners .,The clubs lawyers would have already looked at the 'gooner-gunners' thing anyway - and they obviously do not agree with your views. But hey, what's new there

Whether or not it is a play on 'gunners' isn't the point, this word was a reference to Arsenal fans and their hooligan firm, not the club.

The fact that people mistakenly refer to the club as 'gooners' is neither here nor there. People mistakenly refer to Mr. Spock as Doctor Spock, is the latter entitled to a share of the royalties from Star Trek merchandise because of this misconception?[/quote]

[Redbull]

Whether or not it is a play on 'gunners' isn't the point, this word was a reference to Arsenal fans and their hooligan firm, not the club.

The fact that people mistakenly refer to the club as 'gooners' is neither here nor there. People mistakenly refer to Mr. Spock as Doctor Spock, is the latter entitled to a share of the royalties from Star Trek merchandise because of this misconception?[/quote][/quote]

You are missing the point Gus, I know gooner's refers to supporters, but it's a play on gunners which is a recognized name for AFC, so the club could argue indeed are so doing , that it's an infringement of their legal rights regarding the selling of merchandise if it appears on products without their consent( or the club not receiving any money from the seller) . Scarves are not supporters, and neither are china mugs, spuds have plenty of mugs though, and they are not all Chinese!

[Cus Geezer]

I suppose this could be seen as a precedent case

http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A13730834

ATV, the owners of the rights to the Beatles backcatalogue suing Neil Innes and his comic creation - The Rutles.

However as settled out of court, ATV were entitled to half of the Rutles royalties. Probably due to the latter not having deep enough pockets to contest it in court.