Are Arsenal justified in trademarking 'Gooner'? (10/9)

Post by **gooner.ed** » Mon Sep 10, 2007 11:07 am

http://www.onlinegooner.com/exclusive/index.php?id=409

usual thread starterâ€¦ more for the sake of completion really. However, I do have this idea that someone at the club will see this, and email everyone at the club to vote upon it in favour of the clubâ€™s actions. Just so you know, before the plug for the vote, the percentages were as follows â€“ 33% thought the club were acting reasonably. 66% did not. However, that was from a tiny number of votes, so I canâ€™t take that as particularly representative. Anyhow, will be interested to see the results after 24 hours of publicising the question. Go vote if you havenâ€™t alreadyâ€¦

Cus Geezer · Post by **Cus Geezer** » Mon Sep 10, 2007 11:21 am

The club is not acting reasonably at all.

The phrase was not coined by them at all. It has it's origin in football hooliganism in the 1970s, why does it want exclusive rights over it?

Ironically I've just picked up my advanced copy of When Saturday Comes magazine, which is not out on general sale yet but probably will be sometime next week. This is covered on p.15 of it.

As described by the author: 'over the last 15 years, the word, rather like the club has become gentrified.....over the last 12 months such people as Melvyn Bragg, Clive Anderson and Piers Morgan have proudly described themselves as "Gooners". In a commercial sense, it's the equivalent of Hugh Dennis's sad dad dancing in The Mary Whitehouse Experience: attempting to be hip and cool by using words and phrases you don't really understand and ending up looking ridiculous in the process.'

I couldn't agree more!

Steve · Post by **Steve** » Mon Sep 10, 2007 11:29 am

This is absolutely ludicrous. Imagine West Ham trademarking the 'ICF' brand or Chelsea 'Headhunters'. I'd have thought the club would want to distance themselves from the word 'Gooner' as much as possible with our new corporate fan base. Mind you, most of these prawn sandwich brigade probably have no idea as to the foundation and origination of the term.

Cus Geezer · Post by **Cus Geezer** » Mon Sep 10, 2007 11:38 am

In the run up to the case, you wanna get some t-shirts and printed up with big burly angry tattooed blokes with black eyes, under the banner 'oooh to be a gooner', they'd soon give up on the case.

Scored Earth Policy there, it worked for the Russians in 1941.

rolypoly · Post by **rolypoly** » Mon Sep 10, 2007 3:18 pm

hullo kevin

i am no expert in copyright law and dont mind doing a bit of research all in a good cause but i would be amazed if the club could do this esp as "gooner " is not a term originally coined by the club.

was it a term invented by arsenal "fans" or by outsiders intended as an insult? whoever did invent the term must surely have more right to copyright the name than the club.

in cricket i believe the barmy army has copyrighted its name. i doubt that the cricket authorities could have done so.

in fact may be worthwhile contacting them for guidance.

U.F.G Anfield '89 · Post by **U.F.G Anfield '89** » Mon Sep 10, 2007 3:19 pm

Cus Geezer wrote:In the run up to the case, you wanna get some t-shirts and printed up with big burly angry tattooed blokes with black eyes, under the banner 'oooh to be a gooner', they'd soon give up on the case.

Scored Earth Policy there, it worked for the Russians in 1941.

are you suggesting we do a Zhukov on the word Gooner Cus?

Herd · Post by **Herd** » Mon Sep 10, 2007 3:48 pm

It was coined Originally as an insult by Tottenham fans,and they were due to sing it at us in a match at the Lane in the 70â€™s.
Unfortunately for them they told a certain fellow by the name of Lee,now fondly known as Lee Gooner who promptly adopted the Title as his own and spread the word.

It was immediately adopted by us as a name for us and we pre-empted the Spurs massive by repeatedly singing Gooners Gooners !

As if to prove that there is some intelligent life forms in N17 about 2 years later they started to call themselves the **** Army.

Years later it became a general word for all Arsenal fans and went on to be adopted by some cheeky wags as a title for a fanzine.

I trust you will be opposing them as much as Colin Ward,we might even get Lee to oppose it !

Post by **REB** » Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:43 pm

i read colin wards letter but somehow cant see him gettin a reply,, its a disgrace wat the club are tryin 2 do,, id be worried at gooner towers cos the club will be looking for payment for using a brand name

Cus Geezer · Post by **Cus Geezer** » Mon Sep 10, 2007 4:58 pm

id be worried at gooner towers cos the club will be looking for payment for using a brand name

Surely that would be an easy one to get around.

Change the name of the fanzine to 'the Goooner'. Sounds the same spelt differently.

All_Arsenal_1886 · Post by **All_Arsenal_1886** » Mon Sep 10, 2007 5:45 pm

Cus Geezer wrote:
id be worried at gooner towers cos the club will be looking for payment for using a brand name
Surely that would be an easy one to get around.

Change the name of the fanzine to 'the Goooner'. Sounds the same spelt differently.

Smart idea Cus Geezer

Surely though this can't affect the Gooner! Can it?

gunners-need-steel · Post by **gunners-need-steel** » Mon Sep 10, 2007 6:44 pm

Does anyone have the clubs statement on why they are doing this, and how they will apply it if they were successful ?

I ask, because I see so much comments/articles about it, but have never seen the clubs statement clarifying their position ...

If the club applied on the bases that they will not charge fans and fan forums who use the word gooner in publications, etc, then perhaps its not such a big deal .. no ?

Post by **REB** » Mon Sep 10, 2007 6:50 pm

they can do wat they want when the word GOONER is copyrighted,, its another way for them 2 make money,, baby gooner clothes etc,, and it will rightly fu*k up the stalls as any thing wit GOONER on it they cant sell without premission,, and that will include the fanzine,,

Galasso · Post by **Galasso** » Mon Sep 10, 2007 6:50 pm

All_Arsenal_1886 wrote:
Cus Geezer wrote:
id be worried at gooner towers cos the club will be looking for payment for using a brand name
Surely that would be an easy one to get around.

Change the name of the fanzine to 'the Goooner'. Sounds the same spelt differently.
Smart idea Cus Geezer
Surely though this can't affect the Gooner! Can it?

As longer as the it doesn't become 'the Goner'

Ruby · Post by **Ruby** » Mon Sep 10, 2007 8:38 pm

I'm most likely wrong on this but my understanding of the word "Gooner" comes from the term used to describe the Hard Firm that stood on the clock end, To be a Gooner was like to be an ultra, but the point is wherever it sprang from it derived from the Fans for Arsenal. Now to turn round and say it's ours is ridiculous - you can't put a patent on every word that springs up, it's just plain greed on their part or the idea of some poncey executive from a major corporation - know need to guess who.
A line in the sand has to be drawn, Don't want to be a doom monger but this lot will sell their soul for a pound I can see a time when someone says "Do we need to be called Arsenal" or "Hey let's not be tied to this Red & White home Kit" Doa they've done that already

Cus Geezer · Post by **Cus Geezer** » Mon Sep 10, 2007 9:18 pm

I think if the club patented the it would still be ok for the magazine to use the name 'Gooner', but sadly it would have to be called the 'Fly Emirates Gooner'.

Any fan that doesn't chant 'ooh to, ooh to be, ooh to be a gooner in association with Fly Emirates, for the best quality air journey to Dubai'

Are Arsenal justified in trademarking 'Gooner'? (10/9)

Are Arsenal justified in trademarking 'Gooner'? (10/9)

Gooner + Proud

Teh Gooner

The word Gooner is ours