Wembley FC vs Wembley

[Stan]

 

Long story short...

- Wembley FC have been around for about 70 years
- FA complained to EU Courts that people would get mixed up between the football club and the stadium and so asked the courts for the club to get rid of 'Wembley' in their name on the basis that fans would get confused between the two.
- dumped all the costs on the small club

 

Quite pathetic from the FA in my opinion. Why choose now? Have fans seriously complained to them that they got confused between a stadium with a big fucking arch with a small 2,000 seater stadium with some miniscule stands?

[Dave]

They wouldn't give a fuck if they were a Premier League club making good revenue.

[Dan+]

Am I missing something or are the FA SERIOUSLY trying to make an example of an absolutely tiny club for the sake of a few quid?

They're an absolute disgrace and not fit for purpose.

[RandoEFC+]

44 minutes ago, Dan said:

Am I missing something or are the FA SERIOUSLY trying to make an example of an absolutely tiny club for the sake of a few quid?

They're an absolute disgrace and not fit for purpose.

How to sum up the last 20 years of the English FA in one retarded legal suit.

[Honey Honey]

Cant play sound so cant watch the video but I thought they were taken to court because of the lion in their badge, which they implemented in 2012.

[Danny]

Taken to court because their crest says Wembley, which apparently is too confusing to have around Wembley Stadium signage.

Bit of a joke really, a non league side who represent the local area and they're treated like that

[True Blue]

Don't see what the big deal is, no one is actually confused apart from the FA

[Danny]

Maybe the reason Wembley struggles to sell out is because it has actually sold out, just the other tens of thousands of people are scratching their heads at Farm Vale and it has nothing to do with, much like this, their ineptitude to avoid complete and utter fuck ups.

[Honey Honey]

They've clearly changed their badge to something that looks a knock off FA logo.

[Danny]

7 minutes ago, Kitchen Sales said:

They've clearly changed their badge to something that looks a knock off FA logo.

theres a lion on it and the crest just says Wembley

[Honey Honey]

7 minutes ago, Danny said:

theres a lion on it and the crest just says Wembley

Exactly. It is blatant why the court have ruled in the FA's favour. They have made no effort to distinguish themselves from the FA and any skeptic would assume that was to deliberately draw attention to what Wembley is famous for.

The only argument is whether intellectual property is a legitimate law to have.

[Danny]

2 hours ago, Kitchen Sales said:

Exactly. It is blatant why the court have ruled in the FA's favour. They have made no effort to distinguish themselves from the FA and any skeptic would assume that was to deliberately draw attention to what Wembley is famous for.

The only argument is whether intellectual property is a legitimate law to have.

Even so the FA have left the club to pick up the court fees also

[Honey Honey]

1 hour ago, Danny said:

Even so the FA have left the club to pick up the court fees also

Maybe justifiably so. The FA claim that court was a last resort when an amicable resolution was no longer possible. Without information on what they tried before court I can't really pass judgement on whether or not they were fair. It is possible that the Wembley FC owner has been a bit arrogant, stupid and naive. Maybe he thinks he is fighting some moral cause over a badge and having lost is trying to stir up classic underdog, little man, david and goliath backing. No doubt the automatic outrage of some people across the nation will be enough to raise the necessary funds to save the club via just giving, if they don't manage to publicly shame the FA into helping out first. 

Of course the FA shouldn't destroy a club, but this chairman may be a bit of a knacker.

[Smiley Culture]

On 22/12/2017 at 11:13 AM, Kitchen Sales said:

Exactly. It is blatant why the court have ruled in the FA's favour. They have made no effort to distinguish themselves from the FA and any skeptic would assume that was to deliberately draw attention to what Wembley is famous for.

The only argument is whether intellectual property is a legitimate law to have.

Wembley isn’t a zoo mate. There’s no lions there. 

It’s also worth noting that Millwall, Boro and Villa have lions on their badges, do people get confused by that, too?

I take it the shit stains at the FA will go after TFL next, I mean WEMBLEY Central and WEMBLEY Park?! How dare places in Wembley dare bear the name of the area without The FA wanting money from them. 

It’s basically all Budweiser’s fault. They put money into the club and signed up some old donkeys like Claudio Caniggia to play for them in FA Cup games a few years back. All of this earnt the club a load of sponsorship, a new badge and some media exposure.

I’m certain people don’t get confused between the two because one is synonymous with Football in the UK and the other is a club that plays in something like the ninth tier in front of less than 100 people. 

It stinks of The FA protecting the brand and I’m sure that, if forced to, they’d be able to provide no evidence of Wembley FC causing confusion or gaining financially from their badge in an attempt to deceit people. 

 

[Honey Honey]

The UK signed up to civil law judgements of intellectual property at a European level. Considerations like the ambigious claim people shouldn't be stupid enough to make the mistake, the present size of the club or whether there is evidence it was deliberate don't carry much weight against their box ticking type rulings.

If you consider the ruling to be wrong then the legal structure of intellectual property is wrong. You can't have a situation where the public determine if it is right or wrong by whether or not the case was called in the first place and then blame the company who called it.

[Guest]

This is like Iceland wanting the supermarket to change their name