The Beatles sue Apple over iPod, iTunes

[Murlyn]

Source: MacMinute.com

The Beatles sue Apple over iPod, iTunes
September 12, 2003 - 00:01 EDT Apple is being sued by Apple Corps., the parent company of The Beatles, over the iPod and the iTunes Music Store. According to Fox News, the breach of contract case was filed a short time ago in London's High Court of Justice, but was just served to Apple in California in the last couple of days. This is the third time Apple has been sued by the band. The Beatles filed suit against the company in 1981 over the use of its corporate name. The result of the suit was a huge cash settlement and a promise that Apple would stay out of the music industry. Years later, "when computers starting having music come through attachable speakers," The Beatles again sued*and won, this time*over breach of a trademark agreement since Apple had agreed to steer clear of the music business. It is estimated*that Apple has paid US$50 million so far to the band.

My Comments: I knew there was a reason why Beatles music just does not appeal to me anymore.. I just couldnt figure it out since I used to really like them... well now it is all explained to me!

 

[Graphite]

Wow, thats bullsh*t. If anything it popularizes the two of them mutually.. Boo to beatles.

[edited my own profanity]

 

[sKaD]

The beatles? Aren't those guys dead? I'm lost and it's too late to look at the supportive link. I'll check it after work tomorrow.

night

 

[Graphite]

Nope not all of them yet. Still alive and kicking. Doesn't Michael Jackson own all those songs though? Thought they lost the rights when they sold them!

 

[Xer0]

Nope not all of them yet. Still alive and kicking. Doesn't Michael Jackson own all those songs though? Thought they lost the rights when they sold them!

He sold half of them to SONY to cover his debts.

 

[MacAddikt]

ya, its a bunch of bs. theres too much of this going on anymore

 

[Murlyn]

Further details emerge on Beatles-Apple lawsuit

This is a follow up to the original post:

Source: MacMinute.com

Further details emerge on Beatles-Apple lawsuit
September 12, 2003 - 15:44 EDT As expected, a representative for Apple Corps, the parent company of The Beatles, confirmed Friday that the company has sued Apple Computer over its iTunes Music Store. CNET News.com reports that Geoff Baker, spokesman for Apple Corps, said the suit was filed two months ago in London High Court. "Specifically, (the) complaint is made over the use by Apple Computer of the word 'Apple' and apple logos in conjunction with its new application for downloading pre-recorded music from the Internet," Baker said in a statement. Apple responded later in the day: "Over a decade ago, Apple signed an agreement with Apple Corps, a business controlled by the Beatles and their heirs, which specified the rights each company would have to use the 'Apple' trademark," Apple said in a statement. "Unfortunately, Apple and Apple Corps now have differing interpretations of this agreement and will need to ask a court to resolve this dispute."

My Comments: It's getting interesting!

 

[MacAddikt]

i can understand the downloading music thing, but the ipod is hardware. how do they figure this was breaking the contract?

 

[rman]

This is just deep mess. It appears (IMO) that Apple corp. wants a piece of the pie. I really don't think they have a leg to stand on, but that depends on how the judge see it. Apple is not creating music, and does not sale any midi hareware. So I don't see the problem. Iff Sony does not have a contract to sell music through the Apple store that is their loss.

 

[rman]

Is Apple Corp is business to do any thing look at their web site (Apple Corp)

 

[Murlyn]

They probably exist just to be a thorn in Apple's side... Oh yeah.. and to earn the Beatles more money..

 

[Graphite]

So why don't they change their name to Apple-Macintosh.. or Macintosh..

 

[rman]

So why don't they change their name to Apple-Macintosh.. or Macintosh..

I like Apple better than Apple-Macintosh or Macintosh. It would take them to long to build brand loyally again with a new name.

 

[rman]

Why hadn't Apple Corp gone after these guys.

 

[Murlyn]

They could do Apple-Macintosh, but definitely not Macintosh.. they could still keep their logo, but.. Apple is so much more.. friendly And from the sound of it, it looks like Apple Corp. is suing because of a past contract saying that Apple-Mac would not get into the music business.. well Apple Corp thinks that iPods and iTunes store etc is getting into the music business. So as Apple-Mac says it looks like there is a conflict of interpretation on that contract and we'll see what the judge has to say on this one.. since I havent read the contract.. I can't say whether or not Apple-Mac did break the contract or Apple Corp is just trying to stick it to them.. It'll be interesting to see the way this plays out.

 

[rman]

I agree it is going to be interesting to see how this will play out. With the creation of the iPod and the iTunes Apple store, I can not see the reason for the name change. Apple-Mac would not work in this situation. The question is: Is Apple creating music of selling music.

Apple has only created another form to play and get music.

 

[Murlyn]

Yep that's the way I see it, but again.. we havent seen the agreement.. I really wish they would publish it so that we could make our own decision. My guess is that we're going to have to wait and see the verdict before we even see so much as a glimpse of that agreement.

 

[Xer0]

I never even saw what was great about the Beattles - their music wasn't that special. Now, i'm a cultured man of wide taste... and i have a wide scope of musical genres i like to listen too - from 18th century classic - to modern.

The Beattles never did it for me... and what millions of women saw in them - i don't know :slant:

They were soo overhyped like Oasis, Ricky Martin and a few others i fail to mention [ but the jury's out on them ]

 

[Graphite]

Its a shame we couldn't just boycott them and force the beatles out of music industry.

 

[nko]

The Beattles were big like Elvis was big. They were pretty much the prototype boy band. Women dig that stuff in ungodly ways. Who are we men to think we could ever understand?

I hate it when there's a company that sues a bigger, far more important company because they can. It's not like Apple Corp is doing anything wonderful with their name. If any business is being done with them, it will NOT be confused with Apple Computer. Still, there's a rash of these types of cases going on. Upholding the loopholes and technicalities over reason. I'd be surprised if Apple Computer didn't lose again.

Apple Corp: "Hey, gimmie money. C'mon, you know you should."

Apple Comp: "Geez, you guys again? .... alright, but for cryin' out loud, get a day job."