The Beatles Sue Apple Computer?

MacRumors · Sep 11, 2003, 07:30 PM

A Fox News column reports that The Beatles (Apple Corps) are suing Apple Computer over their move into the music arena with the iPod and iTunes Music Store.

Apple Computer and Apple Corps are not strangers and, in fact, have had previous legal settlements over corporate name confusion. In earlier agreements, Apple Computer had agreed to not enter the music industry, and had reportedly paid out a large settlement to Apple Corps.

According to this column, Apple was served legal papers over the past few days over breach of contract.

jpmack · Sep 11, 2003, 07:33 PM

Paul McCartney must be down to his last ten billion....

fixyourthinking · 10:13 PM

Apple needs to countersue this time around for frivilous malicious intent and libel - the other 2 suits had NOTHING to do with ANY Beatles copyright

vanillamike · Sep 11, 2003, 07:35 PM

Well I guess it was bound to happen sooner or later.

Mike

alia · Sep 11, 2003, 07:36 PM

I first heard about this when the iTunes Music Store first came out, so it's not a new topic. I think it's silly that they would sue, especially since Apple isn't MAKING music, just selling it. Anyway, I hope they don't have to pay fat fines, or whatever, to Apple Company (Music, Studios... whatever it's called).

Alia

iJon · Sep 11, 2003, 07:36 PM

i honestly think they will not win this case. the riaa loves apple as well as most of the recording industry. plus they should have sued apple back in the early sytem days in they encorparated sound in the system.

iJon

stoid · Sep 11, 2003, 07:37 PM

Maybe they should take this opportunity to do business with Apple, because if I recall correctly, the Beatles are not included in the iTMS.

TylerL · Sep 11, 2003, 07:37 PM

...simplest solution?
BUY APPLE RECORDS!

A little Microsoftian, but it'll get the job done.
...and if Michael Jackson is looking to sell his ranch, I'm sure Apple could make a deal to buy him out too.
Beatles music rights, and thousands of dollars worth of plastic and new noses!

alset · Sep 11, 2003, 07:37 PM

Well, this is interesting. Can't say I blame them. I get confused between pop supergroups and computers all the time.

DesterWallaboo · Sep 11, 2003, 07:38 PM

Just lawyers looking to get rich.

xtekdiver · Sep 11, 2003, 07:38 PM

Screw the Beatles. I can't believe that these egotistical morons would sue Apple over this; I mean, it was a compliment for Jobs to name his company in this way. Talk to the hand!

NavyIntel007 · Sep 11, 2003, 07:39 PM

Come on... Beatles... you had your time... let it go.

Ambrose Chapel · Sep 11, 2003, 07:39 PM

come on already...i can't believe apple agreed to that to begin with. i think they could've successfully argued that apple computers and apple records would not be confused by the public. what the hell does apple records even do anymore??

Wash!! · Sep 11, 2003, 07:42 PM

Cry babies tha's all

Wonder Boy · Sep 11, 2003, 07:42 PM

eh, it was only a matter of time.

JGowan · Sep 11, 2003, 07:44 PM

Although I'm a huge Beatles fan, I think it's ridiculous for Apple Corps to bring this suit against Apple Computer. In the early 70s, YES ("if you use 'Apple' then don't go into the Music business") -- that's when it was the very real possibility that Apple Corps would actually be some sort of publishing force themselves for other bands besides themselves.

It's 2003 -- Apple Corps has only ever really been about the Beatles... it never really tried to represent and push other acts forward. If you read anything about Apple Corps and the Beatles, you find that they initially had a big beautiful dream that died quickly (even before they themselves disbanded)...

Why push Apple Computers around now?

applemacdude · Sep 11, 2003, 07:44 PM

OH-Oh

I think Apple Computer will win this not Apple Reords. Maybe Apple Computer will make a deal With Apple Records. $$$ For both of them. Oh well

VicMacs · Sep 11, 2003, 07:45 PM

unbelievable...

sickracer2015 · Sep 11, 2003, 07:45 PM

Apple did ask for it:

When Apple Computers first came into existence, the Beatles' lawyers_sued -- and won -- over the use of the corporate name. The Fab Four, it_was_widely known, already had their own_company called_Apple Corps. (Ironically, Jobs admitted to naming his company as a tribute to the Beatles.) The result of the suit was a huge cash settlement and a promise that the Apple logo and name would only be used for computers -- and_never for a music company.

Several 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 Computers had agreed to steer clear of the music business. Their winnings against Apple Computers have come to an estimated_$50 million so far.

P-Worm · Sep 11, 2003, 07:45 PM

That's bad. Why can't we just learn to get along?

P-Worm

mathew · Sep 11, 2003, 07:46 PM

I can remember way back when the RUMORS of the ITMS started, people were talking about Apple's promise to stay out of the music industry...

Should be very interesting to see what happens.

xtekdiver · Sep 11, 2003, 07:46 PM

The Beatles can suck my...er...iPod!

Makosuke · Sep 11, 2003, 07:46 PM

I'm not a copyright/trademark lawyer, but it sure seems to me that any particular benefit to Apple (the computer company) on account of sharing a name with the Beatles label went away about two decades ago when Apple Records stopped doing anything. At all.

I would be honestly surprised if there were more than a half dozen people left in the world who might seriously confuse Apple computer and the iTunes Music Store with Apple Records.

And why didn't they sue years ago when the iPod first came out? Probably not enough money in it.

Chris Wardzala · Sep 11, 2003, 07:46 PM

Come on, this is getting really sad. I dont think I am going to confuse Apple Computer with a Record Lable.

"Say," I would say to an incompitant friend, "Have you seen the new iPod?"

Friend: "You mean the one released by the record Lable?"

Fighting ensues and He never confuses them again.

amichalo · Sep 11, 2003, 07:46 PM

I belive that, were Leonnon alive today, he would be a happy fan of the iPod and iTMS. I can see him cruising around Central Park with the other citicens of Gotham with little white ear buds.

Sep 11, 2003, 07:30 PM	#1
MacRumors macrumors bot Join Date: Apr 2001	The Beatles Sue Apple Computer? A Fox News column reports that The Beatles (Apple Corps) are suing Apple Computer over their move into the music arena with the iPod and iTunes Music Store. Apple Computer and Apple Corps are not strangers and, in fact, have had previous legal settlements over corporate name confusion. In earlier agreements, Apple Computer had agreed to not enter the music industry, and had reportedly paid out a large settlement to Apple Corps. According to this column, Apple was served legal papers over the past few days over breach of contract.

Sep 11, 2003, 07:34 PM	#3
fixyourthinking macrumors 6502a Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Greenville SC	Frivilous / Malicious Apple needs to countersue this time around for frivilous malicious intent and libel - the other 2 suits had NOTHING to do with ANY Beatles copyright __________________ WWW.FIXYOURTHINKING.COM Last edited by arn : Sep 11, 2003 at 10:13 PM.

Sep 11, 2003, 07:35 PM	#4
vanillamike macrumors regular Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Ottawa, Ontario, Canada	Well I guess it was bound to happen sooner or later. Mike __________________ "If my rhyme was a drug I'd sell it by the gram" Vanilla Ice

Sep 11, 2003, 07:36 PM	#5
alia macrumors 6502 Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Gainesville, FL	I first heard about this when the iTunes Music Store first came out, so it's not a new topic. I think it's silly that they would sue, especially since Apple isn't MAKING music, just selling it. Anyway, I hope they don't have to pay fat fines, or whatever, to Apple Company (Music, Studios... whatever it's called). Alia __________________ Proud owner of a 1.25 Ghz 15" Powerbook Check out my photography

Sep 11, 2003, 07:37 PM	#7
stoid macrumors 68040 Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: So long, and thanks for all the fish!	Maybe they should take this opportunity to do business with Apple, because if I recall correctly, the Beatles are not included in the iTMS. __________________ Get Salted!

Sep 11, 2003, 07:33 PM	#2
jpmack macrumors newbie Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Davis, CA	Paul McCartney must be down to his last ten billion....

Sep 11, 2003, 07:36 PM	#6
iJon macrumors 601 Join Date: Feb 2002	i honestly think they will not win this case. the riaa loves apple as well as most of the recording industry. plus they should have sued apple back in the early sytem days in they encorparated sound in the system. iJon

Sep 11, 2003, 07:37 PM	#8
TylerL macrumors member Join Date: Jan 2002	...simplest solution? BUY APPLE RECORDS! A little Microsoftian, but it'll get the job done. ...and if Michael Jackson is looking to sell his ranch, I'm sure Apple could make a deal to buy him out too. Beatles music rights, and thousands of dollars worth of plastic and new noses!

Sep 11, 2003, 07:37 PM	#9
alset macrumors 65816 Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: East Bay, CA	Ha Well, this is interesting. Can't say I blame them. I get confused between pop supergroups and computers all the time. __________________ alsetmusic.com standing on the shoulders of giants....

Sep 11, 2003, 07:38 PM	#10
DesterWallaboo macrumors newbie Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Western USA	What a bunch of whiners! Just lawyers looking to get rich.

Sep 11, 2003, 07:38 PM	#11
xtekdiver macrumors regular Join Date: Aug 2003	The Beatles SUCK! Screw the Beatles. I can't believe that these egotistical morons would sue Apple over this; I mean, it was a compliment for Jobs to name his company in this way. Talk to the hand!

Sep 11, 2003, 07:39 PM	#12
NavyIntel007 macrumors 65816 Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Tampa, FL	Come on... Beatles... you had your time... let it go. __________________ Fujitsu T4020 iPod Nano 4 GB (RED)

Sep 11, 2003, 07:39 PM	#13
Ambrose Chapel macrumors 6502a Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Cambridge, MA	come on already...i can't believe apple agreed to that to begin with. i think they could've successfully argued that apple computers and apple records would not be confused by the public. what the hell does apple records even do anymore??

Sep 11, 2003, 07:42 PM	#14
Wash!! macrumors 6502 Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: here, there, who knows	Cry babies tha's all __________________ Anyone who has never make a mistake has never tried anything new... imagination is more important than knowledge ----- G5 1.8Ghz 1gig ram baby!!!; G3 B/W/512 ram; G4 400/1 gigi ram; G4 450/20gig/1.5 gig ram; iMac 400 special edition; PowerMac 7100/80mhz; Mac LC; 15gig 3G ipod-1994 songs and counting!!; 5 gig Original ipod-200 songs (mostly Japanese); newton 100; newton 130

Sep 11, 2003, 07:42 PM	#15
Wonder Boy macrumors 6502a Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: South Windsor, CT	eh, it was only a matter of time. __________________ girls are pretty.

Sep 11, 2003, 07:44 PM	#16
JGowan macrumors 6502a Join Date: Jan 2003	I ME MINE Although I'm a huge Beatles fan, I think it's ridiculous for Apple Corps to bring this suit against Apple Computer. In the early 70s, YES ("if you use 'Apple' then don't go into the Music business") -- that's when it was the very real possibility that Apple Corps would actually be some sort of publishing force themselves for other bands besides themselves. It's 2003 -- Apple Corps has only ever really been about the Beatles... it never really tried to represent and push other acts forward. If you read anything about Apple Corps and the Beatles, you find that they initially had a big beautiful dream that died quickly (even before they themselves disbanded)... Why push Apple Computers around now?

Sep 11, 2003, 07:44 PM	#17
applemacdude Banned Join Date: Mar 2001 Location: Over The Rainbow	OH-Oh I think Apple Computer will win this not Apple Reords. Maybe Apple Computer will make a deal With Apple Records. $$$ For both of them. Oh well

Sep 11, 2003, 07:45 PM	#18
VicMacs macrumors 6502 Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Dominican Republic	No way! unbelievable... __________________ @ MacWorld

Sep 11, 2003, 07:45 PM	#19
sickracer2015 macrumors member Join Date: Apr 2003	Apple did ask for it: When Apple Computers first came into existence, the Beatles' lawyers_sued -- and won -- over the use of the corporate name. The Fab Four, it_was_widely known, already had their own_company called_Apple Corps. (Ironically, Jobs admitted to naming his company as a tribute to the Beatles.) The result of the suit was a huge cash settlement and a promise that the Apple logo and name would only be used for computers -- and_never for a music company. Several 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 Computers had agreed to steer clear of the music business. Their winnings against Apple Computers have come to an estimated_$50 million so far.

Sep 11, 2003, 07:45 PM	#20
P-Worm macrumors 68000 Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Salt Lake City, UT	That's bad. Why can't we just learn to get along? P-Worm __________________ Follow my show The Movie Audit as well as watch my other videos on my YouTube Channel!

Sep 11, 2003, 07:46 PM	#21
mathew macrumors newbie Join Date: May 2003	Knew this was coming... I can remember way back when the RUMORS of the ITMS started, people were talking about Apple's promise to stay out of the music industry... Should be very interesting to see what happens.

Sep 11, 2003, 07:46 PM	#23
Makosuke macrumors 68040 Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: The Cool Part of CA, USA	I'm not a copyright/trademark lawyer, but it sure seems to me that any particular benefit to Apple (the computer company) on account of sharing a name with the Beatles label went away about two decades ago when Apple Records stopped doing anything. At all. I would be honestly surprised if there were more than a half dozen people left in the world who might seriously confuse Apple computer and the iTunes Music Store with Apple Records. And why didn't they sue years ago when the iPod first came out? Probably not enough money in it.

Sep 11, 2003, 07:46 PM	#24
Chris Wardzala macrumors newbie Join Date: Aug 2003	Man oh man. Come on, this is getting really sad. I dont think I am going to confuse Apple Computer with a Record Lable. "Say," I would say to an incompitant friend, "Have you seen the new iPod?" Friend: "You mean the one released by the record Lable?" Fighting ensues and He never confuses them again.

Sep 11, 2003, 07:46 PM	#25
amichalo macrumors regular Join Date: Dec 2001	What's sad is Lennon woudl love the iPod I belive that, were Leonnon alive today, he would be a happy fan of the iPod and iTMS. I can see him cruising around Central Park with the other citicens of Gotham with little white ear buds. __________________ ... or not.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode