Lennon goes online, please, Yoko....

Discussion in 'MacBytes.com News Discussion' started by MacBytes, Nov 9, 2005.

  1. macrumors bot

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2003
    #1
  2. macrumors 65816

    stridey

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2005
    Location:
    Massachusetts, Connecticut
    #2
    Old news. Neither Lennon nor The Beatles will ever appear on iTMS unless Apple and Apple Corps can work out their differences.
     
  3. Moderator

    Nermal

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2002
    Location:
    Whakatane, New Zealand
    #3
    What's the problem? Doesn't the record company want to make money from music sales? :confused:
     
  4. macrumors 65816

    stridey

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2005
    Location:
    Massachusetts, Connecticut
    #4
    Well, they don't really have a problem with Beatles albums selling well. They always have, and they always will. They're far more pissed at Apple for giving their company the same name they already had, and they're not about to forgive them. Stupid and stubborn if you ask me, but they're willing to stick to their guns.
     
  5. Moderator

    Nermal

    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Dec 7, 2002
    Location:
    Whakatane, New Zealand
    #5
    They're better sue the NZ Apple and Pear Board too then, for using their name :rolleyes:
     
  6. macrumors 68040

    shamino

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2004
    Location:
    Vienna, VA
    #6
    There's no conflict there.

    Trademarks are registered for specific industry segments. If Apple Computer was strictly a computer company, then there would be no conflict with Apple Records (now Apple Corps).

    The problem is that Apple Computer is trying to establish itself as a music-industry company. First with music production software, then with iTunes and iPod, and now iTMS.

    When you consider that iTMS is even giving distribution contracts to unsigned artists, that places them in the exact same market as Apple Corps. All Apple Computer needs to do is start selling CDs and the trademark violation will be complete.

    Personally, I think Apple Computer should spin off their music business into a subsidiary company that doesn't have the word "Apple" in the name. Something like "iTunes Digital Media" might work well.

    But Steve clearly has no intention of doing this. So the lawsuits will continue ad infinitum. Unless Apple Computer somehow manages to buy Apple Corps :eek: . But I doubt its owners will ever consider selling.
     
  7. macrumors 603

    solvs

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2002
    Location:
    LaLaLand, CA
    #7
    Please... this all about money. :p For the right price, they'd sell their spouses. Looks like some already have.
     
  8. macrumors 65816

    stridey

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2005
    Location:
    Massachusetts, Connecticut
    #8
    Wasn't it always Apple Corps? I thought the pun was the whole point of the name, and if they were originally "Apple Records" there's no pun. :)
     
  9. macrumors G3

    iMeowbot

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2003
    #9
    Right, Apple Records was (and is) a subsidiary of Apple Corps Ltd.
     

Share This Page