Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple & Apple Corps Settlement?

Do you think Apple Computers bought the Apple Record Lable. Thus the fight is over, and can never spur up again. Thus the huge amount that is involved. Thus why PM is coming to Apple computers as a board member, to help with the music side of Apple Computers.
 
Xtremehkr said:
Apple should own its name and Apple Records name by the time this is all done. Paul McCartney is a prick, I guess he is still upset about Michael Jackson owning all of his songs. Give my regards to Eileen Paul, or whatever her name is.

Submitted by IJ Reilly? as in Ignatious J Reilly? how's your valve?
Click to expand...

The name 'Apple' is their name. Steve Jobs named the company after their company.

I would be very surprised if Paul McCartney has a personal hand in this.

I can't figure out why everybody is getting so hot about this one. Apple computer made an agreement with Apple Music and then violated that agreement... Apple computer apparently sees it that way... thus the big payoff.

If you want to dance the dance you must pay the piper.
It's how life works.
 
darkwing said:
Apple should just announce they are no longer going to do business in the UK and pull all their offices and support out. Then, screw apple UK. Of course, I have no idea how all this works. Someone enlighten me. 🙂

Steve
Click to expand...

Shhh, don't tell the MacRumors UK members that. I think that edesign in particular might flip out! 😱
 
God, I hope not. Paul was always the worst Beatle -- I'd rather have Ringo, and that's not saying much.

.narco
 
ioinc said:
The name 'Apple' is their name. Steve Jobs named the company after their company..
Click to expand...

Actually after no one could come up with anything better Jobs elected to name the company after his favorite fruit as he was a fruititarian at the time. Or so the legend goes ...
 
varmit said:
Thus why PM is coming to Apple computers as a board member, to help with the music side of Apple Computers.
Click to expand...

Heh, what the hell has Paul McC done lately to be of any real use to the "music side" of Apple? 😀
 
I love the Beatles and Apple Computer. Why can't they just get along? Seems to me that they could benefit each other. Put Beatles songs on ITMS like everyone says.
 
Really, what do you expect? They are crappy business men, selling the rights to their songs to Michael Jackson so they have to sue someone to generate the income for their retirements.
 
Does anyone know what the largest settlement ever reached at the moment is? For some kind of idea what kind of numbers we're talking here...
 
Beatles are fascist piggies

Yup... total fascist pigs... it's not like as if they are losing anything because Apple is selling music online. Looks like I'll have to encourage friends to pirate Beatles music.
 
MentalFabric said:
Does anyone know what the largest settlement ever reached at the moment is? For some kind of idea what kind of numbers we're talking here...
Click to expand...


Well... the tobacco industry has to be pretty close.... multi-billion dollar settlement.
 
When Jobs and Wozniak first started Apple they approached the Beatles and the deal was always based on Apple staying away from Music. Jobs and Woz chose the name Apple when there was already an Apple Company so the Beatle' Apple Corp are totally right on here. As soon as Apple got into the music biz, they chanaged their scope!!
 
Loge said:
And a merger makes no sense, they are in completely separate businesses.
Click to expand...

I don't know about that. A record label might fit nicely into a company that is increasingly focused on music.
 
JtheLemur said:
Indeed. I ain't no law-guy... Apple Corps produce music, they're a label, but do they actually SELL the music? Do other labels like Vagrant or Tribunal actually SELL the music? They produce it and market it, but they hand it off to distributors to sell (most of the time at least). Maybe Apple Computer will argue that they aren't REALLY in the music business, they're just a store, like FYE or Best Buy. =)
Click to expand...

exactly! i was hoping someone else would have the same thought as me...

all apple is doing is just distributing the music while making barely any money off of the sale. apple corps just thought that it broke the former agreement.
 
I think this could be a very good thing. Well, I don't like hearing that Apple (Computer) has to settle with anybody but if all this is true then that means the Music Store could have exclusive use of the Beatles' archives. One more nail in Microsoft's music store coffin. Wouldn't it be friggin' awesome to have rare Beatles tracks available in the Music Store.
 
trilogic said:
lawyers and the us law 🙄

man am I glad we don't have this huge lawyer-industry in europe
Click to expand...

The more I travel, the more I understand and agree with (some of) the bashing of america by people from other countries.

Such S***
 
Hey, try starting a company called Virgin or McDonalds or HMV or Tower music. The Beatlkes started Apple as a music company: FACT. Apple'sdeal was originally for computers only. This is simple business not UK vs. USA. They all work Internationally.
 
Apple Computer are in the music business about as much as Best Buy. They don't make music, just sell it.

Whatever the wording of the agreement between Apple Computer and Apple Corp there's no way it took into account current technology.

Apple Corp are obsolete and greedy - bending the letter of the law to extort money from the most popular online music store. I'm British but am embarrassed to admit it given the depths that Apple Corp will stoop.

-----

I read the Steve named Apple so that they would be before Atari in the phone book.
 
key word left out

russoesq said:
Apple Corp is not suing over a trademark violation but a breach of Apple Computer's agreement not to enter the music business. The best thing that could happen is a settlement with Apple Computer getting the rights to sell The Beatles Catalog on itunes music store. That is the largest selling catalog in the world. The computer company would be assured of millions of dallars of revenue each year.
Click to expand...

The keyword you left out is production business. Apple is NOT producing any music or involved in the process of creation (eventhough Apple computers are used heavily in the creation of music)
 
What don't you all get? Apple Corp is NOT bending the law. Both Apples agreed that APPLE Computer would do anything music related. THEY friggen agreed. If the Beatles' Apple started making Computers, they would get sued by Apple too. Christ what is your problem. That is the law and a MUTUALLY agreed commitment.
 
Ja Di ksw said:
The more I travel, the more I understand and agree with (some of) the bashing of america by people from other countries.

Such S***
Click to expand...

Hate the president, not the people 😛 What'd I ever do to you?

Seriously, legal or not, the truth is Apple Corp. has existed basically in name only for a long, long, time. They really are not an active business, which is why it is such a cheap cash-in for them to pull another settlement.
 
But the analogy doesn't fit

nemaslov said:
When Jobs and Wozniak first started Apple they approached the Beatles and the deal was always based on Apple staying away from Music. Jobs and Woz chose the name Apple when there was already an Apple Company so the Beatle' Apple Corp are totally right on here. As soon as Apple got into the music biz, they chanaged their scope!!
Click to expand...

There is a large national staffing chain called Apple Staffing

I'm sure there is an "Apple Staffing" department at Apple that does all the hiring for jobs at Apple.

This would be like like Apple Staffing litigating against Apple because Apple Computer also finds people jobs and places them in positions within the company both part time and full time.

nemaslov said:
What don't you all get? Apple Corp is NOT bending the law. Both Apples agreed that APPLE Computer would do anything music related. THEY friggen agreed. If the Beatles' Apple started making Computers, they would get sued by Apple too. Christ what is your problem. That is the law and a MUTUALLY agreed commitment.
Click to expand...

How about reading the forum posts for comprehension! YOU ARE BENDING and twisting the actual agreement. The agreement was based on production of music as a music label

Would someone please post the actual original settlement for all to see???
 
If you think Apple Corp is NOT an active business you are very ignorant. Even though they are not in your face everyday like Apple Computer, they did have the Number One CD a few years ago with Beatles 1 and the Anholgy series on DVDlast year, and yes they maintain all of the reissues, books, licencing on behalf of the Beatles. The reason they really do not own most of their publishing is that greedy business people made them sign aways their publishing when they were very young like so many bands even today. They finally got wise long after they actually split up. The Beatles and Apple Corp deserve every penny they now get.

If you craeted a company wouldnt you want to be protected? Why do you all love to knock the all down once you get old and rich. I love both Apples but you don;t really think Jobs and Apple did screw a few people along the way no do you?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back