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

Apple Inc and Apple Corps Form New Trademark Agreement

Mariah Carey has an amazing voice. Certainly better than most in the top 15. Whats the problem?
 
Ted13 said:
This is potentially huge, as Apple can now be a record company, signing bands directly and cutting out the middle man, the record companies that get 69 cents out every dollar.
Click to expand...

You're absolutely correct. And this will be the biggest impact of this deal. Apple can now be not just be the distributor, but also content owner.
 
Project said:
Mariah Carey has an amazing voice. Certainly better than most in the top 15. Whats the problem?
Click to expand...

You are right, and clearly the millions who buy her albums agree. I'm just not a fan of vocal pop music (ie Carey, Celine Dion, and for that matter Streisand). I like my musicians to play instruments. Of course, I vote with my wallet, as everyone else does.
 
Project said:
Mariah Carey has an amazing voice. Certainly better than most in the top 15. Whats the problem?
Click to expand...

She's ******* crazy, can't act for ****, thinks she's better than "ordinary" people, dresses like a whore to overshadow her obvious lack of talent, and refuses to accept getting older (see dresses like a whore).
 
Good new for Apple Inc! Already have enough Beatles to last me, but it can only drive the iTMS to greater heights :apple:
 
It makes me sick that any greedy b@stard$ think they can fence off portions of the English language, and so can sue any one who uses a word they think they own. "Apple" is a group of letters denoting a kind of fruit, and no one owns it! :mad:
 
freebooter said:
It makes me sick that any greedy b@stard$ think they can fence off portions of the English language, and so can sue any one who uses a word they think they own. "Apple" is a group of letters denoting a kind of fruit, and no one owns it! :mad:
Click to expand...

As far as I understand it, it's because Apple Computer (as was) was using the name with relation to music, which was a conflict with the Beatles record label.

No one could stop you from using the word 'Apple' in relation to something totally different, say a chain of fruit shops...
 
michaelrjohnson said:
This was a joint settlement...

Can someone provide a better explanation of how Apple Corps, Inc. got anything out of this deal?
Click to expand...

My guess it that for Apple Inc (computer) to get the entire bite of the Apple, they probably paid a big chunk to the Beatles' Apple. Then charges back to the Beatles's to use Apple. Having said that, the Beatles probably didn't pay anything, but worked a deal for music exclusivity for a limited time.

Bring on the remastered CDs. Don't really care for downloads, but the promotions will help them all!!
 
generationxwing said:
She's ******* crazy, can't act for ****, thinks she's better than "ordinary" people, dresses like a whore to overshadow her obvious lack of talent, and refuses to accept getting older (see dresses like a whore).
Click to expand...

Hey, why don't you tell us what you REALLY think of Maria Carey!:cool:

PS Wasn't she referred to as Pariah Carey because of the dodgy people she used to hang around with?
 
Ted13 said:
This is potentially huge, as Apple can now be a record company, signing bands directly and cutting out the middle man, the record companies that get 69 cents out every dollar.
Click to expand...

Wow, never thought of that! Now who would you rather sign with?

Apple Records Inc or Microsoft Music TM ??????
 
freebooter said:
It makes me sick that any greedy b@stard$ think they can fence off portions of the English language, and so can sue any one who uses a word they think they own. "Apple" is a group of letters denoting a kind of fruit, and no one owns it! :mad:
Click to expand...

yeah? And McDonalds is only a farmer's name.... E I E I O :D
 
Rocketman said:
Apple Computer, in a settlement, not a court ruling, agreed to stay out of the music "production" business but BOTH parties agreed Apple Computer could distribute, transmit, store retreive and even sell music. The document is posted in full back on the thread announcing the court ruling on the most recent claim. I posted some coments to that thread as well after reading and actually understanding all the public documents, which included the original settlement agreement and the pleadings from both sides on the current dispute. In summary Apple Corps was seeking compensation for something the agreement expressly allowed Apple Computer to do. They had really crappy lawyers.

Rocketman
Click to expand...

I understand, but if the issues were so completely clear, then Apple would have staying in court and had the thing resolved once and for all that way, having to make no concessions. I suspect that other side issues were involved, including but not limited to the Beatles catalog. Apple Corp must have been exerting some sort of leverage.
 
Ted13 said:
This is potentially huge, as Apple can now be a record company, signing bands directly and cutting out the middle man, the record companies that get 69 cents out every dollar.
Click to expand...

I don't believe that's entirely correct.Apple Corp is a subsidiary of EMI LTD.And they own several other record labels..Apple could not sign any band that has a contract with EMI.
 
Buy them. Sony does it, and gets away with it, so why couldn't Apple? Just buy Apple Corps, start a record label, and put artists first. You'd get mass defections and tons more $$.
 
freebooter said:
It makes me sick that any greedy b@stard$ think they can fence off portions of the English language, and so can sue any one who uses a word they think they own. "Apple" is a group of letters denoting a kind of fruit, and no one owns it! :mad:
Click to expand...
Thanks for the definition, Webster, but YES THEY DO.
 
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