the beatles arent suing the label the beatles are on are suing.. dont get the 2 confused with each other
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
The Beatles Sue Apple Computer?
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
ya know, maybe this is why the ipods are so freaking expensive. Maybe apple knew they'd be sued, and figured out a price that would give them tons of money, and plenty to pay of the beatles.
You honestly have to wonder what these ex rock stars are doing with their lives - obviously not happy with their billions that's for sure!
Grrrrr - it's all Yoko's fault ...
😉
Grrrrr - it's all Yoko's fault ...
😉
Lawsuits are always a stable starting grounding for a lasting business relationship. I'm sure they're just chummy 😉
Phil Of Mac
macrumors 68020
Anyone other than Roger Friedman?
It seems every rumor regarding this is traceable to Fox News and Roger Friedman. Is there any other articles other that come from a source other than the two by this guy?
I'm suspicious because the article reports that the term Steve Jobs admitting "Apple Computer" came from Apple Records, as well as provides no background as to the relationship between the two companies (or if even Apple Records still exists after they were absorbed by Capitol).
Perhaps I'm not up on my history, but I seem to remember that Apple was supposed to be the "third" Apple (after the Fruit from the Tree of Knowledge and Isaac Newton's story). In fact, the original logo was looked like a woodcut of Isaac Newton under an apple tree. It seems the author has done no research. I have never heard a real company giving a comment about a lawsuit that hasn't even been served--Apple is not SCO.
On another note, can anyone find the lawsuits between Apple Records and Apple Computing (I assume they're in England and not in Lexis/Nexis). I ask this because while I know that early lawsuits between Apple and Apple Records occurred, I don't have any evidence that Apple Records ever took Apple Computing up on the offer, "sosumi".
It seems every rumor regarding this is traceable to Fox News and Roger Friedman. Is there any other articles other that come from a source other than the two by this guy?
I'm suspicious because the article reports that the term Steve Jobs admitting "Apple Computer" came from Apple Records, as well as provides no background as to the relationship between the two companies (or if even Apple Records still exists after they were absorbed by Capitol).
Perhaps I'm not up on my history, but I seem to remember that Apple was supposed to be the "third" Apple (after the Fruit from the Tree of Knowledge and Isaac Newton's story). In fact, the original logo was looked like a woodcut of Isaac Newton under an apple tree. It seems the author has done no research. I have never heard a real company giving a comment about a lawsuit that hasn't even been served--Apple is not SCO.
On another note, can anyone find the lawsuits between Apple Records and Apple Computing (I assume they're in England and not in Lexis/Nexis). I ask this because while I know that early lawsuits between Apple and Apple Records occurred, I don't have any evidence that Apple Records ever took Apple Computing up on the offer, "sosumi".
IlluminatedSage
macrumors 68000
apple records is right
I know as a loyal macuser, law school graduate and music industry person my views will be considered unpopular.
Apple Records has a valid trademark protection case here. In addition to the facts of Apple going into Music retail, they had entered into an agreement to restrict any entry into the music field.
If you go by the letter of the agreement, they are not living up to it.
However a slight defense is that it is called iTunes Music Store.
In all truth it is being offered by a company called apple, but it is not the center of the branding. That slightly mitigates, but likely there will be a needed settlement with apple records.
Hey it's just my take on it, Apple computers looks likely to lose, regardless of how old Apple records is and how long it has been since a new recording has been created by them. The beatles were quite huge.
I know as a loyal macuser, law school graduate and music industry person my views will be considered unpopular.
Apple Records has a valid trademark protection case here. In addition to the facts of Apple going into Music retail, they had entered into an agreement to restrict any entry into the music field.
If you go by the letter of the agreement, they are not living up to it.
However a slight defense is that it is called iTunes Music Store.
In all truth it is being offered by a company called apple, but it is not the center of the branding. That slightly mitigates, but likely there will be a needed settlement with apple records.
Hey it's just my take on it, Apple computers looks likely to lose, regardless of how old Apple records is and how long it has been since a new recording has been created by them. The beatles were quite huge.
It could be Paul McCartney, but its more likely to be Yoko Ono.
Paul McCartney is still out there singing and doing tours. George Harrison is pushing up daisies. Ringo Starr is content, and is doing tours also.
Its Yoko Ono. People have discovered how to put earplugs on, and are starting to not pay her the vocal extortion money that she has been accustomed to. 😛
Expect Apple to pay, and pay through the nose. No way this will go to a jury trial. Big Silicon Valley Company vs small foreign widow. Can you just see the headlines?
herr_neumann
macrumors 6502
That is why Apple (Computers) has Wilson Sonsini on the payroll. (www.wsgr.com ) Now hopefully they can win this time. And yes I know they have been with Apple since they took Apple public, but they won with the HP Compaq thingy, so maybe they will do better this time around.
Phil Of Mac
macrumors 68020
I must admit that it's fascinating to see an obscure part of Apple history, and a perennial Mac trivia question, become a current news story.
A Few Things
Apple (Records) Corp. apparently has not sued companies like Screaming Apple Records, Bad Apple Records, Big Apple Records, or Black Apple Records.
I would say these are closer to infringement than Apple. Apple Records likes going after the big fish (Apple Records also won, I believe, like 80% of the revenue from the Beattles when they dissolved -- leaving them with 4-5% each... by taking THEM to court too), but the complete lack of action from them on these other matters is damaging. (Of course, they are suing for breach of contract which is another issue.)
But I would ask the question: has Apple gotten into the Music business? Is a retail reseller in the music biz, or are they in retail? In my mind, selling a music player and selling digital music content at retail is NOT in the Music Business. Producing content, creating music production gear, etc... but selling/distributing content is simply retail.
Anyway, that's the argument I would make.
Apple (Records) Corp. apparently has not sued companies like Screaming Apple Records, Bad Apple Records, Big Apple Records, or Black Apple Records.
I would say these are closer to infringement than Apple. Apple Records likes going after the big fish (Apple Records also won, I believe, like 80% of the revenue from the Beattles when they dissolved -- leaving them with 4-5% each... by taking THEM to court too), but the complete lack of action from them on these other matters is damaging. (Of course, they are suing for breach of contract which is another issue.)
But I would ask the question: has Apple gotten into the Music business? Is a retail reseller in the music biz, or are they in retail? In my mind, selling a music player and selling digital music content at retail is NOT in the Music Business. Producing content, creating music production gear, etc... but selling/distributing content is simply retail.
Anyway, that's the argument I would make.
As much as this sucks for Apple Computer, Apple Music really had no choice.
If they didnt sue this time, they would be setting a precident that they dont care about possible trademark infringement. A judge in any subsequent case is likely to simply say "Well, you didnt sue Apple Computer over iTMS and the iPod, so why should I listen to your case now?"
I would wager that Apple Music is suing simply on the advice of its legal counsel. I doubt Paul, Ringo, or the estates of John and George have any say in this whatsoever.
If they didnt sue this time, they would be setting a precident that they dont care about possible trademark infringement. A judge in any subsequent case is likely to simply say "Well, you didnt sue Apple Computer over iTMS and the iPod, so why should I listen to your case now?"
I would wager that Apple Music is suing simply on the advice of its legal counsel. I doubt Paul, Ringo, or the estates of John and George have any say in this whatsoever.
Sayhey
macrumors 68000
I'm also betting on Apple Corp winning this one. Apple computer has had to pay every other time they violated the agreement, why not this time. Don't know why Jobs didn't settle this before the release of iTMS. I like the idea of maybe buying the Beatles old company and using it for the start of new area of business for Apple Computer.
Hmmm, if you know anyone with the last name Beatle, you should encourage them to sue Apple Records and "The Beatles" , also since Apple Computer and Volkswagen obviously have a business relationship, we should encourage VW to sue them also, yes I know the spelling is different, but it will still cost them money to defend.
Why not? All is fair in frivolous torts.
Why not? All is fair in frivolous torts.
JGowan
macrumors 68000
Beatles Ipod Desktop
http://www.spymac.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=1744&size=big&papass=&sort=1&thecat=500
Here is a Desktop I made about a year ago with the Beatles walking across Abbey Road, listening to their iPods.
http://www.spymac.com/gallery/showphoto.php?photo=1744&size=big&papass=&sort=1&thecat=500
themadchemist
macrumors 68030
I disagree...Too much baggage for Apple. Diversification is great, but when you lose your focus too much, that hurts your product and your sales.
Stella
macrumors G3
Apple Computers last had this battle with Apple Music decades ago... surely the courts must realize companies cannot be sagnant and not progress. Really, this case sounds pathetic and hopefully Apple Computers do not have to worry.
The lines between computer companies and multimedia has decreased so much...
BTW - When CDs first came out, it took years for the Beatles music to be released on CD format.
Beatles do not like new technology.
The lines between computer companies and multimedia has decreased so much...
BTW - When CDs first came out, it took years for the Beatles music to be released on CD format.
Beatles do not like new technology.
rainman::|:|
macrumors 603
breach of contract aside, which Apple's lawyers are going to have to invalidate, there's no case here... there barely was 20 year ago, when this happened the first time (sosume)... Apple Records needs to prove that Apple Computer deliberately acted in a manner to confuse consumers with the name similarity. Which is obvious BS. No judge will accept it. Especially when a name is a common noun, judges aren't too thrilled by having their time wasted by this type of thing. If Apple named themselves Zuzooniacorp, after Zuzooniacorp Records, then started putting out CD's, it would be different.
🙄
and dammit, don't drag the 10 commandments case into this, that is a TOTALLY separate discussion... all you're doing is looking insecure by bringing it up inappropriately. This is not the political forum. 😡
pnw
🙄
and dammit, don't drag the 10 commandments case into this, that is a TOTALLY separate discussion... all you're doing is looking insecure by bringing it up inappropriately. This is not the political forum. 😡
pnw
Re: A Few Things
I am a big shot trademark lawyer ... Apple may have a shot.
With regard to the contract, courts tend to construe non-compete agreements very narrowly in that they restrict trade and are thereby against public policy.
In addition, if the material quoted above is true, Apple may have a defense. Failure to police one's mark can cause one to lose their rights in said mark.
Hey Apple, I'll fight this one for you for free! It would be fun 🙂
www.trademarksolutions.org
I am a big shot trademark lawyer ... Apple may have a shot.
With regard to the contract, courts tend to construe non-compete agreements very narrowly in that they restrict trade and are thereby against public policy.
In addition, if the material quoted above is true, Apple may have a defense. Failure to police one's mark can cause one to lose their rights in said mark.
Hey Apple, I'll fight this one for you for free! It would be fun 🙂
www.trademarksolutions.org
Interesting... but not true
I know you're all having fun debating this story but... it's crap. Not happening. False.
The fact is, though, this is a non-story. There have been rumors of this for months now, and they're not true kids.
So why are Fox running the story? Tychay is right - Mr Friedman either believes 3rd hand information, or is running rumors as truth. Either way, you won't find him retracting this story in a few months when it turns out that there's no case in the UK High Court, will you?
...but by all means keep up the "they had it coming" vs. "those Beatle bastards" exchange. A few more posts from law students who want to teach us peasants what they've learned in sophomore would really help to keep a smile on my face 🙂
I know you're all having fun debating this story but... it's crap. Not happening. False.
The fact is, though, this is a non-story. There have been rumors of this for months now, and they're not true kids.
So why are Fox running the story? Tychay is right - Mr Friedman either believes 3rd hand information, or is running rumors as truth. Either way, you won't find him retracting this story in a few months when it turns out that there's no case in the UK High Court, will you?
...but by all means keep up the "they had it coming" vs. "those Beatle bastards" exchange. A few more posts from law students who want to teach us peasants what they've learned in sophomore would really help to keep a smile on my face 🙂