03/29/2006, 2:30pm, EST
Wednesday, March 29th
Apple Corps seeks logo ban in iTunes
The case will decide whether the Cupertino-based company breached a $26 million settlement in 1991, where Apple Computer was awarded the rights to produce "goods and services," but not works whose principal content is music.
Apple offered money
Apple provided a brief statement about ongoing case to Macworld UK, saying that they have been unable to settle their differences over the use of the logo.
"Over a decade ago, Apple signed an agreement with Apple Corps, a business controlled by the Beatles and their heirs, which specified the rights each company would have to use the 'Apple' trademark. Unfortunately, Apple and Apple Corps now have differing interpretations of this agreement and will need to ask a court to resolve this dispute."
Apple Corps lawyer Vos said Apple CEO Steve Jobs had offered to buy the name Apple Records for $1 million in 2003; however, Apple Corps rejected the offer, according to The Wall Street Journal.
The reports also note that Apple Corps Managing Director Neil Aspinall, a former Beatles road manager, and Apple's vice president for applications Eddie Cue,, are scheduled to testify at the trial, which is due to run through next week.
Filed under: Apple
, 
, 32
, 
, 
, 
, 
, 
Top
subscribe to comments
for this article
iPodia Inc. Well if it catches on you heard it here first.
This case SHOULD have been a non-starter. No WAY is my hard-earned Apple money going to Yoko Ono...
Apple Computer's corporate communications director Alan Hely declined to comment on the case on Wednesday morning, but the company has provided the following statement to Macworld:
"Over a decade ago, Apple signed an agreement with Apple Corps, a business controlled by the Beatles and their heirs, which specified the rights each company would have to use the "Apple" trademark. Unfortunately, Apple and Apple Corps now have differing interpretations of this agreement and will need to ask a court to resolve this dispute."
All the headlines say "Beatles sue Apple", not "Apple sues computer company". No-one today has heard of Apple Corps. If anything, THEY are benefiting from Apple Computer's recent success.
The problem is, this stupid agreement that The Beatles "allowed" Apple Computer to operate a business using this fruit as a name & logo. The agreement should be annulled.
What a shame all the best Beatles are dead now.
BTW, isn't this a case of selective prosecution? There's a "screaming apple records" which is actually a record company - isn't that the cause of more confusion with Apple Records than Apple Computer?
I don't like abuse of the court systems, I really don't, but I can understand why this happening.