toggle

AAPL Stock: 509.46 ( + 6.86 )

MacNN News

The Beatles sue Apple over iPod, iTunes

updated 06:40 pm EDT, Thu September 11, 2003

The Beatles' band company, Apple Corps, has , according to Fox News: "The case was apparently filed a short time ago in London's High Court of Justice, but was just served on Apple Computers in California in the last couple of days." Apple has been sued twice before by the company and paid an nearly $50 million in settlements--initially for a trademark settlement on its name and then subsequently when "computers starting having music come through attachable speakers" because it had agreed previously to solely use its brand in the computer business and not to enter the music business under its brand name.

by MacNN Staff

(98)

TAGS :

industry

Share the Article

Facebook Twitter Delious Slash Dot Digg

toggle

Comments

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 06:48pm | report spam | close Reply |
Quick!

Get on Kazaa and download as much Beatles as you can, greedy bast-ahds. They are NOTHING without John and George anyways.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 06:48pm | report spam | close Reply |
The Beatles are...

elderly has-been tossers!

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 06:48pm | report spam | close Reply |
Pathetic

seeing how apple didn't enter the music business under their brand name, which is "Apple", they followed the terms. They created their music application under the name "iTunes", specifically "iTunes Music Store". Plus, this seems frivolous and ridiculous, seeing how Apple's computers and music software is used pre-dominantly throughout the industry.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 06:49pm | report spam | close Reply |
f*** the Beatles

Yes, they made great music. Now, they're just being old, tired, and petty. Don't they have enough millions?

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 06:50pm | report spam | close Reply |
There's an Apple records

'nuff said.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 06:51pm | report spam | close Reply |
what a load of s***

a*******. Thought Paul was supposed to love Apple? Just another chance to grab money. NO ONE and I mean NO ONE is buying iPods or music from the ITMS because they think its a Beatles company. they are NOT losing anything due to apple.

Then again Apple would prob. do the same if the roles were reversed.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 06:51pm | report spam | close Reply |
what a pickle

Wow. I don't know much about the previous cases, but Apple Corp. does have something to gripe about considering the last settlement said that Apple would not enter the music business. The iTMS I can see being angry about, but the iPod? Wouldn't that facilitate the buying of music that Apple Corp. produces? (You might say the same for iTMS) I love Apple to death, but I don't think Apple is going to win this lawsuit. The worst that could happen is that iTMS gets shut down, but I wonder if they would settle for something like a percentage of each sale goes to Apple Corp.... Hmmm... Best of luck to you Apple....

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 06:52pm | report spam | close Reply |
this blows!

Very petty indeed its not like that old azz company is creating anything new...

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 06:52pm | report spam | close Reply |
yup.. it's bullshit

no doubt about it... someone needs to hire a big dumb guy with a bat to wack their knees out

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 06:57pm | report spam | close Reply |
Computers Starting?

"computers starting having music come through attachable speakers" -- does that mean that they objected to the Mac's startup sound? That's terribly stupid.

If a federal court can rule that MS didn't infringe on the Mac OS' look and feel, then Apple can certainly prevail against such a stupid charge.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 07:01pm | report spam | close Reply |
Beatles sucks

Just give me to hate the friggen mushroom head Backstreet Boys from a few decades ago even more. What the heck are they thinking? I think they should also stop using computers and have a werbsite, because that is Apple Inc. portal. Bunch of bloody retards.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 07:02pm | report spam | close Reply |
Name piracy

Does anyone believe that Apple Corps. has ANYTHING to do with Apple computer or the iTMS? Did the Beatles invent the word "Apple"? Name piracy is all this amounts to. Maybe Mother Nature should sue someone for co-opting Her creation.

Frivolous.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 07:03pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: Beatles sucks

EDIT: It is getting late here...

Just gave me another reason to hate the friggen' "mushroom head Backstreet Boys from a few decades ago" even more. What the heck are they thinking? I think they should stop using computers and have a werbsite, because that is Apple Inc.'s portal. Bunch of bloody retards.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 07:05pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: computers starting

"does that mean that they objected to the Mac's startup sound?" No, they objected to the Apple IIGS, which had the same sound chip used by professional music equipment of the era (Ensoniq ESQ-1 and Mirage).

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 07:09pm | report spam | close Reply |
How many times....

Seems pretty crazy that they can be sued over and over for the SAME THING!! They sued and got compensated, now they should have no say in it anymore.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 07:09pm | report spam | close Reply |
the brits

This case was filed in the UK so who knows what the judge will decide. Plus the whole concept of the "music business" is a very vague concept. Obviously we can't see the exact phrasing, but it was my understanding that they meant Apple can't be a record label, which they are not.

Anyways this is such bullshit. The word "Apple" is such a generic term that I can't believe Apple actually settled with these bozos to begin with. They should have fought and won.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 07:10pm | report spam | close Reply |
The Beatles suck anyway

In the name of the Money, the Lie and the Holy Greed, Amen.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 07:11pm | report spam | close Reply |
Never Paying for Beatles

Will not give them a cent going forward. Greety freaking b*******.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 07:11pm | report spam | close Reply |
A contract is a contract

Jobs' Apple said they wouldn't enter the music business, so the Beatles' Apple let them take the name they already had. (Just try to start a company called Xerox, for example, and see what happens).

Jobs' Apple has now clearly entered the music business. Frivolous lawsuit? Hardly.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 07:14pm | report spam | close Reply |
this sucks

but you gotta wonder what Stevey boy was thinkin when he named the company Apple.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 07:16pm | report spam | close Reply |
No Beatle songs in iTMS..

Damn and I was hoping the Beatles songs would appear in the iTMS... No change of that happening I guess.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 07:16pm | report spam | close Reply |
sosumi

does that mean that they objected to the Mac's startup sound?

they did, that's why one of the original alert sounds was called 'sosumi'. looks like that's what happened...

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 07:29pm | report spam | close Reply |
*yawn*

Contract my a**. Apple Computers have ziltch to do with Apple Records, and I think the makers of Our Favorite Computer should buy Apple Records (I know, I know; won't happen). but this is, to echo previous sentiment, Bullshit! I do so hope the case is thrown out, but like a poster said, it's filed in the UK, so who the h*** knows...I just find it mind-boggling that people/groups/companies can sue others just for the h*** of it, and that's what this amounts to. I guess being mentioned in the current swing of news will keep the Beatles 'fresh' in some people's mind. This indeed blows, but I'm sure Apple will come to a favorable solution. I hope.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 07:36pm | report spam | close Reply |
double jeopardy

If this case was tried in the U.S. it would be thrown out because it is unconstitutional to try someone twice on the same case.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 07:42pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: A contract is a...

I heard that Fiona Apple is going to be forced to either change her last name or stop recording music.

These freaking idiots should be thanking Apple for 'potentially' making them cool by association. Buncha old geezers...

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 07:42pm | report spam | close Reply |
Oh brother

It's perfectly OK to have two companies with the same name as long as they aren't in the same business. This is why there's a Nissan Computers, started by one Mr. Nissan, and one Nissan Automotive. They coexist (though there was an ugly "we're bigger than you, we don't care if you had it first" nissan.com spat).

And Nissan Computers has no right to tell Nissan Auto not to make cars, and vice versa.

And 'apple' is too generic a word to trademark.

These guys need to STFU.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 07:58pm | report spam | close Reply |
Geez...

"If this case was tried in the U.S. it would be thrown out because it is unconstitutional to try someone twice on the same case."

Couldn't be further from the truth. It is unconstitutional to try someone for the same crime in a criminal lawsuit. These lawsuits are civil cases, not criminal cases... And even so, the previous lawsuits were settled out of court, so they never even went to judgment anyway...

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 08:01pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re; Geez

Finally, someone who knows what they are talking about here. Maybe all you other legal eagles should go to law school before you give us the benefit of your moronic opinions.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 08:35pm | report spam | close Reply |
Stones

I guess the Beatles are jealous the Stones are now available through iTMS :P

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 08:46pm | report spam | close Reply |
Have they filed...

...lawsuits against the other record labels out there that have Apple in the Name. Heck, the Beatles's record label Apple Corps is only a holding company now and not an active label.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 09:55pm | report spam | close Reply |
$#%$&^!#&*(!!

First about the trademark, then the Apple IIGS chip and now THIS?? Oh, I thought the iPods and Music Store was from the Beatle's company.... C'mon!

These folk (Apple Records) really have problems. Cash in on your on successes not Apple Computer's!

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 10:10pm | report spam | close Reply |
The suit is a ploy ...

... to get Apple Computer to buy out Apple Corps, closing the door on the past settlement and allowing Apple to exclusively market the Beatles' works via the iTMS. Such a deal would benefit both parties, sparking an upswing in Beatles' sales revenue and generating even more music revenue for Apple Computer. The suit is just to draw attention (free advertising). After it's played out in the news, expect an announcement of a settlement/buyout and another wave of press coverage.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 10:11pm | report spam | close Reply |
Fun read..

You guys crack me up. Thanks for the laughs.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 10:31pm | report spam | close Reply |
APPL buy Apple? No way.

Let's see... a group of the richest entertainers in the world versus Apple Computer. Hmm... let's see....

I think that the more likely scenario (from a monetary standpoint) would be to have McCartney buy Apple Computer - he can certainly afford it with plenty to spare. But all the Beatles have been burned before, so it's not going to happen.

But this suit is well founded. ITMS was originally AppleMusic.com - a clear infringement of the stipulated aggreement. All I can say is: good luck, Steve - you're going to need it.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 10:34pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: APPLE buy Apple?

Does McCartney have 8 billion dollars?

Besides, Apple Corp. isn't worth that much no matter how rich McCartney is. AAPL could probably afford it, but they'll probably settle.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 10:41pm | report spam | close Reply |
Apple computer agreed

They AGREED not to enter the music business! Maybe that was stupid, but they signed the agreement. You can't deny that entering the music business is essentially what they're doing, not so much with the ipod, but with itunes. When you sell music, guys, you are in the music business.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 10:42pm | report spam | close Reply |
Relax

This lawsuit doesn't have any legs. The Beatles are trying to salvage what's left of Apple Records, an arm of their empire that's been defunct for 35 years. It's quite likely that the judge will see right through this ploy (actually, it's much more likely that Apple will just buy them off, like they did last time).

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 10:51pm | report spam | close Reply |
Right Worshipful Steve

Please meet Sir Paul and Sir Ringo in the English Court - sort of like the judge walking into traffic court with a cash box under his arm! I do believe Sir Stevie is in a tough spot. That is he has to prove that Apple Computer is not in the 'music' business - whatever that definition may be. Perhaps they will be able to skirt this but I don't think so.

BTW why didn't Ford sue for using Jaguar? Perhaps they will since the iPod and the VW may constitute the thought of Apple Computer being in the 'Car' business???!!

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 10:55pm | report spam | close Reply |
or

Just think what Steve was thinking when they decided to make iPod.

I think he do not want such an unfair contract sitting in Apple's campus aany longer. Steve come prepared.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 10:57pm | report spam | close Reply |
Imagine

there's no lawyers - da da da di da di dum...

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 11:03pm | report spam | close Reply |
21st centrury?

So a computer hardware and software company in the 21st century cannot have software in the music market, because a bunch of old guys are afraid that someone would confuse Apple with them. Hm...Apple is a hardware and software company, Apple Inc. that is. I have never even heard of any other Apple. This is ridiculous. The Beatles is going too far with this one.

Maybe they just kept their "music" business because they knew that they would be able to sue Apple soon. It is not possible with today's computers NOT to be involved in music. This is plain ridiculous.

s**** the Beatles.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 11:03pm | report spam | close Reply |
sosumi

you know the sound "sosumi"? say it slowly.... "sooo sueee meee" -that's what Apple thought about Apple Music the first time.... and that's what they think now.

I cannot imagine that they didn't see this coming, and provided for it, either legaly or monitarily. This is no surprise to them. They *might* be able to win practically in court, though legally they're in the wrong. Though more likely they'll just pay Apple Music a few million - hey they sold what, 3 million songs? They'll sell more....

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 11:40pm | report spam | close Reply |
yeah!

You go Beatles, Make Apple PAY dearly!!!!

Woo Hoo!

They are more rotten than Microsoft... I just had to say that...

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 11:43pm | report spam | close Reply |
confusion

I know I thought that it was from the beatles company, I was shocked it was some two bit, or should i say 2% marketshare computer company wannabes... Sue them! Take over the company, throw Jobs out!!!

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 11:45pm | report spam | close Reply |
plastic surgery mate

they're doing this because sir paul has to pay for his botox injections some how..i mean hes not the springy little chap he once was..

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/11, 11:55pm | report spam | close Reply |
Steve you moron

Hope they get a big chunk of that cash that Apple won't spend on faster laptops . This is so funny.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 12:10am | report spam | close Reply |
All you need is Cash

Cash, Cash, Cash.
Cash, Cash, Cash.
Cash, Cash, Cash.

There's nothing you can do that can't be done.
Nothing you can sing that can't be sung.
Nothing you can say but you can learn how to play the game.
It's easy.

Nothing you can make that can't be made.
No one you can save that can't be saved.
Nothing you can do but you can learn how to be you in time.
It's easy.

All you need is Cash.
All you need is Cash.
All you need is Cash, Cash.
Cash is all you need.

All you need is Cash.
All you need is Cash.
All you need is Cash, Cash.
Cash is all you need.

Nothing you can know that isn't known.
Nothing you can see that isn't shown.
Nowhere you can be that isn't where you're meant to be.
It's easy.

All you need is Cash.
All you need is Cash.
All you need is Cash, Cash.
Cash is all you need.

All you need is Cash (All together, now!)
All you need is Cash. (Everybody!)
All you need is Cash, Cash.
Cash is all you need.
Cash is all you need (Cash is all you need).
Cash is all you need (Cash is all you need).
Cash is all you need (Cash is all you need).
Cash is all you need (Cash is all you need).
Cash is all you need (Cash is all you need).
Cash is all you need (Cash is all you need).
Cash is all you need (Cash is all you need).
Cash is all you need (Cash is all you need).
Cash is all you need (Cash is all you need).
Cash is all you need (Cash is all you need).
Cash is all you need.
Yee-hai!
Cash is all you need.
Cash is all you need.
Yesterday.
Cash is all you need.
Oh
Cash is all you need.
Oh yeah!
She Cashs you, yeah yeah yeah.
She Cashs you, yeah yeah yeah.
Cash is all you need.
Cash is all you need.
Cash is all you need.
Cash is all you need.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 01:06am | report spam | close Reply |
It Took Them Long Enough

How long has Apple had iTunes, iPods, and the iTunes Music Store? And these chowderheads are just now getting around to suing? In England? Which would be binding on a U.S. company how? (So big deal: yank everything Apple in England.)

I think Apple Corps is in for a surprise ... they're going to lose bigtime this time.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 01:09am | report spam | close Reply |
Beatles Suck!

Old farts.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 01:38am | report spam | close Reply |
MJ

Doesn't Michael Jackson own the Beatles catalog?

Plus, Apple is not a Music Production Company.

I play(ed) in a High School Steel Band, we had a CD, does that make me in the music business?

I ate an Apple the other day. Should I be looking for a summons in the mail?

Isn't our dear Apple Computer's full company name: Apple Computer, Inc. and the Beatles music company Apple Corporation? Isn't Corporation a generic word. So the only two things these companies have in common is the word apple? In that case, shouldn't Coca-Cola sue Pepsi-Cola over the use of the word Cola? (Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if this has already happened before).

It's not like I'm using an Apple Corporation computer. Or, instead of it being called a Macintosh, I'm using the newest Apple with the Lennon4 chip. Coming next week, the new iRingo, it's a cell phone that plays mp3's or m4a's for ring tones in the shape of a drumstick.

Not trying to make any points, just thinking about some things.

Just remember, a few years back, some farmer (i don't remember where) tryed suing the American Dairy Farmers Association because he claimed that Milk was too addicting and clogged up his arteries.

On a separate note: These are the same laywers suing McD's because it's McD's fault they are fat. People need to start taking account for their own actions

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 01:38am | report spam | close Reply |
Apple computer/ music

Besides from selling music on their ITMS what does apple have to do with music? Apple doesn't force it's consumers to put music onto their iPods. you can put audible content on them if you want. Is Apple Corps. also going to sue all the artists and music companies that are on the ITMS too? wtf. I bet that the remaining Beatles members, could careless about what Apple Computer is doing. It's the Apple Corp lawyers who are doing the bitching, guess they needs some new cars and mansions.

I doubt people think of Apple computer and Apple corp or the Beatles in the same thought, except for those who wish ITMS had Beatles songs (which would bring in profit for Apple Corps etc).

Perhaps Apple (computer) will end up changing it's name to "The computer company formerly known as Apple Computer" LOL

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 02:16am | report spam | close Reply |
they mean it

I don't really care about the Beatles and I don't have any record by them because I think they suck. I just searched a lyrics archive somewhere on the Internet and I found this little gem. It probably meant to be ironic at the time of writing but now it is not.

Money

The best things in life are free
But you can tell me 'bout the birds and bees.
Now gimme money THAT'S WHAT I WANT
That's what I want THAT'S WHAT I WANT
That's what I want, ye-ye-yeh,
That's what I want.
Money don't get everything it's true.
What it don't get I can't use.
So gimme money THAT'S WHAT I WANT
A little money THAT'S WHAT I WANT
That's what I want, ye-ye-yeh,
That's what I want.
Yeh gimme money THAT'S WHAT I WANT
A little money THAT'S WHAT I WANT
That's what I want THAT'S WHAT I WANT
So gimme money THAT'S WHAT I WANT
That's what I want, ye-ye-yeh,
That's what I want.
Your lovin' give me a thrill
But your lovin' don't pay my bill.
Now gimme money THAT'S WHAT I WANT
That's what I want THAT'S WHAT I WANT
That's what I want, ye-ye-yeh,
That's what I want.
Money don't get everything it's true.
What it don't get I can't use.
So gimme money THAT'S WHAT I WANT
A little money THAT'S WHAT I WANT
That's what I want, ye-ye-yeh,
That's what I want.
Yeh gimme money THAT'S WHAT I WANT
A little money THAT'S WHAT I WANT
That's what I want THAT'S WHAT I WANT
So gimme money THAT'S WHAT I WANT
That's what I want, ye-ye-yeh,
That's what I want.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 02:33am | report spam | close Reply |
Who is..?

But who is or what is the Beatles? :)

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 04:20am | report spam | close Reply |
Money

It's clear that they are just after the money:
But my Beatles source said, "It's OK with us if they want to go this route. It's just more money for us."

Also if 'so far' they've only got $50M from Apple, compared with the BILLIONS of dollars Apple has in cash, I don't think Apple will worry to much. They could just buy Apple Corps and be done with it.

To add insult to injury, Apple could then offer Beatles songs as free downloads on ITMS!

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 04:47am | report spam | close Reply |
Long time

Remember the first systems sound macs made? It was called sosumi (so sue me)... a challenge to apple records after they had previously agreed no sound would ever come from a mac. They will have been expecting this.

Since Apple computer comes down on a tin of brocks on anyone who comes anywhere near their name, brand, logo or imitating their products too closely, they can only expect other companies to do the same.

You can't diss Apple records for following this up... but I hope common sense prevails.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 05:30am | report spam | close Reply |
It's all Yoko's fault

Frickin s****...
Live 105 in SF had a Yoko Ono week last month, it was hilarious... They played snippets from various Yoko songs.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 05:37am | report spam | close Reply |
Not really..

>Jobs' Apple has now clearly entered the music business. Frivolous lawsuit? Hardly.

Nope, they have entred the DISTRIBUTION business! There is a BIG difference!

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 06:08am | report spam | close Reply |
Re: Long Time...

...Now the revelation about 'SO-SUE-MI' really made me laugh - I knew there was a reason I keep reading this board...

I also really appreciate how our laws help encourage entrepreneurial business activity & design innovation as illustrated in this situation...

Can U say entrepreneurial law... :-)

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 06:39am | report spam | close Reply |
Ford & Jaguar

Jaguar could not be used by Apple in every country if I recall right.

MJ did own part of the Beatles catalog but no-longer does I believe. Anyway, owning an artist catalog has no link to being named one way and having some other company use the same name.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 07:14am | report spam | close Reply |
Who the heck?

Who the h*** are the Beetles anyways?!?! Who cares about an old band that are long gone... most of us weren't even born when they were supposely "big".

Go back to your retirement home Beetles and take your Geritol pills....

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 07:29am | report spam | close Reply |
music business?

I too believe that calling the retailing of music as being in the 'music business' a little far fetched, like calling a petrol station being in the 'oil business', or a video shop as in the 'movie business'.
All these definitions refer to the producing or creating part of industries, not the retailing of gods or services
They may have been stupid about having a phrase as vague as 'music business' in any agreement, but every living soul, if asked, would come down on the side of defining this as the 'music producing/creating' business.
The iPod also is a device to play back music and other media, not to create or publish it. You might as well say that Palm is in the music business, because some of their organizers play back music.
Apple Corporation however does genuinely not seem to be in ANY business, apart from the lawsuit business. They USED to be in the music business...

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 08:51am | report spam | close Reply |
Re: music business

If the iTMS allowed artists to post their own music there, they could be considered a music label. But they're not - every artist has to go through a label. Apple Computer should win this one.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 08:53am | report spam | close Reply |
Re: Who the heck?

supposedly "big"?

Wow, you are ignorant. Does the phrase "Bigger than Jesus" mean anything to you?

Probably not, you sound like a little punk kid who knows nothing of the world.

The Beatles were HUGE. Bigger than any band today. Regardless, I don't care for them much, but I can't deny their influence and popularity.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 08:55am | report spam | close Reply |
Ford

I live near a Ford dealership called Apple Ford. Can Apple Corps sue Apple Ford as well, because Ford sells cars and trucks, that play music with internal speakers? I mean, when I first saw the dealership, my first thought was "Wow, the beatles have gotten into the car business to find new outlets for them to have their music played".

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 09:18am | report spam | close Reply |
f*** YOU BEATLES!

We all have our heads up our a**, our heads up our a**...

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 09:20am | report spam | close Reply |
MCARTNEY YOU DUMB f***!

I HOPE YOU SMOKE SOME BAD POT AND JUST f****** DIE!

GREEDY f****** LOSER!!

I HATE THE BEATLES!!!

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 09:21am | report spam | close Reply |
LUCKY DRUG ADDICTS

THE BEATLES DO DRUGS.

SCUM.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 09:23am | report spam | close Reply |
Open Wide Baby

Open you mouth Paul and I will piss in it.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 09:24am | report spam | close Reply |
DIE SOON PAUL

I will then smear human waste all over your face.

Beatles are a bunch of dumb f****** drug addicts that need to die soon.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 09:26am | report spam | close Reply |
PISS OFF a******

>>Regardless, I don't care for them much, but I can't deny their influence and popularity.

BULLSHIT

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 09:31am | report spam | close Reply |
Grumpy Old Men

I have never spent a penny on any beatles music, and NO, I have never downloaded even a single note.

I wouldn't waste my time listening to the c*** they call music.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 09:34am | report spam | close Reply |
Lack O' Skills

They could barely play there instruments. There's a level of musicianship with the likes of JSBach, Beethoven, John Williams that The Beatles never had.

Writing catchy pop songs is one thing, being a master that has the utmost skill on their instrument is another.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 09:36am | report spam | close Reply |
Washed Up and Pruned

Old, very, very old.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 09:37am | report spam | close Reply |
Beatles Need Geritol

.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 09:39am | report spam | close Reply |
Cool yer jets and MJ, etc

Folks: talking like adolescent wastrels is no way to drive your point home. Hasn't ever worked in the history of... well, just about anything.

To clarify the Michael Jackson involvement with The Beatles: he is part owner (along with Sony Music) of Northern Songs, the publishing house that owns the rights to the Lennon/McCartney song catalog. They do not own the recorded output of The Beatles - said recordings are owned by Apple Corps, which is an extremely viable enterprise.

Apple Corps has been raking in the profits since the mid-1980s, once McCartney, Ono, Harrison and Starkey settled their legal differences from 1970. All merchandising of Beatles-related product is controlled by Apple Corps, and they are one of the most profitable music companies in the world (up there with the estate of Elvis Presley, Rolling Stones Music and Madonna). Their real world value is far, far greater than Apple Computer, if you get right down to it.

Also, remember that Apple Computer has lost every suit brought forth by Apple Corps regarding the "music industry" agreement. ITMS is an extremely flagrant violation of this agreement: music distribution *is* the music industry, and Apple Computer is in the pool, feet and all.

Now, if a settlement can be reached that, say, allows ITMS exclusive online distribution rights for The Beatles' catalogue, that would be quite cool.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 09:49am | report spam | close Reply |
Know your influence

The Beatles have been one of the most influnetal bands of all time (to date, know one knows what is comming down the pike) To say that they didn't play their instruments or had any talent proves how musically inapted you are.

The Britney's and Christinas of today may not leave a lasting legacy as the Beatles. For a band that recorded only 10 albums and went only half a fraction of tours as Celine Dion today does, with still over reaching influence on pop, rock, country (yes that's right), and other genres has to prove something.

The Beatles, as alot of musical acts are known to be, were a bit inapte at their publishing and royalties managment to their music. That's how they lost publishing right to Micheal Jackson, who I believe sold a large portion to Sony Music now. Apple Corporation was started as a place to bring new talent to the music and film industry. Not as lucrative as the Rolling Stones endevours, but it was a way to start managing the work the Beatles produced and performed.

The loose definition of what Apple Corporation is and what it can do I believe creates the murkness of how other's use the "Apple" name. It is kind of like registering the word "the"

That is my little rant. So shut up. Nine Inch Nails is over.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 09:50am | report spam | close Reply |
Re: Lack O' Skills

Umm, are you sure you aren't thinking of the Monkees? John, Paul and George were all incredibly accomplished guitarists and vocalists (and in John and Paul's case, they were also quite accomplished pianists as well). Ringo was not necessarily a great drummer, but he was still a good one, and he fit in well with the group as a whole. I can't see how you could claim they had a lack of skills or could "barely play their instruments". Aside from that, they were incredibly talented composers (even George Harrison, with his songs like Taxman, Somewhere, etc.), and created some of the great rock albums. I'm not sure why you feel the they can't be compared to JS Bach, Beethoven or John Williams (?)..... they are all composers of different time periods and different styles, but all are responsible for some great music, and influencing the music of others.

I don't see why people feel a need here to knock on the Beatles. This involves their record label for one thing, not the Beatles as a band. And even if you don't like it, it seems petty to say the Beatles sucked, their music was c***, etc.... especially considering how incredibly influential they were in songcraft and creating albums that have influenced most musicians since then.

Regarding this case, I think it would be nice of Apple Corps would just drop this, but the reality is that Apple DID sign the agreement. It will be up to Apple's lawyers to try and fight it, but it doesn't make the case that ridiculous. This isn't just about saying no computer company can do anything musically.... this is about a specific agreement Apple Computer made with Apple Corps.

I personally love both Apple computer and the Beatles, as they both represent incredible innovation, incredible quality and complexity and beautiful creations.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 09:58am | report spam | close Reply |
Re: Lack O' Skills

Also, before any Monkees fans jump down my back, I do realize that the Monkees were actually decent musicians too (especially Mike Nesmith and Peter York, who were already folk musicians and such beforehand)...... I made the comment more as a reference to the fact that the people behind the Monkees TV show during the first couple of seasons wouldn't let them play their instruments for the recordings, instead using studio musicians (which was especially galling to York and Nesmith). The Monkees eventually got to play their own music in the last season of the show, and also in the movie "Head". Interesting to note that Mike Nesmith went on to be one of the founders of MTV.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 10:01am | report spam | close Reply |
honesty

To be honest, the Beatles weren't part of my generation. I can understand why people respect them and consider them great musicians.

However, I simply don't care about them. I know that's sacreligious, but I don't care. The Beatles this, that, blah blah blah... I simply don't care. Every generation has it's own set of "revolutionary" artist they look to as inspiration. While my parents my consider the Beatles as great artist, my generation (20's) looks at Nirvana and Metallica in that same light.

What is a shame is that both parties has so much in common. It's amazing that can't work together. Then again, it doesn't shock me that two HUGE EGO's (Beatles and Jobs) can't get along. For all the hippy, love, peace garbage both of these parties smoked years ago, they've learned nothing.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 10:23am | report spam | close Reply |
Regardless

"Apple Computer" or even just "Apple" is NOT the same thing as "Apple Corporation". What, do they think we're all complete idiots? Unless the name is EXACTLY the same, and the two companies sell CLOSELY related products, I see no conflict. I don't know how the law is written. But regardless, I personally feel that unless you are a complete moron, you can tell the difference.

Regarding: "Apple IIGS, which had the same sound chip used by professional music equipment of the era." Um, so what? Just because someone uses a certain type of equiptment does not mean they are in a certain industry. Early macs did not in any way have the same capablities as a professional recording studio.

EVERY modern computer can start up "having music come through attachable speakers." I don't see Apple Corp suing Microsoft. Does apple corp have a patant on making computers with startup sounds? No? Then why should the be able to block apple from creating that?

A computer with a startup sound has nothing to do with the music industry. Any silly electronic device can make a sound.

Either this case is completely without merrit, OR apple was extremely stupid in agreeing to whatever they agreed to (causing this case to exist).

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 10:34am | report spam | close Reply |
WRONG

"...ohn, Paul and George were all incredibly accomplished guitarists"

Ignorance is bliss.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 10:59am | report spam | close Reply |
Uhhh...

All your Apples are belong to us.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 11:15am | report spam | close Reply |
Lame

I've never been a Beattles fan. Now I know why. Bleah.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 11:23am | report spam | close Reply |
re:Regardless

Microsoft doesn't call itself "APPLE"...Bonehead! The Beatles were BIG. I mean REALLY BIG. Nirvana was the equivilent to the Doors. I understand people in thier 20's not being into them but the only act that has come close to the Beatles popularity is Micheal Jackson. And that was short-lived.
Ahhhhhh...I needed that.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 12:02pm | report spam | close Reply |
entertaining thread

There is some funny s*** in this thread. All the beatles-bashing is pretty funny, but tragic in a way, since The individual (living) beatles' involvement in Apple Corp is pretty minimal. No comments from Ringo or Paul have been made, just greedy Apple Corp lawyers. Then I found this gem: "Their real world value is far, far greater than Apple Computer, if you get right down to it." What do you base that on? In Apple Corps' biggest year (2002), apple computer made more than 20x their profit.

Nobody can say "the beatles' music doesn't matter to me one bit" because they influenced popular music so much that any artist you listen to has at least been indirectly influenced by them, even Nirvana. I never listen to the beatles, but I realize what an impact they made on the artists I do listen to.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 12:04pm | report spam | close Reply |
losers

they're all just a bunch of sorry a** losers. just like everybody else sueing companies over obviously dumb things (see lawsuits in the US for most pathetic examples).

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 12:25pm | report spam | close Reply |
lawsuits

Also, remember that Apple Computer has lost every suit brought forth by Apple Corps regarding the "music industry" agreement. ITMS is an extremely flagrant violation of this agreement: music distribution *is* the music industry, and Apple Computer is in the pool, feet and all.

Actually, I believe the lawsuits were settled, not technically lost.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 12:48pm | report spam | close Reply |
Larry H. Parker says...

Sosumi

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 01:45pm | report spam | close Reply |
THE BEATLES WERE small

I'm not in my 20's and never bought a Beatles album.

Paul could use some serious Bass lessons.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/12, 01:50pm | report spam | close Reply |
Public Awareness

I think this case is a stretch at best. Yes, I realize legally they have something, but seriously, who has ever really heard of Apple Corps as a brand? Do I feel that Apple Corps is synonymous with The Beatles? Nope. As a member of the greater public, do I get confused between the brand names of Apple Computer and Apple Corps? Not likely. Am I confused in thinking that Apple Computer is a music record-label? Um, no. Most likely if you asked anyone on the street who Apple Corps is, they wouldn't know the answer, and probably wouldn't guess 'the computer company'. However, there's no uncertainty who Apple Computer is and I think the public most definitely does not mistaken it as a record company.

So, this is more frivolity in lawsuit-land. Whoever is running Apple Corps now should just sit back, sipping their tea, while they collect their royalties on the work of men from 40 years ago, who are now mostly dead. Also, they should beg Apple Computer to sell their tunes on ITMS--so they can make more money off of those dusty tracks and lower their attorney's bills.

I believe is Sir Paul was running things there, this lawsuit wouldn't exist.

Perhaps the Apple Farmers of Washington State should join in and sue both Apple and Apple Corps for using their trademark, too!?!

- Paul Salzman

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/14, 12:07am | report spam | close Reply |
Apple -> Abalone

Here's a brainstorm about how Apple could avoid the current lawsuit.

Maybe, like Anarchie had a name change to Interarchy due to name problems, Apple could change their name to something different. ;-)

Since many of their recent case designs: have a mother-of-pearl silvery coloring; open like a bi-valve; even have a water association, Aqua; it seems obvious they should rename themselves another food, abalone.

Another bonus, alphabetically they will sort nearer to the beginning of various vendor lists.

:-)

To which many might reply with another food: baloney.

Or maybe Apple Computer could just write them a nice deal for the iTMS.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/14, 09:15am | report spam | close Reply |
McIntosh Apples

Ironic as it is I love McIntosh Apples. (The real fruit)

So sue me.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/14, 04:12pm | report spam | close Reply |
Apple is a sad companie

Its sad to see. Even the name Apple stole.. SUE them beatles, for evry damn dollar.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/14, 04:34pm | report spam | close Reply |
you ignorant s****

I am amazed at your stupidity. you whom bash the Beatles over this lawsuit. You are all talking out of your collective asses. First off, the Beatles owned the trademark Apple way before Jobs and Woz built a computer. The agreement between the two companies, was that Beatles 'Apple' would not enter into the personal computer market, and that the 'Apple' computer company would not enter into the music business. Simple, understandable, and agreed to by both parties. Apple Computer, has seemingly violated the agreement they made. It's not about the $$$ you mindless twits. It's about your word. It's about a legal and binding agreement made between two parties. In the agreement it indicated what actions would ensue if either party broke the agreement. I suppose you all think that Iraq was responsible for 911 too. Get a clue, get a job, get a life!

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/15, 09:26am | report spam | close Reply |
sniff sniff

This has Yoko's stink all over it...

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/17, 09:02am | report spam | close Reply |
my thoughts

I don't think it's the Beatles who sued them, it's their company. Yes, Yoko, Paul, Harrison estate and Ringo own them, but they don't give a s***, because they don't manage them. I honestly don't blame the beatles. It's apple corps. that's giving damn about this whole bullshit.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

09/17, 09:17am | report spam | close Reply |
by the way

those who bashed the beatles doesn't have a clue about what they're talking about.... they are the most underrated band ever, you idiots. I know this gets a little personal, but my god... the Beatles were never Backstreet Boys of their decade. They were labeled that way in the beginning, but they got fed up with it and they worked hard to become accepted as the true musicians as they really were. Please, listen to their to all (and I mean all) of their songs before you make any judgements.

MacNN.com Reader
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2001

0

10/18, 09:02pm | report spam | close Reply |
Long live the beatles

The men who changed the world of music, who convinced us that world peace as possible, who created beautiful albums such as Sgt. Pepper, or The White Album. How can the headline "The Beatles sue iPod" when really The Beatles (of whom now do not exist as a band at all, and 2 are remaining) have nothing at all to do with it, but that they were signed to apple. You may as well put any band signed to apple so at least people can hate something they really know.

You people who instantly insult the Beatles because of this, are the growing example that headlines can sway your opinion of something, and it seems that your opinion is simply "the suck, because theyre company wants to sue another company for stealing theyre songs." You download music because you dont want to pay for it, but if you don't even want to pay for it, how much do you really like it?

Show More Comments

Login Here

toggle

Network Headlines

02/15	AMD Radeon HD 7750, 7770 GHz Edition...
02/14	Cook hints at Apple TV set during Goldman...
02/14	Apple CEO: Kindle Fire will sell, but...
02/14	Cook talks labor, pre-paid iPhones...
02/14	Apple 'aggressively' pursuing new production...

Show All

02/15	AMD Radeon HD 7750, 7770 GHz Edition...
02/14	Apple CEO: Kindle Fire will sell, but...
02/14	Time Capsule stock sees delays, sell...
02/14	Readability iOS app delayed, Android...
02/14	Fresh rumors surface of Apple testing...

Show All

02/14	Apple attempting to disrupt Siri hacks...
02/14	Readability iOS app delayed, Android...
02/13	Apple launches 2012 back-to-school...
02/13	Sony Music caught inflating price for...
02/09	Apple explores environment-sensitive...

Show All

02/14	Refurb. 16GB iPhone 4, now only $259...
02/13	Refurb. Flip UltraHD Pocket Digital...
02/10	$380 off refurbished 2.8GHz Mac Pro...
02/09	iHome Dual Alarm Clock for Apple iPod...
02/08	Save 69% on SanDisk Cruzer 32GB USB...

Show All

toggle

The Beatles sue Apple over iPod, iTunes

updated 06:40 pm EDT, Thu September 11, 2003

Related Articles

Recent Articles

Quick!

The Beatles are...

Pathetic

f*** the Beatles

There's an Apple records

what a load of s***

what a pickle

this blows!

yup.. it's bullshit

Computers Starting?

Beatles sucks

Name piracy

Re: Beatles sucks

Re: computers starting

How many times....

the brits

The Beatles suck anyway

Never Paying for Beatles

A contract is a contract

this sucks

No Beatle songs in iTMS..

sosumi

*yawn*

double jeopardy

Re: A contract is a...

Oh brother

Geez...

Re; Geez

Stones

Have they filed...

$#%$&^!#&*(!!

The suit is a ploy ...

Fun read..

APPL buy Apple? No way.

Re: APPLE buy Apple?

Apple computer agreed

Relax

Right Worshipful Steve

or

Imagine

21st centrury?

sosumi

yeah!

confusion

plastic surgery mate

Steve you moron

All you need is Cash

It Took Them Long Enough

Beatles Suck!

MJ

Apple computer/ music

they mean it

Who is..?

Money

Long time

It's all Yoko's fault

Not really..

Re: Long Time...

Ford & Jaguar

Who the heck?

music business?

Re: music business

Re: Who the heck?

Ford

f*** YOU BEATLES!

MCARTNEY YOU DUMB f***!

LUCKY DRUG ADDICTS

Open Wide Baby

DIE SOON PAUL

PISS OFF a******

Grumpy Old Men

Lack O' Skills

Washed Up and Pruned

Beatles Need Geritol

Cool yer jets and MJ, etc

Know your influence

yawn