Apple and Apple Corp iMix it up in the court room over iTunes.
Apple and Apple Corp iMix it up in the court room over iTunes.
All jokes aside, this is truely sad. As a fan of both companies, is saddens me that I cannot download my favorite beatles tunes from Apple because of some squabble of a name.
Company names aside, these two are very different. Once makes software to create music, offers software to burn music, offers technology to take your music on the go, and allows you to buy music and get it instantly.. the other is sitting on its name and collects royalities.
However, when iTunes started selling music, that is when the fireworks began. The ironic thing is iTunes may have been the straw that inspired Apple Corp to sue Apple Computer, it might also be its Saving Grace.
The details behind the court case can be summed up by Apple Corp agreeing that Apple Computer won't enter the music business. The intent of the aggreement was that apple would not create an environement to be a direct Music Label. This means Apple Computer cannot sign artists to deals and act on their behalf as a promotor.
This all was a little hazy till Apple Computer created iMix. This made it clear because iTunes could take music from an individuals computer and create an album. While this is cool, until iTunes lets a user take their own Garageband songs and upload them to make an iMix, Apple is still no a Record Label.
However much it would be cool to be able to upload my own personally created Garageband iMix, the act along would be a true breakage of the long term agreement. Till then Apple Computer should be safe and still within the aggreement.
All jokes aside, this is truely sad. As a fan of both companies, is saddens me that I cannot download my favorite beatles tunes from Apple because of some squabble of a name.
Company names aside, these two are very different. Once makes software to create music, offers software to burn music, offers technology to take your music on the go, and allows you to buy music and get it instantly.. the other is sitting on its name and collects royalities.
However, when iTunes started selling music, that is when the fireworks began. The ironic thing is iTunes may have been the straw that inspired Apple Corp to sue Apple Computer, it might also be its Saving Grace.
The details behind the court case can be summed up by Apple Corp agreeing that Apple Computer won't enter the music business. The intent of the aggreement was that apple would not create an environement to be a direct Music Label. This means Apple Computer cannot sign artists to deals and act on their behalf as a promotor.
This all was a little hazy till Apple Computer created iMix. This made it clear because iTunes could take music from an individuals computer and create an album. While this is cool, until iTunes lets a user take their own Garageband songs and upload them to make an iMix, Apple is still no a Record Label.
However much it would be cool to be able to upload my own personally created Garageband iMix, the act along would be a true breakage of the long term agreement. Till then Apple Computer should be safe and still within the aggreement.
Comments
The issue will settle again and if the parties are both smart the settlement will allow for the distribution of beatles tunes on itms.
My advise to the parties- Give apple corps library to apple itms for distribution 100% of revenue generated from the sales go to apple corps. In exchange apple music to pay a one time undisclosed fee and get exclusive online distribution use of apple corps library for a number of years. Huge buzz for both companies and $$ for apple corps
http://news.com.com/iPod+undermines+...?tag=nefd.lede
Redmond we have a problem!!
no apple would not then act as a label, hell apple corps hasnt signed any new acts in like 25 years so wheres the problem?
Originally posted by TednDi
The whole issue comes down to confusion in the marketplace. Apple corps (beatles) is standing on the theory that someone could confuse Apple computer for the record label of the beatles.
The issue will settle again and if the parties are both smart the settlement will allow for the distribution of beatles tunes on itms.
My advise to the parties- Give apple corps library to apple itms for distribution 100% of revenue generated from the sales go to apple corps. In exchange apple music to pay a one time undisclosed fee and get exclusive online distribution use of apple corps library for a number of years. Huge buzz for both companies and $$ for apple corps
Though I agree a deal like you suggest is most likely...I would prefer to see Apple Computer stick to its guns on this one. No one know who Apple Corps. is anymore. Paul McCartney is still living in a fantasy world where the Beatles are "the bomb"...they aren't. Great band? Yes. But they are over with.
What next? Packard motors filing against HP?
Originally posted by geobe
Apple and Apple Corp iMix it up in the court room over iTunes.
Do you have links to any of the court documents? I've looked previously and have never been able to find any.
The current case was filed in London. It contends from what I understand that Apple Computer has breached its original agreement and thus Apple Corps is damaged. The English Judge (who is an ipod owner) is deciding if he or the original US federal court should hear the complaint as the federal court in San Fran. Has expertise in technology matters.
I have no actual court documents. I am following this by various news sources.
this from Reuters
=======
Beatles' Apple vs. Apple Computer in trademark suit
LONDON -- Apple Computer and the Beatles' record company Apple Corps went to court Wednesday over who gets to use the fruity name now that the computer company has entered the music business on the Internet. The two companies reached a deal in 1991 after a fight over the trademark, signing an agreement that set out who could use the name and logo, and when. But the British record company says the American computer company broke the deal by using the Apple name to market its new iTunes Internet music service. In a preliminary skirmish on Wednesday, Apple Computer asked the court to rule that the full legal battle should be dealt with by California courts and not courts in England. The computer company's lawyer said that the 1991 agreement allows Apple Computer to use the name for data transmission services, even if the data included material such as music, which was within the record label's "field of use." The hearing, which is scheduled to last three days, coincides with news In the United States that rap superstar Eminem is suing Apple Computer on the grounds it used one of his hit songs in a TV advertisement without his permission. (Reuters)