It's official: Apple and The Beatles kiss and make up

Posted:
in General Discussion edited January 2014
Apple and The Beatles' parent company Apple Corps said Monday they have entered into a new agreement concerning the use of the name "Apple" and apple logos, ending a testy trademark dispute dating back nearly three decades.



Under the new agreement, which replaces a pact from 1991, Apple will own all of the trademarks related to "Apple" and will license certain of those trademarks back to Apple Corps for their continued use. In addition, the ongoing trademark lawsuit between the companies will end, with each party bearing its own legal costs, and Apple continuing to use its name and logos on iTunes.



"We love the Beatles, and it has been painful being at odds with them over these trademarks," said Apple chief executive Steve Jobs. "It feels great to resolve this in a positive manner, and in a way that should remove the potential of further disagreements in the future."



The terms of settlement were not disclosed.



Last May, a London High Court judge sided with Apple in the most recent of cases brought on by Apple Corps, which charged that the iPod maker's user of an apple logo alongside its iTunes and digital music player products was in breach of the firms' 1991 contract. Apple Corps was ordered to pay Apple's legal bill, estimated at £2m.



Monday's announcement effectively ends the long-standing dispute between the two companies, which dates back to the early 1980's. It may also lend credence to ongoing reports that firms plan to further bury the hatchet by kicking-off an exclusive arrangement by which The Beatles' music catalog is made available through Apple's iTunes download service.



"It is great to put this dispute behind us and move on," said Neil Aspinall, manager of Apple Corps. "The years ahead are going to be very exciting times for us. We wish Apple Inc. every success and look forward to many years of peaceful co-operation with them."



Apple's Jobs has been courting the British rock group -- arguably the most prestigious name to thus far escape the digital music download scene -- to join his iTunes revolution for some time. Speculation on the matter reached all-time highs last month, as news reports suggested the two parties were close to an arrangement that would give iTunes first shot at online distribution of Beatles songs, including a three-month exclusive that would begin with the release of the Beatles' Cirque du Soleil project, Love, on Valentine's day.



Though such a deal remains unconfirmed, many Apple and Beatles followers gained inspiration from the flagrant display of Beatles propaganda during Jobs' recent keynote address in San Francisco. An iTunes pact, they believe, may be just days away.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 47
    You beat me to it!!!





    Finally the war is over and the Beatles are coming to iTMS! 8)
  • Reply 2 of 47
    tednditedndi Posts: 1,921member
    Revolution!









    And in other news. Steve Jobs uses Time Machine to go back in time India to drop acid with the Beatles and convince them that in the future they will not want to use the name Apple. He then implants a Microsoft brain virus into them causing them to write Revlolution #9



    Namaste!!
  • Reply 3 of 47
    "Apple Inc. will own all of the trademarks related to ?Apple? and will license certain of those trademarks back to Apple Corps"



    Apple can now push the "Apple" in iTunes which which can't hurt the business. I can't wait to see how Apple and Apple Corps move to take advantage of this new chummyness.



    Oh and what happend to the Apple Superbowl ad?
  • Reply 4 of 47
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by 128pluspb100siduo230 View Post


    Oh and what happend to the Apple Superbowl ad?



    It was a fake story to ferret out a leaker within the organization.
  • Reply 5 of 47
    csi95csi95 Posts: 38member
    Great. Now that is behind is.



    Where are the Beatles songs on iTunes???
  • Reply 6 of 47
    Special Edition iPods to follow?
  • Reply 7 of 47
    tundraboytundraboy Posts: 1,845member
    How does Apple Corps go from the originator of the Apple trademark to ceding all rights to the trademark to Apple, Inc. then licensing it back for certain narrow uses?



    Either the US should hire Jobs to negotiate all its treaties or Apple Inc. parted with a lot of $$$$$s.



    I wonder what Cisco is thinking.
  • Reply 8 of 47
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by tundraboy View Post


    I wonder what Cisco is thinking.



    We are thinking Apple records has no where near the $ behind them we do.
  • Reply 9 of 47
    Announcement on Monday. Beatles in iTS on Tuesday?
  • Reply 10 of 47
    johnqjohnq Posts: 2,763member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Strawberry View Post


    Special Edition iPods to follow?



    iPhones
  • Reply 11 of 47
    I guess the iPhone lawsuit will take us through the next 20-odd years...



    --Dj
  • Reply 12 of 47
    akacakac Posts: 512member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by tundraboy View Post


    How does Apple Corps go from the originator of the Apple trademark to ceding all rights to the trademark to Apple, Inc. then licensing it back for certain narrow uses?



    Either the US should hire Jobs to negotiate all its treaties or Apple Inc. parted with a lot of $$$$$s.



    I wonder what Cisco is thinking.



    Cisco: Oh ****.
  • Reply 13 of 47
    *yawn*
  • Reply 14 of 47
    as i recall part of the agreement Apple comp had with Apple CORP was that they couldnt sell iPods PRE-LOADED with music, as that would violate the agreement as Apple Comp. would then be selling music .....



    so now this new situation looks to me like we could get pre-loaded music on iPods... could have a lot of potential, couldnt it
  • Reply 15 of 47
    brussellbrussell Posts: 9,812member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Trendannoyer View Post


    as i recall part of the agreement Apple comp had with Apple CORP was that they couldnt sell iPods PRE-LOADED with music, as that would violate the agreement as Apple Comp. would then be selling music .....



    so now this new situation looks to me like we could get pre-loaded music on iPods... could have a lot of potential, couldnt it



    Hmm, one of the problems with doing that in the past was that your music wouldn't sync back to your Mac if it was on your iPod, because syncing was only one way. But one of the new features is that iTunes store music on your iPod will now sync to your Mac... So how many gigabytes would the Beatles complete discography take up?
  • Reply 16 of 47
    Im wondering how long it will take to sell a million beatles songs.

    1 week?

    1 month?



    Im beting on a week.
  • Reply 17 of 47
    Quote:

    so now this new situation looks to me like we could get pre-loaded music on iPods... could have a lot of potential, couldnt it



    It would have been nice if you could buy a pink iPod shuffle for Valentine's Day, select the music you want to be pre-loaded on it (love songs, presumably) and have it sent to your lucky recipient. The problem though would be making it so that it is not linked to your account.
  • Reply 18 of 47
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by BRussell View Post


    Hmm, one of the problems with doing that in the past was that your music wouldn't sync back to your Mac if it was on your iPod, because syncing was only one way. But one of the new features is that iTunes store music on your iPod will now sync to your Mac... So how many gigabytes would the Beatles complete discography take up?



    the Beatles released a total fourteen real albums in almost 8 years-stunning-(not including repackaged product) so much less than Dylan (whose entire catalogue package - with bonus tracks) is for sales on iTunes.
  • Reply 19 of 47
    wircwirc Posts: 302member
    Still no Led Zeppelin. Will Stevie have to have a séance with Jimmy page to get that to happen?
  • Reply 20 of 47
    johnqjohnq Posts: 2,763member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by mazzy View Post


    the Beatles released a total fourteen real albums in almost 8 years-stunning-(not including repackaged product) so much less than Dylan (whose entire catalogue package - with bonus tracks) is for sales on iTunes.



    And every minute of every day people are ripping used-CDs, friend's CDs or straight-up pirating from filesharing. The Beatles could have been making money off their old (pre-remaster) stuff for years now.



    I don't know a single person who (of those that even like the Beatles) doesn't already have the entire Beatles catalog ripped already (or a lesser amount of songs that they like) to the point where not even a remastered version will compel them to buy it.



    Too little too late.
Sign In or Register to comment.