Apple sued by The Beatles.
Here.
iPod, iTMS. I guess they're none too happy.
Trademark infringement seems like a crock to me. Breaking a contract might be a problem though.
iPod, iTMS. I guess they're none too happy.
Trademark infringement seems like a crock to me. Breaking a contract might be a problem though.
Comments
As others have said elsewhere, there isn't a person on the planet that somehow gets the two confused or is hurt or otherwise screwed over by both companies having this name and even the computer one getting into music areas.
It's just legal volleyball and stuff like that.
I'd love to see McCartney (if he would/could even be the one to make it happen) just step up and go "you know what? Let's rip this silly ass "contract" to pieces...I love Macs! And all this bickering and nonsense ends TODAY. Carry on."
Sounds like a bit of greed at play here from a particular side. And, from what I gather, a certain occupation/profession seems to lie at the heart of this...
What about Screaming Apple Records, Big Apple Records, Black Apple Records, Bad Apple Records, Crab Apple Records.....those folks are all in business and Apple Corps are not after them.
They are recording and producing music.
"John and George are rolling over with Beethoven"
This just proves that it's not about music anymore. Just money. Because, of course, the Beatles don't have any.
The sad thing is, the current Apple will probably get away with breaking the contract. Just becasuse we like to see Apple as the underdog, they are still a huge corporation. Justice is all about the negotiation, and Apple can now hire the best (or worst as the case may be).
Then they can put the music on iTunes and use some of that 4 billion in cash. Plus they would get exclusive rights to the Beatles which would be a real boon to the iTunes Music Store.
Originally posted by Amorph
This just proves that it's not about music anymore. Just money. Because, of course, the Beatles don't have any.
Apple did not create the iTMS out of a love for music.
I think you're rolleye-ing the wrong side, here.
Originally posted by audiopollution
Apple did not create the iTMS out of a love for music.
I think you're rolleye-ing the wrong side, here.
It seems many people think because Apple makes amazing products that are like nothing else and aren't a giant corp (although they are pretty big) that they don't care about money.
The reason Steve is back is because Apple wanted it
Originally posted by audiopollution
Apple did not create the iTMS out of a love for music.
Who's talking about Apple? I was talking about Apple Corps' behavior. Criticism of one is not endorsement of the other.
However, if you want to talk about the computer company, Apple is at least making their money by actively offering products and services, not by leeching money from a currently successful company they bullied into signing a stupid agreement twenty years ago.
So: I hope Apple rids themselves of this parasite quickly and permanently. If Apple Corps wants money, there is no shortage of honest ways to make it.
He's right, you know. I only know of ONE of these two companies currently being worth a damn and actually meaning something to people.
Who's got the most bad-ass lawyers? The Beatles or Apple? Talk about a cage death match showdown!
The two most notoriously "go for the throat" team of sha...I mean attorneys, on the planet.
Somewhere, in all of this, lies a GREAT idea for a cartoon.
"Ladies and gentleman, welcome to the Cupertino Civic Auditorium. And now for our main event! In the blue corner, wearing the Levi's, black mock turtleneck and weighing in at..."
Originally posted by Amorph
Who's talking about Apple? I was talking about Apple Corps' behavior. Criticism of one is not endorsement of the other.
However, if you want to talk about the computer company, Apple is at least making their money by actively offering products and services, not by leeching money from a currently successful company they bullied into signing a stupid agreement twenty years ago.
So: I hope Apple rids themselves of this parasite quickly and permanently. If Apple Corps wants money, there is no shortage of honest ways to make it.
Apple Corps will eke a living out of whatever assets they kept out of Michael Jackson's hands.
Apple Computers may very well be actively offering goods and services, but Apple Corps administrates years and years of work by the Beatles. In the end, they are both out to make money. One from silicon and one from polycarbonate.
I'm not trying to make Apple Records out to be 'all high and mighty'. There does, however, have to be some balanced appraisal of the situation. Until we see the contracts that were signed years ago, we unfortunately won't have a clue.
I suspect that this lawsuit is required to keep the contract valid. If they did nothing, it would be seen as an implied dissolution of said contract. (That's assuming that the contract disallowed Apple Computers from entering the music distribution business.)
The venue for the trial will certainly influence to outcome.
if the tables were turned all you apologists would be flipping out. but because its apple being accused its bullshit
riiiiiight
Originally posted by Amorph
This just proves that it's not about music anymore. Just money. Because, of course, the Beatles don't have any.
I was thinking the same. Any music that is. Ouch. No, they where great, key word here is "where."
I'm hoping that Apple breaks the contract, permanently. If that means throwing a fair chunk of change at a bunch of lawyers fattening themselves on a defunct legacy, fine, as long as the issue is settled once and for all. (Sorry, applenut, but I'm not sympathetic to people who squat on IP, especially when they exist to prevent someone else from doing something productive and life-enhancing. Contribute or get out of the way.) Apple Corps will of course try to prevent that, so that they can get new Bentleys every time Apple changes their system beep.
The hypothetical of Apple suing Apple Corps is absurd (why would they?) and fallacious besides. There is more than enough proof that I (and other supposed "apologists") will not hesitate to criticize Apple for stupid legal action, so that argument can be rejected out of hand.