Breaking: Beatles sue Apple (again)...

serpicolugnut

serpicolugnut

OS X Supreme Being
Well, we all knew it was likely to happen (again), but according to Fox News' Roger Friedman, it's happened...

Beatles Sue Apple

Anybody want to fathom what Apple will do? They've lost the previous 2 times they were taken to court by the Beatles, so it's a pretty safe assumption that they will lose this round as well...

I personally think Apple have to create a subsidiary (with a different name) that will handle all music related products.

The way I see it, they have four options...
1) Go to court. Not likely, as they have lost 2 times previous...
2) Settle... Not likely, since the previous two settlements the Beatles were adamant about Apple not having any products music related...
3) Rename Apple Computer... Again, not likely. Apple Computer is a better known brand than Apple Corps, and is one of the best known brands in the world. What are they going to do? Change the name to Pear Computers? Defintely not.
4) Most likely.... Spin off all music products to a seperate subdivision of Apple with a different name. Apple keeps it's brand recognition safe for the bulk of it's products, it's music products are no longer in violation of the Beatles settlement, and Apple can continue to dabble in the music related field without any threat of lawsuits...
 
I was under the impression that Paul McCartney and Steve Jobs were good friends...and seriously, who's EVER heard of Apple Music (the beatles company)...shouldn't Apple (Computer) win the right based on name recognition alone?
 
Originally posted by Dlatu1983
I was under the impression that Paul McCartney and Steve Jobs were good friends...and seriously, who's EVER heard of Apple Music (the beatles company)...shouldn't Apple (Computer) win the right based on name recognition alone?
Click to expand...

WTF, did you just seriously ask whos ever heard of apple music???
 
Apple's case: evolution! 2001

music has evolved moving more towards "online music" it was inevitable for a computer company to do this. its so stupid for an old record company to sue a computer company service/product which in the majority of the case has improved or will improve the future of its own sales, the beatles for example. the technical evolution has paved way for new laws and meaning of the terms which mabey havent been made yet.

This is getting to be purly base apon making money over sueing someone.
 
Kane, I meant Apple Music as in The Beatle's apple music...I'm fairly into the beatles, moreso than 90% of kids my age...and I've NEVER heard of it, and other than hearing about them suing Apple Computer, probably never would have.
 
also not very professional: www.applecorps.com
And this was on: www.applecorp.com - 9/12/03




Don't even bother looking at this unless you have high speed bandwidth because it was designed to be viewed from a CD. Also, you're going to need Quicktime installed in your browser and preferrably set it as your MP3 player as well. Once again, this was designed for a specific purpose and I'm just putting it on the web, well, because I own the company and I can.
Click to expand...
 
Personally, I've known about Apple Computer since I was 7 years old, I'd NEVER hear of Beatels' company if it wasn't for these lawsuits.
 
Why doesn't Paul McCartney keep his lawyers off of Apple? I was under the impression that he and Steve were good friends...I know he's (at least he WAS, back with Steve's infamous personal delivery service of macs to celebs) a mac user, so why can't he call his guard dogs off?
 
Kane, I meant Apple Music as in The Beatle's apple music...I'm fairly into the beatles, moreso than 90% of kids my age...and I've NEVER heard of it, and other than hearing about them suing Apple Computer, probably never would have. [/B]
Click to expand...


how tf have you never heard of apple music, its a HUGE RECORD label, and beatles fan would know it. BESDIES THE fact that a lot of the beatles cds out today have huge apples ON THE CDS
 
Did you know that 75% of hospital visits are indirectly related to stress? Calm down there, Tiger. Fact of the matter is, when you say "Apple Music", nobody other than Paul McCartney himself thinks of Apple Records. It's a matter of name recognition.
 
I have never heard of Apple Music, the record label. I am confident that the average Joe has never heard of it either. (That's based on my highly scientific lunchtime survey). This type of thing should be based on reasonable degree of confusion, and it seems to me there is none. I guess the Europeans are every bit as letigious as we are (I assume Apple Music is based over there).
 
Apple Music is iTunes, the Music Store, and the iPod. Apple Corps. is the record label that no one's heard of. I think they keep doing this because they start to run low on the $25 million they got from the last lawsuit (as in it's their only source of income). I'm sure all two remaining Beatles care a lot if Apple (Computers) has music-based products or not.

From www.applecorps.com

Home Page for Apple Corps Ltd
This is a placeholder page only for Apple Corps Ltd. This site is not live at this time.

Web and domain administrative e-mail only to postmaster@applecorpsltd.com.
Please note that this is not a general AppleCorps mailbox.
Click to expand...
What the hell? They can't even hire a web designer to run their website?

I like Pink Floyd and Led Zeppelin better anyway.
 
Since when did the Beatles encompass the entire world of Music?

Imagine retailer's sueing each other because one of them promised they wouldn't sell soap?

Just another reason why people can't handle competition.
 
The Beatles reputation could be damaged for being selfish. But what effect could this have on Apple computer?

what's the worst that could happen?
 
Originally posted by ApeintheShell
Since when did the Beatles encompass the entire world of Music?
Click to expand...

it was pretty much before you were born. the beatles were the undeniable top band in the land. even the rolling stones were jealous. and sales of beatle's music continue to provide fat checks in royalties (to Michael Jackson these days i think). their music has lasted longer and stronger than any other modern artists. the mere fact that you people who were born after they stopped making records (yes, records) know about them at all is testament to who they were and the effect of their music. apple records was cool way before there was an apple computer.

that doesn't mean i think they should sue apple computer, just that you shouldn't take your lack of knowledge about something as being universal. ;)
 
The only reason I know any Beatles songs is because my parents are both big fans; they grew up in that time. Well, close to it.
 
A point is plainly being missed... Apple Computers has thrown it's money and popularity at a music based product, which just so happens to be encroaching on another service/product/company going by the same/or similar name. Company law dictates this is wrong (well at least in the UK ;) ) and is contestable.

Because Apple (Computer's) product has become hugely popular, does not give automatic right to use the name over the original's (The Beatles). If this was the case, then companies like M$ would surely have a field-day.

Claiming Apple Computer's product 'is more popular so it should win' is naive... The Beatle's Apple company makes its money, maybe not as a vast network and user-base such as iTunes, but has a right to make that money without someone else muscling in on there brand name.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top