The Beatles/Apple....

serpicolugnut

serpicolugnut

OS X Supreme Being
Here's the rumor

Okay, everybody knows that the Beatles sued Apple twice over the use of the name "Apple" (The Beatles have their own holding co. - Apple Corps, est. 1967). Apple lost both times. On the first occassion, Apple had to promise to stay out of the music field entirely. Later, after releasing the Mac with some enhanced audio capabilities, Apple had to pay the Beatles $26 million for infringement...

Flash forward to today... Now Apple is heading in to the music biz full force, with iPods and the ITMS... Rumors are that the surviving Beatles are gearing up for a fight...

Based on the previous precedent, Apple (computer) really only has three options...

1-Pay off the Beatles, and try to come to some monetary compensation for ues of the name Apple. Highly doubtful this will happen... They got $26mil in the 80's, today that figure would be closer to half a billion dollars or more...

2-Spin off all music products to another company with a different name. Most likely scenario.

3-Change the name of Apple Computer to something entirely different. Highly unlikely, as Apple is one of the most recognized brands in the world.

Apple could try to argue that it is more recgonizable under the name than Apple Corps., and should therefore be entitled to it. Not sure how this would play out in the courts though, since there is a previous agreement and precedent...

What do you think?
 
"Apple music" is here for so long and doesn't use its name anymore for any advertisment... so I hope this time Apple will be able to continue it's business without any problem.
 
i think that apple should settle the issues with apple, and have them on the itunes store! i want some of their soooongs!
 
I don't think the Beatles should care anymore, given the fact that we all have Apple Co. computers on our desks. Oh wait, that's Apple Computers computers!
 
prolly to make their anthology they used iDVD and iMovie, or at least just iMovie.
or maybe Firestarter FX, it does wonderful things.
 
The Beatles are not a group anymore. New songs are not coming out of the wood works and yet a computer corporation has to pay them for a music service that provides music besides the beatles? Give them a break.

I think Apple will continue with its online Music Store and maybe put an end to this legal dispute.
 
I thought Apple settled the whole "we won't get into music" issue with the lawsuit brought on by Apple Music when Apple Computer released the Midi interface for the original Macs. After all, that's where the "Sosumi" sound effects came from...

-B
 
The Beatles are not a group anymore. New songs are not coming out of the wood works and yet a computer corporation has to pay them for a music service that provides music besides the beatles? Give them a break.
Click to expand...

But the Beatles holding coporation, Apple Corps., is still very a much a business. The release of the "1" compliation last year, along with the Anthology DVD is earning them millions. Not to mention all merchandising related to the Beatles. Just because the band isn't making records anymore, it doesn't mean the corporation isn't active...
I thought Apple settled the whole "we won't get into music" issue with the lawsuit brought on by Apple Music when Apple Computer released the Midi interface for the original Macs. After all, that's where the "Sosumi" sound effects came from...
Click to expand...

Apple (Computer) paid Apple (Corp) around $26 million to settle that lawsuit. I believe the original decree of Apple Computer staying out of the music business still holds, because the case never went to trial. Apple Computer just wanted to be done with it, and felt it was cheaper to pay up than continue with a long drawn out trial.

But now that Apple (Computer) isn't tip toeing around the music industry, and is trying to be a player in the field, you can bet that Apple Corps has a solid legal leg to stand on, and if they decided to sue Apple Computer, would probably win. The question is what they would want out of it... Apple to change their name (for the music endevours at least), or another big lump of cash...
 
Originally posted by arden
I don't think the Beatles should care anymore, given the fact that we all have Apple Co. computers on our desks. Oh wait, that's Apple Computers computers!
Click to expand...

Actualy, to my knowledge, apple changed their name from "apple computer" to "apple" a few years back
 
Maybe if they sue 'our' company, we should get together and sue then ;) (I'm just a little protective of Apple the Computer maker :D)
 
This reminds me of the WWF having to change there name because of the other WWF. Now they're WWE and they have to censor any old video with WWF logo's.

Maybe Apple can make a long trial out of it like the O.J. Simpson and Microsoft Antitrust ones.
 
Thats why the wwf changed, I was wondering why it was wwe all of a sudden, I thought since it was fake, they made it clear that it was *entertainment.

As far as the Apple thing, if it was that big a deal, I think they would have tooken the Apple.com url some years ago. Much like many of these other companies that had similar names and lost in court, I think http://www.Nissan.com was one. Although the site is still theirs, they can't use it, see for yourselves.
 
From what I've heard the lawsuit actualy came about because the original WWF was in some financial trouble and was looking for a settlement.

FYI... The organization in question is the World Wildlife Foundation.
 
On the stock exchanges, Apple is still listed as "AppleC" with symbol "AAPL."
 
Originally posted by Urbansory
Much like many of these other companies that had similar names and lost in court, I think http://www.Nissan.com was one. Although the site is still theirs, they can't use it, see for yourselves.
Click to expand...
This is the sort of thing that pisses me off, a bit. Knowing nothing about the situation I glean from the page that the guy's name is Nissan. As such I think he should be able to name his business after himself and Nissan motors be damned. Now if his real name is Uzi Smith and he changed it just to do business with he can't complain about what he got.

Wow, that was off topic a bit, wasn't it.
 
Nope. They did buy out ECW but it wasn't the reason they changed the name.
I would have rather had ECW replace velocity and heat anyday because it was a much better show.

They were getting flack from the World Wildlife Foundation about an agreement they made a long time ago. Just like this Apple thing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top