If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Fox News)   Beatles to sue Apple for going into the music business. Winners of American Idol should be sued for same reason   (foxnews.com) divider line 105
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

15053 clicks; posted to Main » on 16 Mar 2004 at 8:28 AM (10 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



105 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2004-03-16 09:27:33 AM
It's always been the iTunes Music Store, so no, it didn't change shortly after coming out. It was never called anything else in order to change. Secondly, zerplex is right. It was included in the agreement that Apple was allowed to transmit data of any kind in any manner. This clearly is what they are doing, and a judge has already agreed with them. I love the Beatles, but c'mon, give it up already.
 
2004-03-16 09:29:18 AM
I'd make a joke, but this actually is where "sosumi" got its name.
 
2004-03-16 09:37:59 AM


/the best
 
2004-03-16 09:38:11 AM
The reporter is an asshat.

Apple Computers? The name of the company is Apple Computer, Inc. No 's'.

"You may recall that I broke the story last year...." Umm, no, I recall that the story of Apple Computer vs. Apple Records got widespread press coverage at least TEN years ago, not last year.
 
2004-03-16 09:38:43 AM
No no no. Apple's iTunes is clearly an infringement.

Why Paul doesn't just buy Apple (computers) and totally market the hell of the intraweb music is totally beyond me. Its the new millenium Sir McCartney (well, its used and has a few dents and scratches, but its 'like new'), I suggest you keep up with the Joneses...

/what about 'Oprah's online music club'? ...shudder
 
2004-03-16 09:41:56 AM
Traveling Wilburys!!!!
 
2004-03-16 09:56:32 AM
Great Travelling Willbury's pic.

The Beatles, Inc. should just let it be. Let it be, let it be, whisper words of wisdom to your lawyers, Sir Paul, let it be.

/wants to download rare Beatles cuts from iTunes...
 
2004-03-16 09:59:13 AM
The only winners will be the lawyers.
 
2004-03-16 10:16:48 AM
This news is about 6 months old.
 
2004-03-16 10:26:44 AM
Poor Jobs just can't catch a break, first Allen and Gates turned him over and Xerox'd him now the Beatler get their chance.
 
2004-03-16 10:36:16 AM
It's quite simple, really. When Apple computers was formed, Apple Music (the Beatles' publishers) said "Er, hi there. That's our name you're using, guys." Apple computer said "Well, we're selling computers and not things that make music, so I don't think there's any confusion". The Beatles let them use the name because they promised not to get into the music-making business.

Couple of years later, Apple starts putting sound on their computers, and the Beatles' people say "Er, hi, remember us? I thought we talked about this", to which Apple computers said "OK, well, here's some money, we accept the cost as something we agreed would happen".

Jump forward a decade or so, and Apple Computers starts selling songs. Direct distribution of music, which is what Apple (the Beatles' Apple, that is) was formed to do. So, now there's the confusion over two companies in the same business with the same name, more or less.

Apple Computers knew this would happen. They must have planned for it, and taken the inevitable costs into account when deciding on this business model. It's not like the Beatles' Apple is saying "OK, you can't use the name", they're saying "OK, so since you're using our name, you need to give us some money, which you agreed to years and years ago".

It's not an adversarial or hostile thing, it's just business. Apple wants to use Apple's name to do business as Apple in a business where Apple already does business, then Apple is going to have to give Apple some money...unless, of course, they want to apeel.
 
2004-03-16 10:37:10 AM
Odd apple fact...

All Mac OS's since System 7 have included a system sound called Sosumi ("So Sue Me") as a inside jab at Apple Music.
 
2004-03-16 10:41:00 AM
I thought "Susumi" was in response to Carl Sagan (the Butthead Astronomer) who took Apple to court to keep them from _naming an OS after him as a freaking tribute_.

The "Butthead Astronomer" court transcripts are some funny reading - the judge got the phrase "butthead astronomer" into it a few dozen times.
 
2004-03-16 10:57:30 AM
Company A is mad at Company B. Company A sues Company B. Company B throws money at Company A. Conmpany A shuts up for a while.

Business as usual, folks.
 
2004-03-16 10:59:06 AM
I got the loot, Steve!
 
2004-03-16 11:03:19 AM
"Confusion in the marketplace" is a valid reason to bring a trademark infringement suit.

Anyone accidentally download any emimen or 50 cent recently and think they were supposed to be getting the Beatles? [Anyone using itunes old enough to know who the beatles are?]

Does anyone think Apple Computer is benefiting from the goodwill in the marketplace associated with the name Apple Records? If so - sue away...
 
2004-03-16 11:04:23 AM
In 30 years I have a feeling Eminem will be suing Shady Acres Retirement Home.
 
2004-03-16 11:05:04 AM
Those damn hippy beatles! They should STFU! I mean just because you own something its not like you ~own~ it.

...

hey, wait ...
 
2004-03-16 11:07:49 AM
Doing a little research, I discovered that the "Beatles" was a group that Paul McCartney was in - even before he was in Wings! Interesting.
 
2004-03-16 11:09:34 AM
Anagrammar, I did some research too. Apparently there was some very social Russian guy named Lenin in the band as well. I think he had a pet walrus.
 
2004-03-16 11:25:03 AM
Apple Records is entitled to recover 100% of their "actual monetary damages"...

and those would be....?
 
2004-03-16 11:41:04 AM
I guess there are two ways of looking at this. The first is to say that Apple Records is suing because it wants to extract more money from of Apple Computers. The second is to realize that they are suing because Apple Computers signed a contract with Apple Records which barred Apple Computers from doing things they now are, which may or may not threaten Apple Records. It doesn't matter whether it threatens them or not, because the fact remains that Apple Computers entered into a legally binding contract to not do what they now are.
 
2004-03-16 11:56:47 AM
Didn't Nike go on a suing spree several years back of every person alive for stealing their trademark word "Air (TM)".

There needs to be a new law enacted: It's been in the dictionary for 50+ years, please kindly fark off with your "trademark"...

in other news, God sues the Beatles for use of His "Apple" trademark.

/Nike - Just Sue It.
 
Zed
2004-03-16 11:56:56 AM
I wouldn't say Apple is in the music business. Not anymore than Best Buy or Circuit City. Apple is just a distributor of a product that happens to be digital representations of music.
 
2004-03-16 11:58:25 AM
As I said earlier, I don't think they can win this lawsuit. I can understand their trying, because really they have nothing else to do in their job description anymore. But part of the agreement was that Apple is allowed to distribute data of any kind, which is really what they are doing. A judge has already agreed with them. If Apple Records wasn't far-sighted enough to see that music would someday be distributed in a format covered in this agreement, that's their own fault. Try as you might to stop it, progress marches on...
 
2004-03-16 12:10:41 PM
If they beatles where acctually smart they would put their songs on iTunes exclusively and make 10 times the amount they will prob sue for.
 
2004-03-16 12:22:20 PM
The Beatles are like the people in Pet Semetary who kept trying to bring back dead things. They think they're doing good, when actually, their actions result in evil.


Same with George Lucas.
 
2004-03-16 12:33:35 PM
Look, they copyrighted the name "Apple music" and Apple copmuters decided to take it. You can't just take the name of another commercial product and use it as your own. I seriously doubt Paul or Ringo care at all, but at any rate this isn't overly-litigous, it was breach of contract and it is pretty clear-cut.
 
2004-03-16 12:34:01 PM
Beatles? Don't you mean Paul and that idiot Ringo? That's not the Beatles people!
 
2004-03-16 12:36:07 PM
1) Yes, this is old news. The Faux News article was written by a party reporter, covering the Rock 'n' Roll Hall of Fame inductions, who heard that the lawsuit was going to be filed Real Soon Now. Uh-huh.

2) Apple did indeed agree not to compete with Apple Music in the music field. I still don't think that they are, unless they had an online music distributing scheme all ready to go when iTunes rolled out. Record labels aren't record distributors any more than publishers are book distributors. How many people even realized that Apple Records still existed before this lawsuit? (Yes, I realize that the Beatles still reissue albums and songs on a regular basis. For all I know, they were reissued by Barking Pumpkin.)

3) If it weren't for iTunes, Apple Computer would probably be in much worse shape, as it's a break-even scheme to help them sell iPods--which it has, in spades. I don't know that they would have gone out of business if they hadn't broken the agreement (which they may have, depending on how it's worded), but they've certainly come close enough in the past to warrant some caution on their parts.
 
2004-03-16 12:44:56 PM
how much of this is Paul and Ringo, and how much of this are people who were never in fact, in the Beatles?
 
2004-03-16 12:56:03 PM
They *must* sue, it's a case of an experiment in trust gone bad - Apple computers have crossed a line.
 
2004-03-16 12:57:14 PM
Sue the fark outta Steve Jobs and the rest of the merry coontheads known as Apple Computers.
 
2004-03-16 12:59:10 PM
this is really old news, and don't any of you think that Apple had a bevy of lawyers in the UK and California review case law before rolling out itunes music store. You bet they did. I am betting that Apple has the law on its side and Apple Corp. is trying to make a money grab.
 
2004-03-16 01:04:38 PM
It's about time they sued them. After all you don't see Apple Corp. producing computers do you? NO. And if Apple signed an agreement with Apple Corp all those years ago then they should abide by what they signed and not try to weasel around it. Go Paul, Ringo, and Yoko!!!! Sue their butts off.
 
2004-03-16 01:47:15 PM
The Beatles will go. They will vanish and shrink. I needn't argue about that; I'm right and I will be proved right. Jesus is more popular than them now. I don't know which will go first -- rock 'n' roll or Christianity. The Beatles were all right, but their disciples are thick and ordinary. It's them twisting it that ruins it for me.
 
2004-03-16 02:12:55 PM
In a related note, Brian Wilson is suing the Beatles for unlicensed theft of his sound after 1966.
 
2004-03-16 02:48:28 PM
I think most people born after the 70's do not know what the heck Apple Records was or is. Apple = computers. I do not think jobs is dumb enough to enter into a contract in which he would get sued. I think he is business savvy and definitly arrogant.
 
2004-03-16 03:09:21 PM
If the Beatles don't cut the crap, I'll do to them what I did to John Lennon!
 
2004-03-16 03:43:59 PM
Next headline: Apple Computers to Buy Apple Records. (Apple Computers is profitable, has no debt, and has 4 billion in cash in the bank, so it may not be impossible.)

P.S. the Beatles are dying in "the good die young" order. So Paul, you are next. Ringo, no worries for quite a while...
 
2004-03-16 04:29:17 PM
Apple signed an agreement with the Beatles. Apple broke the agreement. The Beatles are suing Apple for breaking the agreement. Anyone who has a problem with this is a stupid retard.
 
2004-03-16 04:46:22 PM
We should sue the Beatles for making crappy music all these decades.

/my opinion and it's mine
 
2004-03-16 04:48:06 PM
And the moment IBM makes a porno distributing company, we're going to see some fat German filmmaker sue them under a similar situation.

/get it? get it?
 
2004-03-16 04:50:22 PM
I say Apple should just pay them off. With well over $4 billion in cash assets, Apple could give the Beatles one massive cup of steaming STFU.
 
2004-03-16 05:14:46 PM
/still waiting for the obligatory "Paul is dead" reference...
 
2004-03-16 05:33:57 PM
Why is this "news" to anyone? Apple has been getting sued by the Beatles ever since the first mac came out with a speaker capable of playing semi-decent music.
 
2004-03-16 05:35:52 PM
I thought "Susumi" was in response to Carl Sagan (the Butthead Astronomer) who took Apple to court to keep them from _naming an OS after him as a freaking tribute_.

The "Butthead Astronomer" court transcripts are some funny reading - the judge got the phrase "butthead astronomer" into it a few dozen times.
------------------------------------------------------------
The "Butthead Astronomer" thing was this:
The code name for the Power Macintosh 7100- this was an INTERNAL code name, used only inside Apple during development, and not in advertising or publicity materials- was Carl Sagan. Carl Sagan the astronomer got wind of this, and decided to be arrogant and stupid (considering it was intended as an HONOR to the man, and it was NOT going to be the offical product name anyway) and sue Apple. Apple promptly changed the code name to BHA, which someone told Sagan that it meant "Butt Head Astronomer." (and this probably was the truth.) Mr. Sagan sued Apple again.

As for the "Sosumi" sound, this came about with System 7- the first Apple OS that had sound RECORDING capabilities built in. Technically, this could have been seen as an infringement on an earlier agreement with Apple Records that Apple computer would not enter the recording business. (But by this time Apple Records was no longer in business!) And yes, the sound was called Sosumi (So sue me!) in reference to that agreement.
 
2004-03-16 06:21:05 PM
It's corporate assholes versus corporate assholes and guess who looses? We do. Lawyers suck. I hope the remaining Beatles die soon so I have a chance at enjoying their music.
 
2004-03-16 06:56:43 PM
Webgrunt
Apple signed an agreement with the Beatles. Apple broke the agreement. The Beatles are suing Apple for breaking the agreement. Anyone who has a problem with this is a stupid retard.


So, you are privy to the agreement? You know the finer points therein?

Didn't think so.

STFU
 
2004-03-16 07:05:05 PM
The agreement was that Apple computers would never enter the music business. They did. The broke the agreement. Simple.
 
Displayed 50 of 105 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report