Slashdot Mirror
Beatles Bite Apple
blamanj writes "Apple Computer, which once got into hot water with the Beatles Apple record label, has been sued once again by the same group. Apple Records says iTunes and the iPod violate the previous agreement." Apple's broke their agreement in the past when speakers were first used with their computers to play music.
it didn't make any sense in the 1980s, and it doesn't make any sense now. Apple Computer is not originating any music in direct competition with the beatles. it's a shakedown, always has been.
if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
I believe you are incorrect, Micheal Jackson just owns the publishing rights to the Beatles songs, not the actual recorded songs. see
He sold most of them back a few years ago. Paul McCartney owns most of them now.
Obveously if your buying music from Apple you know who your dealing with right?
I don't actually exist.
I read in further posts down that Michael Jackson no longer owns the rights to the Beatles music. If they are correct, please pardon my error on this point.
Michael Jackson bought the rights to the library of songs. This has nothing to do with those or him.
Apple Corps - after the music library was transferred to other companies - owns the Apple trademark in US, UK, Switzerland for music production and manages all subsequent performances of the partners- Paul, RIngo, George and Yoko - from that point on. Those four (actually through their reps including Yoko) hold 25% of the corporation.
Apple Corps has subsidiaries including Apple Records CA, Apple Records NY, Apple Music Publishing, Apple Films, Python Music, Maclen Music, & Subafilms.
They went thru this when the put the Ensoniq chip in the IIGS.
They have something of a point on the trademark confusion if AAPL continues to use "AppleMusic", but the consensus is (though they do not disclose actual earnings) is that Apple Corps loses money most years, so this could be a fishing expedition for some no-work income. Memo to Darl McBride...
I bet this could be ironed out over a long lunch by reasonable people.
And/or (duh) they could release their records since the end of the Beatles library to ITMS and make some money from it as well as sales.
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
Sosumi.'snd ' was in Mac OS 7.0. The Power Macintosh computers didn't come out until well into the 7.2 cycle.
Will I retire or break 10K?
Not true. He went 50/50 with Sony music in purchasing them. He has since used his share as collateral with some loans he has taken out from Sony. Sony are licking their chops because there's no way MJ is going to pay off what he owes. Eventually (whenever they decide to call in the loan) Sony will own 'em all. But, as of right now MJ still has a 50% stake in them.
Buy the company outright (not buying any shares from the CEO of Apple Music if they can help it). Then kill the company. Close the doors, liquidate the assets, lay off everybody.
Mr. Happy CEO of Apple Music is suddenly homeless living on the street.
Thus perish all enemies of progress!
This whole situation is bullshit, Nobody on earth is going to confuse Apple Computer Inc. with Apple Corps Ltd. So the trademark point should be moot.
It's not a trademark battle. Apple Computer signed a binding agreement that promised that they'd stay out of the music business.
Shortsighted, but still a legal contract.
I also meant to say I think MJ/Sony only own the Beatles' earlier songs. I believe the later ones are owned by Paul and Yoko (but I could be wrong about this).
you forgot to mention why - the other two models at the time were codenamed "cold fusion" and "piltdown man"
sagan was pissed at being associated with a fraud and a failure (so far) so he sued.
he also sued after he heard the name was changed to BHA, for libel.
i even had a Sagan/BHA PPC, in fact its still in my closet...
turn up the jukebox and tell me a lie
Correction, my mouse got nasty, list is to read:
(2003) Beatles Anthology DVD release (#1 dvd charts)
(2001)George Harrison's "All Things Must Pass" re-release, also owned by Apple Records.
(2000) - Imagine (John Lennon) remastered
(2000)Beatles "1" CD release , over 30,000,000 copies sold.
(1999) Beatles "Yellow Submarine" DVD cartoon and CD/LP re-issue (Remastered)
1998 - "White Album" limited edition (big apple records label on this one!)
1996 - Beatles Anthology 3
1996 - George Harrison "Electronic Sound"
1995 - Beatles Anthology 2
1995 - Ringo Starr CD Apple CDPAS 10002 Beaucoup Of Blues
1995 - Beatles Anthology 1
1994 - Beatles "Live at the BBC"
6/92 George Harrison CD Apple CDSAPCOR 1 Wonderwall Music
27/01/92 George Harrison CD Apple CDPAS 10006 Living in the Material World
27/01/92 George Harrison CD Apple CDPAS 10008 Dark Horse
27/01/92 George Harrison CD Apple CDPAS 10009 Extra Texture - Read All About
1991 - Magic Christian Music 1970
18/05/87 George Harrison CD Apple CDS 7 46688 2 All Things Must Pass
18/05/87 George Harrison CD Apple CDS 7 46688 2 All Things Must Pass
26/05/87 John Lennon CD Apple CDP 7 46641 2 Imagine
4/08/87 Beatles CD Apple CDP 7 46443 8 White Album
19/10/87 Beatles CD Apple CDP 7 46446 8 Abbey Road
19/10/87 Beatles CD Apple CDP 7 46447 8 Let It Be
Mind you keep in mind many of the above 'parlophone' records of any product created by Beatles during the Apple days are also owned by Apple.. and they have a hand in the penny jar for those too!
Interesting
Hoist Number One and Number Six.
The origin of sosumi (at least the name) came about from a complaint by Microsoft that the sound sounded too much like a sound they used in Windows.
Apple renamed the sound (but left the sound the same) to sosumi in response.
This occured long before the Carl Sagan scandal. What a putz! I'd be honored to have someone CODENAME a project after me (not a marketable name, a CODENAME).
Um, Wrong DUMBASS, Apple Computers AGREED to the terms of the settlement. They are not honoring their end of the bargain....its called BREECH OF CONTRACT. Plain and simple. You will see Apple Computers have to pay to settle this breech on their part. As it should be. Had Apple had to make an agreement with you (on anything) and they didnt honor it you would be the one sueing and winning. Apple may be one of your pet computer companies and may even have most favored computer company status with you, but they are still in the wrong and thus must pay the piper. And no the situation is not Bullshit....its called Apple Corps was kind enough and reasonable enough to let Apple Computer license use of the name. Since Apple Computer seems to have forgotten all that they have committed to, the courts will gladly remind them.
. I love the sound of burning women and screaming rubber....
" The Beatles don't control Apple Records anymore. I believe that EMI controls Apple."
I belive Micheal Jackson controls all the beatles works. So I would say he is sueing Apple.
IE: A fruit is sueing another fruit.
No, it's "ringo". "Ingo" is a word that means undergound slang or jargon.
What if your name was used as the code name for one of three big computer models being worked on. The other two are named after well-known hoaxes and examples of bad science. You are a famous scientist.
:P
This is what happened. Carl Sagan was the 7100, the mid-range in the first three models that used the then-new PowerPC. The 6100 and 8100 were called Cold Fusion and PDM, which stood for Piltdown Man (a faked "missing link" fossil, if you don't know). It's entirely possible you'd still be honored (I think if it were me I'd just laugh), but I can understand why Sagan was upset.
If you know all this already, sorry, consider it as extra information for the others.
Mod down posts with a "Free Mac Mini/iPod" sig, they're spam!
It's true that "ringo" means Apple. However, not only can you not directly write "Starr" in Japanese (the closest you can come is "sutaa" or "sutaru"), nothing like it means "sauce," so far as I know. Generally, when a Japanese person wants to say "sauce," they say "soosu", (and that's a long "o", not an "u" sound). They pronounce it pretty much like we do. It's a loan word.
I will admit that it's possible that there's a Japanese word I don't know that means "sauce" and sounds like "Starr," but if so, I don't think it's a common one.
Dan Aris
Fun. Free. Online. RPG. BattleMaster.
sure they knew. the second system beep developed for the mac (after "sysbeep") was called "sosumi" - which is pronounced "so sue me". it was in direct reference to apple records and the whole "can't make music" clause.
2 1337 4 u!
The thing is, when Apple Corps first sued Apple Computer over the Apple trademark, Apple Corps was by far the better known and Apple Computer was this wierd little company producing expensive little 8-bit computers that most people couldn't figure a use for,
As part of the settlement of that lawsuit, Apple Computer agreed not to sell music. It's that settlement agreement -- a contract -- that Apple Corps is charging Apple Computer with violating.
Sure, today Apple Corps probably wouldn't stand much chance in a trademark suit against Apple Computer, even if they did have the trademark first. But that's not what this lawsuit is about.
-- Alastair
Apple went after Zettabyte because they were blatantly violating iDVD's license. They were putting SDs in the eMacs and distributing them with pirated copies of iDVD. If you bought one of those eMacs you were buying a pirated copy of iDVD because its license required it to come with a Mac originally including a SD.
The C&D letters to the makers of Aqua skins were not presented for copying Aqua's look and feel. The first round of skins were pixmaps made from screenshots of OSX. When people generated their own buttons via GIMP/Photoshop/PSP Apple didn't go after them.
If you're going to try to make a point at least get your facts straight, not straight from Slashdot.
I'm a loner Dottie, a Rebel.
Granted that this case is about contract law, what you have said actually demonstrates that Apple Corps are not being frivolous. If an average 20 year old is unaware that Apple Corp exists, they may well assume that various CDs they find in their local CD shop are distributed by Apple Computer. If customers then phone Apple Computer about new CD releases, etc this is not good for Apple Corp.
Apple Logos Dispute Settled
LONDON (AP)
Saturday, October 12, 1991
A multimillion dollar trademark battle between Apple Computer Inc. and the Beatles' Apple Corps holding company over their similar corporate logos has ended with an out-of-court settlement.
Apple Corps, formed by the Beatles in 1963 to manage their music rights, accused Apple Computer of violating a 1981 agreement by using its apple logo on music-synthesizing equipment.
Apple Computer's logo features a horizontally striped apple with a bite out of it and a leaf on top, while the Apple Corp logo is an apple with a stalk on top.
The two-year-old dispute centered on Apple Computer's musical instrument digital interface or Midi. Apple Corps contended the personal computer maker had agreed to use the apple logo only on computer equipment in order to avoid interfering with the British company's music business.
Gordon Pollock, a lawyer for Apple Corps, said in the High Court on Friday that the companies had reached an amicable settlement.
Apple Corps sued Apple Computer in the court last Oct. 29. "It has been a long, hard road," Pollock said. He said the terms of the settlement were confidential.
The San Francisco Chronicle cited one report that it said called for Apple Computer to pay $29 million. The newspaper did not reveal the source of the report.
Apple Computer, based in Cupertino, Calif., disclosed in July that it had put about $38 million in reserve to settle the litigation.
Apple Corps is owned by the three surviving members of the Beatles Paul McCartney, George Harrison and Ringo Starr and by the estate of John Lennon, who was shot to death in New York in December 1980.
London news reports said the case cost the two companies an estimated 7 million pounds ($11.9 million) in lawyers' fees and other costs.
Apple Corps was asking for a worldwide ban on the use of the Apple Computer logo on music-synthesizing equipment designed by Apple Computer.
Lawyers for Apple Computer argued that the agreement was unenforceable and that Apple Corps' claim violated the 1957 Treaty of Rome that set up the European Common Market.
--
Read the EFF's Fair Use FAQ
Whacko had the rights to most of the lyrics a while back, but sold them to Sony.
The way music licensing works is generally as follows
The tune / lyrics belong to whoever wrote them, and these are licensed to a specific publisher. Note that this may not be the label, it can be a seperate company, or in some cases, a part of a company (for example EMI have EMI publishing which licenses tunes and lyrics)
The record label in turn owns the rights to a particular recording of that music, be it a studio track, or a live track.
So whilst Sony own the rights to the beatles lyrics, EMI (through Apple Music) own the rights to recordings of those things.
And that's the simple version, it gets very very messy very quickly when band swap labels, perform live or the song writer moves between publishers.
And what URL do they give for iTunes Music Store on commercials? Why, it's www.applemusic.com
Join the Free Software Foundation
The Beatles don't control Apple Records anymore .
5 -artists-rights_x.htm h tml
Hmm I wonder if they ever did.
Have a look at these to know what I mean...
http://www.usatoday.com/life/music/news/2002-09-1
http://www.negativland.com/albini.html
http://www.janisian.com/article-internet_debacle.
In short: in corporate america the artists *PAY* the company for their work!
- "They misunderestimated me."
IIRC, they named a development system/OS or something 'Sagan' and he objected, so they renamed it 'BHA' which they would never spell out, though everyone knew it really meant 'Butt Head Astronomer'.
All things in moderation; including moderation
The lawsuits occured in the US. You can't find them in lexis because no opinions were ever released. The parties settled the cases out of court.
The first time Apple music sued Apple computers agreed to stay out of the music business and paid Apple music some money.
The second time Apple music sued was when Apple computer started including sound cards, i.e., had the ability to play music. Apple computer paid Apple music about 50 million for the right to include sound cards.
If someone says he and his monkey have nothing to hide, they almost certainly do.
You're missing a fine point: "Windows" may be a "common word" but it also describes a generic UI element, hence "Windows" is a descriptive term. Descriptive terms cannot be trademarked, so Microsoft may have a problem here (unless they can defend that the term "Windows" has become synonymous with their product).
"Apple" is a also a "common word" but it is not descriptive. "Apple" does not refer to anything in the computer realm, hence it is actually a very strong trademark (if "Apple" made apple products, then they'd be in the same situation as Microsoft -- but that's a poor hypothetical because a company that made apple products could never secure the trademark "Apple").
Apple is no danger of losing their trademark in the field of computers. Their ability to use their trademark in the Music industry is what is being challenged (somewhat rightfully IMHO) here.
I will correct that for you:
You break a contract, you pay for the damage. Simple as that.
Now where is the damage for Apple (the beatles?
The Sosumi sound is also the first note of Help!
Owning the copyright to The Beatles' music is not the same as owning the Beatles' record company. Michael Jackson purchased the rights to the songs from Apple Records.
Actually neither of these is true:
Michael Jackson's involvement in the Beatles' music has to do with copyright of the songs, which was owned at the time (1987 - 1989) by ATV music. ATV as a company sold all the rights to the Beatles actual songs to Michael Jackson (or rather, a company he ran.) There was furious bidding for this which also involved Paul McCartney and Yoko Ono. Jackson's company won it. For a long time afterward nothing was actually done with the ATV catalogue. It's important to note that ATV only owned the songs penned by Lennon / McCartney, none of George Harrison's songs are in that catalogue.
Also of interest: ATV owns numerous other artists works, not just the Beatles.
This site has a really good breakdown of who owned what before the purchase, and what it all means.
http://www.snopes.com/music/artists/jackson.htm
My point: NONE OF THIS has anything to do with Apple Corps., which was a record label and not a publishing company. Apple Corps. is still a functioning company, they just released the DVD version of the Beatles Anthology TV series. Very much alive and well (and making billions of dollars.)
There ya go.
ad
Because I can! [Brainrub.com]
I dunno if they actually sued, but the phrase "Macintosh is a trademark of McIntosh Laboratory, Inc. and is being used with express permission of its owner" appeared in mid-late 1980s Apple documentation. I have an old ImageWriter II manual in front of me (copyright 1985) that shows this notice, and IIRC the first Mac ads had it as well.
It seems to have fallen out of use with time, so I guess there was some sort of agreement reached...I'll have to check the manual for my PowerMac at home (which is 1995-1996 vintage) to double check.
-lee