Slashdot Mirror
Apple vs Apple -- Judgment Day
DaphneDiane writes "According to the Times Online Apple Computer successfully defended themselves vs the suit brought by Apple Corps." If you are looking for background on the case we had talked about it earlier. I'm just relieved that the battle of two bazillion dollar companies turned out well. Phew. And, of course, Apple Corp has filed an appeal already.
If you hate the laws, spend your lives trying to get them changed. Do not hate the companies that use the laws in their favor [emph mine]
You note that companies have 'almost unlimited funds' - they use these funds to:
1) Change the law to suit themselves.
2) Discredit / ridicule those who spend their lives trying to get laws changed.
3) Bury in legalities / court fees those who oppose them.
How can we not hate the companies that do this?
There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
I wonder how much the estate of the late John Lennon or other Beatles really wanted a legal fight with Apple Computer. I think they missed out on millions of USD in downloads from iTMS due to their absence. So was it really Apple Corps led? I don't see on which basis an appeal from Apple Corps will be successful. Let's hope to see the old (and upcoming newly digitalized spiffed-up tracks) on iTMS soon.
Rubies and Pearls are not what you think.
They were thinking of settling out of court, and it was going quite well for Apple Corp until, in the middle of negotiation, they broke down.
Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
>If I want to slap another stick of RAM into my machine, I should be able to without being a licensed Apple technician. You can, dude. Always could. Never seen a Mac I couldn't upgrade. Why do you spread this falshood?
Apple won out against the RIAA, Apple won out against France, and now Apple won out against the Beatles' old label. Despite it, every investor knows the truth: Apple is dying. Watch their stock price for a decline this afternoon in light of this terrible, tragic, positive news.
Yes, this is sarcasm. Except for the stock decline thing.
You cannot truly appreciate Dilbert until you read it in the original Klingon.
This is a travesty - not for the gain or loss of two billionaire corporations ...
... Naked album of a few years ago, wasn't all that well liked, but we fans bought it anyway. It reminds me of Eddie Murphy's old joke about giving a starving man a cracker. He's not going to refuse to eat because he wants something else, he's going to say "Man, that was the best cracker I ever ate!"
Why does everyone keep repeating this incorrect statement? Just because the submitter thinks it's true, doesn't mean it is.
Folks, Apple Records, Apple Corp, whatever you want to call it, is NOT a billionaire corporation. Sir Paul McCartney is a billionaire, but it's not because of Apple Corp or the Beatles. He is a billionaire because he bought out song publishing companies years ago, which is where the real money is. The Lennon estate was worth $100 million at the time of John Lennon's death, most due to investments Yoko made. The late George Harrison's estate was probably worth less than $100 million at the time of his death and Ringo Starr is definitely worth less than that. If you have any knowledge of royalty rates in the industy, you will know that the Beatles simply can't be making the kind of money some of you attribute to them. In my opinion, the Beatles and their lackeys have seriously mismanaged their catalog and the failure to put out "new" product (yes, believe it or not, there are still things in the vaults that could be released officially for the first time, such as the White Album demo sessions) more than once every 5+ years have actually kept them from earning as much money as they could have earned. They release material so infrequently that it sells simply because of scarcity, not because of merit. The last offical release, the Let It Be
I don't think there is any realistic chance of the Beatles (Apple Corp) competing against Apple Computers. Apple Corp likes to sit back and get paid. They don't like to actually do something to get the money and setting up their music download store would require real work.
This could very well be a mistake on my part in that I have never seen or heard of anyone able to do that.
Probably. Most all Macs take standard PC memory. Since almost the beginning. Even the first PowerMacs used a slight variation of normal SIMMs. Many brands of PC memory worked in them. Add to that how easy the cases on Macs open up, I get the feeling you've probably just never seen and played with a Mac up close.
On top of that, I thought that their machines had a temperature sensor that would trigger it to internally mark itself as VOIDED if the case was open and the temperature in the room wasn't low enough.
Yeah, not sure where you got that from. They have no special hardware in them like that at all. And, I can't remember ever seeing a Mac with a sticker on it to keep you from opening the case. I've opened up pretty much every PowerMac ever made, was an Apple certified tech at a store for a few years. They really have no clue if you open the case and put in your own ram, harddrive, PCI/video card, NIC, modem, etc. All of these devices can be bought 3rd party, and there is no rule that I've ever heard about installing these voiding warranty. We sold 3rd party hardware all the time, and told them how to install it if they asked.
There's a story at macworld uk and el reg
Quote from Apple Corp's lawyer:So - the fight continues!
There are shills on slashdot. Apparently, I'm one of them.
FYI, "Moron in a hurry" isn't necessarily meant to be insulting under English law. It's the language that a judge used in a case there some years back in dismissing a trademark-infringement suit, so it's an established phrase. This was explained in the comments of a previous Apple-Apple /. article here.
...whereas most PC users are stupid enough to think that using a complicated computer somehow makes you the smart ones, huh? :-)