Slashdot Mirror
Apple Inc. Inks Apple Corps Deal
Sometimes_Rational writes to mention Apple Inc. formerly (Apple Computer) has announced an agreement with The Beatles' company, Apple Corps Ltd. which settles the lawsuit brought by Apple Corps. Under the new agreement, "Apple Inc. will own all of the trademarks related to 'Apple' and will license certain of those trademarks back to Apple Corps for their continued use. In addition, the ongoing trademark lawsuit between the companies will end, with each party bearing its own legal costs, and Apple Inc. will continue using its name and logos on iTunes. The terms of settlement are confidential."
Certainly adds fuel to the rumors of the Beatles catalogue (sic) showing up on ITMS.
Karma: It's not just a good idea. It's the law.
A big hint was dropped during Jobs' keynote address when he played the Beatles on the iPhone. Everything about those presentations is scripted, certainly the addition of Beatles music was no accident. This latest deal might mean that one of the last barriers between the Beatles vast music collection and the iTunes Music Store has been cleared. Whether the Beatles still resist online distribution (through anyone) remains to be seen. They were a late adopter of CDs. Their music, their prerogative.
One thing a lot of people seemed to have missed is that the official John Lennon bus now has an Apple logo on the front side (and has for at least a few weeks if not more):
:)
http://www.jlsc.com/bus/
Image is about halfway down the page.
I wonder what exactly the terms of this settlement were?
One of these days i'm going to find this 'peer' guy and reset HIS connection!
they settled the lawsuit, which means mutual benefit. no court decision. and no complaining about apple inc. lawyers - and they lost last tiome anyway.
If you're even slightly more than a casual Beatles fan, wouldn't you already have all the Beatles music you need. Are there going to be people actually seeking out Beatles songs on iTunes?
There will be, yes. Me for one. I'm not even slightly more than a casual Beatles fan, I'm no form of Beatles fan at all. I like a few tracks that I've heard and that's that. I am, however, pretty curious and might well sample the off track of various albums. I'm not suddenly going to start buying the full collection, and I'd rather get individual tracks than full albums. I'm 35 - the Beatles never happened for me. I always new of them and there'll be many on here younger than me who know their music better, but that's because you actively sort it out. You didn't casually sample it, like I probably would if it appeared online.
Cheers,
Ian
This is one of many lawsuits that have been happening since the 80's (remember the Apple IIgs?). It's just a balance of power. In the early days, the Beatles thought that they were bigger than Jesus, and so they sued a little computer company. Now, that little computer company is bigger than the Beatles, and Jesus has an iPod.
Honestly, I don't understand what this is all about. Why are people making such a big deal about the Beatles being available on iTunes? Has everyone suddenly forgotten about this thing called a compact disc? You just pop it in your CD-ROM drive, run CDex to convert the audio files to MP3, then move the files over to your MP3 player! I've done it! It's not so hard! I actually slammed some knucklehead on Engadget who said that he downloaded the Beatles' songs illegally because he couldn't download them legally! WTF? Is this what we've reduced ourselves to? Are physical discs now completely taboo?
Ordering music online? I buy music online that's not on iTunes lots of times! It's called a "compact disc"! Sure, it takes a few days for it to arrive, but when it gets here I can do whatever I want with it, including rip it to MP3 and put it on my MP3 player.
I know, I know. iTunes gives you the ability to download individual songs as well at whole albums. Well, I'm a big Beatles fan and probably 90% of their most popular songs are on the "1962-1966 (Red Album)" and "1967-1970 (Blue Album)" CD sets.
But even if you wanted songs that are not on those two sets, in total we're talking about 13 original albums that were produced. Sure, that would cost a bit of money to buy brand-new CDs online or at brick-and-mortar stores, but what about discount stores? What about used CD stores? What about eBay, for crying out loud? You can get all of the Beatles CDs (used) for probably less than what iTunes will charge, and you'll at least have a physical, DRM-free CD in your hands! Yes, there are certain things where "instant gratification" is required, like insulin to a diabetic. But music is NOT an "instant gratification" requirement to survive! Is it really that hard to wait a few days for a CD to be shipped?
Come on, people! Just because music isn't available on iTunes doesn't mean that it's not available at all! It's absolutely staggering to see that there are actually people out there who refuse to buy a physical disc anymore, and even more staggering to see people act as though iTunes is the only music repository available. Don't you think this whole iTunes thing is being taken a bit too far?
No, this isn't flamebait, damn it, but it is certainly a question of the degradation of patience in this society when we can't wait a few days for a 5-inch piece of reflective plastic to arrive in the mail and we can't look in the phone book for used CD stores in the area.
The Overrated mod is for reversing inappropriate, positive mods, not for voicing disagreement with a post.
Okay. The Beatles catalog is in Northernsongs, which is de facto owned by Sony unless Michael Jackson starts getting some financial sense. (The financial advice he took from Paul appears to be the last sound financial advice he ever took.) Apple Corp. does own something valuable, though--the Beatles recordings.
To put it another way: if you wanted to record a cover of a Beatles song, or play one in public, you would need to contact Sony, Northernsongs division. If you wanted to use an actual Beatles recording--that is, one actually made by the Beatles--then you would need to contact Apple Corp.
There is a fine line between recklessness and courage... -- Paul McCartney
The Beatles: "You Never give Me Your Money"
Steve Jobs: "We Can Work it Out."
Beatles: "Don't Let Me Down"
Jobs: "It Won't Be Long"
Beatles: "Money, That's What I Want"
Jobs: "Come and Get It"
Beatles: "I Feel Fine"
"Give Peace a Chance" and "Imagine" are not by the Beatles--but they are Apple Records productions. Apple Records does John Lennon's solo work, too.
There is a fine line between recklessness and courage... -- Paul McCartney
This is potentially huge, as Apple inc. now seems to own the trademark and will license it back to Apple Corps Ltd. Unless I am missing something, this means that Apple can sign bands directly, cutting out the record companies which collect 69 cents on every iTunes dollar.
As online music sales surpass physical media, this has the potential of allowing Apple to take over the record industry. I doubt they want to, but it gives them a great deal of opportunity to expand their iTunes business.
.... All you need is love.
And $8.7 Billion USD in cash. But that's a lot harder to rhyme.
"Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
It's a funny thing, I always used to assume that I'd be an Elvis man, not a Beatles man, you know, the same way that I'm a Kirk man, not a Picard man, and so on. There are some questions that you are on one side, not the other.
And then, thanks to my ipod, I tried listening to Elvis properly, and found to my surprise that I didn't like him that much.
So, logically, I must like the Beatles... and when I listened to them properly, it turns out I do!
One of the interesting things about listening to them properly, is that your first thought is "this sounds so modern" and then your second thought is "ah, because everyone in the world has ripped them off!"
~~~~~ BigLig2? You mean there's another one of me?