“A battle over name rights between the Apple computer company and Apple Corps, the Beatles
Previous Post
MusicMatch launches iTunes-like online music store42 Comments
Reader Feedback
Apple pitches its Vision Pro spatial computer to businesses
Apple is touting its Vision Pro spatial computing headset which was made available in the U.S. earlier this year to businesses…
Apple accused of scrapping usable devices
Even if the iPhones looked good enough for resale, Apple’s contract with its recycler GEEP explicitly required that every product it sent be…
Free ‘Delta’ Nintendo emulator launches in Apple’s App Store
The “Delta” Nintendo game emulator launched Wednesday as one of the first officially approved iOS apps to emulate Nintendo consoles…
Apple TV+ sets July 10th premiere for ‘Sunny’ series starring Rashida Jones
Apple TV+ announced Thursday that “Sunny,” its 10-episode mystery thriller with a darkly comic bent starring Rashida Jones, is set to…
Major Apple supplier TSMC expects Q2 sales to jump on ‘insatiable’ AI demand
Major Apple supplier TSMC, the world’s largest chipmaker and a major Apple and Nvidia supplier, forecast second-quarter sales may…
I love the Beatles too…I just love Apple Computers more.
It’s unfortunate that the supposedely ‘free’ and ‘enlightened’ generation is stooping to such lows over a name. And all because of money! Of course! As usual it’s the lawyers who make out like bandits. 🙁
The Beattles should let this matter rest and go back to digging for 8mm home movies from their archives that they can sell to the television stations.
If Apple Computer was recording their own music albums that could possibly be mistaken for Beatles albums, then I could understand this frivolous lawsuit.
Very sad.
I’m taking bets on whether the lawsuit is resolved before or after the Beatles’ reunion:
http://www.zeldman.com/adgraveyard/2.html
(yeah, that need a bit of updating)
the whole thing is disgusting. F*ck “Sir” Paul McCartney, he was always only about money. No soul, and Yoko Ono should know better. It’s a disgrace to John Lennon…
Simple.
Album “1”
Track 13
What a shame.
Simple Question:
When was the last time one of the four members of the Beatles released an album of new material on “Apple” records? None of the members even bothered during their solo careers. McCartney was on Cap/EMI, Lenon on Geffen/WB, etc. Apple Records exists just as a legal entity to collect royalties for the estates of the former members. Does the presence of a computer company in any way infringe on their ability to continue to do the same?
NO
All this is a shakedown.
What’s next? Is MacIntosh, the stereo component manufacturer, going to sue Apple for the use of the term Macintosh? At least they have been making products the last 30 years. If they don’t have a problem with it, I cannot see Paul, Ringo, and the rest having a problem.
P.S. As an American, I don’t recognize the appendage “Sir”. We fought a war to get rid of that shit over 200 years ago. The only people I address as “Sir” are men I respect. Paul and Ringo are not among that number any more.
Bang bang Apple’s silver hammer came down upon their heads…
Yawn … trademark dispute … Yawn, Yawn
All Apple Corps’s troubles seemed so far away…
But not it looks like there here to stay..
At least for a few years it looks like. Has anybody ever really mistaken one company for the other? I think that the once big lable Apple Corps is just after money. They want to go after Apple CoMp’s deep pocket book to add to thier own. I wouldn’t blame the Beatles. Many artists are unhappy with the actions of thier labels.
BTW, How can you have a reunion with only two(3? I think that another one passed away, no? Anyway) Beatles left?
NoPCZone
Sir Paul has done a lot of good for the poorer members of UK society, hence the knighthood. You don’t have to recognise the title, but it is well deserved, and you shouldn’t dismiss the man and his work just because of this lawsuit. Let’s face it, if Apple’s lawyers hadn’t agreed to stay out of music all those years ago, this wouldn’t be happening. It was (for Apple) a bad settlement, and one their lawyers should have seen as a potential problem.
TW, How can you have a reunion with only two(3? I think that another one passed away, no? Anyway) Beatles left?
Follow Zeldman’s link above for your answer. It’s in poor taste, but funny.
Imagine there is no heaven…..
Imagine there is no shame..
Imagine there are no vegetarians!.
Is it all about the fame?
Is it only about a name?
Ringo, Paul or Steve…!
There is no need to be so hostile to the band members themselves, i bet alot of people here like them, i sure do and while the lawsuit goes on its not really good of me to stop liking a good band simply because they are involved in a legal tussle over a name, sure its shit but no need to disrespect good well mannered people.
Also people are assuming its the 2 band that want this…i think its the nameless white collars.
the beatles are OK at best.
You Say You Want A Revolution?
There is this idea that computer companies are free to do what ever they like–Its odd that an industry that so completely depends
upon intellectual rights, after all Gates had to go to congress to beg that congress legislate protection for code when code was otherwise free and in the public domain and not so much a product but a science, should so utterly disregard the rights of others. If I started up Microsoft fabrics, Gates might let it pass so long as I didnt start making software in addition to my soft wear. I suppose the people at Apple didnt realize there was already an Apple when they took the name Apple–maybe it was even the sincereist form of flattery, and I suppose it was okay to do so long as they didnt plunge head long into competition with record companies. Apple is in the music business–You cant claim that you are revolutionizing the music business and at the same time claim that you arent in competition with a record company.
When some one says Apple New Music Tuesdays do they mean
Apple or Apple?
I dont remember the precise legalities of it, but the problem is, if you fail to sue over trademark infringement ( whether you think you will win or not) it creates a presidence for dismissal on future cases of trademark infringement.
something like, “we’re doing the same thing they did and you didnt sue them…”
so they dont have a choice but to sue…of course that doesnt keep them from settling, and you know if iTunes music hadnt made any money thats what they would do. settle.
Lisa,
Companies often have same names, especially if they are generic words from the dictionary (or people’s names) and that is alright if they are in different fields. If you can’t differentiate “Apple COMPUTER” from “Apple RECORDS”, then it is your problem.
“When some one says Apple New Music Tuesdays do they mean
Apple or Apple? “
As NoPC Zone pointed out, it exists now to collect royalties. AFAIK, it has not put out albums from other artists other than The Beatles for a long time. And The Beatles hasn’t put out NEW music for a long time.
BTW, here is a list of other RECORD COMPANIES that has APPLE RECORDS in their names. Are they being sued by Apple Records?
From 4Reference:
“The success of Apple Records resulted in several similar names through the years, including:
*Bad Apple Records
*Big Apple Records
*Black Apple Records
*Crab Apple Records
*Mountain Apple Records
*Screaming Apple Records “
If anything, lawsuits against these companies carries more merits than suing Apple Computer (2 same words in the same industry).
beatles where great,but as they are passing away what does apple records mean? anyways what the hell does apple records have to do with apple computers? nothing in my book. Lawyers looking for money and the sad part is lawyers for apple ,lawyers for apple records both will be making money.WTF!
Lisa,
Apple Computer is not producing any music. It is not distributing any music. Rather, it is providing a service to record producers and distributors. This is a completely different space than that which Apple Records has played.
There is no confusion. There is no competition. There is no mistaking the motives of Apple Records. This is a pathetic effort to grab cash from Apple Computer – and it is nothing more than that!
Is there somthing in Apple Computers that brain washes people?
Are you telling me that Apple Computer Inc is the Ghandi of the Corporate world or is this corporation in it for the money just like every other corporation on Earth? Assume that Apple Records is
a holding company, why os that a black mark against them? Arent they entitled to their name? I guess if Steve Jobs can be called a genius for figuring out after 10 years that people might like thier computers in colors , then he can be called a genius for stealing
a name from a record company. I thought the solution was pretty neat –go ahead and use Apple but stay out of the music business
or pay a licnesing fee to the real apple–You open up a Bad Apple computer company and use an apple as a logo and see how long the buddhist monks over at Apple Computer let you do it.. These computer companies took computer code out of the public domain and away from the scientists so that they could charge big money for some thing that scientists and academics had been developing for free–so the monks over at Apple know what rights are and they live by those rights –I can tbelieve people are talking about Apples motives lolol–Apples is Apples and the motives are the same–MONEY –ask the maharishi over at Apple
Too bad Apple Corps. doesn’t have a price, cause it would be a great asset, giving our Apple exclusive Beatles music for download, and ending these stupid lawsuits.