Beatles’ Apple vs. Jobs’ Apple; 1991 agreement allows for ‘data transmission services, even music’

“Apple Computer and the Beatles’ record company Apple Corps went to court in Britain on Wednesday over who gets to use the fruity name now that the computer company has entered the music business on the Internet,” Reuters reports. “The two companies reached a deal in 1991 after a fight over the trademark, signing an agreement that set out who could use the name and logo, and when.”

“But the British record company says the American computer company broke the deal by using the Apple name to market its new iTunes Internet music service,” Reuters reports. “In a preliminary skirmish on Wednesday, Apple Computer asked the court to rule that the full legal battle should be dealt with by California courts, not courts in England.”

“The computer company’s lawyer said that the 1991 agreement allows Apple Computer to use the name for data transmission services, even if the data included material such as music, which was within the record label’s ‘field of use,'” Reuters reports.

Full article here.


  1. that would be Fox channel’s rediculous lawsuit alleging exclusive ownership to the term “fair and balanced.”

    the judge literally laughed at Fox’s attorneys before telling them to amscray…

  2. Not sure how a previous suit from Fox relates to this story at all, but yeah, Apple computer is sitting pretty if they have in writing what their lawyers are saying they do. This is just another case of someone (Apple music) looking for a free piece of the pie.

  3. Apple Corps has never made anything… In all truth, historically their only function seems to have been to spend money. Oh, and to sue everyone who utters the word “Apple” and not be talking about the Beatles…

  4. Hey mates, it’s me from the other side. I’ve placed a Yoko Hex on Apple Music and soon people will realize that they do NOTHING and need to sue to stay in business. Even us dead Beats blanche at their poor business tactics.

  5. Judge is going to be evil to Apple. Judge will rule that Apple Computer must release iTMS in Europe tomorrow and include all Beatles music in that so that Judge can fill the iPod. Both Apple’s luses. Apple Computer because they have to sell Beatles music and Beatles because Apple Computer is selling their music.

  6. Steve probably asked the Apple lawyers, the probably said go ahead. In todays sue happy society people and companies yelling about protecting whatever…… it seems to be a commonly used sound byte to cover the real motivation “hey, I can get something (money) from this”

    After the FBI announce that IP and copyright is its 3rd highest priority, I;ll bet we see much more of the same. What’s M&M going to do, sue anyone on the street mouthing or singing words to his songs? This is getting pretty ridiculous

    The real question should be “why did apple corps wait until iTunes became so successful, and gathered so much good press coverage?” If Apple Corps (applecorpse?) really wanted to ‘protect’ their image/trademark/property/logo (which ISN’T the same as Apple Computer) they should have filed this within moments of Steve announcing iTMS. Unless of course they just sat back and said, lets wait and see if this really takes off, then we will take action, we could pillage more money if they get big.

  7. EMI controls music from the Beatles which MJ and SONY don’t have.

    Apple Corps have only a couple of bands like Badfinger which John brought in before he died. Apple corps do handle Beatle’s image licensing.

  8. Applecorp also “discovered” James Taylor a million years ago, but he split after one album and rerecorded what he had done at apple. They did know talent, and weren’t business people. The two frequently go hand in hand.

  9. ATL,USA.SEP DEL 2004!!!

    Y QUE DEL “ARCA”??
    Y QUE DE
    LA “PINTURA”??



Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.