Apple sued by Beatles!!!!!

[Dinner]

The story I've heard is that the judge was some old moron who didn't know what a computer was.

Judging by his ruling I'm inclined to agree.

[JohnT]

Originally posted by Agathon


The story I've heard is that the judge was some old moron who didn't know what a computer was.

Appeal.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Yep, John is right. If the first judge was an idiot, there is always the Appeal.

And yeah, the first lawyers were bad, they really messed up the agreement. They should have more properly specified how far Apple could go in relating to music, if at all.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Yep, John is right. If the first judge was an idiot, there is always the Appeal.

And yeah, the first lawyers were bad, they really messed up the agreement. They should have more properly specified how far Apple could go in relating to music, if at all.

This was in 1991. Napster blindsided everyone. It would have cost Apple a great deal more to gain such an agreement back then. The original agreement was signed way back in 1981. I don't think Shaun Fanning was alive then.

Anyway, it's a storm in a teacup. AppleCorps is worth peanuts. Apple Computer will buy them out. I imagine discussions to this effect have been going on for some time now. AppleCorps is just jockeying for position for its payday.

[Imran Siddiqui]

This was in 1991. Napster blindsided everyone. It would have cost Apple a great deal more to gain such an agreement back then. The original agreement was signed way back in 1981. I don't think Shaun Fanning was alive then.

Even then, a good lawyer is supposed to be able to look ahead.

AppleCorps is worth peanuts. Apple Computer will buy them out.

Then they should go ahead .

Anyway, it's a storm in a teacup.

Why make a thread on it then .

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

This was in 1991. Napster blindsided everyone. It would have cost Apple a great deal more to gain such an agreement back then. The original agreement was signed way back in 1981. I don't think Shaun Fanning was alive then.

Even then, a good lawyer is supposed to be able to look ahead.

Come on. Almost nobody in the music business, who have the most to lose, did.

AppleCorps is worth peanuts. Apple Computer will buy them out.

Then they should go ahead .

I looked around and they've been in talks over a settlement for a while now. I think Apple Corps is only suing because if they don't they lose their rights - at least that's what one commentator said.

Anyway, it's a storm in a teacup.

Why make a thread on it then .

Because I thought it was an amusing thread title and a chance to complain about silly trademark laws.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Almost nobody in the music business, who have the most to lose, did.

You'd be surpised what agreements consist of these days. Every possible little thing that can happen is accounted for. It would have been obvious that at some point PCs would have sound.

I think Apple Corps is only suing because if they don't they lose their rights - at least that's what one commentator said.

Don't forget easy money.

[chequita guevara]

Napster wasn't around in 1991.

[Sirotnikov]

A little re-editing and taking out of context, can do wonders:

Posted by Imran Siddiqui

Posted by Agathon
If the Beatles want to make themselves look like total ****s that's their business.

That isn't part of the music business?

[monolith94]

"The result of the suit was a huge cash settlement and a promise that the Apple logo and name would only be used for computers -- and never for a music company."

An ipod is not a musical device - it is a miniature computer that has the ability to play music. The only difference is in size, processor power, etc.

They might have a case against itunes though.

[Imran Siddiqui]

iTunes is actually thing that has sparked this, from what it seems to me. It's a music service, no doubt. But, claiming the iPod isn't a musical device is just a ****ing dumb argument . It's marketed and made with music in mind. Therefore it is a musical device.

[The Mad Monk]

Originally posted by Agathon


This was in 1991. Napster blindsided everyone. It would have cost Apple a great deal more to gain such an agreement back then. The original agreement was signed way back in 1981. I don't think Shaun Fanning was alive then.

Anyway, it's a storm in a teacup. AppleCorps is worth peanuts. Apple Computer will buy them out. I imagine discussions to this effect have been going on for some time now. AppleCorps is just jockeying for position for its payday.

Is AppleCorps a public, or a private company? If they're private, Apple Computer may not be able to "buy them out". It depends on how Paul, Ringo, and the families of John and George feel.

[Imran Siddiqui]

I have a feeling that AppleCorp is a public corporation. For an enterprise that big, they had to have issued shares at some point to raise some money (while the Beatles may have had cash, it takes more than that to start up a business).

[The Mad Monk]

I cannot find any reference to it as an publicly traded company, although I have found several that imply it dosen't hold much in the way of physical assets -- apparently they pay other record companies to "press records" under their label.