Skip

Apple sues Apple over Apple
September 11, 2003 8:02 PM   Subscribe

Apple Corps Ltd. sues Apple Computers over AppleMusic. "When it first happened with the iPod, we said, "What could they be thinking?" said a Beatles legal insider, who agreed that posters announcing the iPod from "AppleMusic" were among the most egregious violations. "They knew we had the agreement, and that we'd won a lot of money from them already."
posted by riffola (31 comments total)

 
I have to say, suing apple over having a sound chip in their computers (my IIGS's Ensonic chip kicked serious ass in it's day) was stuipd. But in this case I think they've got Apple Computer by the balls.
posted by Space Coyote at 8:13 PM on September 11, 2003


Apple Corps has forgotten it has become irrelevant. They are not now or have they ever competed in the same market place.
posted by MrLint at 8:17 PM on September 11, 2003


They've got Apple by the balls, and they've managed to get them to use the buttplug.
posted by angry modem at 8:18 PM on September 11, 2003


modem : was that supposed to make sense?
posted by MrLint at 8:20 PM on September 11, 2003


i was wondering when this was going to happen. it seems to me that it's ridiculour apple corp won anything in the first place but, hey, ianal.
posted by dobbs at 8:21 PM on September 11, 2003


*pats MrLint on the head*

Nah.
posted by angry modem at 8:25 PM on September 11, 2003


*looks at my first post, decides it's time for more coffee. Stupid coding binges*
posted by Space Coyote at 8:28 PM on September 11, 2003


Apple Corps was always about the money, especially with Yoko running John's share. Paul didn't get to be the richest man in the UK just from writing some good tunes, you know. So why the surprise when they see the opportunity to take a few more million quid off a too-stupid-to-learn Apple Computers?
posted by billsaysthis at 8:36 PM on September 11, 2003


I thought part of the reason The Beatles broke up was because Paul refused to sign on to Apple Corps.
posted by riffola at 8:37 PM on September 11, 2003


Didn't Apple also settle with the high end tube amp maker McIntosh for using that name?
posted by lasm at 8:50 PM on September 11, 2003


Jobs lied about the McIntosh name, so Apple had to buy it for ALOT of money.

Apple Computer corp would have done well to move to the McIntosh name rather than keep violating a court agreement.
posted by rough ashlar at 9:09 PM on September 11, 2003


Well, seeing as they sold all their songs to (eventually) Micheal Jackson, they've got to make money somehow... besides the lawyers have no choice but to perform their duties. Just think a couple of dollars of every iPod sold goes to the Sean and Yoko fund.
posted by damclean2 at 9:18 PM on September 11, 2003


TIBCO sues Apple for Rendezvous trademark infringement.

Apple sued over use of 'Unix' trademark.

Apple sued over Mac Manager branding

Cobalt may sue Apple over 'cube' rights.



From floridalawfirm.com.com:
Bob Dylan has purportedly sued Apple Computer for naming a computer language "Dylan." It was supposedly an abbreviation for "Dynamic Language." Astronomer Carl Sagan also complained to Apple when they starting using "Sagan" as the internal code name of a computer that became the Macintosh 7100. Apple stopped using his name, but instead started calling it the "BHA." Sagan supposedly sued Apple anyway for trademark infringement, defamation and invasion of privacy, claiming that it was well known that Apple used "BHA" as an acronym for "butt-head astronomer." The Judge reportedly threw out Sagan's case.
MicroWare sues Apple over OS9 trademark (since resolved in Apple's favour) MicroWare made an old unix like OS called OS9 (lord knows why) and apparently sued because Apple had the gaul to put out version nine of an operating system.
posted by Space Coyote at 9:27 PM on September 11, 2003


I'll never buy music from Apple Corp again!...oh wait, I don't even own any of their music, what do they sell again?
posted by filchyboy at 9:31 PM on September 11, 2003


The Beatles? You mean Paul and Yoko.
posted by the fire you left me at 9:38 PM on September 11, 2003


Keep in mind that this is being reported only by one news outlet, Fox, and that this report appears in a gossip column above rumors about Ben & J. Lo's wedding. No UK outlet that I know of is reporting it.
posted by kindall at 9:42 PM on September 11, 2003


In finding those above links I'd like to ask the Google people if they could please filter out the hundreds of duplicated stories that show up on every damn website on earth cluttering up the more rare, interesting ones.
posted by Space Coyote at 9:44 PM on September 11, 2003


Well, seeing as they sold all their songs to (eventually) Micheal Jackson

Sort of OT, but doens't MJ own those Beatles songs via a loan from Sony Music? So when MJ finally goes belly up, Sony will own them?
posted by Steve_at_Linnwood at 10:21 PM on September 11, 2003


Don't forget the legal tiff between Apple Computer Inc. and Carl Sagan.
posted by BartFargo at 11:30 PM on September 11, 2003


Sosumi, indeed.
posted by Down10 at 1:11 AM on September 12, 2003


Apple Corps. is so gonna lose.
No confusion here. Apple innovates, Apple Corps silently rots in obscurity.
posted by Blue Stone at 2:21 AM on September 12, 2003


Wanna bet, Blue Stone?

Apple Corps is going to win, becasue they have a rock sold case.
posted by salmacis at 5:39 AM on September 12, 2003


Hee hee. Thanks, Down10.
posted by carter at 6:26 AM on September 12, 2003


This is the stupidest thing I've heard in a long time. I don't think you should be able to sue and win copyrights over an established dictionary word used in a completely different context. I can't believe they got sued over attached speakers let alone an ipod. As far as I can tell apple still isn't in the music business, unless they're responsible for the bad version of 'hooked on a feeling' my ipod came with.
posted by Hildegarde at 7:24 AM on September 12, 2003


i swear if I hear another shit-eating-grinner telling that sosumi story again I'm going to quack

[groan]
posted by Fofer at 1:55 PM on September 12, 2003


Fofer: moof!
posted by Space Coyote at 3:48 PM on September 12, 2003


Is trademark law even relevant? Since Apple Computer signed an agreement last time around, presumably agreeing to things above and beyond trademarks.
posted by smackfu at 7:19 PM on September 12, 2003


So what's stopping me from working a clause into my insurance scams that says that if you ever become rich and successful you owe me half?
posted by Space Coyote at 9:41 PM on September 13, 2003


Another source.
posted by dobbs at 1:02 AM on September 14, 2003


I think somebody owes me an apology. Or maybe I owe Apple computers an apology. I'm not sure which.
posted by seanyboy at 1:13 AM on September 14, 2003


Or maybe they don't. Repeat... Must read thread before posting.. Must read thread before posting.
posted by seanyboy at 1:15 AM on September 14, 2003


« Older Faklng Cultural Interest   |   momento more Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments



Post