Apple Corps. судится с Apple Computers

Звукозаписывающий лейбл группы Beatles судится с Apple Computers

12 сентября 2003 года, 10:20; текст: Иван Карташев

Британская звукозаписывающая компания Apple Corp., сделавшая себе имя на издании пластинок группы The Beatles, подала судебный иск против компании Apple Computers. В этом иске компания Стива Джобса обвиняется в нарушении договоренности с Apple Corp., согласно которой марка Apple может использоваться только для компьютерной техники, но не для товаров и услуг, связанных с музыкой. Выпуск Apple Computers плеера iPod и начало работы онлайновой музыкальной службы iTines Music Store идут вразрез с этими договоренностями.

Интересно, что одним из вариантов возникновения названия Apple Computers является то, что Стив Джобс и Стив Возняк назвали свою компанию в честь издателя альбомов The Beatles. Впоследствии это неоднократно приводило к осложнениям с Apple Corp. Первый иск против Apple Computers был подан еще в 1980-х годах. Он был урегулирован миром, причем Apple Computers согласилась выплатить приличную компенсацию и не использовать название Apple в музыкальных продуктах.

С началом эпохи мультимедии Apple Computers пришлось раскошелиться еще раз за право выпускать компьютеры со встроенными средствами воспроизведения звука. Сразу после выхода iPod некоторые эксперты обратили внимание на возможность нового конфликта с лейблом The Beatles, и их ожидания полностью оправдались. Первоначально иск против Apple Computers был подан в Великобритании, но сейчас он перенесен в Калифорнию. В Apple Computers пока никак не комментируют ситуацию, а анонимный источник, близкий к Apple Corp., сообщил Fox News, что компания не имеет ничего против выпуска под маркой Apple плееров. "Это лишь принесет нам больше денег", - уточнил источник.

http://compulenta.ru/2003/9/12/41939/
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,97064,00.html

Wednesday, April 7, 2004

Beatles win round in Apple battle

Associated Press

LONDON -- A High Court judge ruled Wednesday that a trademark battle between Apple Computer Inc. and the Beatles' record company Apple Corps Ltd. should be heard in London.

Judge Martin Mann rejected an argument by California-based Apple Computer that the case should be tried on its home territory. He didn't set a trial date but granted the U.S. technology giant permission to appeal the decision.

Apple Corps, the Fab Four's record company, is suing Apple Computer, claiming the American company violated a 1991 agreement by entering the music business with its ITunes online store.

The 1991 pact, in which each side agreed not to tread on the other's toes by entering into an exclusive "field of use" of the Apple mark, was signed after a long-running multimillion-dollar trademark fight between the companies.

The current lawsuit by London-based Apple Corps -- founded in 1968 and owned by surviving Beatles Paul McCartney and Ringo Starr, the widow of John Lennon and the estate of George Harrison -- seeks an injunction to enforce the 1991 agreement, and monetary damages for the alleged contract breach.

Mann, who confessed during the hearing that he owned an Apple Computer IPod digital music player, gave several reasons for his judgment, including the fact that the trademark agreement was governed by British law and that a trial in California would likely be longer and more costly than a hearing in England.

Mann was told that the ITunes Music Store, which enables users to download and save thousands of prerecorded songs from the Internet, is currently available to Apple users in the U.S. only, but that its introduction to Europe is imminent.

The service has sold more than 10 million songs at 99 cents US each since its April 2003 launch and is central to Apple's strategy to promote its computers as digital entertainment hubs.

It has generally been welcomed by record companies because of the fee -- as opposed to the criticism leveled at "free for all" Internet sites -- but it carries no songs by The Beatles because Apple Corps has yet to authorize distribution.

The Beatles sued Apple Computer over the corporate name in 1981, four years after Steve Jobs co-founded Apple Computer. He is said to have chosen the name in part as a tribute to the Beatles.

The 1981 case ended after the tech company paid the Beatles' company an undisclosed amount of money and agreed to use the name only for computer products.

A decade later, the Beatles sued again, alleging Apple Computer was violating the initial agreement by using its Apple logo on music-synthesizing products. The case was settled out of court with Apple Computer paying an undisclosed amount to the Beatles' company and signing the agreement around which the latest lawsuit revolves.

Terms of the 1991 settlement were kept confidential, with Apple Computer allotting $38 million US at the time to settle the litigation.

Apple suing Apple Computer again
http://abbeyrd.best.vwh.net/news/912applesuesapple.html

Apple придется судиться с лейблом Beatles в Великобритании

Корпорации Apple Computer не удалось убедить британский Верховный суд в необходимости переноса в Калифорнию слушаний по делу о нарушении прав на торговую марку Apple.

Осенью прошлого года, напомним, звукозаписывающий лейбл группы The Beatles, Apple Corp., обвинил компанию Стива Джобса в нарушении соглашения от 1991 года. По условиям достигнутого тогда договора, Apple Computer могла использовать вышеназванную торговую марку исключительно для компьютерной техники и сопутствующего программного обеспечения и не имела прав заниматься поставками товаров и услуг, связанных с музыкой. При этом производителю "Макинтошей" пришлось выплатить Apple Corp. весьма крупную компенсацию.

Позднее, когда Apple Computer выпустила на рынок ПК, позволяющие прослушивать музыку, лейбл Beatles снова подал в суд и опять выиграл дело. В настоящее же время речь идет о сервисе iTunes Music Store и портативных МР3-плеерах iPod, пользующихся бешеным спросом. В Apple Corp. утверждают, что появление онлайнового музыкального магазина и устройств, проигрывающих аудиоконтент, не укладывается в рамки договора от 1991 года. При этом компания Стива Джобса, хотя и отрицала претензии, все же настаивала на переносе слушаний в Калифорнию, поскольку соглашение была заключено между двумя компаниями именно в этом американском штате. Суд, тем не менее, посчитал, что в этом нет никакой необходимости, сообщает Reuters. Таким образом, Apple Computer придется и дальше выяснять отношения с Apple Corp. на территории Великобритании. Дата следующих слушаний не называется.

http://biz.compulenta.ru/2004/4/9/46232/

Inside Move: Beatles' suit could upset the Apple cart

Sun Sep 12
LONDON -- Beatles fan Steve Jobs (news - web sites) could lose a large bite of his Apple to his idols.

The Beatles' company, Apple Corps., is involved in a legal battle with Jobs' Apple Computer, claiming the hardware manufacturer is in breach of a 1991 agreement that that forbids it from using the trademark for any application "whose principle content is music." The two companies have been involved in a number of court battles over the years involving the use of the Apple trademark.

Word among the legal community is that an out of court settlement could be imminent and that it will massively dwarf the $26.5 million paid to the Fab Four's company in 1991 in a row over trademark use.

One lawyer told Daily Variety, "People are expecting this to be the biggest settlement anywhere in legal history, outside of a class action suit. The numbers could be mind boggling."

Earlier this year, the computer company failed in a bid to have the latest case heard in the United States, when a judge in London's High Court in London granted jurisdiction in the U.K.

The litigation is seen as one of the main reasons behind Apple Corps. preventing the Beatles catalog of songs being made available on the computer company's iTunes song store.

Some speculation suggests the settlement could see Apple Corps. becoming a major shareholder in the computer company, with Paul McCartney maybe even becoming a board member.

Lord Grabiner and Daniel Toledano are acting for Apple Computer, while Geoffrey Vos and Daniel Alexander are representing Apple Corps.

Despite splitting in 1970, the Beatles interests are still administered by Apple Corps., which is owned by McCartney, Ringo Starr and the families of John Lennon and George Harrison.

An Apple Computer rep declined to comment on the pending litigation and pointed to an earlier statement that said the two companies have "differeing interpretations" of the agreement.

September 14, 2004 -- Mac Observer

McCartney Rumored Apple Board Member In "Mind Boggling" Beatles Settlement

Variety has set the speculation machines on fire today by reporting that Apple and The Beatles are close to a settlement in the two companies' legal dispute. According to the entertainment magazine, the settlement would "dwarf the US$26.5 million" paid to the Beatles in the 1990s the last time they sued Apple. Variety also says that there is speculation that Sir Paul McCartney could become a board member at Apple.

From the magazine:

Word among the legal community is that an out of court settlement could be imminent and that it will massively dwarf the $26.5 million paid to the Fab Four's company in 1991 in a row over trademark use.

One lawyer told Daily Variety, "People are expecting this to be the biggest settlement anywhere in legal history, outside of a class action suit. The numbers could be mind boggling."

Some speculation suggests the settlement could see Apple Corps. becoming a major shareholder in the computer company, with Paul McCartney maybe even becoming a board member.

The Beatles sued Apple in 2003 for breach of contract after Apple entered the online music download business with the iTunes Music Store (iTMS).

According to the (remaining two of the) Fab Four, the iTMS violated a 1991 settlement between The Beatles' management company, Apple Corps, and Apple Computer that precluded Apple Computer from being involved in the music business. Apple Corps owns a trademark for its name in the music business, which was the source of that lawsuit and the subsequent payment of US$26.5 million from Apple in 1999.

For his part, Apple CEO Steve Jobs has maintained that the issue between The Beatles and his company was a trademark dispute. In September of 2003, Steve Jobs told UK newspaper the Independent that:

"Apple Corporation and Apple [Computer] signed a legal agreement more than a decade ago. I wasn't there, and it says what each company can do with their trademark. I inherited that, and right now there's a disagreement about this. It's a trademark dispute... We might have to get a judge to decide on it."

Later that month, UK newspaper The Times reported that Mr. Jobs had said of the lawsuit that, "It's really stupid. We can't reach an agreement, but the courts could drag on for a few years."

In October, he added to that sentiment by saying that, "It's unfortunate because we love the Beatles. I'd do anything for those guys." In fact, one of the legends of Apple's founding has it that the name Apple Computer did indeed stem from Steve Jobs' love of The Beatles.

The Beatles have been quite litigious over the years through its corporate branch, Apple Corps. In addition to suing Apple Computer three times, The Beatles have aggressively defended their copyrights and other legal rights through the courts.

For its part, Apple has an enormous cash reserve of more than $5 billion.

The Mac Observer Spin:

Any payout to The Beatles of less than $150 million won't have much of a material effect on Apple Computer, save that it's a waste that didn't need to happen in the first place. Apple should have known better when the company embarked on its musical endeavors, or at least set itself up in such a way that it was protected. Remember that when the iTMS was first launched, its URL was Apple.com/music, something that was shortly changed to Apple.com/iTunes.

For all we know, however, Steve Jobs was planning on being sued, and this is all part of his master plan. Stranger things have certainly happened.

That said, it would be a huge coup for Apple to get Sir Paul McCartney on its board. Note that Variety was only reporting speculation, so who knows if that part of the report was true, but we think it would be a good thing for Apple were it the case. It would also be a major coup for Apple if it could land a significant exclusive with The Beatles' catalog for the iTMS.

Победа, надо не сомневаться, будет как всегда за нами.

September 24, 2004 -- PC Pro

Beatles demand $15 million for online rights

The Beatles are asking $15m for six months' exclusive rights to sell their catalogue online, according to a News.com report.

If true, such a high premium would almost certainly price the world's biggest selling group out of the range of most of the online services. Microsoft could afford it but only Apple could be sure to recoup the outlay, if only because it would be certain to sell many more iPods.

Of course Apple are in the middle of a legal battle with the Beatles' record company, Apple Corps, over the rights to use the fruit's name for music-related businesses. Nonetheless, the article says, 'Apple Computer might be the only company ready to pay, particularly if the payment comes attached to a legal settlement in which millions of dollars are already changing hands.'

Assuming that the Beatles, EMI, Apple Corps and Michael Jackson also take their share of royalties from online sales, recouping $15m from the songs alone would require sales of something like 375 million tracks, an impossible target.

According to new research by the Susquehanna Financial Group, Apple and HP are planning to ship one million iPods per month in the run-up to Christmas - last quarter Apple sold 860,000, despite problems with iPod mini supplies. Such is the expected demand that Apple Australia's marketing director Arno Lenior said that anyone wanting an iPod for Christmas should place a deposit now.

Apple confirms Beatles court date

The Beatles' record label Apple Corps is seeking to stop Apple Computer's association with music, claiming trademark abuse. That trial is scheduled to begin in UK courts on March 27, 2006.

http://www.macworld.co.uk/news/index.cfm?NewsID=11515&Page=1&pagePos=2

Neil Aspinall, the managing director of Apple Corps Ltd, the Beatles' record company, arrives at the High Court in London, Wednesday March 29, 2006. Two giants of the music industry are due to face off in court Wednesday in a battle over trademarks. Apple Corps Ltd., the Beatles' record company and guardian of the band's musical heritage and business interests, is suing Apple Computer Inc., claiming the company violated a 1991 agreement by entering the music business with its iTunes online music store.

A record with an Apple Corps logo is seen placed on the top of an Apple computer with its logo, top left, in London Wednesday, March 29, 2006. The on-off trademark battle between Apple Computers and the Beatles record company Apple Corps re-emerges in the High Court in London Wednesday. The dispute centres on the US computer company's iTunes online music store which enables users of its revolutionary iPod to download and save thousands of pre-recorded songs via the internet.

JOBS TOOK BEATLES' APPLE: PAL
http://www.nypost.com/business/66444.htm

EVERSHEDS' COMMENTS ON Apple v Apple DECISION

Commenting upon the judgment in Apple Corps v Apple Computer handed down by Mr Justice Mann today, 8 May 2006, Nicholas Valner, partner at Eversheds, solicitors to The Beatles' Apple Corps Ltd, said:

"This is a particularly disappointing decision. The judgment is curious. So much of what the judge says is right. It will be noted that he rejected pretty much every argument advanced by Lord Grabiner for Apple Computer.

He expressly found (paragraph 83) that Apple Corps' exclusive province includes recordings transmitted in intangible form and says "[Apple] Computer has no right to apply its marks to such matters". He thereby expressly agreed with Mr Vos' submission (paragraph 60) that Apple Corps' area of exclusivity covers a download over the internet.

But since the only visible element in such a music download process would be a store like iTunes Music Store (or one of its rivals) appearing on a computer screen, it is inconsistent then to hold, as the judge does, that the use of the apple logos is not use in connection with the downloaded music.

The way the judge seeks to avoid this inconsistency is two-fold: first, he places a narrow construction upon the words "on or in connection with", and expressly rejects their normal English meaning in favour of a very limited 'trade connection' sense. In doing so, the judge ignores what is referred to as 'the Golden Rule' of construction[1] - that the words of a contract should be construed in their grammatical and ordinary sense. Secondly, he gives an interpretation of clause 4.3 of the contract (the clause is set out on page 6 of the judgment) which Counsel for neither party advanced because they both knew it was wrong. It involves implying into it the words "fair and reasonable use when applied to the service" (see paragraph 78). English law on implied terms is clear: terms cannot be implied if they contradict express terms in the contract. Since the judge's implied term imported into clause 4.3 has the direct effect of contradicting the clear terms of clauses 4.2 and 4.9 (which expressly forbid App le Computer from using their marks on or in connection with Apple Corps' exclusive field (which includes downloaded music - as the judge concedes)), the judge cannot be right.

It is for these reasons, among others, that Apple Corps has been advised that an appeal has every prospect of success. It will be appealing."

End

Полный вердикт http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,200-2170977,00.html

"Apple Corps lawyer Nicholas Valner hands out press releases to journalists outside the High Court. The Beatles' multimedia corporation has lost a British High Court battle with Apple Computer, leaving the US group free to continue using the apple name and logo on its revolutionary iTunes music store website."

Here are statements issued today by Neil Aspinall and Nicholas Valner, a lawyer for Apple Corps. Ltd.:

PRESS RELEASE
for

APPLE CORPS LIMITED

When the two Apple companies reached their agreement in October 1991 over future use of the apple name and marks, they did so on the clear basis that Apple Computer would be unable to use these on or in connection with pre-recorded music. That was to remain the exclusive province of The Beatles' company, Apple Corps. The launch by Apple Computer of its iTunes website selling pre-recorded music, coupled with its extensive marketing and advertising campaign, clearly, in our view, broke that agreement because the apple name and logos were and are used very extensively in connection with pre-recorded music.

Commenting on the judgment handed down today by Mr Justice Mann, Neil Aspinall, Manager of Apple Corps, said:

"With great respect to the trial judge, we consider he has reached the wrong conclusion. We felt that during the course of the trial we clearly demonstrated just how extensively Apple Computer had broken the agreement. We will accordingly be filing an appeal and putting the case again to the Court of Appeal. We have been advised by our legal team, including two eminent specialist QCs and our solicitors Eversheds, that we have every prospect of reversing this decision on appeal.”


End

"Halifax Daily News" editorial cartoon from the May 9th 2006 edition

Конкурент Apple хочет запретить iPod в США
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/russian/sci/tech/newsid_4986000/4986306.stm

Однако, до судились!

A nice apple tart, I feel your taste all the time we’re apart ("Чудесный яблочный пирог, я чувствую твой вкус все время, пока мы в разлуке"), - пели в свое время легендарные Битлы. Впрочем, вряд ли тема яблок в наши дни вызвала бы у них столь же романтические ассоциации: когда говорит Фемида, музы обычно молчат. В начале мая завершился очередной судебный процесс между двумя "яблочными" компаниями: компьютерной корпорацией, приучившей мир "думать иначе", и звукозаписывающей Apple Corps, основанной участниками группы The Beatles и поныне обладающей авторскими правами на ряд сочинений ливерпульской четверки.

К юридической междоусобице компаниям-тезкам не привыкать: компьютерная Apple начала подвергаться нападкам музыкантов практически с момента своего возникновения, при этом сумма денег, вытребованных у нее за четверть века капризной соперницей, превысила 100 млн. долларов. По условиям "яблочного перемирия", заключенного в 1991 году, "компьютерщики" торжественно поклялись ни при каких обстоятельствах не распространять музыку на физических носителях. Сыр-бор возобновился в 2003 году, когда Apple Computer открыла онлайновый магазинчик iTunes и разгневанные битлы немедленно обвинили новоявленных коробейников в вероломстве. Те отбивались, говоря, что в ассортименте онлайновой лавочки не сыщешь ни кассет, ни "сидюков", следовательно, ни одна буква договора не нарушена. Впрочем, сей аргумент не убедил британских "яблочников", с подачи которых начался изнурительный судебный марафон.

В результате знак равенства между закачкой хитов из Сети и их покупкой на CD так и не был поставлен - после почти трехлетних слушаний лондонский суд наконец признал претензии "музыкантов" к "компьютерщикам" беспочвенными. "Винчестеры и флэш-диски MP3-плейеров являются носителями музыки, но было бы грехом утверждать, что они используются для распространения предзаписанного контента", - отметили судьи. Наряду с многочисленными поклонниками iTunes своего удовлетворения по поводу вердикта суда не скрывал и главный "яблочник" Стив Джобс, всегда бывший заядлым битломаном. "Как здорово, - расчувствовался он, - что нам удалось преодолеть непонимание. Мы всегда любили Beatles и надеемся заполучить их творения в наш музыкальный магазин".

Увы, предаваться эйфории ответчикам пока рановато: за апелляцией проигравшей стороны дело, по-видимому, не станет. На каком куплете закончится яблочная сага, сказать трудно. Ясно одно: разжиться полной антологией битловских хитов на онлайновом прилавке iTunes в обозримом будущем не удастся. - Д.К.
http://offline.computerra.ru/2006/638/269000/

> Интересно, что одним из вариантов возникновения названия Apple Computers является то, что Стив Джобс и Стив Возняк назвали свою компанию в честь издателя альбомов The Beatles.

http://community.mylj.ru/advertka/4781610.html
Интересно что в качестве первого вижуала (логотипа?) использовался И. Ньютон, сидящий под яблоней.
Самая большая коллекция принтов и мануалов Apple, которую я видел.
http://www.macmothership.com/gallery/gallerytextindex.html

April 10, 2007

OFFICIAL PRESS RELEASE

APPLE CORPS LTD ANNOUNCES THE APPOINTMENT OF JEFF JONES (CEO)
AS NEW CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

AND THE DEPARTURE OF NEIL ASPINALL

London, England, Tuesday, April 10, 2007 ­ Today Apple Corps Ltd. announced that Jeff Jones will become Chief Executive Officer of Apple Corps Ltd.

Apple welcomes Jeff, who comes with over 30 years experience in the music business with a brilliant record. He leaves his position of Executive Vice President, Legacy Recordings/Sony BMG Catalog Worldwide where he has been since 1995.

Apple also announces the departure of Neil Aspinall, who had been with John, Paul, George and Ringo for a spectacular 40 plus years, during which he played an indispensable role for the four. He was there since the inception of the band in Liverpool and has meant so much to the Beatles' family for all these years and still does. However, he has decided to move on. Apple as a whole, and each member of this company, wishes him great success in whatever endeavor he chooses to pursue in the future.

THE "fifth Beatle" has quit as head of Apple Corps in an apparent row over turning the band into a "cash cow".

Neil Aspinall, 64, a schoolfriend of Sir Paul McCartney and George Harrison, was their first road manager and drove the Fab Four to concerts.

He was later rewarded with a management role. But he walked out as chief executive yesterday following "differences" between him and the board.

A music insider claimed: "The board is not Paul and Ringo - it's lawyers and accountants. They want to make as much money as possible. Neil was against making the Beatles a cash cow. There is a plan to flood the market and put out a newly-remastered Beatles backcatalogue."

The Beatles' ex-PR Geoff Baker said: "I fear for the integrity of the Beatles' legacy without Neil."

Daily Mirror: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/topstories/tm_headline=fifth-beatle-quits%26method=full%26...