By Jo Best, 9 May 2005 16:10
NEWS Apple Computer - the iPod maker - and Apple Corps - the Beatles' record label - are due to face each other in court next year over trademark usage, filings by Apple Computer have revealed.
According to the Apple record label, Apple Computer has reneged on an earlier trademarks agreement, signed in 1991, and filed suit against the company in November 2004.
Apple Computer's latest filing to the Securities and Exchange Commission has revealed that the Apple vs Apple case is set to go to trial on the week of 27 March 2006.
The legal battle centres on which of the two companies has the right to use the trademark Apple in relation to music. According to Apple Corps, iTunes infringes the earlier agreement between the two which stipulates Apple Computer must keep its distance from the music business.
As part of the 1991 agreement, Apple Corps got the rights to use Apple in relation to creative works whose principal content is music, while Apple Computer retained the right to use the name on goods and services used to play music.
Apple Corps has taken issue with Apple Computer's use of the trademark in the past, although the pair have always settled out of court, with Apple Computer's biggest payment to the record label topping $25m.
Apple Corps is now suing Steve Jobs and co for "unspecified damages and other relief", the filing says.
Comments
There are 5 comments. Join the discussion
1. Bob Kerstetter
Yawn! Just another company (Apple Records) trying to get money without working for it. Do sometime innovative to get money. Supply products and services people want. No one. That is no one. Gets the Apple record label confused with Apple computer, not even iTunes. Lighten up Apple label. Quit stealing. Try working. You should actually be selling on iTunes rather suing Apple.
2. anonymous
Why doesn't Apple Computer just take over Apple Music and tear up the deal. This bollocks has been rumbling on for years. Only winners, the lawyers
3. Full name
>>Why doesn't Apple Computer just take over Apple Music and tear up the deal.
I bet because they couldn't afford it. Apple (the Beatles' music company) is a pretty rich company.
4. Mike Powell
This isn't just a storm in a lawyers office, Apple was a very well known brand when Steve Jobs came along.
It was the quirky name for a company set up by the biggest band in the world. It had clout. The Beatles were huge, and still make a mint.
As I understand it, the name helped to establish what was then just another computer start-up company operating in a home workshop. Thats why there was a contract signed over use of the name.
Apple said: use the name for you computers, but don't confuse things by selling music, thats what we do. Seemed quite a reasonable request back then, and the computer company must have thought so too.
Now things are different and the original company has to take a stand otherwise its not worth signing any contract.
If the computer company wants to become a music company it should change its name, or settle, its quite simple really.
I don't know what the relative valuations of the two companies might be, but its bizarre to suggest that a company pays out tens or hundreds of millions to buy a company just to get use of a name.
Its especially so when it has so many of its own: Mac, PowerMac, iBook, iPod, iTunes, Lisa.
5. Beatles and Apple Computers fan
I am still waiting for a lawyer representing mother nature in court against Apple Records. It's all about the stinking money....again. People will never learn.
Do the Beatles pay royalties for using city names in their songs? Imagine...
Apple Records, start selling the songs on iTunes! You would also "earn" some respect.