Apple vs. Apple Corps. Ltd.

[Vox Verus]

I've never seen a substantiated story on the copywright issue between
Steve Jobs and the Beatles - if there was one.

Can someone aptly describe this?

Cheers....

Phred

--

All follow-ups are directed to the newsgroup rec.music.beatles.moderated.
If your follow-up more properly belongs in the unmoderated newsgroup, please
change your headers appropriately. -- the moderators

[Edward S. Chen]

> I've never seen a substantiated story on the copywright issue between
> Steve Jobs and the Beatles - if there was one.
>
> Can someone aptly describe this?

"Trademark," not "Copyright"

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&safe=off&selm=31D9304A.70F4%40kalika.demon.co.uk

Very short version:

(1) Apple Records allowed Apple Computer to use the name as long as they
didn't 'move into music.' (1981)

(2) As time marched on, Apple Computers gained some sound and music
capabilities. Among the earliest sounds on the Macintosh was an eep
the company named "sosumi" (so-sue-me)

(3) Apple Records did just that in the early nineties. A settlement was
reached, but never to the satisfaction of both parties. The case remained
open in one form or another for nearly a decade.

(4) Early 1999 brought the case to a close with a $30 million dollar-plus
payment from the Computer company to Apple Corps. Ltd. There was additonal
wrangling between Apple Computer and its insurerer, but that is not relevant
here.

(5) Irony eventually reared its ugly head in that in 2002 Apple Computer was
given a technical Grammy for "contributions to the Music Industry."

<ESC>