Beatles vs. Apple

Fab Four's original company sues Steve Jobs over name

Apple vs. Apple, i.e. The Beatles vs. Steve Jobs. The Beatles management company, Apple Corp., announced last week that it is seeking a court injunction against Apple Computer Inc. The bone of contention is the success of iTunes, the online music store, and of iPod, which allegedly would damage the interests of the British band's trademark.
The case was apparently filed a short time ago in London's High Court of Justice, but was just served to Apple Computers in California last week.
Legal battles between these two iconic entities began many years ago, in 1981, when Apple Corp. sued Steve Jobs' and Steve Wozniak's recently founded enterprise. In a few years, the two California students, just over 20, had managed to turn a garage business into a multimillion-dollar company floating on the stock exchange.
Jobs, a big Beatles fan, had chosen the name "Apple" for their company precisely as a tribute to the Fab Four. Apple Corp., in fact, was the name of the record company that the band from Liverpool had created in 1968 and that still collects millions of pounds sterling every year in royalties.
As we said, when Apple Computers first came into existence, the Beatles' lawyers sued - and won - over the use of the corporate name. 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.
Several years later, when computers started having music come through attachable speakers, the Beatles again sued and won, this time over breech of a trademark agreement since Apple Computers had agreed to steer clear of the music business.
Music has become the forbidden fruit for Apple Computers. It looked like an equitable settlement: in the early 80s Steve Jobs could not dream of the impact, 15 years later, of Internet sharing and MP3 files. He could not imagine that Apple's best selling product in the early years of the new millennium would be the iPod, a portable device for playing digital music, nor that iTunes Music Store, Apple's service selling musical files online, would sell over 10 million songs in four months.
In a communiqué released shortly after the suit was served, Apple Computer stated that its position as to the correct interpretation of the agreement on music is quite different from that of the London corporation, and that the only way to settle the matter is to go to court.
Meanwhile in London, in the headquarters of Apple Corp., managers expect another settlement that would bring more easy millions in the company coffers.
Analysts deem likely a new settlement: the Beatles will withdraw their opposition in exchange for financial compensation, possibly a share of the revenue generated by iTunes Music Store.
Many people feel that the suit brought to court by the corporation founded by the Fab Four is merely a way to cash in and has nothing to do with supposed loss of earnings or image.
It is indeed difficult to believe that the two companies might be confused with each other, or that the sales of iPod or iTunes could somehow detract from the revenues of a record company that lives almost exclusively off royalties.
If we consider how generic the word "Apple" is, things would appear even more garbled.
However, we all know that few things in life can be taken for granted. Even though "an apple a day keeps the doctor away", it seems powerless against lawyers.

Publication Date: 2003-09-21
Story Location: http://tandemnews.com/viewstory.php?storyid=3159