Comments on: Apple vs. Apple: Perfect harmony?
Can Steve Jobs turn around a tough legal problem and get his beloved Beatles in an iTunes exclusive?
Can Steve Jobs turn around a tough legal problem and get his beloved Beatles in an iTunes exclusive?
January 5, 2010 6:35 AM PST
January 5, 2010 6:33 AM PST
January 5, 2010 6:08 AM PST
Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.
More feeds available in our RSS feed index.
Related quotes
greedy. like they need more money! they're the biggest global
phenomenon ever and they're rolling in cash! don't try to tell me
they're protecting their name because i don't buy it! when you
think "apple" do you think "beatles" or "apple computer." that's
right, you DO think apple computer, and for a good reason.
Apple Corps is full of iteself. i think they should mind their own
business (which is doing quite well by any standard), and stay
out of apple's, unless of course they want to actually DO some
business with them.
On a more personal note, Apple Corps has lost a customer in me. I won't be buying anything else from them again.
-Alex Alexzander
Wrote about this over a week ago:
http://www.buzzhit.com/2004/09/forbescom-mccartney-rumored-apple.html
Nothing's changed since.
is that Steve Jobs may be buying Michael Jackson's interest in Northern Songs to get more leverage in his dealing with Apple Corps. This doesn't affect Ringo Starr or the Harrison estate so much but much irritates Paul McCartney. The idea is plausible because Michael Jackson is now bleeding money worse than SCOGroup and pre-1970 Apple Corps combined.
"If he looks too eager on that score, it's going to cost him."
I think Jobs can handle himself in negotiations.....
Hello!
Thats suppose to be sarcastic response to the quate, as in a
MAJOR UNDERSTATEMENT of the century!!!
Apple Corps doesn't sell anything to anybody. It licenses the image, words and music of The Beatles to other companies to sell and Apple Corps collects all royalties and other fees. This includes recorded music.
own way OVER 30 YEARS AGO is, to twist a phrase, "so last
century". As a highly trained classical musician, I could
appreciate a few songs that actually had real structure and
innovation. However, and in the "pop" culture of today, when
did The Beatles last record a new song? Sorry all, but I agree
with many other posters. If you think Apple, you think
computer/iPod/Thinkdifferent. You do not think of a small
scurrying bug. I can't say however that Apple Corps will be
loosing another customer because of this flap--they never had
me and never will. Let it go Apple Corp, you were a "revolution"
once, but that was "long, long, long" ago, so just "let it be".
The Beatles should win this quite easily since the agreement with Apple computer is quite clear. Apple computer and Apple records may share the name Apple as long as Apple computer does not enter the entertainment business.
With luck Apple records will win enough damages to wipe iTunes off the map but, I doubt it.
Apple corp never comes to mind.
i have been an apple computer fan from the begining. the logos
dont even look alike.
Apple corps logo is just ONE SOUR APPLE
I dont know too many people that really care about Beatles tunes
anymore. Over played and OLD
- apple vs apple
- by skidoodle March 29, 2006 5:10 PM PST
- When i think of apple i think of computers or fruit.
- Like this Reply to this comment
-
(22 Comments)Apple corp never comes to mind.
i have been an apple computer fan from the begining. the logos
dont even look alike.
Apple corps logo is just ONE SOUR APPLE
I dont know too many people that really care about Beatles tunes
anymore. Over played and OLD