“It’s a busy time for Apple Computer. Its iPod portable music player is the Walkman of the millennium. The accompanying iTunes program is resolving long-standing disputes in the record industry. Apple is reportedly even looking into buying a record company. But there’s a wrinkle,” reports Roger Friedman for FOXNews.com.
“It’s the Beatles. They haven’t recorded together since 1969. Two of the four original members are, quite sadly, deceased. And yet the Beatles stand to pose a big problem for Apple Computer. That’s because the Beatles own a holding company called Apple Corps, Ltd.,
You knew it was only a matter of time…
now theres some crappy news
What a load of crap.
because you know…people would get confused and think that maybe steve was the really the 5th beatle
and you know how pissed they’re going to get knowing that apple (computer) is going to make it so easy to buy music that people will be updating their beatles collections at the click of a mouse…that’s gotta suck…all of those royalties and stuff…
money, money, moneeee, monnn – naaaaaay! let the litigation begin.
that may be why they insist on calling it the “itunes music store” and not the “apple music store” ????
I believe that Apple was named after the apple commune or farm (in Oregon) that Jobs worked at, before Apple Computer, hit it big. He didn’t name it after the Beatles label.
Well and agreement is an agreement. If jobs wan’t visionary enough to see that music was in the computers future, then he shouldn’t have signed the agreement. I say that Apple just needs to pony up.
What’s wrong with changing the name of it to itunes music store? As long as Apple has the service, I don’t care what they call it.
And while we are on the subject of the Beatles and Apple Computer, why can’t Apple get the rights to distribute their music?
– Mark
One of many strikes against the Beatles, even though they had some great music, they are not the Gods that most would make them out to be. And this just proves how all the “imagine” fluff is a load of crap from them…
I am sorry but the only living Beatle that holds any of the original spirit of the Band The Rocked the World is Ringo, and I doubt he really cares.
Leave Apple alone, the Beatles should be trying to sell more songs to Michael Jackson, you know – because they arent sell outs or anything.
Not that the Beatles don’t already have enough money. Let’s sue Apple for more. Personally, I think that it is Paul more than Ringo that throws all these fits. Didn’t Michael Jackson buy many of the rights to the Beatles?
As a side note, has anyone seen the old Apple logo with Issac Newton and the apple falling from the tree? I think that in and of itself is differerent enough. My 2�.
One, look at the source: Fox News. We aren’t talking about the most legit or unbiased news source out there. Two, even if Apple Records were gearing up to take on Apple, they would have known about this when Apple was talking with EMI…I, for one, think this is a complete load of crap and that it is possible that Apple is in negotiations with Apple Records to get Beatles songs on the store…
Geoffrey Sperl: You mistake FOXNews brand of actually FAIR AND BALANCED NEWS (without a leftward liberal slant) as not “legit” because you are a tree-hugging, commie, pinko, hippie. You are so used to looking through the liberal bias prism of US National news media that when that prism is removed you can’t fathom the truth.
Of interest to all:
Origin of the Apple Name: Steve Jobs came up with the name Apple when he was driving with Steve Wozniak, and The Woz has provided a few possible reasons for Jobs’ selecting that name other than because it’s easy to remember. Not long before Jobs told Woz what he wanted to name the company, Jobs had been at the All One Farm in Oregon where there were a lot of apple trees. Woz also suggested it could have been because Jobs was a music fan and wanted to name the company after The Beatles’ record label, Apple Corp. If you look at the original Apple logo, you’ll notice it’s a picture of Sir Isaac Newton sitting under an Apple tree, so maybe Newton was the inspiration.
In any case, The Beatles’ record label didn’t appreciate Apple ripping off its name and approached the computer company. Apparently, some secret agreement was made allowing Apple to continue to use the name so long as they never started making music products. In 1989, Apple started offering products that could synthesize music, which resulted in a lawsuit from Apple Corps. The suit was settled in 1991 for $26.5 million. As a side note, Apple gave Yoko Ono and Sean Lennon Macs when they debuted in 1984 and used an image of John Lennon and Yoko during its “Think Different” campaign.
From TechTV: http://www.techtv.com/screensavers/twistedlist/jump/0,24331,3330833,00.html
Re: One, look at the source:
Yeah, guess you would have believed it if it came from the “truthful” liberal NY Times…
One other point: Berhard Goldberg, a longtime liberal reporter, has a book that outlines the liberal bias in the media. Your problem is that your so used to news being reported with a liberal bias. When Fox reports it with less of a liberal slant, you see it as a conservative bias.
Goldberg, a liberal, has said Fox news is actually pretty fair and balanced. So who should I believe, you or a liberal who’s worked almost his entire life in the media?
Why not offer those two left-over Beatles sellig their music without a percentage for Apple.
Gee, what a winers.
If Fox News is “balanced”, then David Duke will be the next chairman of the ACLU, when he gets out of jail, of course.
FoxNEWS *is* balanced coverage. You are just so used to getting your news with a liberal slant that when the field is level you tip sideways.
– I am a black man and a conservative Republican and a Mac user. Wrap your tiny minds around that one.
I LOVE this site!
Anyone suggesting Fox news is a “Fair and Balanced” source for news ought to have their head examined. And the “liberal media” canard is getting very tiresome (Hello…Clear Channel, Rupert Murdoch, Gannett News???). If you want to inform yourself, pick up Eric Alterman’s “What Liberal Media?” Otherwise, keep your head in the sand and avoid seeing the truth at what is happening to this country.
Read and learn, everybody:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/0895261901/ref=lib_dp_TFCV/103-9924986-0490232?v=glance&s=books&vi=reader#reader-link
Yes, read and learn: http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0465001769/qid=1054654657/sr=2-3/ref=sr_2_3/102-5575466-9445715
Fox News; tee hee! Hard to take them seriously about anything after their GWII coverage. They routinely braodcast conjecture and opinion as “news.” It’s not real journalism.
Honestwoman, when Rupert Murdoch comes out and says (in an interview with Charlie Rose) that he has no interest in objective news reporting and would rather be the nation’s “cheerleader,” all the sloganeering in the world by people like you won’t hide the truth about the bias of FoxNews. But way to keep the debate above the table, without all of the petty name calling. Hey, if you want to think that Private Lynch ran out of ammo while killing all of those evil Iraqis, great. If you need to believe she got shot and stabbed during her courageous battle, okay. If the fact that she just fell out of a truck during a firefight slights you in some way, go for the myth. But do some real research before you shoot off your mouth. (And maybe you’ll find out why people say Lynch got the “Statue Treatment” and what that means.) You want to be one of the “angry sheep”, fine. But at least attempt some amount of credibilty in the process. Back to Apple…
Fox News – it’s nice to hear the news without the Democratic National Committe’s influence. Fox News – not afraid to step on emotional, lacking-in-pragmatism, liberal toes.
Once the Liberal Bias is removed, it’s so shocking that people can’t believe the truth. There’s a reason Fox is number one and CBS, NBC, and ABC are in deep decline.