Apple vs Apple - Judgement
06/04/06 12:27
The final judgement in the Apple Computer versus Apple Corps case is expected before the end of the month.
The Beatles holding company, Apple Corps, is hoping the case will be declared in its favour. It wants Apple Computer to cease using the Apple logo in connection with its iPod and iTunes products.
If Apple Computer fails in its defence that its service is simply data transmission, rather than the release of music, then Apple Corps will pursue the computer company for damages.
With the arguments for both sides now closed, Judge Edward Mann must now decide whether to grant an injunction barring Apple Computer from using the logo within iTunes.
Justice Mann says he will probably issue his ruling toward the end of the month, but not before Easter weekend.
The Beatles holding company, Apple Corps, is hoping the case will be declared in its favour. It wants Apple Computer to cease using the Apple logo in connection with its iPod and iTunes products.
If Apple Computer fails in its defence that its service is simply data transmission, rather than the release of music, then Apple Corps will pursue the computer company for damages.
With the arguments for both sides now closed, Judge Edward Mann must now decide whether to grant an injunction barring Apple Computer from using the logo within iTunes.
Justice Mann says he will probably issue his ruling toward the end of the month, but not before Easter weekend.
Apple vs Apple - more....
04/04/06 21:04
An Apple executive took the witness stand Monday to defend the company against a lawsuit filed by The Beatles’ record company for allegedly breaching a trademark agreement.
Eddy Cue, vice president of iTunes at Apple Computer, on Monday sought to deflect Apple Corps Ltd.’s charge that the computer company violated a 1991 agreement that it would stay out of the music business.
The iTunes Music Store is a feature within Apple Computer’s iTunes music jukebox software application. Since the feature debuted in April 2003, Apple Computer says it has sold more than one billion songs, pushing sales of its hard-disk and flash-memory music players, which firmly hold 70 percent of the market.
Apple Corps attorney Geoffrey Vos asked Cue to confirm that the Music Store had offered exclusive tracks from artists such as U2 and Bob Dylan.
“We have tracks that are temporarily exclusive to us in the Music Store, and so do most of the other services,” Cue said in the High Court in London.
James Hoffman, an Apple Corps witness, testified earlier that Apple Computer converts its music files to a proprietary format to restrict how the files are used. Hoffman is chief executive officer of Woodstock Systems LLC.
The similarity of the two Apples’ names and logos has prompted three lawsuits from the record company since the early 1980s. This round, lawyers are contesting a 1991 agreement that limited the services and business areas where the companies could use their trademarks.
But the agreement, which resulted from a US$25 million settlement paid by Apple Computer from the second lawsuit, hasn’t kept up with the Internet era.
Vos has argued that the agreement said Apple Computer can’t use its logo to sell downloaded music. Apple Computer counters that the agreement permits data transfers, and the content it sells is generally available elsewhere online.
The subjective answer lies in just a few lines of legalese from the agreement. The High Court’s official, Justice Edward Mann, has an iPod and said he has used iTunes, a familiarity that attorneys on both sides have warmly accepted.
Apple Corps is seeking an injunction that would bar Apple Computer from using the logo in connection with music sales. If granted, Apple Computer may have to remove the trademark from advertisements and software that use it in connection with the Music Store.
The record label could then pursue damages against Apple Computer, a potentially expensive thrust.
Apple Corps, founded in 1968 by The Beatles, administers the band’s continuing commercial interests with an acute legal scrutiny. The label is still owned by Paul McCartney, Ringo Starr and the heirs of deceased members John Lennon and George Harrison.
As a group, The Beatles have shunned selling their music online. But in July 2005, concert renditions of “The Long and Winding Road” and “Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Band” by Paul McCartney from a Live 8 performance in London were sold through the iTunes Music Store.
John Lennon’s solo work was licensed in November 2005 to several download services. Ironically, that deal excluded iTunes, despite Apple Computer co-founder Steve Jobs’ professed affection for the band.
Eddy Cue, vice president of iTunes at Apple Computer, on Monday sought to deflect Apple Corps Ltd.’s charge that the computer company violated a 1991 agreement that it would stay out of the music business.
The iTunes Music Store is a feature within Apple Computer’s iTunes music jukebox software application. Since the feature debuted in April 2003, Apple Computer says it has sold more than one billion songs, pushing sales of its hard-disk and flash-memory music players, which firmly hold 70 percent of the market.
Apple Corps attorney Geoffrey Vos asked Cue to confirm that the Music Store had offered exclusive tracks from artists such as U2 and Bob Dylan.
“We have tracks that are temporarily exclusive to us in the Music Store, and so do most of the other services,” Cue said in the High Court in London.
James Hoffman, an Apple Corps witness, testified earlier that Apple Computer converts its music files to a proprietary format to restrict how the files are used. Hoffman is chief executive officer of Woodstock Systems LLC.
The similarity of the two Apples’ names and logos has prompted three lawsuits from the record company since the early 1980s. This round, lawyers are contesting a 1991 agreement that limited the services and business areas where the companies could use their trademarks.
But the agreement, which resulted from a US$25 million settlement paid by Apple Computer from the second lawsuit, hasn’t kept up with the Internet era.
Vos has argued that the agreement said Apple Computer can’t use its logo to sell downloaded music. Apple Computer counters that the agreement permits data transfers, and the content it sells is generally available elsewhere online.
The subjective answer lies in just a few lines of legalese from the agreement. The High Court’s official, Justice Edward Mann, has an iPod and said he has used iTunes, a familiarity that attorneys on both sides have warmly accepted.
Apple Corps is seeking an injunction that would bar Apple Computer from using the logo in connection with music sales. If granted, Apple Computer may have to remove the trademark from advertisements and software that use it in connection with the Music Store.
The record label could then pursue damages against Apple Computer, a potentially expensive thrust.
Apple Corps, founded in 1968 by The Beatles, administers the band’s continuing commercial interests with an acute legal scrutiny. The label is still owned by Paul McCartney, Ringo Starr and the heirs of deceased members John Lennon and George Harrison.
As a group, The Beatles have shunned selling their music online. But in July 2005, concert renditions of “The Long and Winding Road” and “Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Band” by Paul McCartney from a Live 8 performance in London were sold through the iTunes Music Store.
John Lennon’s solo work was licensed in November 2005 to several download services. Ironically, that deal excluded iTunes, despite Apple Computer co-founder Steve Jobs’ professed affection for the band.
Aple vs Apple - Day 4 in court
03/04/06 12:01
Apple Computer's legal team continues to pick holes in the argument fielded by Apple Corps in the landmark trademark case in the UK High Court.
Apple Corps is demanding that Apple Computer cease using an apple logo in connection with iTunes and the iPod, claiming such use is in breach of a 1991 usage agreement between the two companies.
Apple Computer counters that the agreement instead allowed Apple Computer to employ the mark in a wide field of use, including data transfer and transmission.
As a result of the $26.5 million 1991 settlement, both parties had agreed terms of use of the apple logo: "Apple Corps' field of use is very narrow indeed, being confined to creative works whose complete content is music," said Apple Computer courtroom representative, Lord Grabiner, QC, according to the BBC.
He also lamented the fact that The Beatles have so far not licensed their music to any existing online service, saying the surviving members of the band have "missed out" in the fight against piracy as a result.
Apple Corps' claims Apple Computer's music distribution business to be "flatly contradictory to the provisions of the agreement."
An Associated Press report reveals an amusing moment in the case last week when iPod user Judge Mann cut short Apple Computers' explanation of what iLife '06 does.
"ILife is not a complete novelty to me. I've got it and I use it," the judge said. Apple Computer's QC said that should the case go to a higher court, the judge there may not be as clued-in to such technology.
Judge Mann replied: "The higher up one goes, the less likely it is that anyone will know what we're talking about."
The hearing is expected to close this week.
Apple Corps is demanding that Apple Computer cease using an apple logo in connection with iTunes and the iPod, claiming such use is in breach of a 1991 usage agreement between the two companies.
Apple Computer counters that the agreement instead allowed Apple Computer to employ the mark in a wide field of use, including data transfer and transmission.
As a result of the $26.5 million 1991 settlement, both parties had agreed terms of use of the apple logo: "Apple Corps' field of use is very narrow indeed, being confined to creative works whose complete content is music," said Apple Computer courtroom representative, Lord Grabiner, QC, according to the BBC.
He also lamented the fact that The Beatles have so far not licensed their music to any existing online service, saying the surviving members of the band have "missed out" in the fight against piracy as a result.
Apple Corps' claims Apple Computer's music distribution business to be "flatly contradictory to the provisions of the agreement."
An Associated Press report reveals an amusing moment in the case last week when iPod user Judge Mann cut short Apple Computers' explanation of what iLife '06 does.
"ILife is not a complete novelty to me. I've got it and I use it," the judge said. Apple Computer's QC said that should the case go to a higher court, the judge there may not be as clued-in to such technology.
Judge Mann replied: "The higher up one goes, the less likely it is that anyone will know what we're talking about."
The hearing is expected to close this week.
Happy 30th Birthday Apple
01/04/06 08:33
Yes, 30 years ago Apple Computer was formed.....
My how times have changed..
My how times have changed..