Mr. Thompson suggests that, in 1991, nobody had heard of a firm called Apple Corps. I doubt that very much. There are enough fans of The Beatles who know plenty about their history. I’m sure many of us recall seeing the name “Apple Corps Ltd” on the ‘Magical Mystery Tour’ album (in the US) or EP (in the UK) back in 1967, and, wondering what that was about. Fans being fans, we really did want to know everything about our favorite group. How could you not know about ‘Apple Corps Ltd’ since evey recording from the “Hey Jude” single forward was a self-promotion for the company based on the logo itself.

What is excessive about being paid for your work considering the unknown shelf life of music (intellectual property seems, to me, to take an awful beating in the world of commerce versus other more tangible goods). Think about it. Not everyone is or can be a Beatles. Even to The Beatles, this “business of music” is new territory. So, why not protect your property?

So, Apple Computer makes agreements and breaks them (allegedly), and, the implication is that Apple Corps should be more humanistic and generous. What?!

I like these comments about The Beatles taking from the past and they were radical anti-establishment “heroes” (my interpretation of Mr. Thompson’s comments).

Of course, music is influenced by what came before. That’s someting that makes it so damn interesting as an art form. It’s organic. So what? The Beatles gave us brand new interpretations that were solely their own, which is what artists do. The Beatles never claimed credits for recordings of others they covered. Those writers did quite well from Beatles sales as well.

Yes, I am in complete sympathy with anyone, in any field of art, who, due to past practices, was not paid properly. That needs to be fixed.

The more perspective I have on The Beatles’ history, the less I find that they were radical anti-establishment “hippies” to the degree that is sometimes associated with them. When push came to shove, three of them fell into Allen Klein’s world, while Paul went with traditional entertainment lawyers, the Eastmans. Even prior to Apple, Brian Epstein was pretty traditional. Yes, their music and personal behavior was radical and anti-establishment and they were loved by people from 9-90 around the World, but that is one part of their lives, a huge part. Thier business world was not so radical and anti-establishment. I think that’s what we are addressing here.

As far as business models go, how do we address the lack of ethics that appears to have become the norm when it comes to intellectual property? I mean, really, when do you, as an individual, understand the potential suffering that is caused by treating intellectual property as something different from buying a refrigerator. I suggest that the general public is no better than the old record company moguls who stole from their artists.

Maybe we need to re-think the business model, but if we are going to have a world where some people use their heads to write a book or compose a song, they should at least get paid for it, so they can live to write another day. I don’t think anything’s going to change the fact that there are going to be those who, in the eyes of the genral public, are so good at what they do, that, as a group summed, these vast majorities will fork over an ungodly sum.

Thanks for the space to reply

It’s a chase to be the first to “own” a name.
Why should people own words?
Very vague and broad words?

“Apple corp.” is rather abusive.
Why not “Beattle’s Apple Corp”?

Ah, because corporations can then use the system to extort money.
And we all know they like money.

Someone needs to stand up to these thugs. Even if they just go it alone in court, I can’t see a jury convicting someone for copyright infringement.