The Guardian's technology blog explains why Apple Computer won the lawsuit brought by Apple Corps.

Apple Computer, the court ruled, is in the data transmission business. It's not in the business of selling music.

(Now at this point you should hear a chorus of cackles and laughs from the old school music biz crowd for who digital music is a rather soulless, geek-driven business.)

The Guardian poses a question:

"Simple question: does Computer package, sell or distribute any physical music materials? That's the crux of the whole argument. And the answer has to be no. When the iTunes Music Store tells the hard drive on your computer to rearrange some of its bits, there's nothing physical being passed. Just instructions. In theory, (Apple) Computer could sell songs by having semaphore teams and someone standing by your computer, adjusting the 0s and 1s on the platter in just the right way to create a copy of the song that's at the Store."

Before you ask about the different between digital and physical music --- as in, "Isn't music music?" -- here's a quote The Guardian lifted from the Apple/Apple 1991 agreement:

"The computer giant agreed that although it may be involved in digital music, it would not package, sell or distribute any physical music materials, such as CDs."

Could it be that Apple Corps didn't anticipate the rise of digital music? In 1991, the act of selling music was selling CDs, cassettes and LPs. In 2006 it includes those three plus digital downloads -- which are "just instructions" between computers that a pre-Internet, protectionist company simply couldn't have foreseen.