Insert cliché about the occurrence of precipitation generally coinciding with the condition known as "pouring" here; just yesterday we mentioned that rapper Eminem had sued Apple over the use of one of his songs in an iTunes commercial, and then today we find that bona fide courtroom drama has just commenced in the Apple-vs.-Apple (read: Beatles-vs.-Apple) legal tussle. Movement in two recording artist lawsuits in the same week? Hallelujah-- and it's only Wednesday! If what they say about things always happening in threes holds true, then we suppose we can expect one more rock star lawsuit against Apple to show up within the next couple of days. Our money's on one by Courtney Love-- that lady just seems like she's itching for a fight. (Grounds, shmounds; she'll find some reason.)

Anyway, details on the Eminem suit were a little light yesterday, but now that there's been a day or so for people to dig a bit deeper, things are looking decidedly Less Good™ for Apple. Check out MacMinute for a juicy look at the 15-page lawsuit, including actual scans of the incriminating email from Apple's ad agency Chiat/Day in which the firm acknowledges that it did not have permission to use the song-- a full two months before the commercial wound up on the airwaves anyway. Whoops.

According to the suit, after Chiat/Day was denied the use of "Lose Yourself," it tried to license "The Real Slim Shady" instead, for a fee of $300,000. (That explains the mystery of the second "Jacob" ad.) However, that's when Steve Himself got into the mix, called the publishing company, and said it's "Lose Yourself" or nothing; he told Eminem to "rethink" his position, Eminem told his publishers to "end all discussions regarding the use of any of his compositions in Apple's ad campaigns" (although we strongly suspect those weren't his exact words; none of them is four letters long), and a couple of months later the commercials were broadcast anyway. Hey, didn't Steve say that stealing is corrosive to one's character? Maybe he's got Karmic Rust-Oleum or something.

Meanwhile, in Beatle country, Bloomberg reports that Apple has asked London's High Court to allow the lawsuit to be moved to California, presumably because it's sunnier there and it's easier to find good avocados. Lawyers for The Beatles want to keep the case in London, from which we infer that they just aren't fans of fresh guacamole. Apparently both the London court and a California judge have to rule on the issue, and if they don't agree on a common locale, the trial might proceed in both places. Woo-hoo, intercontinental courtroom intrigue! It's the stuff that miniseries are made of!

We also get a glimpse into Apple's defense strategy, here: whereas its agreement with The Beatles was that it would never go into the music business, Apple is apparently arguing that the iPod and iTunes are kosher endeavors because they actually deal with "data transmission"-- those "songs" are really just collections of ones and zeros that Apple is shuttling around at 99 cents a pop. Sound a little sketchy to you? Well, okay, but believe it or not, it just may be enough, because get this: "Justice Edward Mann asked if he was disqualified from presiding over the case because he owns an iPod." Score one for Apple, whose attorney replied to the judge, "I'm delighted to hear that-- we would perhaps have sent you one for free if that would not have been improper." So the judge is a 'Pod-lover; do we sense a slam-dunk in the offing?

Wuh-oh, looks like dark forces are conspiring to end our Napster-bashing once and for all. Yes, the company might have taken twice as long as Apple to sell its first 5 million songs, despite selling to a market ten times the size; sure, the company lost $15 million in its first quarter and is selling "about a quarter" as many songs as the iTunes Music Store; okay, a ton of top executives have already flown the coop and a bunch of employees were pink-slipped last week-- but Napster can still crush the iTMS underfoot and turn Apple back into, of all things, a computer company. All it needs is a little help from Redmond... and apparently it's going to get it.

That's right, people; now that the market has determined that Napster sucks the least among the iTMS's various competitors, Microsoft wants to make sure it sticks around for a good long while-- at least until the iTMS is beaten into submission. Faithful viewer Robert Fernando tipped us off to a New York Post article which claims that, in order to fight the iPod and the AAC audio format, Microsoft is "quietly shifting some of its marketing muscle" to give Napster a little boost. So far evidence of Microsoft's help is a little on the skimpy side: a Napster-branded version of Windows Media Player and "prominent placement" for Napster on Media Center PCs. But the Post seems to think that might just be the beginning, and with Microsoft's weight behind it, Napster could emerge as the dark champion in the battle between the iTMS and Everyone Else.

Microsoft's motive, of course, is to get as many people as possible buying music in its Windows Media format, instead of the AAC format which Apple uses, which is-- horror of horrors-- not owned or controlled by Microsoft! (You didn't know such things still existed, did you?) The idea is apparently that if more people buy WMA music, then fewer people will buy iPods, which, at least for now, won't play WMA songs. And if people buy WMA players instead of iPods, then more WMA music gets sold and the iTMS loses its momentum. At some point, Apple either loses enough money to get out of the digital music business altogether, or it gives in and licenses WMA; either way, at that point it's WMA all the way, Microsoft finally owns the entire planet, Bill Gates ascends to outright godhood, and we can all line up to get our mandatory Passport ID codes tattooed on our foreheads. Simple, huh?

So other than Apple licensing its Digital Rights Management system so that other stores and players could use its protected AAC format (a move which would likely kill the company's iPod sales, and the iTMS already only breaks even), mankind's only hope for survival is for Apple to maintain its massive technological and sales lead with both the iPod and the iTMS long enough for other download services, including Napster, to wither and die from slow sales and terrible profit margins. It's certainly possible, since Apple has a huge lead and doesn't seem willing to let it go. But Microsoft's wallet is a lot fatter than Apple's, and the forces of evil have nothing but time...

Just a quickie, here, folks, on the prospect of further Apple retail stores in foreign lands. But first, an apology: a couple of days ago we made a throwaway comment about Canadians calling ham "bacon" and that appears to have offended a few of our normally easygoing neighbors to the north who were quick to insist that, in actuality, they call bacon "ham." Or maybe it's that we call bacon "ham," we forget. There's also some issue with "bacon" versus "back bacon," and apparently somehow universal health care and hockey fits into the whole thing, too; don't ask us, we really don't understand any of this whole bacon-ham imbroglio. We're vegan, remember? We eat Bac-Os.

Anyway, we're sorry if we offended the Canuck portion of our viewing audience; while we don't partake of your lovely meats, you should know that we're huge fans of your knack for teen melodrama, so we can state with complete confidence that this continent would be far the poorer without your presence.

Moving on, this is the part where we say "golly gee whillikers, what a coincidence!" Because here we are apologizing to Canada, and our topic for this scene just happens to be rumors of the imminent spread of Apple retail stores north of the border! How 'bout that? AppleInsider reports that, after peppering the U.S. with its stark 'n' swanky boutiques and then moving on to Japan and, allegedly, the U.K., Apple will soon be doubling back to its home continent to slap up a couple of stores in the Great White North. The first two stores are rumored to be going up in the Toronto area: the Yorkdale Shopping Centre and Toronto Eaton Centre. Other locations would presumably follow.

It's still just a rumor at this point, but a pretty believable one in our estimation. Sadly, there are no details about when these stores might open, but if we were Canadian we'd still be resting comfortably in the knowledge that, in addition to not having to shell out a thousand freakin' bucks a month for health insurance (on a totally unrelated note, have we mentioned lately that we're selling t-shirts?), someday soon we'd be able to get a little taste of retail heaven on earth. Life is good in the Northern Lands.

Of course, we still say that stuff ain't bacon.