iTunes Music Store: Soulless corporate rip-off?

Discussion in 'General Mac Discussion' started by Flowbee, May 21, 2003.

  1. Flowbee macrumors 68030

    Flowbee

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Location:
    Alameda, CA
    #1
    Here's the column from the SF Cronicle:

    http://www.sfgate.com/columnists/morford/

    A quote:
    "This is the tragic flaw, the biggest disappointment of Apple's much-vaunted service. It is the underlying unfair evil that, if you're at all aware of the music industry's long-standing vow to gouge your ass to high heaven and screw their own artists out of royalties and keep the prices of antiquated CDs artificially high and continue to promote slick prefab hit makers to the detriment of new, quirky, more talented indie acts, bites your attuned consumerist butt every step of the way. Apple could've gone for revolution. They settled for mild rebellion."

    What do y'all think?
     
  2. Flowbee thread starter macrumors 68030

    Flowbee

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Location:
    Alameda, CA
    #2
    I think this column is way off base. The writer has a problem with the music industry and is basically blaming Apple for not creating an entirely *new* music industry. One step at a time, dude. :confused:
     
  3. QCassidy352 macrumors G3

    QCassidy352

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2003
    Location:
    Bay Area
    #3
    The Boston Globe had an article about the apple music store today and it didn't take that tone at all. About the only problems listed were that selection could be better and that it's too addictive. ;-)
     
  4. pianojoe macrumors 6502

    pianojoe

    Joined:
    Jul 5, 2001
    Location:
    N 49.50121 E008.54558
    #4
    What exactly did this guy expect Apple to do? How do you maintain a general-public music store, and include only artists that haven't signed with the Big Five?
     
  5. strider42 macrumors 65816

    strider42

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2002
    #5
    well, apple has said they intend to include indie labels as well, its just a matter of priorities (I mean, obviously the stuff they'll sell the most of is the pop radio stuff). And since the music is all owned by the record companies, apple can't very well sell it however they want. Apple did a great job in minimizing the impact of DRM. Frankly, I don't think the person writing such an article really understands whats going on.
     
  6. bennetsaysargh macrumors 68020

    bennetsaysargh

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2003
    Location:
    New York
    #6
    he obviously does't know what's going on. sure it may be mainstream, but it needs time to get more music on there.
     
  7. Abstract macrumors Penryn

    Abstract

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2002
    Location:
    Location Location Location
    #7
    I think that what he wrote was the longest run-on sentence I have ever read in an article written by a "professional" writer. He already lost credibility with me, so I don't care of his opinion. ;)
     
  8. G4scott macrumors 68020

    G4scott

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2002
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    #8
    The problem is that if Apple doesn't play by the rules of the major recording companies, they get the shaft, and no more music for iTMS....

    I'm sorry, but Apple alone can't change the recording industry, because the big 5 own the business...

    This isn't like the computer industry, where Apple can bring on a new revolution with every new product...
     
  9. bennetsaysargh macrumors 68020

    bennetsaysargh

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2003
    Location:
    New York
    #9
    as long as Apple keeps on continuously adding more music, and good music, they will do fine. note i said fine, i said that because they won't revolutionize it because it will take a while for everything to become online and what-not.
     
  10. AmbitiousLemon Moderator emeritus

    AmbitiousLemon

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2001
    Location:
    down in Fraggle Rock
    #10
    (trying to ignore the bigotted comment about SF)

    I largely agree with the author of the article. The Music Store is a blantant rip off and just more criminal activity of the music industry. However I do not blame Apple. Everything that was in Apple's control seems near perfect (though the store does need some work). I always find it funny how the music industry spends tons of money trying to convince consumers they are thieves and then it is the music industry that twice been found guilty of price manipulation. makes you think about who the real pirates are.

    Apple had a choice between offering what they gave us or giving us nothing. Although I will never use the store in its current incarnation I still believe Apple was right to offer what they could.

    Even with the apparent success of the store the Music Industry is fighting the porting of the store to windows. They make more money off digital files than CDs (while offering less) and CDs have already been shown to be priced illegally high. More money for the Music Industry (let apple cover all the costs and risks), less product for the consumer, no benefit to the artists.

    But as I said Apple was in no position to change any of this. Seems they had to bend over backwards just to get the Big5 to agree to what we got.
     
  11. jadariv macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2002
    #11
    I would have to say, that 'yes', the music industry has abused artists.

    But let's not forget that it is an "industry". 2 cents do not go to the artist and 9.98 into some executives pocket. There are hundreds of thousands of people who make their livings off of that $10.

    If not for the industry, the artist would not sell albums and be able to travel the world and make the money or live the lifestyle that they get.

    It wouldn't surprise me in the least that this writer was in a band that didn't make it.

    As for CD pricing. I think this is what is killing the industry and not file swapping. The music industry had it's biggest sale year in 2000 at the height of Napster's power. They work hand in hand.

    Also, the Apple Store is great, easy and once it is a proven and viable entity I am sure they will have sufficient leverage to start lowering prices and adding the content that this author wants. Rome wasn't built in a day.
     
  12. AmbitiousLemon Moderator emeritus

    AmbitiousLemon

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2001
    Location:
    down in Fraggle Rock
    #12
    I agree with much of what you said (CD pricing/napster) but I disagree with your harsh assessment of the author. Though I disagree with the way the author blames Apple for the illegal business practices of the music industry, I still feel he is correct in labeling the store as a soulless corporate rip-off. Apple did all they could (apple's side of things are near flawlesss). But the plain fact of the matter is that in the end this means more money for industry, less product/rights for the consumer, and no more money for the artists. Also if CD prices have twice been found illegally manipulated by the music industry and digital files are now being sold at even higher prices (with less production and overhead costs) it makes you wonder how anyone can consider $1 a song fair pricing.

    Pay more, get less, reinforce illegal plrice fixing. How can you not frame this as the author did. The only mistake the author makes is to suggest Apple had any choice. Considering the way Apple has been fighting to get a windows version past the Big 5 it seems Apple battled all they could to bring something worthwhile to the consumer. It was this or nothing I suspect. Lets just hope Apple continues to fight the Music Companies fromt hte inside, it may be a battle of baby steps but we could see changes.
     
  13. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #13
    Blaming Apple for the underlying problems in the music industry is like blaming California for being located in an earthquake zone.

    For me, it's the greatest thing since the CD. Besides, it's cheaper;)
     
  14. AmbitiousLemon Moderator emeritus

    AmbitiousLemon

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2001
    Location:
    down in Fraggle Rock
    #14
    This is a good way to look at it. Although since the Music Industry holds all the cards at this point the deal consumers are getting is getting slanted to favor the industry. But I beleive Apple is fighting for us.

    Btw many people here are familar with lawsuits against MS, but seem to be unfamilar with the illegal activities of the Music Industry. Before you accept their braindwashing telling you file sharing is wrong perhaps you should look at who is telling you this. [just a note, no one here was defending the music industry outright but i thought it should still be said]
     
  15. Snowy_River macrumors 68030

    Snowy_River

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2002
    Location:
    Corvallis, OR
    #15
    Yes, I agree with much of what's said, but I do think the author missed the boat in blaming Apple. I, too, think that Apple is fighting for us. A couple of years from now (yeah, maybe that's being a bit optomistic, but hey, I'm an optomist) the iTMS could prove to be the crack that breaks the foundation out from under the Music Industry. We could see a much more 'indie' run music industry, where most distribution is handled through the iTMS or a competing product. Indies sign up and upload their music, and that's that. From there on, it's in the hands of the consumer. Who knows, maybe there will even be a version of this for radio stations, where they can download the song just before playing it... Hmm...
     
  16. tazo macrumors 68040

    tazo

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2003
    Location:
    Pacific Northwest, Seattle, WA actually
    #16
    I disagree with this guy on many levels. One such level is that he blames corporate greed for apple's problems. This is simply untrue. i also disagree with him based on the fact that he writes from a newspaper that historically I vehemently disagree with.

    [mod edit: There's a new thread.]
     
  17. Phil Of Mac macrumors 68020

    Phil Of Mac

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Location:
    Washington State University
    #17
    *innocently wonders what's wrong with selling valuable things*
     
  18. tazo macrumors 68040

    tazo

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2003
    Location:
    Pacific Northwest, Seattle, WA actually
    #18
    Thx rower, although at the time I had not seen it.

    -tazo
     
  19. Tequila Grandma macrumors regular

    Joined:
    May 17, 2003
    Location:
    Boston MA
    #19
    I think because Apple's products bring us such joy, and are so user-friendly, we assume that they're not actually some giant corporation, but they are. Of course they're going to push the same boring crap music they play on the radio, because that's the easiest way to make money, and Apple, like all other large corporations, wants to make money. Sure, it'd be really neat if Apple gave the front page of their music store to better artists, but that wouldn't result in them making nearly as much money -- it's as simple as that.

    ...and the author of the article can't be that bad, they like "Bachelorette", one of my favorite Björk songs :D

    Arigato,
    Brook
     
  20. Foxer macrumors 65816

    Foxer

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2003
    Location:
    Washington, DC
    #20
    Apple has to make the music available on iTMS "popular" music, as opposed to the "quirky" indie bands. Popular music is just that - popular. It is where the money is. "Popular" doesn't mean "good." To be honest, as much as I like the iTMS, there is much, much more music I would buy available on eMusic.com. However, I already bought that on regular CD.

    iTMS is, I hope, only a first step. I look for the catalogue to grow, as well as the "exclusive" content. A wise company would allow the "quirky" indie bands to make their songs available to the public on iTMS (and thus to a large audience) for whatever fee would be needed to cover Apple's hosting costs.
     
  21. Ugg macrumors 68000

    Ugg

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2003
    Location:
    Penryn
    #21
    Supposedly Apple gets 33% of the sale from the 5 majors. Say you're an Indie band and sign up with Apple, Apple keeps 75% for the first 10,000 songs sold and then the band gradually gets a larger share of the take. That provides Apple with enough revenue to cover its intial costs and the band gets (eventually) worldwide exposure.
     

Share This Page