The Register: Apple = greedy, desperate and gasping?

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by srobert, Nov 7, 2003.

  1. srobert macrumors 68020

    srobert

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2002
    #1
    Ooooo.... nasty one here from the Register.

    Here is an extract:

    "...Running counter to several thousand years of basic human observation, Apple decided it could afford to control those points where we share music. It developed an opportunistic business with such compromises built in: a plan is to infect as many computers it could with restrictive DRM technology to allow us to rights we once took for granted. But why, you ask, is Apple helping an extinct, and unworthy industry back on its feet? Precisely why does this strike you as greedy, desperate and gasping? Let us explain..."


    Link to the article here
     
  2. Sayhey macrumors 68000

    Sayhey

    Joined:
    May 22, 2003
    Location:
    San Francisco
    #2
    Not only nasty, but what nonsense! This guy's idea is that artists will get money from a penny tax on every cd sold that would be shared with all artists. The record labels will just go away in his utopian world. A little less venom and a little more realism might be in order.
     
  3. mactastic macrumors 68040

    mactastic

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2003
    Location:
    Colly-fornia
    #3
    Didn't this surface a while ago? or something very similiar? I'm no fan of the RIAA, but this just doesn't sound like the way to go.
     
  4. jxyama macrumors 68040

    jxyama

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2003
    #4
    very interesting read...

    a few points of objection:

    1) his suggested "flat-tax" to be charged to everyone and distributed to artists have some problems. it will not fly in america because some people will NOT pay for music because they just don't listen to music. taxes for road or healthcare are different because whether we walk, use pub. transportation or drive, we still use the road and we could also get suddenly ill and require healthcare. listening to music is probably a bit too personal of a choice to validate a universal tax. in addition, distribution of the tax back to artist is ripe for corruption and red tape. also, who will take care of marketing?

    2) i can understand why apple would want to do iTMS - to sell iPods. i think to them, making a few cents (eventually) on iTMS song sales is nothing compared to the profit they get from the sale of iPods. if iTMS helps sell 10% more iPods than now, it's well worth it.

    3) i agree with his assertion feeding the antiquated dinosaur that is RIAA is not the best thing to do. however, i am not sure if that makes apple greedy or desparate. apple simply sees an emerging market. i *think* once the CD sales sag further and RIAA has no choice but to distribute music primarily on the internet (which i believe will happen), the leverage will shift to the online music sellers. they will be able to negotiate a better licensing deal simply because RIAA won't have much choice.

    4) the iTMS may be a short term solution to a newer eventual model of music distribution, however, since music purchased from iTMS will not "expire" like some rental services, you can keep on listening to music you purchased even if iTMS is terminated... yes, some of its functions may be cut back, like sharing, if apple decides to kill iTMS, but you can still listen to music...

    5) DRM, evil or not, is a response to rapid advancement in technology. "fair use" in the past didn't consider the possibility of distribution of near-exact copy to become so popular and easy. so i think it's at best debatable to think that what used to be allowed under a different technological circumstances should simply be extended. so i think some level of DRM is necessary because it is now simply too easy to share and too many copyright holders are not be in compensated. now, the issue of those copyright holders not being the creaters of those copyright works is a bit different matter...
     
  5. groovebuster macrumors 65816

    groovebuster

    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2002
    Location:
    3rd rock from the sun...
    #5
    Not to forget, that not every music you listen to is necessarily from an US artist. So what happens to artists from other countries? Also... who decides who is an artist or not? So my sister buys a guitar next week (she knows about 3 chords) and claims that it is art what she's doing and wants to be paid by the government.

    In my opinion that guy is a pot-head. Why not providing free cars to everybody as well and taxing everybody for it! Now that would make sense!!! ;)

    groovebuster
     
  6. LethalWolfe macrumors G3

    LethalWolfe

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2002
    Location:
    Los Angeles
    #6
    I love how Apple gets singled out like there are no other on-line music stores. :rolleyes:

    That rambling is so pathetic it's staggering.


    Lethal
     
  7. caveman_uk Guest

    caveman_uk

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2003
    Location:
    Hitchin, Herts, UK
    #7
    Andrew Orlowski has a REAL problem with DRM and has railed against it in the past in it's many incarnations - not just iTMS. So at least he's consistent.:rolleyes:

    To be honest his idea of a flat tax for music is dumb. Why don't we also have a flat tax for cigarettes, gasoline and alcohol? Sure lots of people use these things but there's a fair few that don't and to penalise all of them is a little unfair.

    If you want a non-DRM'd source of downloadable music then there's plenty of choice - if I was given the choice I'd prefer legal. Sadly being a mac user outside the US I'm not given that choice....
     
  8. johnnowak macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2003
    Location:
    New York, New York
    #8
    That tax is beyond stupid. How old is this guy, 14? Has he no clue about how anything works? He should be shot.
     
  9. srobert thread starter macrumors 68020

    srobert

    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2002
    #9
    The guy says: "As iTMS is the leading download service, with 80 per cent market share (or so Jobs claimed)..."

    Make your research buddy. That data came straight form Nielsen SoundScan, not "Jobs" So NO, he's not lying or exagerating as you might be trying to lead your readers to believe.

    Looks like he's just frustrated that he can't easily download his music for free from Kazaa anymore. The guy is scared of lawsuits from the RIA and that pisses him off. He's just vomitting his anger on iTMS.

    Very theraputic... but oh so unprofessional.
     
  10. Fukui macrumors 68000

    Fukui

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2002
    #10
    Re: The Register: Apple = greedy, desperate and gasping?

    He's just very anti-DRM, which is understandable. Apple is the leading force for all this, so of course their being singled out.

    Hopefully, if apple can get the trust of RIAA, someday they could slowly move toward thinning the DRM till it doesn't exist anymore.

    Wasn't there a story or something saying apple wanted to do no DRM in the beginning?? Maybe sometimes you have to work with the tough guys to get their trust, and then slowly change things as time goes by...
     
  11. rueyeet macrumors 65816

    rueyeet

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2003
    Location:
    MD
    #11
    The bias of the Register against ANY scheme of DRM is made plain every time they use the term "pigopolists" to describe RIAA members, or when they talk about DRM "infecting" people's computers. They seem to be among the people who want to believe that "information may inherently want to be free, to find the shortest path, to interpret payment as damage and route around it" (link), but that's more philosophy than reality.

    The current abuse of the copyright system by the recording industry is indeed f*ed, and a new solution needs to settle out of the ashes here, but whether that's the pie-in-the-sky of compulsory licensing has yet to be seen, or tested.

    I actually was so amazed by the disconnect of the article from the realities of the actual world, that I wrote the guy. Basically the point was: Steve doesn't care about RIAA, or DRM, or your philosophy. He wants to sell iPods, and you don't sell iPods without music. Since Apple doesn't make money off the music either with iTMS or compulsory licensing, what the heck does the whole mess matter to them either way?

    Talking to some open-source fanatics can be much the same headache: to some, not only should open source be a legitimate alternative, but all software should be open AND free (both as in beer and liberty).....and everyone should care as much about it as they do!

    :rolleyes:
     
  12. e-coli macrumors 68000

    e-coli

    Joined:
    Jul 27, 2002
    #12
    iTMS is a marketing channel to save QuickTime as a format, and to sell iPods. Period. End of story.

    The author of that article is both angry and socially immature.
     
  13. jxyama macrumors 68040

    jxyama

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2003
    #13
    completely off topic but e-coli, man, i've noticed your 'tar for a while. i can't say whether i think it's cool or it's frustrating waiting for your 'tar to stop so i know the Mac OS is done loading... :D
     
  14. MrMacMan macrumors 604

    MrMacMan

    Joined:
    Jul 4, 2001
    Location:
    1 Block away from NYC.
    #14
    Apple is greedy.

    They could easily lower each of their models price by $300 and probably more.

    Apple gets a lloott of money from each model they sell.


    As for iTMS there was no way for apple to get a deal with the artists or RIAA without DRM.

    Apple is not very restrictive so let it be.
     
  15. Macco macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Jun 15, 2003
    #15
    Yeah, if the computer had no processor :rolleyes:



    BTW, what does this even have to do with this thread? The article is about the music store, not really Apple in general.
     
  16. themadchemist macrumors 68030

    themadchemist

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2003
    Location:
    Chi Town
    #16
    thanks, this had to be said. But Apple really could start selling computers 300 dollars cheaper, if it didn't spend the money in R&D, stopped innovating, and sent everything out in beige boxes with 12 loud fans JUST TO MAKE SURE it had its bases covered. No, precision costs money, and Apple is precision. It's a premium product and you've got to be willing to pay a premium price. I wish it were a little cheaper, and I'm sure Apple could bankroll a say, hundred dollar discount, which it does & more if you're a developer or educational buyer...Nonetheless, I understand the prices and I'm willing to pay what I do because I know what kind of product I'm getting, not a hunk of hardware thrown into some el cheapo metal box. It's part of the reason that Mac users don't surf the web looking for that "sweet case," and, worse, those "sweet fans."
     
  17. Sun Baked macrumors G5

    Sun Baked

    Joined:
    May 19, 2002
    #17
    So it would be better to add a 1-7 cents tax on every blank CD-R, CD-RW, DVD-R/RW, etc. sold than find a way to reduce piracy, and make legal music purchases easier and less expensive.

    And it's doubtful that Apple will make any staggering profits with music at the iTMS, it may take other media such as movies, books on tape, etc. to bring in the money.
     
  18. Freakk123 macrumors regular

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2003
    Location:
    Bronx, NY
    #18
    HOW DARE YOU! I'm 14, and NO 14 year old is this dumb!;) :D But anyway, what an idiot... he has absolutely no idea what he was talking about.
     

Share This Page