Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Adele's New Album Won't Be Available on Apple Music
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
How is it greedy for someone to want the music they created to be distributed on their terms? Completely up to her and similar artists how they want their music to be distributed
As someone else mentioned, how odd for people to claim she is greedy and then say they will use it as an opportunity to pirate. Not a fan of adele's music and wouldn't have listened to it either way but people should stop acting like Adele or anyone else owes them something
As someone else mentioned, how odd for people to claim she is greedy and then say they will use it as an opportunity to pirate. Not a fan of adele's music and wouldn't have listened to it either way but people should stop acting like Adele or anyone else owes them something
This story has nothing to do with Syrian refugees and the support of anything political. Further - can you please point out anywhere in the MR story or the NYT story where Adele gives ANY commentary about wanting more? I read that she wasn't available to comment. But maybe you spoke to her on the phone today and could provide greater insight.
Things like this are why I don't like Streaming Services. Netflix have the same issue there is always that one piece of content that isn't available and you think to yourself why am I even paying for unlimited access if they don't have what I want?
Sucks that Adele's decided to do this but I can understand why, it will sell more Albums and then later on when the buying frenzy wears off she can open it to streaming services and get some more money.
Sucks that Adele's decided to do this but I can understand why, it will sell more Albums and then later on when the buying frenzy wears off she can open it to streaming services and get some more money.
I can appreciate the sentiments, but this is a reflection of a situation that pre-dates the existence of recorded music. Rights to distribute books, music, movies, videos, etc. are sold/licensed on a nation-by-nation/region-by-region basis (my company once had a distribution contract with a Canadian firm that covered all Canadian provinces and territories but Nunavut - they weren't willing to promise they could profitably sell our product in that particular locale). Copyright laws vary on a nation-by-nation basis. For physical media, this kind of piecemeal distribution was (and is) necessary - physical goods require a physical presence, and in many cases, to have a physical presence, the law requires a separate corporation that is registered (and paying taxes) in that country.
Part of it is just plain common sense - a locally-based business is generally in a better position to efficiently reach the wholesalers and retailers who sell in that market, to produce consumer advertising and promotional materials that resonate in that market, etc. And all but the largest companies simply do not have the resources to do all of this on their own - rights are often licensed at a fairly low price to local publishers and distributors, because the costs and barriers to entry are far higher than even the most optimistic profit projections allow. A fair amount of the business that goes on at publishing industry conventions has to do with the licensing of international rights.
Internet vendors like Apple and Amazon have to deal with the laws that are in place, as well as traditional deal-making practices. If, say, Adele's management makes an exclusive deal with a Russian distributor of online music (for sale to the Russian market), then Apple and Amazon can't sell Adele's music in Russia unless they buy it from that Russian distributor. If local laws ban the sale of a particular kind of media over the Internet, than the iTunes Store unit that operates in that country isn't going to be able to sell that kind of media. And so on.
The Internet can present the illusion that we live in one world, but that world is fragmented by language, custom, the desire for local rule... Territoriality is a trait that's nearly as old as life on Earth. And iTunes Store operations reflect that reality. Apple's fault, if any, is in the decision to operate world-wide and to abide by local law.
As to Adele, Taylor Swift, et. al... These are experiments. Artists and publishers are searching for viable, profit-making strategies in the face of change. They're taking their cue from time-worn practices in book publishing and the movie industry - withholding the product from the less-profitable forms of distribution during the initial release period (hardcover-only during the first months, followed by trade paperback, followed by mass-market paperback; first-run theaters followed video-on-demand followed by DVD/Bluray/digital download sales, followed by rentals, followed by pay-cable networks like HBO, followed by network television....). In many cases, a few months of piracy will only build interest in the legal editions of the work, once available.
To me this says my album sucks and I know no one will stream it. If I can't stream I won't listen to your songs sorry, unless it's on the radio.
100% agreed. All these artists continue to complain about streaming and piracy. Yet none of them complain how much money labels take from them per dollar generated. Why not challenge the labels' business model first instead of going after the end consumer?
I'm glad i stuck on the purchase my music path 
I look forward to buying a physical copy later today. Going to be a great album.
Adele never complained about wanting more... she's one of the more down to earth artists, who does things on her own terms. She doesn't play the game, she practically just releases the music she wants to release and does things how she likes.
I look forward to buying a physical copy later today. Going to be a great album.Adele never complained about wanting more... she's one of the more down to earth artists, who does things on her own terms. She doesn't play the game, she practically just releases the music she wants to release and does things how she likes.
So when Apple overcharge for some things it's because they're a business after all, but when an artist values their work they're greedy? That's so hypocritical.
Good decision, it keeps the Apple Music subscribers safe from an album of whinging and self pity. How long can anyone go on about a failed relationship? Her album called '85' will probably still be about that one.
This at least means I won't accidentally have to hear Adele wailing uncontrollably by accidentally if i shuffle new releases. Excellent news.
The comments on here boggle my mind. I can't believe you'd support piracy because an artist value of their art. She will for sure released her album later on streaming services but wants to release her album traditional ways to start. Nobody here calls Drake greedy because he signed a multi-million dollar deal with Apple to be exclusive for Apple Music.
That's not what I was saying.
I can't even buy a copy of the album on iTunes or a physical copy at the store until tomorrow. I can't stream it today, or ever it seems. I'm already paying $15/mo for Apple Music. So if I want to hear it now, the only option would be to steal it.
The point is the record industry's expectations need to become congruent with modern realities. I don't know what the solution is, but they have billions of dollars to hire people smarter than me to figure out how to monitize their product appropriately and keep fans happy. Streaming music is a damn good start.
This is a dangerous prescident. We may not have access to the biggest names in music on our streaming services as time goes on.
Apple should not sell her album on iTunes either until she agrees to both sales and streaming terms together.
Yeah - I caught that sense of entitlement in both that qualifier and that he would need to pirate it. Because clearly waiting is just way too much trouble.
Oh well it is Adele no loss like Taylor Swift less of typical pop music better for me to find better underrated artist or Electronic/Dance artist on Apple Music and I wasn't going to buy Adele's album either way never had interest into her music. Yeah I know I am going to get hate comment such as "Good for you now good bye and let people who like Adele make comments".
By promoting music as having greater intrinsic value you can artificially raise the cost of hearing it. This makes some music inaccessible because there is a large upfront cost associated with consuming it. Consumers, now forced to make a choice between artists will lean towards musicians who have produced music they enjoyed in the past, or are part of popular culture. The problem for artists is that it ultimately reduces consumption and lowers brand recognition of fringe artists. Who wins if this idea is embraced by society? The people already winning.
Even if she had it on iTunes Music you'd have to pirate it, as its not out in the US yet....