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.
Apple Corps Confirms Beatles Coming To iTunes
- Thread starter Flowbee
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Exclusive deals are the devil.
If this was MS, we'd all be up in arms crying foul. No songs are contractually exclusive to iTunes, yet it does OK. We'll be fine.
If this was MS, we'd all be up in arms crying foul. No songs are contractually exclusive to iTunes, yet it does OK. We'll be fine.
Agreed!
I've been enjoying Apple since '92, The Beatles since '73.
I don't want exclusive "Beatles with Apple" for the same reason I don't shop at the iTunes Store: I require more control, over the content I purchase, than Apple allows.
And that very concept - "Apple restrictions" - is one I am still having trouble accepting. It completely goes against that which drew me into the Apple abyss to begin with: a sense of independence, control, and freedom in a time with increasingly less of those same qualities.
Ke sera sera... so break out Leopard already and let' get to it!
I've been enjoying Apple since '92, The Beatles since '73.
I don't want exclusive "Beatles with Apple" for the same reason I don't shop at the iTunes Store: I require more control, over the content I purchase, than Apple allows.
And that very concept - "Apple restrictions" - is one I am still having trouble accepting. It completely goes against that which drew me into the Apple abyss to begin with: a sense of independence, control, and freedom in a time with increasingly less of those same qualities.
Ke sera sera... so break out Leopard already and let' get to it!
Not that I disagree, but who else would offer "U2" other than Limewire? Exclusive isn't really exclusive when there is only one "REAL" store in town. If there were more available music stores at the time, that deal probably wouldn't have been exclusive.
Eventually nothing will be exclusive...
Anybody that likes the Beatles already has their LPs, 8-Tracks, Cassettes, or CDs. Why wouldn't they just rip it into their iTunes Library?
There is a reason Apple didn't have the commercial at the Superbowl for the Beatles future digital release... nobody really cares.
Let's get some new mac pros and a true video iPOD already...
I think that's a load of crap....The Beatles are a wonderful band, I mean, what other band has come close to 166 million albums.
swingerofbirch
macrumors 68040
I couldn't tell you the Beatles from the Monkeys. But I start to wonder if they wouldn't be such a big deal if they didn't act like such a big deal. It makes me feel a little sick to see people with so much money trying to scrape a little more. I hope Jobs' wasn't blinded with his fanboyness for the Beatles to cut them an overly generous deal (although it seems any deal is overly generous).
Good.Because I do love Paul, Ringo, John and George except they and their familes really don't need to be any richer.
Tomorrow I will call his boss and get him to send Alex3231's wages to charity instead. Because I do love Alex3231, except that he and his family really doesn't need to be any richer.
It's all the songs that were published under the Northern Songs banner (which includes the later Lennon/McCartney compositions, but not the early stuff as well as some of the earlier Harrison and Starr songs). As you've said, the recordings weren't owned by Northern Songs, but the songs themselves, are. This is why you can hear lots of covers of these same songs in ads, etc., but not the original Beatles recordings (the infamous Revolution ad being an exception). Northern Songs was sold to ATV which was then purchased by Michael Jackson (with many thanks to Yoko Ono who wouldn't partner with McCartney to buy them out and supposedly encouraged Jackson to bid). Due to financial problems, Jackson merged ATV with Sony's music publications, and has subsequently used his shares as collateral on debts. On a side note, George Harrison's "Only a Norther Song" was a bit of a jab at Northern Songs and his dissatisfaction with his royalties, etc.
Cheers.
Beatles fans anywhere???
The attitude of some of the posters here makes me feel like NOT using an apple computer. I have used apples for years, not just since the "intel" jump... I am starting to believe that we are seeing some of these "crossover" users now and I sense a 12-16 year old wintel mentality towards things. Since so many apple users are so "artistic" how do so many here have such a poor attitude towards the Beatles - considered to be the harbingers of so many of the things we take for granted now in the musical arts. The Beatles as a band were very similar to apple as a computer maker. Do you not see that??? Both were pioneers, full of quality and a vision towards the future. There are very few musicians that would discount the Beatles so easily. Do a little research about the influence the Beatles had on people, the arts and recording technology - and then come back feeling a LITTLE bit less happy about your own influential abilities(and artistic offerings...) Beck and Radiohead (and other "artsy" people) seem a little less strange than once perceived after you really LISTEN to the beatles. Thank You. I feel slightly better now.
The attitude of some of the posters here makes me feel like NOT using an apple computer. I have used apples for years, not just since the "intel" jump... I am starting to believe that we are seeing some of these "crossover" users now and I sense a 12-16 year old wintel mentality towards things. Since so many apple users are so "artistic" how do so many here have such a poor attitude towards the Beatles - considered to be the harbingers of so many of the things we take for granted now in the musical arts. The Beatles as a band were very similar to apple as a computer maker. Do you not see that??? Both were pioneers, full of quality and a vision towards the future. There are very few musicians that would discount the Beatles so easily. Do a little research about the influence the Beatles had on people, the arts and recording technology - and then come back feeling a LITTLE bit less happy about your own influential abilities(and artistic offerings...) Beck and Radiohead (and other "artsy" people) seem a little less strange than once perceived after you really LISTEN to the beatles. Thank You. I feel slightly better now.
As opposed to a 12-16 year old mentality towards insignificant pop ballads adored just because the singers are cute.
The Beatles own the rights to their own recordings. Michael Jackson owns the rights to new versions (as in, performed by other artists than The Beatles) of those songs. But every original song performed by The Beatles is 100% owned by the Beatles. So if you want to make a cover-version of a Beatles song, you need to go talk to MJ.
I can never figure out why everyone here thinks the Beatles and Apple have a special relationship. Just because S. Jobs LOVES them and their two companies just reached a trademark agreement does not mean they're buddy-buddy. If anything, Apple Corps has realized 1) they can no longer make any money suing Apple and 2) Beatles record sales surely aren't increasing. Therefore their only remaining option is to offer the catalog online where they know stupid people will download redundant copies of "remastered" music.
Lame.
Get over yourselves.
It sounds the best on an LP anyway.
-Clive
Lame.
Get over yourselves.
It sounds the best on an LP anyway.
-Clive
I don't think anyone thought it would be exclusive to iTunes beyond a short introductory period, which is what makes this article such a NOP. I'm not convinced that article rules out a brief period of exclusivity, and those who think exclusivity will bring seven plagues can take solace in the fact that the exclusivity will expire around the third plague or so...
I've grown to like the Beatles, but I'd take that Police iPod in a snap!Bahhhhhh.
Forget a Beatles iPod.
I would rather have a special edition iPod of The Police!
Over rated and over hyped? Have you even listened to the Beatles? This is a band that in just 7 years went from "Love me do" to "Abbey Road". Name another band that so totally changed their music in a short amount of time, explored new paths, influenced more bands and basically changed the world. The only other band that comes close would probably be Led Zeppelin.
Name a band like that today. Hell, name a band that even sticks around for 2 years! Seems you hear from a band one month, then they're gone forever. No one comes along now to totally change everything and influence so many. I mean, how many big named bands were started the day after the Beatles appeared on Ed Sullivan? You'd be surprised.
If you don't like the Beatles that's fine. Opinions vary of course. But to deny their legacy and influence is a bit short sighted.