Maybe Anton Newcombe - will like Soptify's business practices better for royalty payments where the CEO gets paid billions and artists who get millions of streams get paid next to nothing - that is evil.
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 Not Coercing Indie Artists Into Apple Music Deals With iTunes Removal Threats
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
As has been stated a couple of times, the "guy" in question does indeed have a screw loose... they made a whole documentary about it!
Sounds more like you are a straight-up Apple hater...
Anyway, to everyone else, since I am both a fairly unknown indie artist as well as an indie record label with music on the iTunes Music store, I have some actual insight into all of this. The offer I received was simply, Apple has a new streaming service "Apple Music" and I have the option to add all of my current iTunes Music Store music to this new streaming service with the condition that I won't get paid for the first 3 months of streaming due to the free trial. Me opting in or out has no affect on my music releases that are currently in the iTunes Music Store. Simple as that. I opted in since it's worth it for me to get my music on Apple's streaming service in case it does take off; though I generally don't like streaming services because I don't make as much money...
Also, I've made more money selling through Apple's iTunes Music Store than any other service (e.g. Amazon MP3 Store, Google Play, Xbox Music, etc.) And don't even get me started on Spotify! As I mentioned in another thread here, for every song of mine that sold on the iTunes Music Store (of which I received 70 cents per song) that same song streamed 50 to 100 times on Spotify... and I have yet to see a single penny in over 2 years from Spotify! Yes, I'll be pulling all of my music from Spotify very shortly here.
EDIT: One other thing I want to clarify is this, I don't think people get how the 3 month trial works, especially with relation to an indie artist. It's not a 3 month free trial starting in June and nobody gets paid no matter what! It's a 3 month free trial whenever a particular user signs up for the Apple Music streaming service and it depends on what he/she actually listens to.
So, for example, lets say Joe Schmoe decides to finally sign up to Apple Music on September 1st. He now has a 3 month free trial until the end of November. During that time all his "streams" are nothing but U2, AC/DC and Neil Diamond. So those 3 artists (or rather, their Record Labels) won't get paid for Joe's streaming during the months of September through November. Do you really think I am worried about that as an indie artist? Really?
On the flip side, say one of my fans (yes, I do have some) signs up to Apple's Music stream and the first thing they do is look for my songs. If I had opted out, my fan can't stream my stuff and I don't make any money anyway (and then my fan may forget about me and move on.) But if I opted in, which, again, I have, then my fan, who has already most likely bought my music in the past, is happy to see I am also part of the streaming service and now looks forward to what I do in the future. It's definitely a win/win for any indie artist to opt in and not to worry about the 3 month trial. It's really not that big of a deal.
Last edited:
I myself have been a musician for 35 years. When I consider the amount of airplay and exposure I could receive on Apple Music I think I can accept 3 months of free streaming if I can get more exposure to sell tracks in the future. It's not all one sided here.
Spotify and Rdio combined don’t cover all of the user bases, being on another wide-spread platform gives the artists a chance to enlarge their audience base.
It does sound good, expect the only things guaranteed are that the artists will not get paid during the free trial and the more artists on Apple Music the more appealing the service looks to potential customers. The artists are giving a lot in exchange for nothing for a guaranteed nothing for the first three months (which will most likely have an insane amount of traffic).
Apple certainly has the funds to pay royalties for the first three months out of it's own pocket and make it a win/win situation. Apple gets more artists (the more musicians the more appealing Apple Music is) and the artists still get paid. Great PR is a bonus for Apple. Of course, Apple didn't get to have nearly $200 billion in the bank by being loose with the purse strings.
@ "The biggest company on earth wants to use my work to make money for 3 months and pay me nothing..."
Knock yourself out pal and turn down a chance to have tens of thousands of potential new customers be exposed to your music. I've never heard of your band and I suspect I'm not an isolated case. And the way you've acted, I have no desire to either.
Knock yourself out pal and turn down a chance to have tens of thousands of potential new customers be exposed to your music. I've never heard of your band and I suspect I'm not an isolated case. And the way you've acted, I have no desire to either.
of course it is.
But since it is Apple who is trying to enter the market, and it is Apple who is offering the free service, it should be Apple picking up the costs. Not trying to pass it on to the suppliers
I don't believe that's true at all. I have neither Spotify nor Rdio, but listening to ITunes Radio has allowed me to find over a dozen artist I've never heard of before, and whose music I've purchased. I expect the same to happen with the new iTunes music, so personally I see the benefit for artist to opt in even if they don't get rolayry payments the first few months.
On the flip side, once again if an artist or a label doesn't like the terms, they don't have to sign up. I know corporations lie, but it would be very stupid for Apple to straight up lie about this if the artist in question has proof, so unless I see some sort of evidence, I'm going to believe Apple for now.
There's no gun to anyone's head.
I thought Spotify paid half a penny per time song was streamed? Why haven't you at least gotten a few little checks?
More customers = more money for the artist
Free trial = more customers = more money for the artists
If artists don't see the value in investing in the free trial they can choose not to be a part of the service. But no way in heck should apple have to pay artists in order to encourage them to invest. They've already built them a platform that prints money.
Did the musicians pay Apple while they were building this platform? Heck no. Apple made an investment and built the platform and now the artists can choose to join.
No one owes anyone anything here. You either sign up or you don't.
Again:
More customers = more money for the artist
Free trial = more customers = more money for the artists
Don't like the idea of a free trial that is designed to make you more money? Don't join the service. Simple as that.
Gesualdo murdered his wife. Schubert was rumoured to be homosexual.
Even sinners can write good music. It's a good idea to separate the man from the music.
Ignoring the little guy for a moment (though we shouldn't) imagine the impact on a known, big, popular artist who is releasing a new album on July 1 and the impact on sales if everyone for the 1st three months of availability could listen to it for free; do you really believe that wouldn't impact sales?
Imagine if everyone could watch Jurassic World free for the first three months after release for nothing, do you really think that would be good for cinemas or the studios?
You kind of missed the part of the story (In the headline) where the guy wasn't actually telling the truth...
They don't have to take part. It doesn't devalue anything. If you get added to people's playlists during the free trial and they still listen to you after the trial ends, you get paid. Pretty good deal.
Terrible analogy since the work is already done and after the three months they will start to get paid without doing any additional work...
Indeed he must have something in writing somewhere. No one from Apple is phoning every indie artist in the i
Last year they forced app developers to give away five copies of their apps for the price of one. I guess that emboldened them to now screw musicians.
Sometimes you can't have a decent conversation when the other person is loyal to a brand. Discussion basically ends up being a joke. That's why I try not to click Samsung vs Apple articles. It will be a one sided discussion.
I own a iPad Air 2, iphone 5, a Note 4, Moto G, Moto E, Nexus 7, Nokia 635, 521 and custom hand built pc times 3. I'm as honest as it will get around here.
I didn't read all the replies, but I got to thinking, Apple Music is new music offering among ones already in existence. I get artists want to be paid for their work. I am trying to understand how providing work that has already been available on other services, free to the user or otherwise, to a new service will put them out of business. Do they stop getting royalties from other sources?
Serious question.
Serious question.
Homosexuality isn't a bad thing.
Murder isn't going out of your way to bite the musical hand that feeds you in a desperate attempt to gain attention for that same music. In other words, his personal problems don't color my perception of his work. Even if they did, Gesualdo's affront was over four centuries ago -- he won't be benefiting in the slightest by my enjoying his music (or be put out if I don't).
This is different. It'd be like someone barging down my door and blaring out music in my living room at 4am, yelling at me to buy their stuff. It might be great music, but I'm going to be pissed off enough that I'm not likely to give them my patronage. This kid is obnoxious to the point that I don't want to reward his lie-fueled tantrums.
Its almost like we both make music and understand what is really going on here. People need to think more like an artist before getting upset about this stuff
Thanks for the clarification.
I kind of thought that was how it was. Opt-in to the new Apple Music service under their (Apple's) conditions, which is total separate of the existing arrangement artists have in the iTunes Music (download) store.
Artists that don't like it can stay with the existing arrangement.
I actually had offers like this when I was looking to break into the movie business. Ended up going the special effects route. If it wasn't for a very specialized skill I had that they they were desperate for in a few productions, I would have been eating dog food for the pleasure of being in the business. Even then, the "Who is he?" and then the scoffing reaction of "He is getting paid!?!" when I was not in their secret society was enough for me to tell most of their cabal to **** off before I left. Tech is so much more up-front, honest and pays better.
I get that, but that will/might be the case regardless of wether their music is available in Apple Music. I think I would want to be on it, who knows if you get suggested or put in a curated playlist.