It's good to hear that Apple is going to pay the artists during the free trial. This should hopefully bring in labels that weren't going to participate in the free trial.
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 Reverses Course, Will Pay Artists During Apple Music Free Trial
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
If Apple wrote it they wouldn't have burned themselves so badly.
I expect Apple to pay taxes, I just know it's not going to happen.The US over-pays for healthcare while Canada gets free healthcare. Yeah it's funny that people that don't live in the United States expect Apple to pay taxes.
Of course they could go into pharmaceuticals if they really wanted to make money, those margins make Apple's look pathetic.
She already showed that she doesn't have any issues with retracting her music, so I'm guessing there is some merit to what she is saying. And Does it matter? She achieved something that none of those little grubby hipster bearded groups that you are likely to listen to will never achieve.In stead of second guessing the motivations of something that might not adhere to your personal taste, it might be good to look at the overall picture and see what is happening here.
I wish Taylor Swift's music was half as good as her negotiation skills. I mean she should probably be SVP at Apple.
Do you know how long trials have to go on and all of the red tape those companies have to go through to get their drug to market?
Am I the only person who is glad that Apple reversed course, but hopes that Swift's album still doesn't appear on Apple Music?
In stead of second guessing the motivations of something that might not adhere to your personal taste, it might be good to look at the overall picture and see what is happening here.
I agree, after all, this is good news for everyone, Taylor Swift, the artist, and the paying customer. And not to forget, Apple as well.
I think this turnaround by Apple is a good thing, but why do you "hope" that Swift's album doesn't appear on Apple Music? I'm not a Taylor Swift fan but I couldn't care less if others do like her music. It's not like you're being forced to play her music you know....
That opens the door to a whole new tier of Apple Music. $9.99 a month you get unlimited streaming music including Taylor Swift, $14.99 a month you can skip the Taylor Swift songs.
You know all this talk of flip flopping around with multi billion dollar contracts at the last minute makes me think this was a cunning stunt. Perhaps Taylor wanted to get back into streaming but didn't want to capitulate to spotify so she concocted this with Apple. I would say the ownership of the cunning stunt is hers and Apple have just gone into it to satisfy her hoping to get her on to Apple Music.
I'm loving Taylor and Apple so I'm happy !
I'm loving Taylor and Apple so I'm happy !
Nope, Apple got beat up by the rolling stones: http://www.rollingstone.com/music/n...-refuse-to-sign-apple-music-contract-20150616
Oh, that's great, I haven't heard that excuse parroted since 7pm when Sixty Minutes ran an old rerun on Big Pharma.
Why do we pay five times as much for the same drugs? Could it be because congress is in Big Pharma's pocket, check that out when you're off the kool-aid.
Oh, and be sure to also review the publicly funded research that gets patented by private drug companies, it's a hoot.
Family Sharing from the consumer side shows that some apps are not shareable, as an opt-out item.
Indeed, and that's because Swift is generating quite a bit more money these days than the Stones are.
So, they got beat up by a girl and some senior citizens.
I wonder if the Apple fanboys who berated anyone who spoke out about this policy of not paying the artist now feel betrayed by apple for not reciprocating the blind allegiance.
Would that make you feel better as a person? It's funny how some people think there is some war to be fought and won on this forum.