I think music should be free and artists should make a living of ads and concerts.
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
I think music should be free and artists should make a living of ads and concerts.
Fine, at last apple reversed bad decission.. but, they tried it, that makes me worried about apple`s class... don't get how you can say apple is classy because they changed their decision under pressure, so Microsoft like (xbone launch similarity)
I think iPhones and iPads should be free and people like Tim Cook, Jony Idiot, Eddy Cue should get their salaries paid from keynotes entrance fees...
If you can't afford to pay for music, just say so... You can't expect people to work for free, especially something that involves their passion, just to satisfy your lust for everything free...
Btw, how old are you kid...?
Could we get Taylor to tweet them and ask for a 32GB mackbook pro ?
Pshh... Artists have scrawny arms. They need retina MBAs.
Artists should have the right to choose how to distribute their work and how much to charge - just as you have the right to chose your workplace and negotiate your salary. If I like a car, I will buy it. I won't steal it and expect the manufacturer to make their income from advertising.
Many artists make most of their income from concerts - but the work that goes into writing and recording an album should not be ignored. I can't go into a recording studio and tell the staff that I refuse to pay them because my music will be distributed for free!
I agree it is cheap, but I would not compare it to renting stuff at a department store.
For me, streaming is mostly about listening to music that I usually wouldn't buy. There is a huge amount of music on my wish list that I would like to listen to, but I know that I would listen once or twice, and then perhaps never again. There are soundtracks for example or more obscure music by artists who I generally like. So I don't buy the music. No, I don't torrent it either, I simply decide not to listen to it. For $9.99 a month though, I feel that it is "cheap enough" that I don't mind anymore. I will continue buying music that I really like, but all the rest will be streamed, and then artists will get money for music that I usually wouldn't buy. I'll actually be spending more money for music than before. It's a bit like getting stuff from the department store cheaper that they have trouble selling at full price.
Of course, there are people who will just stream all their music. Yes, they will be able to get a huge amount of music at a pretty low price indeed.
It's just what I think, I don't know why people think the artists should gain millions... But anyway, that's how the market works, if people is willing to pay a dollar for a song then that's how it's gonna be, and if people just wan't to pay 9.99 for streaming or streaming for free with ads then you have to suck it.
Why is this funny? We know from history that this could happen. https://www.macrumors.com/2013/07/10/apple-found-guilty-of-conspiring-to-fix-prices-in-e-book-trial/
to everyone who defened Apple over this, now you get to praise them. Though quite a few people over the last couple threads are going to look very very silly.
Though as Swift said something bad about apple, I'm sure she will get a bashing here, MR lynch mob 101 rules.
And well done apple. Lesson here, when you piss away billions on Beats, followed by buying them a radio station and streaming service, don't go tight on the lifeline of the service, the artists! Bad press, you can afford to avoid.
Though as Swift said something bad about apple, I'm sure she will get a bashing here, MR lynch mob 101 rules.
And well done apple. Lesson here, when you piss away billions on Beats, followed by buying them a radio station and streaming service, don't go tight on the lifeline of the service, the artists! Bad press, you can afford to avoid.
This is worth a read https://junction10.wordpress.com/2015/06/21/those-in-glass-houses-shouldnt-throw-stones/
Apologies if it's been posted before
Apologies if it's been posted before
Lol, you've got it all wrong. Using the case you linked as an example, Apple would be Amazon.
This whole Apple Music thing has been messed up from the beginning. First this awful presentation, now this. It seems like Apple is in a comfort zone right now. I wish they would operate less open and more streamlined again.
I think iPhones and iPads should be free and people like Tim Cook, Jony Idiot, Eddy Cue should get their salaries paid from keynotes entrance fees...
If you can't afford to pay for music, just say so... You can't expect people to work for free, especially something that involves their passion, just to satisfy your lust for everything free...
Btw, how old are you kid...?
Why the attack? Who's the kid here? I said I think music should be free, does my opinion affect your insecurities in any way?
I'd assume they know what they are doing, in regards to streaming, though i suspect the presentation has left a bad taste in our mouths, it was that bad, I think the service could actually be very good.
exactly, there original decision was anything but classyHow quickly you forgot the original decision
Now they can stop whining and congrats Apple for responding in the right way.
I fear though that Artists will now have the power to hold Apple in the future, by removing their music from the service and saying they want higher payments ETC..
EDIT: Do you think Swift and Cue look similar?
I fear though that Artists will now have the power to hold Apple in the future, by removing their music from the service and saying they want higher payments ETC..
EDIT: Do you think Swift and Cue look similar?
That's not intimidation. She politely pointed out they were being tight arses, and that is not apple we all know. That was a guilt trip. And it worked.
You congratulate people for correcting wrong decisions ?
How do you come to a conclusion that the artists have the power now? They had no bargaining power other than media and bad press for Apple. It was about to go viral and make apple look bad.
You are going the wrong way, im saying if you cannot afford why no steal and live a better life?
Remember, the definition of words were made by people and not by GOD or something
So maybe live by the laws are making other people rich when you are living in the streets or have no music in your life
Means a decision was made, was about to go viral in the media making apple look bad, the decision was overturned , everyone one thinks apple are awesome and the best company in the world again , and have selective amnesia over the first decision.
This must be worth quite a bit in the free publicity. btw does this mean that the royalty to labels is reduced back to the industry standard 70%?