Sidebar Sidebar
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

You can say what you want, but ...Taylor Swift made this happen.

I've been working professionally in the music biz for twenty years. It's good to see someone who has it all take a stand for those of us with less fame and fortune.

Today's a good day !!!
 
jdillings said:
Thriller has sold 42.4 million copies. How many copies has 1989 sold?
Click to expand...
4.6 million records in U.S. In 2014 and 10 million plus singles.

By the way Thriller sold 166k albums its first week versus 1.28 million for 1989.
 
Last edited:
N4v4rmind said:
You can say what you want, but ...Taylor Swift made this happen.

I've been working professionally in the music biz for twenty years. It's good to see someone who has it all take a stand for those of us with less fame and fortune.

Today's a good day !!!
Click to expand...
You should instead be mad at your label for agreeing with the original terms. They were supposed to be the ones to fight on your behalf.
 
So she's going to do the right thing and put her album on it right? Cause why else would she make such a big deal?
 
LMAO at Taylor, its obvious she is only in this for the money, as dissing one music streaming service and supporting another that pays better is just transparent. Also she could care less about "indie" artists, since she has been a signed puppet of the music industry for years. How about try singing a song without Auto-Tune rather then acting as a corporate shill for getting paid to play under the guise of standing up for indie artists.
 
I've heard that Ms Swift also likes her computer's up-gradable with no soldered in RAM.
Eddie, she's expecting your call. & don't forget to ask her what's she's wearing... ;)
 
doelcm82 said:
Her album sales say people do like her.

Personally, I don't think I would recognize her if I saw her on the street, or if I heard her songs. But I'm admittedly out of touch with what's popular in music. Apparently, so are you.
Click to expand...
Yeah i guess i'm still stuck on the 80's and 90's Alternative.
 
ChrisCW11 said:
LMAO at Taylor, its obvious she is only in this for the money, as dissing one music streaming service and supporting another that pays better is just transparent. Also she could care less about "indie" artists, since she has been a signed puppet of the music industry for years. How about try singing a song without Auto-Tune rather then acting as a corporate shill for getting paid to play under the guise of standing up for indie artists.
Click to expand...
The authentic Taylor Swift died ~2008-2009.
 
It's not surprising Apple would try this. What's surprising is that they did a 180.

What's also surprising is the lack of the usual "Apple is not a charity" commenters here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Nausicaa
MentalFloss said:
Actually, it was a matter of hours between Swift's letter and Apple's reaction, which makes it very unlikely that Apple reacted to her letter. I think they were reacting to the general publicity snafu that this whole thing was turning into. To make the change, they had to change the contracts with the record labels. Contracts always have to go through legal departments and legal departments work slowly.

Whatever Cue tweets then doesn't matter. He won't tweet the meeting minutes of the internal meetings of Apple management. He tweets whatever looks good for Apple.
Click to expand...

He's claiming her letter was the deciding factor but they were aware of discontent from other artists.

In an interview with Billboard, Cue elaborated that it was Swift's letter that turned him around on the issue. "When I woke up this morning and saw what Taylor had written, it really solidified that we needed a change. And so that's why we decide we will now pay artists during the trial period."

Cue added that Apple had heard the same "concern from a lot of artists," noting that it was "never our intent" to not compensate artists, rather they were planning to originally negotiate a higher royalty rate, which they will stick with.

Asked if Apple is eating the cost of the 90-day trial period, Cue said, "We're certainly paying for it, yes. We're all in."
Click to expand...

http://www.billboard.com/articles/n...ylor-swift-open-letter-will-pay-labels-during
 
  • Like
Reactions: ErikGrim
ChrisCW11 said:
LMAO at Taylor, its obvious she is only in this for the money, as dissing one music streaming service and supporting another that pays better is just transparent. Also she could care less about "indie" artists, since she has been a signed puppet of the music industry for years. How about try singing a song without Auto-Tune rather then acting as a corporate shill for getting paid to play under the guise of standing up for indie artists.
Click to expand...

Obviously you're not talking about Taylor Swift here.

Nice attempt though.
 
n8lio
 
I don`t get it 95% of all app developers work for nothing all the time!!!!! So what is the fuss about.
 
Benjamin Frost said:
It's not. It's just another bad album like most new music these decades.

We'll have to agree to disagree.
Click to expand...

I regularly listen to music from just about every decade and century (back into the 1500s). There's a lot of junk music today but there was a lot of junk in the 90s, 80s, 70s, 60s, 50s.... There is more enjoyable and good music today than there was in the 60s and 70s, you just have to filter out the noise (just like you did in the classic rock days). Some of the hit pop music today is quite good (and a lot is not). I know many people who get so stuck on music from "their generation" that they miss out on quality new music.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Nausicaa and JeffyTheQuik
Parystec said:
I don`t get it 95% of all app developers work for nothing all the time!!!!! So what is the fuss about.
Click to expand...
Don't you understand? Getting a record deal is supposed to equal immediate fame and fortune to these whiners.
 
ChrisCW11 said:
LMAO at Taylor, its obvious she is only in this for the money, as dissing one music streaming service and supporting another that pays better is just transparent.
Click to expand...
Yes, this whole discussion was about money. Nobody kept that a secret, perhaps that is why it is so "transparent". You're acting like you made some major discovery here.

Also she could care less about "indie" artists, since she has been a signed puppet of the music industry for years.
Click to expand...
She is signed to an independent label. Even I knew that, and I have hardly any interest in contemporary music.

How about try singing a song without Auto-Tune rather then acting as a corporate shill for getting paid to play under the guise of standing up for indie artists.
Click to expand...
How does her choice of production techniques have anything to do with her stance on streaming services?

Your whole argument appears to be "I don't like her music and she is earning money from it, so she is not entitled to having an opinion on the music business!"
 
  • Like
Reactions: ErikGrim
It seems to be lost on most of the media reporting this that Apple was still paying the labels during the 3 month trial period. These artists complaining need to go back to their labels and bitch. The labels are taking advantage of the newer technologies and the pay scales associated with them while artists remain at their existing contractural rates. Artists have been at the mercy of record labels for years getting pennies on the dollars earned. This is just another example. If artists like Taylor Swift want to make a difference, maybe they need to start fighting the labels themselves and demanding more. That of course could be suicide for an artist in the recording industry and isn't likely to ever happen...

Like usual, the way people listen to music is continuing to evolve and change and there is nothing the industry can do to stop it. Streaming services are here to stay and the largest music store in the world is finally embracing it too. If Taylor wants to pull her album from these services, that's her prerogative, but in the end it isn't going to slow things down and only moves people to shrug and listen to someone else or find it elsewhere for free. I applaud her for taking a stand - few people do these days - but you also have to consider the big picture and who is really getting rich here - the labels.

And that's without getting into the whole concert "business" which has it's own big issues...
 
apple hell rich - no problem with that -
9.99 per month after a year they will raise up to 19.99 per month and get back all money they pay - that how they do all times - hahahhaha
 
Darrin Bell said:
I'd think it would be evidence that she WAS standing up for the little guys. If she doesn't release her album on Apple Music, that means she wasn't just trying to ensure that she was paid royalties.
Click to expand...
Actually it will make her look sorely bad if she doesn't release her album. After all she made the threat to pull her music if Apple didn't pay the artists during the trial period. As big as TS is she can't afford that kind of negative publicity for essentially screwing over a big company like Apple after they made good promptly on her request. I have a good feeling her album will not be removed from Music, but if it does she will lose all sorts of credibility and lose a ton of respect in the music industry. Instant big stars are not invincible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back