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

HenryDJP said:
Yep, damned if they do damned if they don't. Good ole MR. Nothing changes here. Something positive finally happens and we still have to say bad things about Apple. Can't even have a positive discussion after hearing some good news.
Click to expand...

I'm glad she got what SHE wanted, but you cannot deny Apple's general hubris in terms of how they treat content providers (developers and artists).

With Family Sharing, Apple FORCED app developers to give away four extra copies of each app for one sale (5 copies total). If a developer did not agree to the new terms, they could not submit new apps or updates of existing apps. Those terms effectively kicks you out of the store if you don't capitulate.

"No one" (big/significant) said a peep in the software industry because Family Sharing only affected small developers. When small shops go out of business, the big companies (including Apple) reap the rewards from less competition for employees. Family sharing was a direct hostile attack on developers by Apple.

Thanks Ms Swift! Glad to see someone standing up to Apple. I wish someone significant in the software industry stood up to Apple like you did.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Strutten
Dennison said:
What do you mean they're not getting anything from you? Do you buy any music from anywhere? Do you actually listen to music?... o_o

Sure, the $10/month doesn't change for consumers. Except... that's nothing to complain about. That's honestly a real steal. So much value in that kind of access to the iTunes library. Consumers, including yourself, get to try it for three months for free, and the artists get paid.

That's captivating. I can't wait to try it out myself.
Click to expand...
Thank you for letting me know that the artists needs are more important than the consumers needs. For the record that's my opinion about the $10 and there was no reason for you to rebuttal it. I can't even believe I'm even having this argument with people here. It's okay for someone to speak up about the artists to get paid but as consumers we should keep our mouth shut if were not happy about the $10 fee because according to you were getting a steal of a deal. Give me a break. :rolleyes:
 
  • Like
Reactions: Benjamin Frost and Jstuts5797
MacRetina said:
So we will get to listen to Taylor Swift on Apple Music?
Click to expand...

Yes, and that will drive many people from other streaming services towards Apple Music.

In any case Apple is onto a winner here. The integration of Apple Music with the entire Apple Ecosystem including iTunes will also drive actual sales of music. Combine that with the fact that the app will be on ALL Apple iPhones (as opposed to their streamers) AND it will have a free trial period of three months means, that they will be able to bait and stick many many users that will not look back from Spotify or others.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Arndroid and Jstuts5797
thehenry said:
Suddenly Taylor Swift is more powerful than the most profitable company in the world..
Click to expand...

No. Swift is hugely popular and influential in the music world and significantly more valuable than hundreds of indie acts. The sad thing is that it's unlikely that Apple or Swift give two craps about indie artists. Doesn't matter though because this solves the problem, even if for the wrong reasons.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mel823
peterdevries said:
Yes, and that will drive many people from other streaming services towards Apple Music.

In any case Apple is onto a winner here. The integration of Apple Music with the entire Apple Ecosystem including iTunes will also drive actual sales of music. Combine that with the fact that the app will be on ALL Apple iPhones (as opposed to their streamers) AND it will have a free trial period of three months means, that they will be able to bait and stick many many users that will not look back from Spotify or others.
Click to expand...

I agree. If it can all work together smoothly, Apple's really built a strong ecosystem.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jstuts5797 and ErikGrim
Che Castro said:
So this album 1989 is the thriller of this generation ?
Click to expand...

I don't really understand why music should be bad because it appeals to a mean stream audience and is sung by a pretty girl in her twenties.

She writes her music and lyrics herself, supported by a few producers and can actually sing very well live. Look it up on YouTube.

I don't see a reason why one can't like Pink Floyd, Taylor Swift, Muse, Kasabian or any other band at the same time. I do. Maybe it is time some of you get off their high horses about music choice. Everyone has a different taste and there is not such a thing as a wrong taste.
 
  • Like
Reactions: flur, seventhedition and CalWizrd
roland.g said:
I'm sure the indie artists will appreciate it, but the Taylor Swifts, and Metallicas of the music world, let's not pretend it's for them.
Click to expand...

But in reality, it is. They stand to benefit the most along with the labels. Most indies don't make their living from selling singles on iTunes.
 
peterdevries said:
I don't really understand why music should be bad because it appeals to a mean stream audience and is sung by a pretty girl in her twenties.

She writes her music and lyrics herself, supported by a few producers and can actually sing very well live. Look it up on YouTube.

I don't see a reason why one can't like Pink Floyd, Taylor Swift, Muse, Kasabian or any other band at the same time. I do. Maybe it is time some of you get off their high horses about music choice. Everyone has a different taste and there is not such a thing as a wrong taste.
Click to expand...

I totally agree. I listen to Pink Floyd, Dire Straits, Mumford and Sons, Taylor Swift, Carrie Underwood, etc. They're all good in their respective genres.
 
  • Like
Reactions: flur, Arndroid and gr8tfly
The comments here about Apple doing the right thing make me laugh. They are only doing the right thing after being publicly outed, shamed and pressured to do so. They had no intention of doing the right thing until now.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Benjamin Frost and developer13245
Rogifan said:
So what exactly is Jimmy Iovine good for then? This should never have snowballed to where Apple he to cave in the first place. It's like the U2 album giveaway. Was there no one at Apple that thought perhaps not everyone would want a U2 album shoved in their iTunes library as though they purchased it? Apple has had a year to get their ducks in a row for this streaming service yet it seems like they're fumbling their way through it. Embarrassing to watch.
Click to expand...

I blame the labels more than Apple.

It just highlights what little regard labels have for the artists they claim to represent, when bloggers and Taylor Swift can get them a fairer deal in a weekend - than the many months of negotiations that took place between labels and Apple. Ultimately it should have been the labels fighting the corner of artists that secured the royalties through trial got paid. Generally it isn't Apple's job to negotiate for higher payments out of their coffers. They have probably chosen to do it now because it doesn't cost that much, and they feel it is the right thing to do. It's the labels who should face the brunt of the backlash here!
 
  • Like
Reactions: CalWizrd, DanJBS, Jstuts5797 and 1 other person
minus.toes said:
The comments here about Apple doing the right thing make me laugh. They are only doing the right thing after being publicly outed, shamed and pressured to do so. They had no intention of doing the right thing until now.
Click to expand...

It's a stunt, come on. This is all to build hype for the launch next week. How can people not see this?
 
farewelwilliams said:
Reverses course? What if they did that from the beginning?
Click to expand...
I understand what you mean. They never did mention if they would be paying artists or not because it wasn't any of the consumers business. They obviously wouldn't mention it at the Keynote because, again, this doesn't concern the majority of its consumers. The only people that would know about this information are the labels with contracts in hand.
 
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