Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Apple Threatens to Close iTunes Store Over Possible Royalty Hikes

cantthinkofone said:
Good God.

These greedy fu*ks. :mad:

It's not like music is very hard to make any more. A computer will practically make a song all the way from concept, to a store self in packaging. All from the same computer.

But its soooooo expensive to hit start on a computer.

Do these douche bags govern all music? Or just a few?
Click to expand...
Easy huh? If it's so easy, why aren't you out there making millions?

You haven't the slightest clue what it takes to make a record.

Most of you complaining about "crappy music" make me laugh... if it's so crappy, why are you BUYING it? :rolleyes:

Hypocrites... nothing but a bunch of hypocrites.
 
What happened to supposedly using the store to leverage iPod sales? Oh well...

I have never and will never "buy" activation DRMed content.
 
I agree with a previous poster, this cost will simply be passed along to the consumer. These extra costs will also be applicable to amazon so not sure it would be as big an impact as some might think.
 
MIDI_EVIL said:
I've never used it and I never will.
Click to expand...

Same here. I refuse to pay the same price for downloads as I would for a CD. No physical media. No printed artwork. Lower quality sound. DRM limitations. No thanks.

The only music files I have downloaded were free tracks directly from the artists. Almost everything in my collection is from records and CDs that I own.
 
Yes, the costs will be passed along to the consumer, and Apple will then be able to say, "Hey, but aren't you glad the store is still open??"

This a ruse to make Apple look better when the prices go up.
 
JG271 said:
*The article says copyright holders, which almost always are the record companies instead of the artist/s.
Click to expand...
You couldn't be more wrong.

No self respecting musician would ever turn over copyright ownership to the label.

Next time you flip open a CD, look at who "owns" the copy right.
It's typically the artist or the artists publishing company, not the record label.
The publishing company is typically a unified entity in which all band members have an equal ownership stake in.
Makes filing out Copyright forms and BMI/ASCAP paperwork a lot easier.
 
Plutonius said:
Not if they start losing lots of money on the iTunes store. Apple claims to be almost breaking even at the current song margin / volume.

If Apple accepts a lower margin, they will be losing money. If they pass the cost to the consumer and the volume goes down considerably, they will be losing money.

I'm not sure what the break even point is for them but I'm sure Apple will pull the plug on the iTunes store if losses reach a certain point.
Click to expand...

Before we had a clear understand of the iTunes store pricing structure, plenty of people thought they were losing money on each sale and argued that it was insignificant if it helps boost the extremely high margin iPod sales.

I still think this is the case, and that's why I consider this an empty threat.

Even if they went from making 3 cents a track to losing 3 cents a track, the idea that they'd close down the largest music store in the United States and open the market up to a competitor seems ridiculous.

If nothing else, they'd just raise their prices to approx. $1.05 as other have suggested.
 
economics

It is simple economics but in this day and age with the economy you know people will be upset at first.. As I stated before $1.05 for a song would not be bad and that is if they just raise the price to cover the six cent increase and yes that is business I think the price will raise more then just six cents. Apple is being a tad childish to a point but it is a good thing that they are being up front and drastic.. sometimes it is needed in biz
 
valvehead said:
Same here. I refuse to pay the same price for downloads as I would for a CD. No physical media. No printed artwork. Lower quality sound. DRM limitations. No thanks.

The only music files I have downloaded were free tracks directly from the artists. Almost everything in my collection is from records and CDs that I own.
Click to expand...

Yep. I've bought a few tracks from Amazon's download thing (since it's not DRMed), but if I want the whole CD (or most of it) buying it on CD makes much more sense.

But OH NO! I have to wait two whole days to get it through the mail! :rolleyes: (Preemptive eye role at people who seriously think it's too hard to wait for physical media. Sorry, but anyone who honestly thinks that has serious self control issues, or something's going on...)
 
arkitect said:
This is a laugh… :rolleyes:

Steve Jobs would sooner hack off his own nuts with a blunt MS Vista installation disk than close the iTunes store.

This is Apple, Inc's own Golden Arches 24/7 drive-thru to iPod/iPhone sales.

Consumers will bear the brunt of any price hikes.
Click to expand...


Haha, Loving the 'Steve Jobs would sooner hack off his own nuts with a blunt MS Vista installation disk than close the iTunes store.' bit

I LOL'ed so very hard :D

-Sam
 
cantthinkofone said:
Good God.

These greedy fu*ks. :mad:

It's not like music is very hard to make any more. A computer will practically make a song all the way from concept, to a store self in packaging. All from the same computer.

But its soooooo expensive to hit start on a computer.

Do these douche bags govern all music? Or just a few?
Click to expand...

So why don't you just make your own music then and save a few pennies? All it takes is a computer, right? :rolleyes:
 
NewMacbookPlz said:
One side of me would be quite saddened by this, as the iTMS is a great way to get music legally.

On the other hand though, this would give the RIAA/NMPA a massive kick in the coinpouch and they would be forced to reform their ways.
Click to expand...

It is NOT the record companies.....It is the song writers and publishers (Copyright holders) that are requesting the increase. No artist or songwriter hands over the copyright to a record label. That is not what happens.

The record companies actually lose on this one as well as Apple! So lets all stop saying record companies! It is a separate issue here.
 
4JNA said:
note to self; sell aapl and dust off dual cassette deck....:eek:
Click to expand...

First thing....best movie ever!! :D

rjohnstone said:
You know I find it extremely insulting to hear some of you guys call the songwriters "greedy pigs" who are trying to "pad their pockets".

It's called making a living.
Inflation happens and costs go up... Economy 101, get used to it.
.09 today does not buy what it did 5 years ago.

I guess you can live off the same salary you make today for the rest of your life.... I think not. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Unfortunately the truth is most of us in this bad economy are barely making what we did last year. For example, if my raise is 4%, while basic economics say that inflation was approximately 5.2%, then technically am I not actually making less money than I did last year.

I find it funny that while the artists want more money (since the record companies themselves take most of it) they don't just go after the record companies themselves. I personally think that :apple: should grant that 9 cent increase to the artists (who definitely deserve the money for doing the work), as long as they cut the record companies share by 9 cents.

Truth be told, I try to by my music off of iTunes on a regular basis and a 9 cent increase will not really affect that. However, I know of better ways to get music at much cheaper prices and I would probably shift over my buying habbits to those alternate methods if this was to occur. Just another example of everyone trying to take the money we work hard for.
 
Wolfpup said:
What happened to supposedly using the store to leverage iPod sales? Oh well...

I have never and will never "buy" activation DRMed content.
Click to expand...

Again people DRM can be stripped from the files.. You just have to do one extra steps but you can have Free DRM music from DRM files.. Also people that keep saying low quality.. 128 is fine and 320 is over kill...
 
The App Store and iPhone have revealed Apple's future. The Music Store helped the iPods, but iPods are going away to be replaced with pocket computers, some with phones. Apple built the music store cause there was nothing else at the time. Now we can all go to Amazon and be happy.

Apple loses very little if they drop the music store. They still have video and apps. It would be unfortunate, but not crippling by any means.

=)
 
Jobs is a formidable negotiator. Publishing quotations during negotiations can lead to sensationalism and hysteria.
 
If the iTunes store closes {site reference removed} is going to become by best friend again. Somebody makes a torrent of the billboard top 100 every week and you can check the ones you want and just let it download. If I'm going to have to run another app and have to drag the songs into iTunes then it's torrent-land here I come...

Amazing that Congress can pass something that screws the consumer at the same time the consumer is already getting screwed by the p!ss poor economy...
 
Slim02 said:
Again people DRM can be stripped from the files.. You just have to do one extra steps but you can have Free DRM music from DRM files.. Also people that keep saying low quality.. 128 is fine and 320 is over kill...
Click to expand...

and 90% of the people b!tching about DRM never put their music on anything but Apple products and only listen to their music in iTunes...
 
kyrow123 said:
Unfortunately the truth is most of us in this bad economy are barely making what we did last year. For example, if my raise is 4%, while basic economics say that inflation was approximately 5.2%, then technically am I not actually making less money than I did last year.

I find it funny that while the artists want more money (since the record companies themselves take most of it) they don't just go after the record companies themselves. I personally think that :apple: should grant that 9 cent increase to the artists (who definitely deserve the money for doing the work), as long as they cut the record companies share by 9 cents.
Click to expand...
I couldn't agree more.... My "raise" this year was only 3%... not enough to offset the increase in the cost of goods, let alone get ahead of the game.

So I am technically making less than I was last year even though the paycheck is bigger.
This is why I do not have any issue with an artist trying to get a pay raise.
They deserve it just as much as the rest of us.

As for getting the labels to absorb the cost increase, that's between the label and the retailer.
The artist is already out of the equation at this point.
 
rjohnstone said:
You couldn't be more wrong.

No self respecting musician would ever turn over copyright ownership to the label.

Next time you flip open a CD, look at who "owns" the copy right.
It's typically the artist or the artists publishing company, not the record label.
The publishing company is typically a unified entity in which all band members have an equal ownership stake in.
Makes filing out Copyright forms and BMI/ASCAP paperwork a lot easier.
Click to expand...

I was under the impression that the artists are essentially employed by a record label, and subsequently the copyrights are owned by the employer, the record label, or that the copyright is under license to the record company.

Either way, its the record companies or the publishing companies that own the rights to sell the songs, and as a result dictate the price or royalties?

On the CDs i have, a few said the sound recording was owned by the record company, some said it was under license to the record company but most said nothing at all about copyright, or just that the rights were reserved.
 
Uh oh.

What about TV Shows, Movies and Rentals? They aren't "music" - so if they closed the Store, I doubt they would shut them too.
 
1. Apple makes very little from the iTunes music store, so this would not really impact them financially THAT much

2. P2P is free, and the royalty rate for that is 0%. So really the music cartels are not shooting anyone in the face other than themselves.

3. History has already shown what happens when one label tries to act smart and pull out, only to end up with huge quarterly losses.


So basically, it's suicide for the record companies, not for Apple.
 
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