The music industry just need a black sheep to put a blame on no matter how helpful said sheep want to be for music industry. Come on, can't you smell the whole thing is a bs? It's stinking
It might be total bs. Good click bait for MR.
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 Urging Music Labels to Stop Licensing Free Songs on Spotify and YouTube
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It might be total bs. Good click bait for MR.
Tell me about that. This thread has 13 pages of comments, and still going strong. $$$$
I get what you're going at, but if Spotify is not sustainable, it'll go under. The whole point here is that Apple doesn't need to enter this debate. Ads pay Spotify, Spotify pay for music to get customers to get ads. If ads don't produce enough money to buy music to get customers, it's over. Simple as that. Long term, the music industry isn't at risk, because there'll always be a demand for music, and where there's demand, supply will arise, and where there's supply and demand there's profit
You are living in 1987. Sorry bud - that business model is dead and it's never coming back.
Consumers are going to access music for free, one way or the other. That's not up to Apple or any other giant corporation. If it's not YouTube and Spotify, it will be piracy. Period. Full stop. End of discussion.
The days of charging $20 for a product with a marginal cost of $0.00 are over and they will never return. Might as well mourn the horse shoe industry or the buggy industry.
This is a straight up scumbag move by Apple. We all know it. I can't wait for their useless little Beats service to flop worse than itunes radio did.
You are talking out of your a$$. The bolded sentence is a blatant lie. Industry revenues collapsed LONG before any streaming service existed and revenues have been remarkably stable since 2010, thanks to digital downloads and subscriptions.
http://www.statista.com/statistics/272305/global-revenue-of-the-music-industry/
Fragile music business? Taylor swift and the other WHINERS like Jay Beyoncé Z Playa are billionaires or whatever. Apparently the business is just fine. Gimme a break.
There are people who aren't Top Ten artists who also make music people like.
Last I checked my public library had TONS of CDs and could get (within a few days) any other CD I want.
CD is short for "Compact Disc". It's a small, plastic disc that you actually use a laser (I, know, crazy but hear me out) to read data (in this case music) off of. You can put these into some older computers that have the ability to accept them and you can take the data (again, in this case music) and transfer it to your computer which you can then put into iTunes (cause you can NEVER get around that!) and put onto your iPhone, apple watch, or iPod.
You ought to bookmark this post in case all of these shenanigans that Apple is trying to do actually go through. You'll thank me later.
CD is short for "Compact Disc". It's a small, plastic disc that you actually use a laser (I, know, crazy but hear me out) to read data (in this case music) off of. You can put these into some older computers that have the ability to accept them and you can take the data (again, in this case music) and transfer it to your computer which you can then put into iTunes (cause you can NEVER get around that!) and put onto your iPhone, apple watch, or iPod.
You ought to bookmark this post in case all of these shenanigans that Apple is trying to do actually go through. You'll thank me later.
That chart is inaccurate and excludes the drop in revenue post-Spotify. I'm not saying that there was no drop prior, I'm saying that there was a drop in iTunes revenue post-Spotify. A big one.
You can download your music and playlists for offline playing with Spotify.
https://support.spotify.com/us/learn-more/guides/#!/article/Listen-offline/
----------
That's some bootleg bootlegging. Quality sucks, go to the bay. LOL
How do you know Apple won't do the same? You never know right? If they do that, I move on to the next service that will offer it for $5-10, because if Spotify does that there will be a mass exodus to a new service. Not that they would do that they are business people not buffoons.
----------
But not everyone is blessed with lots of cheap U.S. data. Plus some of us have underground subways to deal with aka no signal
You can listen offline
https://support.spotify.com/us/learn-more/guides/#!/article/Listen-offline/
You must only watch the original series on both of those (which equates to very little TV annually), because both of those are 90% crap. You're paying for 10% decent material and 90% crap. Enjoy.
Shame on Apple
Shame on you, Apple. Shame on you.
You're scared that people won't have an incentive to use Beats if they can use the freemium model offered by Spotify. And/or you can't figure out a way to effectively monetize a similar freemium service, so you're trying to use your weight to eliminate the competition through shady business practices.
You're hoping that once you (hopefully illegally?) squash the freemium Spotify business model, maybe then customers will migrate to Beats.
Pathetic. And sad. I thought Apple was better than this.
All else being equal, Spotify still has a much better user interface design & functionality than the current Beats (in my opinion). And I wouldn't want to have two first party Apple music apps anyway - having both 'Music' app and 'Beats' app made by Apple seems superfluous and makes the music experience unnecessarily cluttered - a unified Music app would be much better that integrates both iTunes radio and the new rumored streaming service.
Shame on you, Apple. Shame on you.
You're scared that people won't have an incentive to use Beats if they can use the freemium model offered by Spotify. And/or you can't figure out a way to effectively monetize a similar freemium service, so you're trying to use your weight to eliminate the competition through shady business practices.
You're hoping that once you (hopefully illegally?) squash the freemium Spotify business model, maybe then customers will migrate to Beats.
Pathetic. And sad. I thought Apple was better than this.
All else being equal, Spotify still has a much better user interface design & functionality than the current Beats (in my opinion). And I wouldn't want to have two first party Apple music apps anyway - having both 'Music' app and 'Beats' app made by Apple seems superfluous and makes the music experience unnecessarily cluttered - a unified Music app would be much better that integrates both iTunes radio and the new rumored streaming service.
I'm not argueing against Spotify, I'm argueing against subscription-based music in general. Music is personal, it's emotional, it brings back memories and makes new ones. I don't ever want any part of my experience to be at the whim of any company, baffooons or not. Once it's on my computer, I want it to be mine forever.
MR didn't create the report. It is from The Verge. And they are pretty credible in general.
I simply cannot understand how we've been so brainwashed into thinking that Spotify is the villain here which "barely payouts its artists". The music labels have always been the owners of music. It's not like Spotify stole their music and gave it away for free and then strong-armed the labels into accepting low royalty fees. The terms of the royalty payments (and how much Spotify has to pay the labels for LEGALLY licensing their songs) was a bargain reached between two business entities at arms length.
Are you honestly telling me that music labels lacked the bargaining power here and simply had to accept whatever terms Spotify offered them (like a consumer bank loan?). If you want to 'support artists" start campaigning for better terms between Artists and their Labels.
And before we start bashing labels and hailing artists, keep this in mind. Most artists are nothing without their labels. The only ones that are "independent" are the artists who are successful enough to pay for the entire backend supporting services that labels provide (like recording studios, sound engineers, marketing, network and distribution connections etc) or those who are simply not good enough to get a label contract.
At its core, a music label is no different from a company like Apple. You can be a genius engineer, but often you need the institutional and infrastructure framework that a larger organization (like a company) provides to realize your skills and potential. No engineer, no matter how great he is could have created the iPod tinkering away in his basement. Likewise, no artist, no matter how great, is singlehandedly capable of creating a chart topper on his/her own. (there are ALWAYS exceptions, but im talking about the norm)
Okay, I'll be smug once again. Go off the chair, lay off the " Two Minutes of Hate " on the enemy known as Reality, and give the DOJ a call. Ask if this case is for real. The members on this forum do not have this insider information, nor do the media. The media only reports what it sees and hears.
It's those law enforcement officials that know a thing or two what's really going on under the surface. You have to go straight to the source PAST the media yourself.
It doesn't surprise me to hear of Apple pulling this kind of move.
Strange. The DOJ has a home office at Apple because of what Apple tried to do wit the E-Book market and got caught. Looks like Apple is trying to do it again with the music streaming market as well. I think the Market should dictate the their own industry and not Apple. Not good.
Actually this has been covered several times in the last two months on multiple websites. The music industry is not happy with Spotify/iTunes Radio/all other streaming radio services. None of them have converted free customers to paying customers at the rate the music industry was expecting. They're the ones putting pressure on Spotify and others to drop or severely limit the free versions. Apple is just trying to use that to their advantage to negotiate a new Beats contract.
Apple : Streaming Music Should be Less Costly!
Streaming music isn't something I do. However, I have upon a rare occasion used the streaming services from various radio sources to listen to random classical stations.
To make streaming music be costly is MADNESS. The entirety of the internet is proliferated with music illicitly and legally alongside one another. Let the music be heard!
Pardon my ignorance, but isn't streaming music free because the listener is only experiencing the song in a lossy format for a brief time? It can incentivise sales! Let it be free!
If anything, I'd like Apple to focus on making the music you DO purchase to be LOSSLESS.
24 bit sample rate, even, with 96000 Hz (96 kiloHertz, in case you don't know), or even more!
Research new methods of information compression to have lossless files be not as large as others! Find a way to make device storage larger and/or make internet connectivity so reliably fast that one can stream and/or download full lossless quality songs via a mobile signal!
Ideally, consider making some songs have a 5.1 DVD audio / BluRay audio option sound so that one can even splice apart the sections for their enjoyment.
There seems to be a delusional opinion that high bit-rate lossless audio files (often very large files) are not appreciated by the average listener. This is patently untrue.
If you compare lossless and lossy versions of songs in for example, a run of the mill car stereo system purchased after 2007, one can hear an appreciable difference.
Even the Apple EarPods benefit from higher quality songs.
Instead of ruling streaming services, Apple, make people fall in love with the crispest audio quality one can experience by making Beats headphones that rival that of $10,000 headphones from the Ultrasone Edition 5, Audeze LCD-3, the Abyss, Sennheiser HD800, and so forth.
Streaming music isn't something I do. However, I have upon a rare occasion used the streaming services from various radio sources to listen to random classical stations.
To make streaming music be costly is MADNESS. The entirety of the internet is proliferated with music illicitly and legally alongside one another. Let the music be heard!
Pardon my ignorance, but isn't streaming music free because the listener is only experiencing the song in a lossy format for a brief time? It can incentivise sales! Let it be free!
If anything, I'd like Apple to focus on making the music you DO purchase to be LOSSLESS.
24 bit sample rate, even, with 96000 Hz (96 kiloHertz, in case you don't know), or even more!
Research new methods of information compression to have lossless files be not as large as others! Find a way to make device storage larger and/or make internet connectivity so reliably fast that one can stream and/or download full lossless quality songs via a mobile signal!
Ideally, consider making some songs have a 5.1 DVD audio / BluRay audio option sound so that one can even splice apart the sections for their enjoyment.
There seems to be a delusional opinion that high bit-rate lossless audio files (often very large files) are not appreciated by the average listener. This is patently untrue.
If you compare lossless and lossy versions of songs in for example, a run of the mill car stereo system purchased after 2007, one can hear an appreciable difference.
Even the Apple EarPods benefit from higher quality songs.
Instead of ruling streaming services, Apple, make people fall in love with the crispest audio quality one can experience by making Beats headphones that rival that of $10,000 headphones from the Ultrasone Edition 5, Audeze LCD-3, the Abyss, Sennheiser HD800, and so forth.
But the. I am still paying monthly and would still need a very large iPhone to store all of it. Plus I probably own what ever I would be storing of line. Like I said I am probably in the minority. I have 25,000 plus songs on my iPod. So to pay for a service to let me listen to all that music I already paid for seems a bit odd to me. Again call me old fashion.
...you're getting oldReally Apple ?
Between 1984 and 1995 I considered Apple cool.
Between 1995 and 2001 I felt sorry for Apple.
Between 2001 and 2012 I was cheering for Apple.
Ever since 2013 I'm just increasingly pissed at Apple.
Why is that ?