Apple Urging Music Labels to Stop Licensing Free Songs on Spotify and YouTube

[Frosties]

It has been been stated here at macrumors for years that Apple was behind the very late introduction of Spotify in the US after being a high volume streaming service in the EU with talks and arm twisting with record labels.

 

[Bot4Hire]

Yeah and maybe you could think this article isn't true for once. Lord knows this forum believes anything negative about Apple.

Think about it. When has Apple ever attempted to pre-kill it's competitors in order to monopolize business? That's Microsoft and Samsung, not Apple. Come on man.

A certain Book scandal that they were found guilty comes to mind.

 

[HenryDJP]

The people who are forced out of the free version won't switch to Apple, they'll just go back to pirating.

Doubtful, since Apple was the main company that got people into buying music again when pirating was very popular.

 

[BillyBobBongo]

Yeah, this article has got me worried that might happen.

Apple isn't going to remove this from you can give you nothing in return. Either iTunes Radio will remain or a new product will come out that will replace it. It will be fine.

 

[barkomatic]

Pretty much exclusively stupid comments here.

Some facts:

Ad-based music offerings devalue music, are not sustainable. Tying an entire industry to the whims of the internet advertising market isn't doing anyone a favor.

Apple has paid more to labels/artists in the last quarter than the entire subscription based industry life to date.

Subscription based music offerings have resulted in massively lower music sales without the revenue to replace what was lost.

Not facts, but true:

Ad-based services suck. Junked up interfaces, click here for pepsi, etc. No one wants that crap. The only people who use subscription music services and don't pay are those who can't pay - trying to shake a few cents out of that audience is not a thing Apple does.

Apple appears to be attempting to reshape the streaming market into one where a premium, exclusively subscription-based offering can exist. I don't see how this is a bad thing, seeing as we all like high quality things here.

Make a free Spotify account, login to Spotify Desktop with no subscription and tell me that is a high quality service...

I completely disagree. Not all supported music services "suck"--though that is subjective of course.

I use a free ad-supported service and I have to only endure one 10-30 second commercial a day. I wouldn't say that is terribly onerous.

It sounds like you're trying to justify Apple's anti-consumer behavior here.

If paid services are so superior than why does Apple feel the need to try and eliminate the ad-supported free services?

 

[ugahairydawgs]

Apple, just create a service that's head and shoulders above the alternatives so that people with Apple hardware will want to use it by default instead of getting it for free. iTunes was the epitome of that for me a decade ago.

iTunes completely put an end to music piracy for me 10 years ago because I could have access to tons of vetted content in one place and, more importantly, I could get just the music I wanted without having to buy a CD full of things I didn't want.

We live in a world now where the masses lose their minds if a developer wants to charge more than $0.99 for an app. When you have a large portion of the market that is expecting to get everything for free you're going to have a hard time selling subscriptions regardless of how great the quality of the product actually is.

 

[HenryDJP]

A certain Book scandal that they were found guilty comes to mind.

Well I would prefer to wait and see if something happens than to put the accused in prison without any proof. That's what many of you guys refuse to do around here.

 

[jdechko]

I wonder if this is Apple-Apple or this is Beats-Apple trying for this move. Iovine and Dre are old-school music. The new-school, free tier streaming goes against everything they've spent their careers on.

The old way is losing it's grip, and the big artists that prop up the old business are saying the same thing. Taylor Swift, Tidal and now this-it just reeks of the old business that refuses to adapt.

 

[Pilgrim1099]

I completely disagree. Not all supported music services "suck"--though that is subjective of course.



I use a free ad-supported service and I have to only endure one 10-30 second commercial a day. I wouldn't say that is terribly onerous.



It sounds like you're trying to justify Apple's anti-consumer behavior here.



If paid services are so superior than why does Apple feel the need to try and eliminate the ad-supported free services?

And ironic since Apple has iAds.. Think of the hypocrisy.

 

[elmateo487]

Call me new fashioned, but I rather listen to unlimited music for half the price of an album with spotlight student pricing per month. $60 a year.

Glad I am not a musician who you enjoy listening too. And are you going to be a student forever?

 

[dashpuppy]

Spotify free should end. The amount they pay out is ridiculous because people love to be cheapskates and want everything for free. Music streaming services should be like Netflix, pay or nothing. If people are perfectly fine paying for Netflix and not having a free tier, why must we allow it in music?

why should we have to pay for EVERYTHING in this world just so someone else's pockets can be lined with MILLIONS AND MILLIONS of $$$ you do realize that the rich get richer and way richer and the poor line their pockets. RIGHT ?


I'm getting sick of all these monthly fees. TV used to be 15$ to watch it. now its WAY WAY WAY over priced.. Just wait internet used to be decently priced now that's going up too, soon people are going to ditch that feature too because it's now considered a luxury.

 

[MTW]

I completely disagree. Not all supported music services "suck"--though that is subjective of course.

I use a free ad-supported service and I have to only endure one 10-30 second commercial a day. I wouldn't say that is terribly onerous.

It sounds like you're trying to justify Apple's anti-consumer behavior here.

If paid services are so superior than why does Apple feel the need to try and eliminate the ad-supported free services?

Hate to break it to you, but you aren't the kind of customer Apple is looking for. The ad-laced services have interface ads, audio ads, ads ads ads everywhere and they suck due to it. Apple is trying to create a service/market that can replace the revenue lost from the sale of music. Ads will never do that.

'anti-consumer' I have yet to see a usage of that term (on the internet, anyway) that describes anything other than 'thing doesn't benefit me in way that my tiny mind can comprehend, so thing is bad'

Ad based services are not sustainable. Which wouldn't be a problem (sustainable things die, that's their nature) except for the problem: they create a barrier that a viable business model can not pass - every 'proper' subscription service has had to introduce free tiers to survive. Once one service has it, people go there for free stuff. Some of them sign up for paid subscriptions. Few, if any, evaluate the paid-only services (only Google Play All Access standing as the remaining example)

See the problem here? Thing that has no future is preventing thing that has a future from existing, so thing with no future dies an early death.

 

[Pilgrim1099]

Well I would prefer to wait and see if something happens than to put the accused in prison without any proof. That's what many of you guys refuse to do around here.

Don't sit there and attempt to challenge us for proof. GO out the door and walk to the DOJ and ask them that. They have Timmy on their crosshairs.

 

[Tech198]

Call me old fashioned, but I would rather just own my music.

At one time, i would have accepted that...... But times change...

The same reason my parents also refuse to get used to streaming is for the same reason *you never own it as no physical copy in hand*.

However, u give up that for the sake of convenience... (some would also say "the convenience of Apple removing it without your knowledge) *shrugs*. However we are being pushed more and more to this...

Physical media is dead, in some countries.... and its dying in others........ or it will eventually.

I'm just wondering if Apple is wanting these labels for themselves. so in an they see it as a "we don't like what we are seeing" type move.

 

[Frosties]

Same story 2010 - Apple did this then and now

Here is the link to the older story of the same practice. Apple has been doing this for years.

https://www.macrumors.com/2010/10/07/apple-trying-to-torpedo-spotifys-u-s-launch/

 

[skellener]

Apple Urging Music Labels to Stop Licensing Free Songs on Spotify and YouTube

Huh?

How about Apple urging Music Labels to pay their artists better from Spotify and Youtube licensing as well as from iTunes sales? I think that might be a bit more productive.

 

[thekeyring]

Call me old fashioned, but I would rather just own my music.

You never listen to the radio?

That's all this is: On demand radio. Find a song you like? Buy it, and you don't have to stream.

 

[Pilgrim1099]

I wonder if this is Apple-Apple or this is Beats-Apple trying for this move. Iovine and Dre are old-school music. The new-school, free tier streaming goes against everything they've spent their careers on.



The old way is losing it's grip, and the big artists that prop up the old business are saying the same thing. Taylor Swift, Tidal and now this-it just reeks of the old business that refuses to adapt.

I suspect it's both Apple and Beats. It's all on Timmy, Eddy Cue and those two Beats fools they brought in. All four of them should go.

 

[Alith]

Say no to exclusives. They harm the consumer. Look at the TV, film, gaming. Forcing consumers to use multiple delivery platforms because everyone has exclusives on things makes life very difficult for the consumer and only serves to drive up piracy.

Let me buy my content from any delivery platform I want. If you want my business then make your delivery platform the best one, don't just gate off content because I will boycott your platform.

 

[Q-Dog]

Not true. Tidal has no free tier and no ads. Same with Rdio, and also Netflix.

Spotify needs to have ads because they are the biggest player and they know that without free they would not dominate market share as much.

They (almost) always start out free.

 

[Mockenrue]

Subscription based music offerings have resulted in massively lower music sales without the revenue to replace what was lost.

Most would argue that Napster started killing music sales long before Spotify existed. Today, my teenage daughter goes to Youtube for songs, many of which are unlicensed uploads by users.

Subscription as a model isn't the issue... it's the lack of exclusivity. HBO and Netflix are certainly not killing the TV industry, but it would decline if we could pay $10 a month to one service and get Game of Thrones, House of Cards, *and* The Walking Dead. They build value from exclusives, which is probably where music will go - which is unfortunate for consumers.

 

[Razeus]

The DoJ will come knocking.

 

[Codyak]

Doubtful, since Apple was the main company that got people into buying music again when pirating was very popular.

You honestly believe people who are used to paying absolutely nothing and even have easy access to auto block out the ads are going to just start paying a dollar/euro for each song?? Those people who are willing to pay are already doing so for the higher quality and offline capabilities.

 

[MTW]

Most would argue that Napster started killing music sales long before Spotify existed. Today, my teenage daughter goes to Youtube for songs, many of which are unlicensed uploads by users.

Subscription as a model isn't the issue... it's the lack of exclusivity. HBO and Netflix are certainly not killing the TV and movie show industries, but it would decline if we could pay $10 a month to one service and get Game of Thrones, House of Cards, *and* The Walking Dead.

They build value from exclusives, which is probably where music will go - which is unfortunate for consumers.

The subscription based model is great. It provides the rare 'better than piracy' user experience.

The problem is tying it to a free offering. User base goes up, label fee goes up. Ads don't cover it now and won't cover it in the future. Free tier goes away, use base falls. Fees stay where they are. Service fails.

We've seen this play out time and time again post-mp3. It happened briefly post Napster. It happened recently to smaller, less popular subscription services. It will keep happening until the industry says 'yeah, no, don't give our content away for free'.

 

[Sethp]

The majority of Spotify-customers doesn't care about a superior product if it isn't free

It would be a bad move use the record labels to make them pressure Spotfy.

Music streaming has a lot in common with i Netflix but If a TV show our a movie comes and goes it doesn't matter that much. But with music it's more upsetting.

To me a mix between beats streaming, iTunes match, iTunes radio and iTunes Store with good editorial is the perfect paid product.