Criminals? What a joke. Steaming music, movie and TV shows from website is entirely legal.
Only when time all free steaming services goes down, I will go torrenting.
By all means, if you want pay, go pay. I will never pay
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's New Music Royalty Proposal Would Make Streaming Costlier for Free Services Like Spotify
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Criminals? What a joke. Steaming music, movie and TV shows from website is entirely legal.
Only when time all free steaming services goes down, I will go torrenting.
By all means, if you want pay, go pay. I will never pay
Hmm, DRM will exist whether pirating exist or not, and Some types of DRM will be cracked eventually. You can see how BD protection becomes almost nothing after all. And you also can see why Apple pushed their iTunes Store DRM free.
Pirating itself will never disappear after all, although we can suppress it to not let it dominate the market.
Some ridiculous price tags also drive people who does not want to pirate resort giving up/torrenting for what they want.
This is a loop NO ONE ever bother to break. High price --> fewer buyers --> higher price, although lower price --> more buyers --> lower price is not what music industry WANT. Wishing the entire industry to self-control and break this circle is like wishing thunders hitting someone staying inside a Faraday cage.
Streaming is only legal on certain sites. Something tells me you're not using legal sites. Something tells me you're a criminal.
how have they shot themselves in the foot? they have a far superior service, a better user experience and a much broader selection or artists than apple music. apple has been super lackluster in innovating lately and is trying to take elements from popular services and put the squeeze on them. pretty lame tactic. i've used both services and apple music is just stale.. spotify will respond properly i am sure
A piece of crap company use a logo with Apple trying to drive out competition. This is what this thread about.
Spotify going down not because of free tire, it is because company like Apple exist.
Does not matter where you stream. It is not illegal in Canada. You will never get someone being put in jail because he/she streaming videos on prime wire.
This reply immediately transforms you as an anti-apple person. I can sense it.
The free tier brought in 195m while paid brought in 1.74b. If they weren't being held back by free people who cost more than they bring in, they'd be profitable. How can I say this? It would massively lower their royalty fees if they didn't have deal with leeches. Even if it only lowered it by half, that'd be 600m in their favor (taking out the 200m roughly they'd lose from ads) as they paid 1.63b in royalties.
Free users are killing Spotify, not Apple.
This reply immediately transforms you as an anti-apple person. I can sense it.
I don't like its anti-competitive behaviour, that is all.
Apple has made some great products, like Mac Mini and MacBook Air, its iPod. iPhone before 6 and 6S are great product.
I am never fan of iOS and never will be. I will continue use iOS, but iOS devices never will be my primary devices. I hate the control imposed by Apple. This ruins all.
No problem, tonight seems to be a night where I give all the bad news.
[doublepost=1468812601][/doublepost]
Nothing is anti competitive about this move. They might even be helping Spotify in the long run.
[doublepost=1468812697][/doublepost]
So you're saying Canada has pretty much no IP laws?
I have used many many free services. Like Google Play Music, QQ Music, Bilibili etc. Almost all of these services are running great and profitable.
Spotify is running and it will continue to exists. Apple on other hand is trying to squeeze
Yes there is. But streaming does not consider as illegal.
The law exempts temporary reproductions of copyrighted works if completed for technical reasons. Since most streaming video does not actually involve downloading a copy of the work (it merely creates a temporary copy that cannot be permanently copied), users can legitimately argue that merely watching a non-downloaded stream does not run afoul of the law.
Also from CBC
http://www.cbc.ca/beta/news/business/android-box-streaming-1.3455524
GPM is attached to a company that is able to throw money at something unprofitable. QQ Music, from what I can find, is an app that is owned by Tencent and also doesn't have to make money. I also can't find where any9ne has established either of them do. And according to Wikipedia "Bilibili is still in development and has yet to find a viable revenue model. How it will sustain long-term operation remains to be observed." Of course, that ignores that they're working with state-run media conglomerates. So they have a sugar-daddy as well. None of them are just music companies that just run free things. All of those great examples are tied to giant companies.
So? Free stream services can still exist and run well. Almost all stuff Tencent does are free with lots of paid add on. Bilibili is still operating strong and does not look like it will be fail anytime soon.
Services like curchyrolls, kissanime exits and working well.
And why do I care. There will always be free streaming sites pop up just like business come and go. You will never run out free streaming sites. Heck, I watched entire euro cup without paying damn ESPN or Sport Network.
Your Crunchyroll example is the best one y9u have,]. Then again, I'm betting they're profitable because of paying users like me. Kissanime is illegal in most countries, by the way. Also, it's kind of killing the anime industry. All of your other examples wouldn't work if people weren't paying for things. But you just don't get that other people are paying for your free crap.
You are welcome to pay for the services. But don't point finger to our free users. You choose to pay and I choose to use it free.
You have no rights to complain free users. It is your choice to pay, no one force you to pay by gun.
As kissanime, it is legal here in Canada and that is all I care.
We should and ALWAYS need to pay for those works, being one way or the other, eventually. So many stuff you think it is "free" are actually not.
Just a simple example: to download "free" music, you need a lot of time to find source, download it, and maybe convert it to the form you like. If you buy from iTunes Store, all are done for you already, although quality is not that good in general.
But, also, customers are the one always being raped and beat to death, no matter when, and no matter where. This is human nature to kill those weaken than them after all. Nature law, should I say?
I can't wait until Canada gets its head out of its rear and makes it illegal. I'm guessing you'd continue, though. Also, I have every right to complain about free users. It isn't even because you can't afford it, but because you don't care. You don't think the people who provide these things to you deserve to make any real amount of money. I choose to pay because I respect art. You choose to leech because you don't respect anyone other than yourself.
You must be very jealous that people choose use free streaming sites.
Get over your so called moral ground. There is nothing wrong with using free streaming sites.
If it is not illegal, in which ground can you accuse someone doing something legally? I don't care if streaming site pays artist or film makers, it is not my concern.
I don't care if film maker can or cannot make ad placement or making toys. If small Japanese animation studio can leverage all these tools, i fail to understand Hollywood could not do.
It is not up to consumers or viewer to concern of film maker or film studio making money or not. It is simply not our problem. If they cannot even find someone willing to sponsoring or place ads on their work, then i do not think their works worth for someone to pay for.
Whether streaming music, movie or TV shows for free or not, it is your personal choice. I streaming from website that hosting these content, it is not my concern that this website not paying content maker.
P.S. Where were you when Apple originally decided to not pay artiest during free trial period? I still remember lots of people here support Apple. So when Apple decided to use artist work for promoting Apple Music without paying artist, is Tim Cook a self-entitled scumbag? It is funny how double standard works so well. To these day, many of people here still upset Taylor Swift for publishing that letter.
Also what exactly is your fair profit. I am certain label companies are very profitable and making boatload of money each year. All these actors are making billions of dollars each year. And sorry, if you are talking about some artists that nobody heard about, then it is not my concern.
Last edited:
The primary reason Spotify is losing money is because it freeloads on artists and does not charge at least the cost of doing business. Spotify needs to charge more for its services.
Apple at least makes money on Apple Music. Apple always makes money. Apple doesn't give away anything for free. That is just good business.
It is my my concern that how much money does one content creator makes or loss.
Now let us say, if website offers free steaming content, but pays louality to content maker. If someone streaming content for free, would you also complain?
You just feel that it is unjust that you paid for something that others did not.
[doublepost=1468818671][/doublepost]
We should and ALWAYS need to pay for those works, being one way or the other, eventually. So many stuff you think it is "free" are actually not.
Just a simple example: to download "free" music, you need a lot of time to find source, download it, and maybe convert it to the form you like. If you buy from iTunes Store, all are done for you already, although quality is not that good in general.
But, also, customers are the one always being raped and beat to death, no matter when, and no matter where. This is human nature to kill those weaken than them after all. Nature law, should I say?
You are correct. Though with Google Play Music or QQ Music or whatever streaming services, you can find anything just as quickly and streaming for free.
Why would I be "jealous" of someone making a choice? And let's make a distinction between a free site like spotify, and the crap you say you use if you can't get it elsewhere. Spotify still pays the creators, those other sites don't. Again, I need to call out your critical thinking skills.
There IS something wrong with using free streaming sites when they are streaming intellectual property that the owners don't want on there. Honestly, what's hard to understand about that?
And did you actually read what I wrote?? Not every movie is a "hollywood movie," fool. Not every movie has a story that lends itself to selling toys. Yeah, let's sell toys based upon The Ice Storm. And you conveniently ignored musicians in your weak rebuttal. Should they place ads in the songs? Maybe sell toys about the songs? Should writers and poets and digital painters put ads for Chevrolet in their works? Maybe sell toys? No they create their works, and they deserve to get paid so that they can continue to create.
And it IS your concern if people aren't getting paid for their work. It's called a conscience.
If YOU weren't getting paid for your work, I'd be concerned. I'd fight for you. And that's exactly why I do take the moral high-ground here. It's not a bad thing to look out for your fellow humans.
But hey, enjoy your free stuff.
Teddy argues that Apple is ripping artists off and being greedy yet enjoys free loading. Hilarious and sad at the same time.