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

Beatles Songs on iTunes?

The Starpulse article does not say that!

Just READ the quoted article in Starpulse. It says the catalog is being prepared for a download service. It does not say iTunes is that service. Apple Corps only confirmed the download part. They did not say iTunes was involved.
 
Kingsly said:
First windows on a mac, now The Beatles on iTunes! Looks like Hell froze over, folks.
Click to expand...

Aren't you forgetting about multi-button mice and Intel chips in Macs?

It's official! We now have the four signs of the Mac Apocalypse!
 
Gary Cohen said:
Just READ the quoted article in Starpulse. It says the catalog is being prepared for a download service. It does not say iTunes is that service. Apple Corps only confirmed the download part. They did not say iTunes was involved.
Click to expand...
Your point has already been made several times in this thread.

Fact: starpulse says that the Beatles catlog will be distributed through the iTunes Music store.

Fact: Apple Corps confirmed that the catalog will be going online (somewhere).

Rumor: The Beatles catalog will be distributed through the iTunes Music Store.
 
song ownership

reminds me of the Bittersweet Symphony controversy


The Verve wrote the lyrics and 99.8% of the music, but the recording contains a sample of a riff in a Stones song circa 1970.

The Verve's lawyers negotiated with the Rolling Stones, and when agreement was reached, they called Richard Ashcroft (the singer). Cruelly they told him the royalties would be split 50/50.

50% for Jagger, and 50% for Richards.

The Verve got thier due when they sold the commercial use of the RECORDING to Nike for a reported $25 miliion.
 
A deal?

Perhaps Apple Corp have made a deal with Apple: We'll let you sell our catalog on iTMS, but we reap 100% of the proceeds from it... and we'll forget about that contract you signed all those years ago.
 
davester said:
Perhaps Apple Corp have made a deal with Apple: We'll let you sell our catalog on iTMS, but we reap 100% of the proceeds from it... and we'll forget about that contract you signed all those years ago.
Click to expand...


the record companies get pretty much all the profit from iTunes anyway.

iTunes just drives iPod sales for Apple.
 
Uh oh, I just thought of another angle. Steve Jobs loves secrecy and making big announcements himself.

Perhaps if Apple Corps is speaking in public about going online, that's a sign that Apple Computer isn't their choice of online distributor.

In any case, I will change my prediction to this:
The Beatles music will be added to iTunes. Steve Jobs will make a big announcement and introduce a "Beatles on iTunes" ad campaign. Then Apple Corps will sue Apple Computer for using the word "Beatles" to advertise a product related to the music business.​
 
Just to refresh memories, the plan to sell Beatles tracks over the Internet has been in the works for some time. The last time there was buzz about this, Apple Corps were shopping the catalog around to the various download outfits, to see who could do the best job of presenting it.
 
kansaigaijin said:
reminds me of the Bittersweet Symphony controversy


The Verve wrote the lyrics and 99.8% of the music, but the recording contains a sample of a riff in a Stones song circa 1970.

The Verve's lawyers negotiated with the Rolling Stones, and when agreement was reached, they called Richard Ashcroft (the singer). Cruelly they told him the royalties would be split 50/50.

50% for Jagger, and 50% for Richards.

The Verve got thier due when they sold the commercial use of the RECORDING to Nike for a reported $25 miliion.
Click to expand...
Richard Ashcroft made one major error, he stole from The Rolling Stones.

He was no better than Vanilla Ice claiming that he wrote the bass hook for Ice Ice Baby!

And remember The Verve's lawyers were in no position to negotiate with The Stones, since if they refused the song would have been pulled from the Album.

FYI: The publishing rights to this went to Allen Klein, The Rolling Stones' former manager. The Stones signed a very lopsided contract with Klein early in their career, and had to make huge concessions in order to get out of it. Part of the deal gave Klein the publishing rights to all of the Stones' songs through 1969. He made, and continues to make, far more money than anyone else from this song.
 
Without more context, I'm skeptical of such advanced plans for iTunes--maybe the re-mastering was being done anyway, and Apple Corps had some reason to want to emphasize their openness to working with Apple?

But at the very least, they do sound very open to the idea. That would be a great outcome. And of course, Apple will have to have triple disclaimers from now on:


Don't Steal Music.

If It Hurts You, Turn It Down.

We Are Not The Beatles.​

.
 
Its a shame that the surviving beatles are broke. I understand that Thingo is down to his last $300 million, and McFartney only has $700 million left!
Poor old Koko, the widderwoman of the Lenin guy has $27 trillion and she still worries about the price of coffee at starbucks.
Harrison didnt seem quite as insanely GREEDY as the others.....

Screw the beatles, and their ancient music with its simple tunes and schoolboy lyrics, mostly whining about teenage luv issues.
Its relevance has gone, as it should.

If you like the stuff, someone will give you a copy, I'm sure. Check Limewire maybe?
That will really get Koko the Japanese Accountant (sorry, Artist) really howling.

WTF this has to do with Apple Computers I cant quite see.

As for the court case, its just evidence of the Koko woman and the other two nitwits being unable to shake their addiction to getting money.
As the lawyer said, only a half-witted moron would confuse Apple and Apple Corps.
Apple make things and are famous and Apple Corps is an unknown corporation that looks after the interests of some old greedy blokes and a Japanese loony chick.

Judge should order Koko to serve 200 community hours in a homeless shelter for wasting court time.
 
Love, Love Me iTunes!

Until it happens, iTunes is not complete! I'm sure you know what I mean?
If you don't, I don't care to listen.:)
 
nostaws said:
I know some people have floated this idea previously - but Apple Computer has a lot of cash - How much would it cost to just buy Apple Corp?
Click to expand...
Paul McCartney has always prevailed in getting he what concerning The Beatles and considering all that he did in the band, for the band and after the band, who can blame him.

He is already a Billionaire (literally, with £1.1bn in 2002) so money is not the issue here. Not for selling Apple Corp nor with even selling Beatle music.

Ringo on the other hand, would probably welcome a buy-out, if he even has a hand in Apple Corp which I highly doubt. Also, since Ringo never wrote any of the songs of the Beatles, probably would welcome any type of deal to make some sort of money.

This has never been about money, really. It's been about McCartney standing up for what he thought was right. I love his music, but his stubborn attitude is a blessing and a curse.

The signs are right for this to be real. The article on Macworld refers to "digital booklets to accompany the downloads" which sound just like several PDFs that I've received when buying iTunes music (U2 comes to mind). Also, this sounds just like the kiss-and-make-up thing that Paul and Steve would come up with. Also, Paul giving away video ipods to people on his tour shows that he knows a good gift. Lastly, if The Beatles are going to want the type of exposure needed to make this great, why would they go to any other type of service. ITunes is far and away number one.

Also, I see this as the perfect time to introduce higher-quality downloads. A special Beatles iPod would be very welcomed with signatures from all the band mates and The Beatles & APPLE CORP logo would be fantastic!

I hope this rumor is right and that people will be able to Beatles music on iTunes. What a story that will make!
 
I wonder what the big deal is all about. I'm thinking that the majority of ipod, apple users would have easy access to CDs, and you could easily buy a Beatles CD and rip it onto your ipod. There are enough Beatles compilations and best ofs and bootlegs to satisfy any combination you may like. It's not like there will be a lot of people who have not heard of the Beatles and would like to test out a single song or two?
 
So hold on... Apple Corps is waiting for their umpteenth remastered works of the Beatles catalog, before they distribute the works in a lossy format thru some sort of digital download...

How is this news? Apple Corps reeks of greed. I'm not buying.
 
Here'a a press release from a few minutes ago

Beatles set to join online music revolution


Reuters 8:31 am April 13, 2006

By Adam Pasick

LONDON, April 13 (Reuters) - The Beatles are preparing to sell their songs online after years of refusing to take part in the Internet music boom, according to testimony given by the head of their record company.

Neil Aspinall, a former Beatles road manager and managing director of Apple Corps, was a witness in the company's trademark lawsuit against Apple Computer .

He said that the company was digitally remastering the entire Beatles catalogue, which would pave the way for selling the songs online.

"I think it would be wrong to offer downloads of the old masters when I am making new masters," he said in a written statement submitted to the High Court in London earlier this month.

"It would be better to wait and try to do them both simultaneously so that you then get the publicity of the new masters and the downloading, rather than just doing it ad hoc."

A spokeswoman for Apple Corps confirmed Aspinall's statement, and said that the company is preparing to make the Beatles catalogue available through online music services.

"There's no firm date on any of this at the moment. There are a lot of projects that Apple are working on at the moment," she said on Thursday.

The Beatles have been high-profile holdouts from the booming online music sector, which saw sales triple to $1.1 billion in 2005.

Apple Corps, owned by Beatles Paul McCartney, Ringo Starr, John Lennon's widow Yoko Ono and the estate of George Harrison, have accused Apple Computer of violating a 1991 agreement by using the Apple name and logo to sell music downloads through its market-leading iTunes Music Store.

The trial ended on April 6, with a decision from the judge due after Easter.
 
Kingsly said:
First windows on a mac, now The Beatles on iTunes! Looks like Hell froze over, folks.
Click to expand...

Hmmm and a pig just flew by my window, suprisingly carrying two apples, one rainbow, one green, in its mouth.

Glad to see this though, my mom keeps telling me her White Album LP is off limits, and my CD is cracked........
 
JGowan said:
Also, since Ringo never wrote any of the songs of the Beatles, probably would welcome any type of deal to make some sort of money.
Click to expand...

He did write Don't Pass Me By and Octopus's Garden, and had co-writing credits for What Goes On and Flying.
 
JGowan said:
Ringo never wrote any of the songs of the Beatles
Click to expand...

What JQW said. Not that either has made much of a dent in the grand scheme of things.

jicon said:
So hold on... Apple Corps is waiting for their umpteenth remastered works of the Beatles catalog, before they distribute the works in a lossy format thru some sort of digital download...
Click to expand...

Uh... Apple has remastered the entire Beatles catalog exactly once. And that was way the hell back in 1987 to standardize for CD distribution. Seems like now's a great time to do it again.

Granted, in the mean time they've given us the remastered Yellow Submarine Songtrack, 1 and the new Capitol album re-releases, but that really doesn't even begin to scratch the surface. I'd kill for a remixed and remastered UK Beatles catalog... especially if they follow Capitol's lead by including the mono and stereo versions on the same disc. Looks like I'll have to buy the White Album again.:)

I'm a big enough Beatles fan that I'll always stick to the CD releases, but I think digital distribution is a good thing. As long as they do it via iTunes.;) But knowing Apple Corps, the possibility of them creating their very own exclusive Beatles download service isn't entirely out of the question.
 
I have read several stories about this subject and no where do I see any mention (except in the "headline" of this stories link) that The Beatles songs will be distributed on iTunes. There are only mentions of "Online distribution" and no mention of iTunes. There is no official mention anywhere from Apple Corps. that they plan on allowing the iTunes music store to distribute The Beatles music.:confused:
 
Kingsly said:
First windows on a mac, now The Beatles on iTunes! Looks like Hell froze over, folks.
Click to expand...

Actually, that already happened. Apple announced that hell froze over when they released iTunes for Windows. Now that they have Macs powered by Intel processors AND booting into Windows, iTunes for Windows really seems like a trifle.
 
elgruga said:
Screw the beatles, and their ancient music with its simple tunes and schoolboy lyrics, mostly whining about teenage luv issues.
Its relevance has gone, as it should.
Click to expand...

You've never actually listened to The Beatles, have you?
 
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