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

Extended iTunes Store Song Samples Held Up Over Licensing Issues

Rafterman said:
The record industry needs to die. They still think this is the 1970s.
Click to expand...

Actually its more like they're stuck in the 1990's, and are stammering around wondering why the warehouses are overflowing with un-purchased CDs.

jav6454 said:
My same exact thought. Seriously, you live off selling songs, but they impose so many ******** and bureaucracy that distributers end up giving up.
Click to expand...
Its not so much the distributors who are having a rough time, but rather the retailers. Many of the large distribution companies are in bed with one or more of the major labels, and mass distribution is one of the few reasons artists still fly into the "bug light" which is major labels.

Let's see if they continue making money if people can't be allowed to preview songs. There have been many songs I thought were the right ones, but I was wrong, a simple extra 10 or 15 secs could have avoided that and make me buy the right ones.
Click to expand...

But at the end of the day you still purchased a song and someone got paid. Therefore, your reasoning is not enough to cause a wave of concern at a corporate music label.

AlphaBob said:
No wonder music sales are in decline.

I can't believe how difficult it is for anybody to do business with these idiots. If they keep this crap up, soon there will be no reason for "Major Labels" because there won't be any business left. All they are doing is interfering with innovative new ways to 'consume' music that may well become the life-blood of the industry.

Record labels remind me of the old railroad companies as they struggled to retain their business as faster and cheaper methods of transportation appeared. They thought they were in the 'railroad' business but figured out too late that they were in the 'transportation' business.

Record labels think they are in the music business. They aren't. They are in the licensing, distribution, production and promotion business. The internet has changed everything about distribution, production and promotion, leaving them to rely on their existing back catalog for license revenue while hoping they can trap some new talent into their out-of-date model.

Maybe Apple should just become a retail outlet for independent music. They could follow the "App" model and allow anyone to post their own music for sale by cut, or album. I bet that would be a heck of a lot more revenue going to the artists than they get from their current contracts.
Click to expand...

Well said.

X38 said:
It's long past time for the entire music publishing industry to just die. With the technology available now, music should just go straight from artist to itunes (or equivalent) to consumer. There is no need for anyone else.
Click to expand...

But emerging artists cannot side step the myriad of other aspects which labels still have some hand in (see AlphaBob's post above). An artist/band can get their music onto iTunes without a label, but if no one knows who they are its not gonna sell. Its all about marketing.

devburke said:
Record labels never cease to amaze me with how much they just don’t get it.

They’re trying to sell your songs!!! Why would you want to get in the way of that??
Click to expand...

Because they are trying to shove a square peg into a circular hole, which then changes into a triangular hole and then into a trapezoidal hole. The industry is changing rapidly - far more so than ever before - and the institution that is the "Major Labels" cannot react fast enough to align with the demands of the market in such a way that will sustain profitability, so they they flounder and grasp at whatever straws they can get their hands on.
 
Poor Reading Comprehension

It seems some people around here need to go back to school to learn how to improve their reading comprehension.

This licensing issue has nothing to do with the major labels. None whatsoever.

It has everything to do with BMI and the NMPA, as a couple of educated posters previously pointed out.
 
You have to sympathize with the license holders at least a little. An additional 30 seconds of preview would increase sales, and they surely don’t want to see that! Where would they put the money, for one thing?
 
Seriously, the point of the preview is to purchase the song. There are many songs, at least over 100 I may have bought if I could have heard more.

Thing is, there are alternatives, for those that don't want to play ball, give them the boot. Ask NBC
 
iBryton said:
Sorry for Caps...WHY ARE THEY REFUSING APPLE BUT LETTING THE PREVIEW FOR THE WHOLE SONG FROM ZUNE?

WTF!!!!!!
Click to expand...

Simply because Apple now dominates the distribution market for music. The major labels and licensing agencies are afraid that if Apple grows unchecked it will be able to dictate terms to them (wouldn't you worry if 80% of your sales went to one customer that he might demand you lower your price or refuse to sell your goods if you don't?)

The playing field is never level in business. Apple has a size advantage, but other players enjoy different advantages such as lower pricing that encourages their growth with a hope of taking away some of Apple's market share.
 
interesting to see what would happen to shorter songs something less than 90 seconds? what would happen you can download/preview the whole song for free? or should Apple just suggest working a % of the song to preview?. Seeing most songs are 3 - 5 minutes per song wouldnt it make sense to preview 70% of the song? i mean radios play the complete songs and a few seconds at the start or end of the song they start playing other content to dub over it so a song is not completely stock this would make sense?.

anyone else agree?
 
From reading the article it seems that the labels have given their blessing. Its the National Music Publishers Association who are standing in the way?
 
It amazed me how many artists are still dependent on the labels. You would think that they would rather do a direct deal with Apple, bypassing the predatory middle men altogether.
 
hikokun said:
interesting to see what would happen to shorter songs something less than 90 seconds? what would happen you can download/preview the whole song for free? or should Apple just suggest working a % of the song to preview?. Seeing most songs are 3 - 5 minutes per song wouldnt it make sense to preview 70% of the song? i mean radios play the complete songs and a few seconds at the start or end of the song they start playing other content to dub over it so a song is not completely stock this would make sense?.

anyone else agree?
Click to expand...

Yes a 70% preview would probably be much more intelligent than a fix 90 seconds.

But still, imagine you can preview the entire song on iTunes: you would have to have some kind of software to rip the music that your computer is playing, and then edit it to cut off the silence at the beginning and the end. Then you would have to save it, and then manually add album art, track title, artist and album information.

Or, if you still want the song for free, you could just download it from any Peer-to-Peer network, it would take less time and less effort.

I don't think people would go around stealing song previews, today there are much easier ways to steal music.

Plus, someone who has an iTunes account and listens to previews probably already has the intention to buy songs. And I'm sure MORE people would buy songs thanks to 90 sec previews than the people who would steal them. And don't forget this would only apply to a minority of songs!

But they could still reduce the preview time of short songs.
 
Or perhaps the 30s samples could be a little more representative of the track? In some cases, you get a snippet of a long/repetitive intro that gives no indication of later hooks (or lack thereof).
 
The great thing is that full album/song reviews are available already – in a number of EU countries – and it is called http://www.spotify.com/

It comes with free 20 hour listening pleasure, and adds 5 new hours every week. Jump on the bandwagon and get yourself a proxy/anonymous server connection to join from the US.
 
Ah, the music biz. The only industry that thinks publicity for its products is a bad thing.
 
I always held the impression that the 30 second previews were pretty much all that was allowed through copyright fair use. Wonder if that's the hold up ... anything longer, suddenly permission is needed from all of these sources.
 
Wait! Didn't Lala had full song reviews already? And didn't Apple acquired Lala? Both yes, so what is the deal here? I mean it can be done, legally, because Lala had deals in place [but these are non-transferable contracts]. What label is blocking this?

I guess this is it:

"Even with all the labels on board, Apple didn't have all the licenses iTunes needed.

...Some from the music sector say Apple simply tried to rush a deal through and misjudged its ability to get a deal done without agreements from all the necessary parties. Apple has made it clear that it doesn't want to pay to license song samples, insiders say, and even they acknowledge that Apple also wants to avoid the nightmare that other music services have gone through when trying to obtain licenses from untold numbers of rights holders."
 
This isn't about labels, it's about publishing. And since Apple has already socked it to the publishers and songwriters (in the UK at least, in forcing down the royalty from 12% to 8%), perhaps this is them trying to get a few extra quid in the renegotiation of licences. I don't blame the songwriters, I blame apple - for being a ferociously hard negotiator that will trample anyone.
 
If the music industry ran other industries:

-- Consumers would not be allowed to touch clothing in stores for more than 30 seconds unless they bought it first; staring at an item for too long would be considered shoplifting by way of imagining wearing it.

-- The aisles at CostCo would be bereft of food samples

-- Consumer electronic stores would charge an admission fee to look at their TVs.

-- Sports fans attendees would have to pay extra to watch warm ups

-- Libraries and schools would have to pay royalties to have "Story Time."

-- Chairs and sofas in bookstores would be removed and replaced with sharp metal rods. Patrons caught doing more than paging through the table of contents of a book would be escorted out and banned for life.
 
Cat-toy said:
Apple should start it's own music distribution co. ...
Click to expand...

Actually Apple has already done this, it is called iTunes. If you look at the catalog there are a large number of artists/bands/acts that directly market their work through iTunes. Apple supplies the market tool and takes a modest cut of the action, and the musicians get far more money per song or album then they ever did from a recording label. Musicians are finding out they do not need a studio and airplay to sell their efforts. Thanks to the social networking sights the word get spread far and wide when a good new band appears on iTunes. Bye Bye BMI.
 
Erm?

You want to preview the full song?

Easy just DL it from a P2P site, listen then go buy it from iTunes. Then delete the P2P track and… oh hmmmm.

Just let us preview the whole song already geeeez record company people types. I can't tell you how many songs I haven't bought because I'm not sure which version is the one I want. AND NO I didn't go to a P2P site I just didn't bother supporting your artist.

Does this work in any other industries?

Me: I'd like to buy those Levi jeans please, can I try them on first?

Shop: yes, the changing rooms over there.

Me: thanks.

Shop: remember you can only try one leg though!

Me: bye!
 
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