Extended iTunes Store Song Samples Held Up Over Licensing Issues

[alent1234]

As someone here that knows people in the Music industry who will be surprised on how many old people in charge despises Apple and the iTunes Music Store. They all feel resentment toward Apple because apple thought of the digital music sale to stem music pirating before any of the any of them did. Plus now they all got in their heads that Apple's iTunes has grown to big and they want to do anything to take iTunes Music down. Hence the sweet deals at Amazon and a lot of smaller music subscription service, given almost freely away (lower prices )by the RIAA.

IMHO it could be cause for a DOJ antitrust investigation.

they are right, look at Ping. it's crap now but apple can build it into an artist promotion tool so new artists can go straight to Apple to sell music and book tours instead of the record companies

 

[kazmac]

Hope the licensing issues

get sorted. I'll hold off as I'm kind of tired of losing money based on 30 second samples.

One element of iTunes I wish would change is if you buy a song and your external and interal hard drives go, it would be nice to be able to download what you've already paid for. If it isn't an upgrade to the current iTunes plus, fine pay for that...

 

[ps45]

a lot of people here don't seem to understand the difference between recording rights (i.e. the recordings of people playing songs) and the publishing rights (the songs themselves, whoever records them).

publishers and songwriters do make money through selling records, it's true - but usually (and more and more so) they make their money through other ways, such as broadcast royalties.

publishers may have been forced to accept bad deals with apple (apple and its other behemoth buddies like yahoo and AOL etc. actually sued the comparatively miniature UK publishing industry so they wouldn't have to pay the going rate)... but if they're currently signing far better streaming deals with new players in the market such as Spotify, why should they screw up those deals by letting apple offer almost the same for far less money?

believe it or not - the publishing industry doesn't rely on iTunes. It's doing pretty well from live music, TV, radio and streaming. maybe that's why David hasn't rolled over for Goliath.

 

[jacollins]

This is such stupid Sh**t do these various organizations that represent music rights want to sell music or not?! A 90 or even 60 second song sample will ultimately sell more music and will result in consumers who are happier with their purchases and will be more likely to buy more music from that artist again. I have a number of songs I've purchased in my collection that I based on a 30 second snippet that I'm not happy with. 30 seconds is not long enough!

I suspect the bolded line is the real reason they dont want longer samples. I've got the same as well (sounds great on the sample and when you get it, you wonder where the heck the sample is in the song, because it is crap).

I'm sure it's all dollars and cents to them. Will longer samples really get more sales, or less sales? Considering the utter crap they've been tossing out there over the years (especially the radio cuts that are like 2 minutes long), I think they'd actually sell less if they gave a 90 second song sample. Especially at $1.29 a pop for the song. I don't think the studios really see an upside out of a longer sample for a sale.

 

[Northgrove]

So silly of the music companies making a fuss out of this.

What are they afraid of? That their users will be satisfied with 90 secs of music and not opt to purchase it? That's crazy. If the songs are *that* bad, they don't deserve being purchased.

 

[rish]

Stamp with your feet

I suspect the bolded line is the real reason they dont want longer samples. I've got the same as well (sounds great on the sample and when you get it, you wonder where the heck the sample is in the song, because it is crap).

I'm sure it's all dollars and cents to them. Will longer samples really get more sales, or less sales? Considering the utter crap they've been tossing out there over the years (especially the radio cuts that are like 2 minutes long), I think they'd actually sell less if they gave a 90 second song sample. Especially at $1.29 a pop for the song. I don't think the studios really see an upside out of a longer sample for a sale.

These so and so's need to be reminded whose boss. We the consumer. I spent a few years boycotting certain artists associated with certain companies in the music industry. These people don't listen. You as the consumer need to keep moving the goal posts in order to get what is fair. The amount of total dross that's out there is phenomenal and the only way you'll change it is by a boycott! You buying something based on 30 seconds of a sample and then realising after hearing that it's total crap results in you being in a difficult place to return it and get back your hard earned cash. Time we stuck it to the man and keep sticking it until the terms for the consumer are more favourable and ultimately fair!

 

[twoodcc]

why am i not surprised by this? in the end, the consumer suffers