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.
Pandora May Shut Down Due to Rising Royalty Fees
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I found out about Pandora just recently with the one article on these iPhone blogs last month. I downloaded it to my iPhone but have never used it there... I use it all the time though at work and LOVE IT!
The RIAA should thank Pandora and fight for its right to continue service at current royalties if not cheaper royalties, because since listening to it for a mere 30 days, I have purchased about $30 worth of music off of iTunes. Do you know the last time I bought that much music? Try 3 years ago.
The RIAA should thank Pandora and fight for its right to continue service at current royalties if not cheaper royalties, because since listening to it for a mere 30 days, I have purchased about $30 worth of music off of iTunes. Do you know the last time I bought that much music? Try 3 years ago.
WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!
iPhone users using something and NOT being charged out the rectum for it! Blasphemy.
if Pandora gets shut down, I can guarantee I will not be using any paid or ad supported radio app. Not a chance. I'll just stop listening, its that easy.
If others would follow this example, there would be less taking advantage of iPhone users
iPhone users using something and NOT being charged out the rectum for it! Blasphemy.
if Pandora gets shut down, I can guarantee I will not be using any paid or ad supported radio app. Not a chance. I'll just stop listening, its that easy.
If others would follow this example, there would be less taking advantage of iPhone users
Pandora is awesome. Especially on the iPhone. I'm hooked. I listen all the time and it discovers new artists for me that I like. Its like having a personal DJ. I love listening in the car w the iPhone.
Legacy industry trying to squeeze money from the internet, resist change and ignore the needs of their customers. RIAA and the music industry will obviously never change. They will eventually disappear to be replaced by new companies which do understand the world we live in.
Legacy industry trying to squeeze money from the internet, resist change and ignore the needs of their customers. RIAA and the music industry will obviously never change. They will eventually disappear to be replaced by new companies which do understand the world we live in.
Exactly! I may be wrong, but I *think* Pandora is the only service that does what it does. I've found several of my all-time favorite bands from listening to Pandora. It will be a sad day if it has to shut down.
At the risk of sounding like a party-pooper, you're all complaining about what exactly? That your free alternative to over-the-air radio stations must use ads to stay in business? That you're no longer able to get something for nothing?
Let's calm down here. As long as there are fewer ads than on radio, isn't Pandora still a better choice?
And FWIW, some satellite radio stations already do have ads.
Let's calm down here. As long as there are fewer ads than on radio, isn't Pandora still a better choice?
And FWIW, some satellite radio stations already do have ads.
Uh, no. That's not what we're talking about at all.
This isn't about Pandora adding advertising (which would kind of suck but still be okay). This is about Pandora going under (as in, not being there anymore in any way) because they can't generate enough ad revenue to pay for the royalties they have to pay, royalties over-the-air radio doesn't have to pay at all; royalties that are much smaller for satellite radio.
Give me a break! More like money-grubbing greedy capitalists. If they were really socialists, the government would be looking at ways for everyone to enjoy the service, not ways to charge them out of existence.
You guys are still lucky to have it; They were forced to kill off non US access a while ago.
When will the RIAA wake up and smell the coffee? Do they really think in this day and age that restricting what we can and can't listen to and where we can listen to it is a GOOD idea?
Without Pandora, there's around 90 CD's I'd have never bought because I'd never heard of them. Yes, I still BUY CD's - And yes, I do realise that around 80% of CD's that you buy these days are not actually "CD's" as defined by the red book.So Why Do I buy? From that CD I can choose to do with it what I like - If I want to lend it to a friend to listen to, I can. If I want to listen to it in the car, I can. If I want to rip to my Mac or stick it on my mobile phone to listen to, I can.
So thank you RIAAA - By shutting down pandora, you're just killing a revenue stream. Perhaps we should shut down the radio stations too eh? Lord only knows, we may hear a tune we like, wander off down the street singing it and therefore be in breach of copyright eh?
When will the RIAA wake up and smell the coffee? Do they really think in this day and age that restricting what we can and can't listen to and where we can listen to it is a GOOD idea?
Without Pandora, there's around 90 CD's I'd have never bought because I'd never heard of them. Yes, I still BUY CD's - And yes, I do realise that around 80% of CD's that you buy these days are not actually "CD's" as defined by the red book.So Why Do I buy? From that CD I can choose to do with it what I like - If I want to lend it to a friend to listen to, I can. If I want to listen to it in the car, I can. If I want to rip to my Mac or stick it on my mobile phone to listen to, I can.
So thank you RIAAA - By shutting down pandora, you're just killing a revenue stream. Perhaps we should shut down the radio stations too eh? Lord only knows, we may hear a tune we like, wander off down the street singing it and therefore be in breach of copyright eh?
Yeah, it's horrible. If you guys haven't read "The Problem With Music" by Steve Albini, I strongly recommend you do. Hopefully the RIAA and all the labels will go under.
Pandora is being punished for helping to sell more music.
See, the thing is that the record labels don't really want any exposure except what they pay for on normal radio. They don't want Indie bands to be exposed which is why they are trying to destroy internet radio, and they don't even necessarily want bands other than the ones like Nickelback and Avril Lavigne to be exposed either because it will change up what's popular and they will lose their cash cows.
Here's an idea that someone gave me on the internet: buy CDs used or download songs on BitTorrent and then send a personal check to the artists. They will make so much more money that way and it will kill the labels.
This is why the RIAA deserves to get ripped off by people. They continue to rip off the artists and the consumer every chance they get.
I'm so glad half the population is stealing from them. The industry has been raping artists for years now and all of a sudden they want to protect the artist?
Give me a break.
I'm so glad half the population is stealing from them. The industry has been raping artists for years now and all of a sudden they want to protect the artist?
Give me a break.
Oh really? Capitalists are in favor of more government regulation and federally-imposed fees?
If you think socialism works for the betterment of the people, you've obviously never heard of the Soviet Union, the "People's Republic" of China or the "People's Republic" of Korea. Those governments really have/had the people's best interests in mind, didn't they?
Of course. And right now, they're doing very well. People keep asking when these agencies built upon restriction will "wake up and smell the coffee." Why should they? They're making a killing the way things are now, and even if they could make more, by changing things, they could make less. Their behavior is really quite understandable. Not logical, but understandable.
I'd love to see a torrent client with a feature like that built in.
The Soviet Union was never really socialist. How to tell? When leaders are rich and the people are poor. In an ideal socialist society, everyone is equal. In a perfect world, socialism would be a better choice than capitalism. Not the best choice, but a better choice. (Example: ideal capitalism allows people to starve, while ideal socialism supports everybody). The "People's Republic" of China is a dictatorship, with a mix of socialist and capitalist ideas added in. Most people don't realize how capitalist China is. I don't know a lot about Korea.
Point is, you're wrong. Those aren't fully socialist societies.
More artists need to follow the Radiohead way of doing things; Looks like it paid off:
http://www.comscore.com/press/release.asp?press=1883
http://www.comscore.com/press/release.asp?press=1883
Who are you arguing with?
IgnatiusTheKing would call paying a dollar more for a coffee "socialism", or getting dumped by his girlfriend "socialism".
He probably calls his zits "Mao" and his hemorrhoids "Stalin".
Apple Inc. would not even have been born or exist in a socialist society.
You would have no Mac, iPod, or iPhone. There would be no incentive to make cool things or great art. We'd all be the same and poor. No thanks!
yes yes yes. I read it and couldn't agree more.
As far as Pandora, I believe they had every intent to move to ad-generated revenue. They didn't see this coming? Venture capital companies don't give money out unless they expect to get a return on their investment. I think it's extremely naive to believe that this was going to always be free.
Many companies and industries favor regulation because it limits competition.