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

Universal Confirms iTunes Contract Change

There Loss

It's funny how Apple (a computer company) came up with a solution to help reduced online music piracy, that the music industry or an other retail chain could come up with. Now they are complaining that Apple has too much control. They are not taking control, the mass of people supporting them are putting them in control!

Your loss Universal - Good luck using other online music stores



www.netdealsetc.com
 
Schtumple said:
Universal (and most record labels tbh) are like bloody screaming toddlers, someone needs to kick them in the face
Click to expand...

Yikes! Is that what you do to screaming toddlers? No wonder they are bloody!

Here is my thought on this issue: Someone somewhere has talked Universal into something that requires them to alter the contract with Apple. I wonder who that could be?

(Hint: would take a company willing to burn / loose billions of $ to try and take Apple's share away and has a boss who monkey dances)
 
lets hope for universal in the next couple of weeks to sign a long term deal after they realize no one shops on the zune marketplace and that if you give out DRM free songs, they can be played on any music player...
 
"UMG's record labels have many of the world's biggest artists [1] including The Killers, McFly, Shania Twain, Bon Jovi, Elton John, Method Man, Tupac Shakur, Aaliyah, Jay-Z, Mariah Carey, t.A.T.u., Eminem, Dr. Dre, Diana Ross, Reba McEntire, Luciano Pavarotti, U2, Kanye West, Rihanna, Bone Thugs-N-Harmony and 50 Cent. UMG owns one of the largest music publishing businesses of the world, the Universal Music Publishing Group." - Wikipedia

So we're losing a bunch of c-rap. Gosh darn. :rolleyes:
 
Surely if this was really about preventing a monopoly, Universal would have set up a DRM-free iTunes scheme like the one Apple have started with EMI.

But, of course, people forget that actually, iTunes poses little monopolistic threat and this whole situation is driven by one thing: Greed.

Go on. Brand me an Apple-loving fanboy who doesn't see sense. Tell me i'm wrong to think that Universal are only after more money. Tell me i need to get my head out of the clouds.

Flame away, boys.

MA.
 
Cygnus311 said:
"UMG's record labels have many of the world's biggest artists [1] including The Killers, McFly, Shania Twain, Bon Jovi, Elton John, Method Man, Tupac Shakur, Aaliyah, Jay-Z, Mariah Carey, t.A.T.u., Eminem, Dr. Dre, Diana Ross, Reba McEntire, Luciano Pavarotti, U2, Kanye West, Rihanna, Bone Thugs-N-Harmony and 50 Cent. UMG owns one of the largest music publishing businesses of the world, the Universal Music Publishing Group." - Wikipedia

So we're losing a bunch of c-rap. Gosh darn. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

If Universal threatens to pull its content off of iTunes Store, I don't think Apple will blink.

Universal has the attitude that it controls unique content and the only way for Apple to get it is to cave. But iTunes offers lots of other choices, and the other labels will jump into the vacuum and promote their own artists. on iTunes. Life goes on.

The Universal artists who get the lights turned out on them will have a bigger fit than iTunes Store customers who can't buy their albums. iTunes may still be small relative to total music sales, but it's a huge promotional platform.

You think U2 is going to be very excited about delivering an album to Universal that it knows won't be available on iTunes? Universal will cave or artists will leave. Simple as that.
 
hey to all that say universal can go to better alternatives, give me one alternative that plays its music on the ipod and doesnt have an interface which is complex and hard to use on the mac computer...
 
Universal seems to be a bunch of cocky morons.

First, they stick exclusively to HD-DVD, and now they're pulling songs off of iTunes.

They must really not like making money, or something.

I mean, Blu-Ray is gaining momentum and support, and iTunes is the 3rd largest music retailer in the United States. o_O
 
Porchland said:
If Universal threatens to pull its content off of iTunes Store, I don't think Apple will blink.

Universal has the attitude that it controls unique content and the only way for Apple to get it is to cave. But iTunes offers lots of other choices, and the other labels will jump into the vacuum and promote their own artists. on iTunes. Life goes on.
Click to expand...

I agree. There are tons of other choices on the store and one thing that I like to do is poke around and see what sort of music I can find in there. Sometimes I find a few gems and sometimes I don't. :D

I have several pieces of paper on which I write songs that I hear through internet radio. Most of this stuff isn't on the store yet I've waited patiently. And guess what? One or two at a time pop up and I download them.

Perhaps my point is that there is plenty of other content in there and if we all wait patiently new, fresher content might fill some of the Universal holes.
 
ReanimationLP said:
Universal seems to be a bunch of cocky morons.

First, they stick exclusively to HD-DVD, and now they're pulling songs off of iTunes.

I mean, Blu-Ray is gaining momentum and support, and iTunes is the 3rd largest music retailer in the United States. o_O
Click to expand...

I was wondering when somebody was going to touch on this. Seems like the microsoft-HD-DVD connection may be leading towards a Universal-Zune exclusives connection. Bottom line would seem to indicate that someone else was willing to throw a little money at universal and so they once again went running. Don't be surprised to see Universal releasing titles on Blu-Ray sometime next year, and continuing to release the big titles on iTunes.
 
Apple direct to the artists

Apple needs to get off their butts and create the management/contract/payment infrastructure to deal directly with artists. It needs to be as easy as signing the contracts, getting and account and uploading your material. Say $.24 per download direct to the artist.



It is time to cut the big middle men out of the picture.
 
Oh, Universal wants flexible pricing now? Well, I guess the range will be from $0 via P2P to... well, I can't listen to anything protected via MS, I hate Realplayer, and I won't buy an entire CD of music if I just want one song.... so I guess zero is flexible, right?
 
Cygnus311 said:
So we're losing a bunch of c-rap. Gosh darn. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

The issue is not whether or not you like rap, or for that matter any music on the label.

And, speaking as a professional musician, I'd be careful dismissing rap. There's a lot more to it than you realize, unless you've been in a studio with a competent engineer and producer. It's easy to say "it isn't music," but I only seem to hear that from people who can't play music or who have never tried to work in the genre.
 
With Universals incredible successful deal with the Zune (royalties on every Zune sold), heck, they have probably made a couple of hundred dollars already, they feel they now have the power to impose this on Apple, get them inline where the market is going.

market is going, as in LimeWire

Do not get me wrong, I have 397 items, 159gb worth of iTune purchased content, mainly for our appleTV, but if Universal pulls out from iTunes, I will download everything I can, just to do it
 
They'll be back...

Let me get this straight. Universal is threatening to leave the fastest growing music service in the country, soon to be the #1 seller of music in America?

No one can be that stupid. With CD sales dropping like a rock (down 20% yoy) and online sales growing 50% yoy, this threat look like an empty threat.

Apple gave the masses an easy, affordable, convenient alternative to P2P. And guess what, it worked and saved the music business. And now the greedy bums at the music companies what more money from the company that saved their butts.

Personally I'm looking forward to the time when a majority of artists are selling direct to consumers, cutting out the greedy bums at the record companies that leech off the talent of others.

One only needs to look back a few decades to see some of the shameless contracts that record companies signed with early R&B and Jazz artists.

They are slime balls of the highest order, hopefully they are going to become a thing of the past. With iTunes, the hidden (social networking) power of playlists, and intelligent recommendations that are all built into the system good bands are going to find it easier than ever to make REAL money in the 21st century music business.

Here's hoping that the artists start making more money that the management and record company slimeballs.
 
KingofAwesome said:
I'd be careful dismissing rap. There's a lot more to it than you realize, unless you've been in a studio with a competent engineer and producer. It's easy to say "it isn't music," but I only seem to hear that from people who can't play music or who have never tried to work in the genre.
Click to expand...

Does it take a "competent engineer and producer" to make music? Absolutely not. What they do is polish the final product.

Rap is a niche market. You can defend it all you want but it's designed to appeal to a very narrow segment of the population. Just like country or R&B or any other genre. Some people, myself included, simply have no interest in it.
 
I really think this is not about Universal being "concerned" about a monopoly in the business (I seriously doubt that if they were the monopoly, they would be this concerned) and more about being able to get more money for their music. It's funny how desperate these music Biz guys were back in the early days of the iPod and iTunes. They were on their death bed when Apple comes along and was able to breathe new life into them again. People were tired of the crap in selections that were out there and were resorting to downloading their music (albeit illegally) because there was no choice. You either had to buy the whole CD or nothing, even though they was only one or two decent songs on the damn thing. Then iTunes comes along, makes buying music online, fun, with choice and only $0.99 to boot! This of course doesn't sit too well with the "Big Boys" but they take it anyway considering the financial state they are in. The music industry gets a breath of fresh air in them again. Online music sales becomes a viable option and the music industry gets a second wind.

Now, we are a few years down the road and they want to see how far they can take it. And that's OK. There is nothing wrong with that. Let them see what's out there (not much really, but they can still look). I really do think (as many have posted on this thread) that they would rather have their music "rented out" (i.e. subscription-based) as opposed to people actually "buying" their music (iTunes). But what these guys don't get, is that the general public doesn't like this method. This (among many other things) is what makes iTunes so popular. People don't want to have to rent their music, only to have their entire library go away as soon as they stop paying their monthly subscription fees. I don't think so. While many go for this option, the majority do not.

I wonder if Universal actually DID get more money for their music, how much of it would ACTUALLY end up in the artists pocket, if any at all.
 
calculus said:
I think you'll find that 'Apple' already does this.:)
Click to expand...

..and you should check out SNOCAP. They allow bands/artists to sell music directly. They are the ones who have the interface that all of the artists use to sell music on their MYSPACE sites. So far I think only MP3s but they soon will also have DRM free better quality if the artist and or label allows them.

The artist sets the selling price of a song. What ever they want, I think Snocap marks up 35-40 cents each. It is great for indie artists. They also have larger labels and are very artist friendly.

Check them out: http://www.snocap.com/
 
Cygnus311 said:
"UMG's record labels have many of the world's biggest artists [1] including The Killers, McFly, Shania Twain, Bon Jovi, Elton John, Method Man, Tupac Shakur, Aaliyah, Jay-Z, Mariah Carey, t.A.T.u., Eminem, Dr. Dre, Diana Ross, Reba McEntire, Luciano Pavarotti, U2, Kanye West, Rihanna, Bone Thugs-N-Harmony and 50 Cent. UMG owns one of the largest music publishing businesses of the world, the Universal Music Publishing Group." - Wikipedia

So we're losing a bunch of c-rap. Gosh darn. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Those artists have alot to lose. It will be interesting if they stay with universal or switch to another more progressive label like emi. One can only hope :)
 
Universal must be taking its cues from Adobe.

From this thread:
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/325676/

iSee said:
I think Apple was playing a game of chicken with Adobe over the flash player licensing fee. Adobe wants a pretty penny for the player on embedded devices.

[Dramatic reenactment]
ADOBE: So, you want the flash player on your new phone, eh?
STEVE: Yep.
ADOBE: OK, that'll be 5% of retail sales.
STEVE: Ah, no
ADOBE: OK, 2.5%, bottom line.
STEVE: Look, we can release this device without the Flash player at all.
ADOBE: No way, we rule dynamic content on the web--if you want to give people the "real web" you've got to play ball.
STEVE [to the public]: Develop using Web 2.0, Flash Player will suck your battery so it's really better that you don't have FP. [applies RDF effect].
PUBLIC: [Buys 100,000 x ? phones in the first week]
ADOBE: Ah, Steve? Steve? Are you there?
STEVE: Hmm, oh it's you. Can I help you with something?
ADOBE: Ah, how's about 5$/unit.
STEVE [Applying RDF]: you think it would be strategic to offer the Flash Player for free on the iPhone.
ADOBE: Ah... We've decided it would be strategic to offer the player for free on iPhones... [blinks a few times, regains focus] But you've got to pay for the development and maintenance.
STEVE: Already done.
Click to expand...

This is how i see this being played out.
 
starflyer said:
Universal must be taking its cues from Adobe.

From this thread:
https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/325676/

Originally Posted by iSee
I think Apple was playing a game of chicken with Adobe over the flash player licensing fee. Adobe wants a pretty penny for the player on embedded devices.

[Dramatic reenactment]
ADOBE: So, you want the flash player on your new phone, eh?
STEVE: Yep.
ADOBE: OK, that'll be 5% of retail sales.
STEVE: Ah, no
ADOBE: OK, 2.5%, bottom line.
STEVE: Look, we can release this device without the Flash player at all.
ADOBE: No way, we rule dynamic content on the web--if you want to give people the "real web" you've got to play ball.
STEVE [to the public]: Develop using Web 2.0, Flash Player will suck your battery so it's really better that you don't have FP. [applies RDF effect].
PUBLIC: [Buys 100,000 x ? phones in the first week]
ADOBE: Ah, Steve? Steve? Are you there?
STEVE: Hmm, oh it's you. Can I help you with something?
ADOBE: Ah, how's about 5$/unit.
STEVE [Applying RDF]: you think it would be strategic to offer the Flash Player for free on the iPhone.
ADOBE: Ah... We've decided it would be strategic to offer the player for free on iPhones... [blinks a few times, regains focus] But you've got to pay for the development and maintenance.
STEVE: Already done.


This is how i see this being played out.
Click to expand...

OMG, I laughed so hard! Great stuff.

As Obi-Wan Kenobi would say "These aren't the Apps you are looking for."

We want to see more scripts, more scenarios!!!

I can definitely see that happening. Especially now that we have the Flash rumor from Walt Mossberg. Funny, the iPhone is released WITHOUT Flash and within a few days, we get a rumor that Flash WILL be released after all. Hmmm . . . . this scenario seems more plausible everyday.
 
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