Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Fee for PC/Mac sales?

I apologize as I have not read through all the comments as yet but if this goes through, how long before we see the request for these types of fees for all PC/Mac sales as those are used to download and listen to music as well?
 
Same here, paying a levy on iPod's is like paying one on Hard drives as many of them contain copyrighted material, except they could never do that as the business world would go insane if they had to pay a levy to the music industry.

i agree too. it's kinda making you want to rip off their music seeing as you'd be paying for it already :rolleyes:
 
I apologize as I have not read through all the comments as yet but if this goes through, how long before we see the request for these types of fees for all PC/Mac sales as those are used to download and listen to music as well?

May as well add the fee to headphones. Don't forget speakers, receivers, cables, speaker wire. And cars, since many people listen to pirated music there. Oh, and add the fee on the monthly electricity bill (can't pirate music without electricity!) and any medical procedure involving the ears or hearing.
 
To those saying they'll boycott, I'd just like to point out...

...Universal is by far the largest record label in the world, and those of you that say you don't listen to anyone of their artists might need to dig deeper into their subsidiaries, as just a few of the musicians in their stable are:


The Carpenters
Jimi Hendrix
Nikelback
Carole King
Andrea Bocell
Four Tops
Lionel Richie
Cat Stevens
The Jackson 5
The Andrews Sisters
Cradle of Filth
HIM
The Temptations
Diana Ross
Scissor Sisters
Boyz II Men
Patsy Cline
Joan Baez
Stevie Wonder
The Police
Bee Gees
Hanson
Marvin Gaye
Count Basie
Louis Armstrong
John Cale
The Roots
Elliott Smith
Frankie Valli
Beastie Boys
Roxy Music
Duke Ellington
Fairport Convention
John Williams
Anthrax
Cream
Hank Williams
Bananarama
Black Sabbath
Public Enemy
The Righteous Brothers
Jethro Tull
Jay-Z
Ella Fitzgerald
Prince
Judy Garland
James Brown
Buddy Holly
Bing Crosby
Bryan Adams
U2 (with their close ties to Apple...)
The Fat Boys
Peter Frampton
Elvis Costello
Billie Holiday
Mel Torme
Janet Jackson
Kraftwerk
Dresden Dolls
Willie Nelson
Soundgarden
Luciano Pavarotti
Megadeath
TV on the Radio
Van Morrison
Kanye West
The Killers
The Orb
Slayer
Bon Jovi
Aerosmith
Beck
Mariah Carey
Emerson, Lake and Palmer
Nine Inch Nails
Keane
MIA
Primus
Wolfmother
Patti LaBelle
Get Up Kids
Paul Westerberg
Garbage
Dr. Dre
Cher
The Cure
...And You Will Know Us by the Trail of Dead
Blink 182
Peter Gabriel (a big Mac user!)
The Eagles
Guns 'n' Roses
Eminem
John Lennon
Elton John
Joni Mitchell
The Misfits
50 Cent
Marilyn Manson
Sigur Ros
Gwen Stefani
Nirvana
Snoop Dogg
Siouxsie and the Banshees
The Who
XTC
Neil Young
Weezer


So I'm sure there's someone in that last that nearly all of us listen to regularly...

Yeah... I listen to some of those... but of those artists, which of them are putting out new material that I don't already have. Some of these artists depend on internet sales because Virgin Mega Stores and Best Buy do not carry older CD's.

You are also forgetting there are a lot of Jazz Labels, Rap Labels, Country Labels, and even Classical Labels that are not related to Universal in any way. Those are the labels that have benefitted the most from digital sales because they have less PR, less radio time, and less store space than a lot of this oversaturated POP market that floods the isles of a typical music store.

If Apple pays 1 cent to the recording companies, these companies will be nickle and diming them until the end of time... or just long enough for us to want to switch back to RECORDS or CASSETTE TAPE.
 
I'm certainly not on the record label's side on this, and I'm someone who almost never downloads anything online (not even free, MP3 of the week type tracks), but I think two important things we're glossing over are:

1 It is illegal to pirate music, regardless of whether or not a label gives their artists their fair share of profits.

2 Like it or not, most of the music on most people's portable music players is downloaded off of P2P. We "affluent" Mac users, who stay on the cutting edge of technology and come to places like MacRumors for heated exchanges about Apple news are not a typical cross section of music consumers.

I'd reckon most iPods are owned by the under 21 crowd, who've grown up with P2P as an ever-present option for music, and who swap songs with friends without thinking twice about it.

And as this generation gets older, things will only get worse for the labels, I figure.

On the other hand, at some point in time, this same generation will be in our courtrooms running the judicial system and in our capitol running our government, so it could be that some of these antiquated laws get modified for the digital age, but until then, refer back to Points 1 and 2 above and realize that despite how we may feel about the issue, it's illegal to download music freely and most people are doing it...
 
This can only be a good thing

Why just the other day I was thinking to myself, 'There ought to be an easier way to get my money to UMG.'

This sure beats taking out a fin, finding an envelope and stamp, digging out an address, and making the trek out to the mailbox.

Let's face it, the Universal Music Group DESERVES our money. Sure I don't listen to Ashlee Simpson, Lindsay Lohan, or the Doggy Style All Stars but who am I to say where my money should go?

And why on earth should an independent society for artist rights like ASCAP, BMI, or SOCAN be responsible for distributing money collected from what amounts to an MP3 tax? They'll just divy up the money to artists and music publishers according to boring criteria like record sales/radio play, etc.

I want my money going directly to the LABEL to do whatever they see fit with no public oversight! Maybe the artists don't need the money this month and the coke-head A&R guy needs it instead? Did you ever think of that?

Thank God UMG is FINALLY standing up for its rights and Microsoft had the good sense to listen when it agreed to implement a UMG tax in the Zune!

Apple, pay attention, or I'll just have to mail my money to UMG instead of buying an iPod!
 
See, that's the catch-22 for new artists. The labels are the ones that get tunes played on the radio. In the 50's and 60's they would strong-arm their stuff in, but I'm sure even nowadays they provide incentives (read: bribes) to get new stuff on the air. Especially if they think the band is really good and will make it in the long run. And don't fool yourself into thinking a new band can get huge without radio.

The internet can become the new radio. I am quite fond of looking for pre-made playlists, I will get the songs on LimeWire, listen to them, the ones I like, I buy legally, the ones I don´t I delete them. You don´t get commercials, just music. I am not saying that radio is going to dissapear completely. TV didn´t kill it. But its importance will diminish.

The problem is that the labels get the artists by the balls when they sign them up to ridiculous contracts. Your 1-4 examples look pretty good on paper, but in order to sell any significant number of copies of their music, anyone wanting it (but doesn't know it yet) has to wade through tons of (what that persons sees as) crap just to get any exposure to something they'll consider good. I'm sure there's a lot of music in the indie catalog that I would just love, but I don't have the time to wade through it all to find it. Instead, I'll listen to the radio and when I hear something I like, I'll try to pay attention to who it is. I may or may not end up buying it, or checking out what else they do, but without radio exposure, most good indie bands don't have a chance in hell of selling to anyone except those that happen to be in the bar where they're playing one weekend..

iTMS could potentially change this. There are some people that will do all the research for you (as in what is good music), then ratings will allow you to get the good songs! It´s similar (and somebody will flame me for saying this) to researching a product on Amazon or CNET, you usually look for a LCD screen, all the results pop, and you will go for the ones with the highest ratings, read the comments and eventually make up your mind. Some day you will look up for electronic music (which I love), all the DJ´s will pop, you will pick the highest rated songs or playlists (because most people like a song because other people like it), listen to their songs for free (yeah, just like radio), and then buy them if you want.


Now, if you take a look at already established and popular bands, that's a different story. Someone mentioned huge bands like Pink Floyd. Their last couple of CDs didn't need a big label to sell. People were going to buy it if they like Floyd no matter what. And in a case of that kind of popularity, the radio stations were going to play them with or without a major label. The same could be applied to other huge (classic) rock bands, as well as established artists in other music styles (country, rap, R&B, blues, etc...). Another example would be someone like Eric Clapton. He could put one out on "Clapton Records" and would sell nearly, if not exactly, the same number of CDs as he will on a major label..

I agree record labels + good music = superstars like Calpton, Floyd, U2 etc... But these bands became popular in a different time (before the internet). Internet is changing the record labels´ business model, and that is what they afraid of. The new wait of creating bands and distributing their music is not as profitable for them as it used to.

Unfortunately, the number of artists (of any type of music) that could dismiss the labels and still sell as many CDs and get the same radio exposure are limited. And any new band is going to go nowhere without radio (or MTV/VH1) exposure.

Internet is offering them exposure. Right now MTV and VH1 are still popular. But YouTube, Yahoo!, MSN could become the new MTV and VH1.

Not really relevant, but interesting to think about is that most of you have probably seen the video of the ruma ruma guy (I can´t link it because I am at work and the proxie does not allow me to visit YouTube). But how many have actually seen the video for the song? YouTube made that fat kid a star, and most people probably know his face better than the guys that sing the song. Exposure.

In the end, I don't see the labels going away totally any time soon. They're in cahoots with the big FM music stations and in general, they do a good job of promoting new good bands that sign up. It's just a shame that there's really nothing to keep them from raping the artists. If there were just some way for new bands to get exposure to the masses without having to sell their souls to the labels then things would be better. Unfortunately, the Internet can only go so far in helping a new band with this.

I agree, they won´t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.

Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don´t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)
 
I'm certainly not on the record label's side on this, and I'm someone who almost never downloads anything online (not even free, MP3 of the week type tracks), but I think two important things we're glossing over are:

1 It is illegal to pirate music, regardless of whether or not a label gives their artists their fair share of profits.

2 Like it or not, most of the music on most people's portable music players is downloaded off of P2P. We "affluent" Mac users, who stay on the cutting edge of technology and come to places like MacRumors for heated exchanges about Apple news are not a typical cross section of music consumers.

I'd reckon most iPods are owned by the under 21 crowd, who've grown up with P2P as an ever-present option for music, and who swap songs with friends without thinking twice about it.

And as this generation gets older, things will only get worse for the labels, I figure.

On the other hand, at some point in time, this same generation will be in our courtrooms running the judicial system and in our capitol running our government, so it could be that some of these antiquated laws get modified for the digital age, but until then, refer back to Points 1 and 2 above and realize that despite how we may feel about the issue, it's illegal to download music freely and most people are doing it...

For starters, it's not illegal to download music freely. There are quite a few artists that allow free downloads of their music, so the first part of your statement "it's illegal to download music freely" is not correct. The second half of your statement ".... people are doing it....", assumes that everyone is guilty until they prove themselves innocent. Which is wrong.

I've been re-thinking my stance here. And if Apple decides to give a portion of their future iPod revenue to the music industry, then let them. I personally would never do it, but again, we're only talking a couple of dollars per iPod. Would Apple raise their prices on current models, most likely not. I would rather have Apple pay the iPod tax, instead of changing the iTunes Music Store's pricing model.
 
Great argument, except that OK Go are signed to a major label, Capitol Records, only one of the most histroically great labels!! Please see: The Beach Boys, Pink Floyd, The Beatles, Nat King Cole, etc.)! :rolleyes: YouTube doesn't sell music; just look at OK Go's numbers, they are mediocre at best. One hugely popular viral video is not going to move that many CDs.

Also, as an aside, they are not "recording studios," they are "recording labels," or more commonly, "record labels."

Those bands became what they are in different times my friend.

And sorry about the recording studios thing, I am not a native english speaker.
 
I also wanted to add... go onto UNIVERSAL MUSIC GROUP and see how many groups you would be missing if ITUNES didn't offer Universal.

If you need "98 DEGREES" on your iPOD, then you better start freaking out...

Otherwise, don't sweat it. Universal has nothing to threaten Apple with. No worries here.

I went there, made it thru the "D"s and came up with these artists in my digital collection:
Aaron Neville
Al Jarreau
BB King
Big Bad Voodoo Daddy
Blues Traveller
Bob Marley and the Wailers
Cardigans
Counting Crows
Cowboy Mouth
Cranberries
David Benoit
Def Leppard
Del Amitri

There's a boat-load more there, yes they're a BIG label.

Z
 
To those saying they'll boycott, I'd just like to point out...

...Universal is by far the largest record label in the world, and those of you that say you don't listen to anyone of their artists might need to dig deeper into their subsidiaries, as just a few of the musicians in their stable are:...


That's a nice back catalogue, but how many new albums has The Carpenters, Jimi Hendrix, Carole King, John Lennon, etc released recently that weren't 'Greatest Hits' and 'Best of's? The challenge for the "Big Boy's" of the record industry is to find the next group of artists that will still be selling in 20-30 years time. I don't think my children and grandchildren will be buying Pussycat Dolls and Britney Spears albums in thirty years time. This is reason that their music sales have been falling, it's not exclusively piracy.
 
We might hate to admit it as Apple fans, but Apple needs the labels for the iTunes store to work just as much as the label needs Apple.


Not true. Apple doesn't need the iTunes Store since all iPods are full of stolen music! ;)
 
For starters, it's not illegal to download music freely. There are quite a few artists that allow free downloads of their music, so the first part of your statement "it's illegal to download music freely" is not correct. The second half of your statement ".... people are doing it....", assumes that everyone is guilty until they prove themselves innocent. Which is wrong.

Of course not all music is illegal to download, but for the sake of the conversation, which is full of 10 pages of posts concerning Universal's copyright protected cataloge, I assumed a qualifier wasn't necessary in my post.

To make myself clear, it's illegal to download copyrighted music which the artist and/or label has not explicitely made available as a free, promotional download.
 
this makes me so furious...

I can't get over the blind greed of these companies.

I'm waiting on Apple to get "threatened" by the bastards one time too many and then Apple says "ok" then approaches all the artists and opens the store to them paying part of their production costs and then giving them 80 percent of the profit off every song sold. Let's see how long the record companies KEEP their artists after that.

They better wake up to the new century before their artists do.

With most music savvy artists able to produce an album for less than a few thousand bucks now, Apple could turn on the industry and just blow it out at any moment. the industry could fragment into producers and mastering studios that get only for the service of producing and then it goes up to iTunes where it's subjected to reviews by peers and by a DIGG type system to promote it.

Browsing and sampling does a lot to increase ones musical library.. I found 80 percent of my new music by just searching and browsing on napster back in the day... I would find a new artist by chance and then go and by their CD. If apple would make their previews longer you would have the same type environment.

I'm not against a company making billions, but those billions should be made from giving the people who put them there what they want.

ugh. sorry, rant over.
 
I agree, they won´t go away anytime soon, but change is coming, and change will be good for artists and consumers, not for the record labels.

Sorry for my weird grammar or mispells, I am not a native english speaker, I don´t have a spell checker on this computer (in english at least) and I am too lazy to proof read what I wrote lol :)

Dude, I think you're right on, and your English is fine (better than some native English speakers who post here, in any case!).

Distribution methods like iTunes make the middle men - the labels - obsolete. It puts artists on a level playing field and coupled with viral marketing like MySpace and such it really spells the end for record labels as we know them.

If anything, all a "record label" might hope to be in the future is a marketing branch that works with an artists and takes a small cut of their sales, not the eight headed monster who controls ever aspect of an artists career - from where they record their album to what sizes their t-shirts come in - that we find today.

And as far as radio goes, it's totally done as a means of making hits. Heck, even next generation satellite radio is struggling - you're telling me terrestrial radio, which is nothing more than 15 minutes of talk and 20 minutes of commercial per hour is deciding what's popular today? Nuh uh. Try: MySpace, commercials, blogs, television series background music, etc. THAT's where today's hits come from.

FM radio and MTV lost all significance ages ago. If you're using them to find hits, maybe you should get off your PowerMac 6100 and upgrade your 14,000 baud modem to a DSL connection so you can visit the real world...
 
Just thought of something, maybe Apple could charge the record company for each song released by means of "Oh, you used a Mac to make this song. Give us this amount of money for each copy of the song you sell."
 
real music lovers buy their music in order the support great artists. i don't buy crap from the people at universal. nor do i expect to give them money when i buy an ipod.
 
I only registered to respond to this idiot "dougny". I usually just lurk and read what everyone else has to say on here.

You have no clue what your talking about, all your statistics are wrong and I feel really sorry for whatever artists you represent.
Your a f_ck_ng moran.


Anyway, to everyone else....
Here is the deal. The money Universal got Microsoft never EVER touched the hands of any artists.. it went straight into some very deep pockets. This is exactly what is going to happen with Apple's loot if this little deal goes through.

Total revenues in the MI (music industry) have actually been UP, and consistently so. More people are going to concerts than ever before, download sales are so large that they are numbing, and BEST OF ALL indie labels are thriving. Yes, people do still buy CD's, and DVD's.

Wow, you logged on just to show everyone you are an idiot. You actually think because paid downloads are on the rise that record companies are making more money? You are flat out wrong. Also, record companies don't share in concert ticket sales (which are also down BTW).

Dumbass
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.