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.
Universal May Want Money From iPods
- Thread starter Motley
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
http://www.thelongtail.com/the_long_tail/2006/04/music_industry_.html
Oh, oh, we did it again.
We need to look at overall sales and not segments of the total market. Basic econ 101.
Totally the music industry is thriving. The accountants over there probably don't know how to add.
Remember it's about profits, never sales. Costs of manufacture down with digital distributions
Geez.
the band-wagon
That was the first question I thought of when I read this. Tunes do not play the iPod, the iPods play the tune. Meaning, you deserve no royalty money Jack!
If the music industry gets away with this, then what's next? What's stopping the movie industry from getting on the band-wagon? Will DVD player manufactures have to pay a royalty for each DVD player sold? Sounds like a horrible nasty trend if you ask me.
That was the first question I thought of when I read this. Tunes do not play the iPod, the iPods play the tune. Meaning, you deserve no royalty money Jack!
If the music industry gets away with this, then what's next? What's stopping the movie industry from getting on the band-wagon? Will DVD player manufactures have to pay a royalty for each DVD player sold? Sounds like a horrible nasty trend if you ask me.
honestly the real way to solve these problems is simply to move piracy from a crime with years behind bars and exhorbitant fines to one with miniscule fines, yet easier to prosecute....
i.e. if musician or his lawyer has proof that you have an illegal copy of his or her music, then all they need is get information from your service provider as to your address and send you a letter as they have done with others
in the letter they give you two options:
1) pay for the album plus a penalty along the lines of $10 dollars and shipping costs for that album.
2)if you don't, you are then taken to court and liable for $100 fine plus court costs for that city/state. The fine money goes to pay the label exactly what they would have recieved for the sale of that record (like $8) and the remaining money goes strait to the recording artist only
if people know that there is a very real threat of getting caught and paying some cash they are more likely to curb their habits..... however exhorbitant fines like $500,000 and jail time make the RIAA and MPAA seem like bastards... it's bad PR
it's so rampant today, like speeding and marijuana use, that it needs to be treated like a minor crime.... no public/criminal record, no jail time, just fines
of course people doing major distribution should have stiffer penalties.
intellectual property simply isn't physical property since stealing it does not mean loss for the property owner, only loss of a potential sale.
by using the above suggested system it makes it easier to convert those potential sales into real sales, which is the ultimate goal, isn't it?
i.e. if musician or his lawyer has proof that you have an illegal copy of his or her music, then all they need is get information from your service provider as to your address and send you a letter as they have done with others
in the letter they give you two options:
1) pay for the album plus a penalty along the lines of $10 dollars and shipping costs for that album.
2)if you don't, you are then taken to court and liable for $100 fine plus court costs for that city/state. The fine money goes to pay the label exactly what they would have recieved for the sale of that record (like $8) and the remaining money goes strait to the recording artist only
if people know that there is a very real threat of getting caught and paying some cash they are more likely to curb their habits..... however exhorbitant fines like $500,000 and jail time make the RIAA and MPAA seem like bastards... it's bad PR
it's so rampant today, like speeding and marijuana use, that it needs to be treated like a minor crime.... no public/criminal record, no jail time, just fines
of course people doing major distribution should have stiffer penalties.
intellectual property simply isn't physical property since stealing it does not mean loss for the property owner, only loss of a potential sale.
by using the above suggested system it makes it easier to convert those potential sales into real sales, which is the ultimate goal, isn't it?
The government should subsidize musicians period. Get rid of the execs, those dirty rotten ***************.
There's way too many alternatives out there.
One place (or event) that really helps to showcase this is the South Park Musical Festival. There are several artists who've appeared at this annual event in years past and at the present who's music I'd love to buy directly from them (that is, the artists).
Also, if you want to hear some really jaw-dropping instrumental music, check out Acoustic Eidolon. I've seen them live, and no matter the venue (or medium), they're simply awesome.
One place (or event) that really helps to showcase this is the South Park Musical Festival. There are several artists who've appeared at this annual event in years past and at the present who's music I'd love to buy directly from them (that is, the artists).
Also, if you want to hear some really jaw-dropping instrumental music, check out Acoustic Eidolon. I've seen them live, and no matter the venue (or medium), they're simply awesome.
wankers
Good Idea! I think that a tax on all methods of playing music is the only way the Record companies can survive.
I was just playing a beatles tune on my guitar and I fully expect to get sued by Apple unless I pay them every time I play 'She loves you (yeah yeah yeah)'.
I got a letter from the Govt. today asking how much oxygen I will use this year in order for them to estimate my 'air taxation rating'.
I understand that the Dinosaurs also had a tax system......just before they disappeared from the face of the planet.
Goodbye, Universal Music - its only a matter of time.
Good Idea! I think that a tax on all methods of playing music is the only way the Record companies can survive.
I was just playing a beatles tune on my guitar and I fully expect to get sued by Apple unless I pay them every time I play 'She loves you (yeah yeah yeah)'.
I got a letter from the Govt. today asking how much oxygen I will use this year in order for them to estimate my 'air taxation rating'.
I understand that the Dinosaurs also had a tax system......just before they disappeared from the face of the planet.
Goodbye, Universal Music - its only a matter of time.
It's the blame game: They have to find somebody to blame for them losing money, so they blame normal consumers for being "thieves" when it is actually them that is doing the stealing in the 1st place, that's how they came up with the idea. They label iPod customers/users "thieves" for "stealing" all the "legal" songs they already own, when it is actually the executives that are carrying around an iPod full of REAL "stolen" music! Wow, what a brilliant idea! Allienate your own customers and make them look like "theives" or make them look stupid just to compensate for your own shortcomings. -->(not being able to sell music normally, with good promotion; but by resorting to "customers are thieves, we must blame them for stealing all their music."
Universal: You get my idiot award as the top idiot for the year of 2006! Congratulations!!
Brilliant idea Universal!
Anyone else see the demise of Universal, and Microsoft COMING SOON!....?
P.S. On a side note, this sounds awfully similar to Microsoft using their "Windows Genuine Advantage", why is that? I guess Microsoft and Universal think that all the customers that use their products are thieves; so they should be compensated for all their "hard work" and supposed "R&D", even though Micro*oft puts out a very *hitti product!
Originally posted by bilbo--baggins
"Ultimately those of us that buy our music legitimately will be paying for those that pirate music....but for Apple to agree to pay royalties on iPods would be admitting that the iPod helps/encourages people to pirate music."
Just because I own an iPod does not mean I pirate music!!
Evil Microsoft and Universal, I hope they dissapear soon!
Originally posted by edeloso
"It would be a nice idea, if people would just give me $1 for talking to them"
Very funny, not a bad idea too!
May not be a very good way to get friends though....
Originally posted by tumblebird
"Has anyone bought a domain name yet?" (about boycotting Universal Music)
This might be helpful--> (http://www.boycottumg.com)
I don't know that I will boycott them, that's a lot of bands. i just hope it doesn't go through. I think Steve Jobs is a smart guy!
Originally posted by Unspeaked
"...despite how we may feel about the issue, it's illegal to download music freely and most people are doing it..."
This is a very blunt generalization of all music listeners. Watch what you say, it may make you look stupid. While it may be true that "most" music played on digital music players "may" be pirated, you have no idea what is on someone else's media player, just the people that YOU KNOW! Saying that you KNOW that most people in this "generation" are pirating music does not mean it is true. Maybe you are thinking everyone is pirating music, because you do??
(So if you are pirating music, maybe you think everyone else is doing it. It's the old remark "everyone else is doing it, why not you") Are you pirating music? Come on, honest now, you "thief"!!!
I find people sound smarter if they don't make blind statements like this. You can't state "most people are doing it" as a fact and hope it holds up (without some shred of proof)
Originally posted by kresh
"The real implication is on the moral front. You mentioned "group think" and I think that is the real danger for the record labels. If enough people were to convince themselves that the record label has grabbed enough money upfront, then they could step across the moral line that keeps them from piracy.
It's not law enforcement, or the actions of RIAA, that prevents the vast majority from crossing the line into piracy, it's their own built-in moral objection to it.
If the record labels remove this moral hurdle through their own actions, then there are not enough police officers, federal agencies, or private enforcement groups to even begin to stem the resulting piracy wave."
I have some questions or thoughts about this quote.
Say a "computer user" finds a video they like, then they download it to their computer. This may include a music video (where else are u going to get it unless u buy a whole concert album u don't want- just for one song) On this music video, it includes music that was originally wanted, so that's 2 things obtained. They are not just songs, they include videos with them, hence "music videos". I don't know if YouTube is legal. Is that going to stop me from downloading videos from them? NO!
Just because one may have a "moral objection" to something does not mean they are not going to go do it. It won't stop some, regardless of "moral objection". If they get caught, they get caught, that's their fault. Is it hurting the artists? I don't know, don't think so. The "listener/watcher" still might want to purchase the song so it can be played on an "iPod shuffle" (for example) because it doesn't show movies. If the artist thinks it's unfair, they would then get paid for it (for the video).
The Questions
1. Do you not think that "some" cops/other law enforcement employees posess some form of "illegal" music video, music, or video that someone sent them or they copied? What's Youtube for? Isn't this what it mainly is.
2. Do you really think that most people still have "moral objections" to downloading pirated music?
Yes, I think it is a possibility some still have "moral objections". Anyone have any thought/ideas/opinions?
P.S. I like the idea of making pirating a misdameanor. It would stop a lot more people from doing it than what happens now.
P.S.S. I hope this whole post does not portray me as a hypocrite, no more time left to edit, gotta run!
Universal: You get my idiot award as the top idiot for the year of 2006! Congratulations!!
Brilliant idea Universal!
Anyone else see the demise of Universal, and Microsoft COMING SOON!....?
P.S. On a side note, this sounds awfully similar to Microsoft using their "Windows Genuine Advantage", why is that? I guess Microsoft and Universal think that all the customers that use their products are thieves; so they should be compensated for all their "hard work" and supposed "R&D", even though Micro*oft puts out a very *hitti product!
Originally posted by bilbo--baggins
"Ultimately those of us that buy our music legitimately will be paying for those that pirate music....but for Apple to agree to pay royalties on iPods would be admitting that the iPod helps/encourages people to pirate music."
Just because I own an iPod does not mean I pirate music!!
Evil Microsoft and Universal, I hope they dissapear soon!
Originally posted by edeloso
"It would be a nice idea, if people would just give me $1 for talking to them"
Very funny, not a bad idea too!
May not be a very good way to get friends though....
Originally posted by tumblebird
"Has anyone bought a domain name yet?" (about boycotting Universal Music)
This might be helpful--> (http://www.boycottumg.com)
I don't know that I will boycott them, that's a lot of bands. i just hope it doesn't go through. I think Steve Jobs is a smart guy!
Originally posted by Unspeaked
"...despite how we may feel about the issue, it's illegal to download music freely and most people are doing it..."
This is a very blunt generalization of all music listeners. Watch what you say, it may make you look stupid. While it may be true that "most" music played on digital music players "may" be pirated, you have no idea what is on someone else's media player, just the people that YOU KNOW! Saying that you KNOW that most people in this "generation" are pirating music does not mean it is true. Maybe you are thinking everyone is pirating music, because you do??
(So if you are pirating music, maybe you think everyone else is doing it. It's the old remark "everyone else is doing it, why not you") Are you pirating music? Come on, honest now, you "thief"!!!I find people sound smarter if they don't make blind statements like this. You can't state "most people are doing it" as a fact and hope it holds up (without some shred of proof)
Originally posted by kresh
"The real implication is on the moral front. You mentioned "group think" and I think that is the real danger for the record labels. If enough people were to convince themselves that the record label has grabbed enough money upfront, then they could step across the moral line that keeps them from piracy.
It's not law enforcement, or the actions of RIAA, that prevents the vast majority from crossing the line into piracy, it's their own built-in moral objection to it.
If the record labels remove this moral hurdle through their own actions, then there are not enough police officers, federal agencies, or private enforcement groups to even begin to stem the resulting piracy wave."
I have some questions or thoughts about this quote.
Say a "computer user" finds a video they like, then they download it to their computer. This may include a music video (where else are u going to get it unless u buy a whole concert album u don't want- just for one song) On this music video, it includes music that was originally wanted, so that's 2 things obtained. They are not just songs, they include videos with them, hence "music videos". I don't know if YouTube is legal. Is that going to stop me from downloading videos from them? NO!
Just because one may have a "moral objection" to something does not mean they are not going to go do it. It won't stop some, regardless of "moral objection". If they get caught, they get caught, that's their fault. Is it hurting the artists? I don't know, don't think so. The "listener/watcher" still might want to purchase the song so it can be played on an "iPod shuffle" (for example) because it doesn't show movies. If the artist thinks it's unfair, they would then get paid for it (for the video).
The Questions
1. Do you not think that "some" cops/other law enforcement employees posess some form of "illegal" music video, music, or video that someone sent them or they copied? What's Youtube for? Isn't this what it mainly is.
2. Do you really think that most people still have "moral objections" to downloading pirated music?
Yes, I think it is a possibility some still have "moral objections". Anyone have any thought/ideas/opinions?
P.S. I like the idea of making pirating a misdameanor. It would stop a lot more people from doing it than what happens now.
P.S.S. I hope this whole post does not portray me as a hypocrite, no more time left to edit, gotta run!
If the only use for an ipod is storing stolen music, then the same logic can be applied to all storage devices ( desktops, laptops, cell phones) Maybe Universal and all the other poor studios should be paid for every piece of silicon that is sold. Maybe we should all pay a fine for having ears, we only have them to enjoy stolen music after all.
I hope people vote with their wallets, and send the clear message that this type of treatment will not accepted. We don't all steal music, and maybe less people would steal if the studios had been actively trying to meet the demands of the consumers for the last 10 years. Maybe some compelling music at a fair price in the delivery form that works would help. I have to say I don't feel sorry for them. Prosecuting teenagers for downloading the latest crap they churn out seems less effective than actually offering something we are willing to pay for. They can do this with a carrot or a stick, I would prefer the carrot.
I hope people vote with their wallets, and send the clear message that this type of treatment will not accepted. We don't all steal music, and maybe less people would steal if the studios had been actively trying to meet the demands of the consumers for the last 10 years. Maybe some compelling music at a fair price in the delivery form that works would help. I have to say I don't feel sorry for them. Prosecuting teenagers for downloading the latest crap they churn out seems less effective than actually offering something we are willing to pay for. They can do this with a carrot or a stick, I would prefer the carrot.
The Police Station near my house has a fully chipped Playstation 2 so the officers can play a round of soccer before going on shift... they don't earn enough to throw in 70€ everytime they want a game
I live in a country that is currently going through an economical chrisis, our minimum wage is 375€, do you think everyone has the money to buy the music they want to listen to? Culture is a luxury, I pay 20€ for a music CD, do you think it's fair for me to give 5% of my monthly income for one music album??? Piracy is the poor people's weapon, otherwise how would they watch movies? listen to music? get sofware?
Don't they have the right to do these simple things like that just because they work *****ty jobs and weren't born on a golden craddle?
I'm really sorry if artists get stolen from but it's the price tags that record labels put on their records that makes it like this... people do what they have to do to manage, I bet few rich people have the need to download illegal stuff...
I really liked your suggestion, very thoughtful and err... "human"?
I live in a country that is currently going through an economical chrisis, our minimum wage is 375€, do you think everyone has the money to buy the music they want to listen to? Culture is a luxury, I pay 20€ for a music CD, do you think it's fair for me to give 5% of my monthly income for one music album??? Piracy is the poor people's weapon, otherwise how would they watch movies? listen to music? get sofware?
Don't they have the right to do these simple things like that just because they work *****ty jobs and weren't born on a golden craddle?
I'm really sorry if artists get stolen from but it's the price tags that record labels put on their records that makes it like this... people do what they have to do to manage
, I bet few rich people have the need to download illegal stuff...I really liked your suggestion, very thoughtful and err... "human"?
O.T. - Six posts in a row?????
I really hope Apple can resist this. I'm also strong on the idea of the actual artists getting a fair deal. Managers and publicity types need a fair take too, with the emphasis on fair. Record labels are dinosaurs tho. buh-bye.
Z
I really hope Apple can resist this. I'm also strong on the idea of the actual artists getting a fair deal. Managers and publicity types need a fair take too, with the emphasis on fair. Record labels are dinosaurs tho. buh-bye.
Z
I don't think pandering to their misplaced, greedy demands will go far in trying to win people over. This assumption that we are all thieves is very telling, we know what they think of us, we should show what we think of them. I hope Microsoft is happy serving it's new master.
One more thought, if I buy a Zune and pay Universal for stealing music, which I have not, then have I paid for the right to steal their music?
One more thought, if I buy a Zune and pay Universal for stealing music, which I have not, then have I paid for the right to steal their music?
Let's just save everybody the trouble and add a few percent to everyone's income tax rate.
Unless you're deaf. Then you can fill out the exemption form, and get a refund.
If you don't think my statement is correct, you're living in a reality distortion field.
If I'm so wrong, where's the data to disprove me?
Search most music forums online, or check out most college campuses and then try to say the majority of music floating around on iPods isn't illegit...
am I the only one to think that one of the (main) reasons microsoft agreed to the Universal hardware fee was exactly to create a precedent that would screw up the itunes store?
Try - the only reason. MS has money to burn, so why shouldn't it try to squeeze Apple? A conspiracy theorist would say that's the only reason they released the Zune once they saw what a crummy product it is.
If by "jack" you mean 'nothing' and not 'steal,' then yes.
NO. This is a false notion and it must be ended. The fee paid, if any, entitles you to nothing. It first and foremost IS NOT A STIPULATION (contract) between you, the users, and UMG, a licensor. It further is NOT FULL CONSIDERATION for a transaction to have taken place (in other words, there is nothing exchanged between the parties even absent the contract).
If Ford add $20 to the price of every car because some of its cars are stolen from dealerships or transports, does that entitle you to steal a Ford car when you want to? Of course not. It also doesn't matter if that fee is charged by someone else. If Continental or Goodyear add a $1 fee for tire theft and Ford pays it, it doesn't matter that Goodyear and Continental are separate and only tangentially related. You can't steal the tires.
This is why the fee must be stopped. It's free money to Universal, and it gains you zero rights or legal defenses of any kind. You can trust me as someone who has experience in this field, or you can feel free to try it yourself, but I assure you you won't enjoy the consequences. If Universal negotiates a deal with a state or federal government to charge all citizens a tax, then you have a different ball game.
I guess I did not convey my thoughts properly, it was a intended as a joke. I know this fee is not a contract granting anything to the user. It is a money grab. The allure of money for nothing will spread among the studios and soon they will all be looking for their cut. In the future I am picturing Microsoft as a prostitute with dozens of pimps looking for their kickback. She will have to work the johns even more as time goes on in order to keep Daddy happy.
Won't happen
As if the labels haven't made enough and won't make lots more in the future. They don't do ANYTHING other than market artists. They front money (and expect it paid back) to record and promote "artists". Some get HUGE like 50¢ or whoever, most don't. The ones that don't end up in hock to the label to pay back their expenditures.
Why do you think MTV is one big happy coke party? They've got money coming out their *&^%#'s
Apple can tell them to stuff it. iPod is the defacto music player. What if Zune gets ditched by MS in 2 years because the public doesn't buy it? If Apple renegotiates with Universal they get stuck with a bad deal for no good reason. No, Apple would and should only change the deal if Zune were to take off in a big way.
I am hoping that Apple pushes more to release INDEPENDENT artists. It is up to the public to be more interested in music as a personal journey and stop being hyped into unloading their bucks for some trendy crap.
As if the labels haven't made enough and won't make lots more in the future. They don't do ANYTHING other than market artists. They front money (and expect it paid back) to record and promote "artists". Some get HUGE like 50¢ or whoever, most don't. The ones that don't end up in hock to the label to pay back their expenditures.
Why do you think MTV is one big happy coke party? They've got money coming out their *&^%#'s
Apple can tell them to stuff it. iPod is the defacto music player. What if Zune gets ditched by MS in 2 years because the public doesn't buy it? If Apple renegotiates with Universal they get stuck with a bad deal for no good reason. No, Apple would and should only change the deal if Zune were to take off in a big way.
I am hoping that Apple pushes more to release INDEPENDENT artists. It is up to the public to be more interested in music as a personal journey and stop being hyped into unloading their bucks for some trendy crap.
Of course ....
by this logic, if I'm an oil company, I should be able to demand that the auto companies give me a royalty for every car sold because those cars use the gasolie I refine.
Absolutely absurd.
by this logic, if I'm an oil company, I should be able to demand that the auto companies give me a royalty for every car sold because those cars use the gasolie I refine.
Absolutely absurd.
i never really understood these music execs are they so out of touch with reality - do they have such bloated lifestyles they don't understand that people are fedup with buying a cd just to get one song and they don't want to be ripped off anymore and secondly they may want money from Apple but i don't think apple will bend over backwards for them. Apple should release a tool for artists to publish their own music on itunes and give the money to the artists might even create a better method of distribution - one day we will all be able to put our tracks on the itms making a record contract a thing of the past
Very good point. 99% of the music I listen to has nothing to do with Universal, so why should they get paid for the iPod I buy?
It's very simple - royalties should be paid by the download. End of debate. It is the only way to insure that everyone gets their fair cut. Should GM get a royalty when I buy a foreign car? Should Exxon get a royalty when I go bio-diesel? Why should Universal get a royalty for my music player when I don't buy their crap? Why should they get a royalty when smaller labels don't?