Microsoft Also Wants Universal Music?

rampant mac writes "An article over at the New York Post is reporting Microsoft has expressed interest in buying Vivendi's Universal Music Group, setting up a possible bidding war between the software maker and rival Apple Computer, according to sources familiar with the matter. Microsoft's interest is said to be at the level of "poking around, kicking the tires," but it has indeed had conversations with Vivendi executives about buying the music division, sources said." Here is a story from a few days ago about Apple and Universal.

Comments

Damn

[MalleusEBHC]

Usually it takes M$ a few years to copy what Apple has done. So much for my pipe dream of Apple owning a record company and making it respectable...

Re:Damn

[abhisarda]

If you recall correctly, then Vivendi itself asked Jobs to take up a minority share in Universal. Why? Because Steve's music subscription plan hit a sweet note with Vivendi executives. Steve might be in talks to buy Universal and that is a good thing.
About Microsoft, they have about 45 billion in liquid assets and they can afford to run the competitors out of business. Note that Vivendi has put up Universal on the block. For Microsoft to buy it, it will have to calm the anti-trust flames that will be stoked on both sides of the Atlantic. Also remember that the anti-monopoly enforcers in the EU have not yet announced the punishment for MS. It will be coming in the next few months and MS's lawyers will be advising that bidding for Universal now won't make things easier for them.
But, if MS is really determined to get Universal then it might take a year to complete the deal.
One thing, I will keep my fingers crossed that this does'nt go through.

Re:Damn

[Wyatt Earp]

With the current economy, I'd rather see MS buy Vivendi.

Then they lose 6-7 billion down a hole of crappy music and Apple keeps it's money in the bank.

Re:Damn

[Anonymous Coward]

Moreover, Microsoft is under investigation by the EU regarding problems of bundling media player software with Windows.

Given the fact they use their monopoly on OS's to get a monopoly on media software (and even hardware with Xbox ???), I don't think the investigators in EU will find this acquisition 'clever'. The investigators might as well bar Microsoft from entering any media-related property just as ATT was barred from entering the computing world at the end of the '70s, and force them to sell any related asset.

That would end the dreams of "Bill in everything", but for example level the playing field in the codec world : suddently, the company which sells its technologies at the lowest price despite spending the most on research would have to attain profitability, giving some air to all those who don't have a cash cow to rely on...

Re:Damn

[VistaBoy]

Actually, the Beatles (and Apple Records) sued Apple Computer about a decade ago for having the same name. The lawsuit basically stated that Apple Computer was never supposed to become a record industry, since it would lead to confusion.

Also, since the computers started recording sound, they decided to add "Sosumi" as one of the sounds that comes with it to make a joke. You know, like "So sue me."

Re:Damn

[Anonymous Coward]

True. But MS really has no interest in getting into music except to stifle competition that flows against their business interest.

Normally, I wouldn't have a problem with it. This would be the normal part of business. Except MS is a monopoly, and their buying power comes directly from illegal activity.

The main reason MS can name themselves is because they are one of the few companies which could intersect their current business model with the music industry -and- have the raw cash to (or stock without losing 20% or so on their current stock in a stock for stock trade; iow, many companies could do a stock buyout, but not without a hit to the general stock used in the buy).

They know this. More importantly, they know this is a threat to their DRM and trusted computing model. So they are either directly interested in curtailing that, or are throwing their hat in the ring "just to see" (which they seem to be stating anyways).

Well, anyone who does something "just to see" has an inkling in truly buying something, but with MS, given their cash reserve to back them, there's another business driven decision--it's also to drive the cost of the sale up.

iow, if Apple has $6 billion in cash, if MS can drive the price up to $8 billion, Apple may withdraw their bid. MS dumps $8 billion, which is little to them, and halts a competitor from offering an alternative business model.

Even without a sale, 2 bidders causes a price war, even if just momentary. Apple may have started their bid at $4 billion, driven it to over $5 billion with their remaining cash or stock. Now MS throw their hat into the ring, driving it to $6 billion for certain. Apple no longer has $1 billion to spend buying some other company, related tech, for R&D, or to recumperate during harder times.

Yes, for all the 'MS is not bad' sayers out their, remember that MS has $40+ billion dollars in cash. If you are their investor, you should be pissed that money has not been returned to you in dividends. If you are a person who believes in fair competition, whenever MS says they "innovate", well, they have $40 billion to innovate and to prosper R&D, and they are doing absolutely little with it. Imagine the computing ideas and prototypes to market models that would stem from a 2% annual return on that money. Even if you like MS, MS isn't competiting because right now, they could blow the doors off of modern computing, and they aren't doing a thing, happily entrenched with their OEM agreements and such--aka Windows XP.

Innovation indeed. I'm no Apple lover, but at least Apple pretends to come out with stuff that at least look and feels a bit different than is par for the course.

Re:Damn

[k-0s]

See here is what I don't understand. Why should/would MS want Universal? If Jobs buys it he will have to pay MS royalitys for using their format to distribute the songs online anyways so they will make money. Now Apple if they buy Universal will have to dump money into promotion of 1)the service 2)the artists and 3)the actual product (CD's, tapes, etc). If I were MS I'd sit back and watch what happens, if it works buy one of the other labels (you know they could buy all the other 4 actually) and collect money from Apple that way also. Just seems like right now Microsoft is thinking of buying the label just so Apple can't. Which, knowing Gates, is entirely possible.

Re:Damn

[Anonymous Coward]

abhisarda wrote:

If you recall correctly, then Vivendi itself asked Jobs to take up a minority share in Universal. Why? Because Steve's music subscription plan hit a sweet note with Vivendi executives. Steve might be in talks to buy Universal and that is a good thing.

All right, now I watched the Vivendi Universal Internet division form from inside of one of the companies that they bought, and I'm afraid this comment touches one of my hot buttons. Vivendi-Universal owns a company that's demonstrated that you can make money off of on-line music sales on a subscription basis, it's called "emusic.com". For $10 a month, you get unlimited access to their on-line collection of music, they keep track of what you download and pay out royalties to the artists on that basis. What you get for this is real MP3s, no audio-watermarked copy protection bullshit or anything like that. If Universal hasn't put it's entire catalog on-line at emusic (or just as a compromise, the entire back catalog? ) it's solely because they're scared shitless of making a leap to a digital business without copy protection. They can't get over the notion that if you want people to give you money, you actually have to give them something that they want in return.

And while I'm bitching anonymously, may I point out that it was somewhat ridiculous to put emusic.com under the direction of the mp3.com clowns? One group has a workable business plan, another group is a holdover from the dot.bomb VC backed stock-swindle days: who would *you* put in charge, eh?

My immediate reaction is that I would love to see Apple buy up this group, because then a real Silicon Valley company would be back in charge, and it's *possible* that things might end up being run by people with a clue.

Re:Damn

[SN74S181]

Apple has a history of satirical code names and sayings. They had all those failed next-generation OS projects floating about in the 90's. Can't even remember the names of all of them. One was switched to butthead-astronomer after a hemp-head opposed them using his name.

Rumor has it that the 'Merglewelp' code name (Klingon for 'we are fucked now') used for that final abortive attempt at a 'New OS,' was what pissed Steve Jobs off and convinced him he needed to bring back NeXT's OS. He knew they'd given up and it would be easy to take it all back.

And thank goodness. The old MacOS was starting to make even ardent Mac zealots feel embarassed, and they'd nearly run out of fuel for the 'Next Generation OS Coming Real-soon-now' hype machine.

Re:Damn

[Anonymous Coward]

Why should/would MS want Universal? If Jobs buys it he will have to pay MS royalitys for using their format to distribute the songs online anyways so they will make money.

Why would apple use MS's shitty format?
Apple would more likely use mp3s than some sort of DRM crap. Apple is going to promote a music distribution paradigm that doesn't use DRM files. Microsoft wants the opposite. They'll buy Universal to keep apple's paradigm from taking off, if they want to.

Re:Damn

[ces]

You are assuming Universal or any other record company will use Microsoft's DRM format.

There are many competing DRM schemes at the moment. None of them including Microsoft's has emerged as the clear winner.

Whatever wins the support of a majority of consumer electronics manufacturers and media companies will be the standard if any. At this point it is not even clear there will be any sort of widespread DRM.

Microsoft can no more force everyone to use it's DRM scheme than it can force someone to buy an Xbox instead of a PS2 or Game Cube.

Re:Damn

[MacFury]

First off, Microsoft can basically do anything it wants. The Government will not stop them! I don't know how Universal is run, but it appers that the only thing stopping Microsoft from buying them would be Vivendi himself. So the question is. If Apple would pay $6 billion and Microsoft would pay $7 billion, who would you sell it to? My vote would go to Apple because I think they will provide a better service, whatever it may be. What's an extra Billion when you already have 6?

What MS could do.

[SocialWorm]

!

It seems like everyone wants to buy Universal.

This could really give MS quite a bit of leverage if it ever needed it - "Upgrade now, get 50 free songs for Windows Media Player" or some such thing. I could possibly even be tied in to some future service like X-Box live.

It's obvious and clever at the same time.

Re:What MS could do.

[Anonymous Coward]

And it would be great way to extend and retain a monopoly too.

"You need a CD player running Windows CE or a PC running Windows XP in order to play this CD"

Re:What MS could do.

[ahaning]

I could possibly even be tied in to some future service like X-Box live.

Are you going to come over to my house and clean my toilets and vacuum and cook for me while I play XBox Live?

That would be nice.

Re:What MS could do.

[Anonymous Coward]

You are going to press PLAY on your CD player and your player will search your home for a computer, then it will search for a MS OS on it. Then it will go to MS web site to download something. You will have to agree. Then, your player will not be good enough for the new CD's from MS. You will have to upgrade your hardware to a newer version with WinXP inside. Of course, this player is going to send MS your entire cd's catalog and before you know it, the cops comes knocking on your door.

Ran

Re:What MS could do.

[tchdab1]

Such as, "What do you want to pay to hear today?"

Re:What MS could do.

[the uNF cola]

I was planning on buying them too, but i misplaced my credit card. Can I borrow a few billion? ;)

Re:What MS could do.

[Anonymous Coward]

at $200/hr, sure. tell me where you live and i'll book the ticket myself

Riiight

[17028]

It's called driving up the price for your competitor.

Re:Riiight

[egoots]

It is also in Vivendi's shareholders interests for this to happen. It wouldnt be the first time that a company brought in (and possibly paid) a "potential competitor" in order to raise the selling price.

Anti-Trust Implications

[manly_15]

It would be my guess that both Apple and Microsoft would want to do the same thing - use music to promote and sell their products. However, if Microsoft bought Vivendi Music, would that not somehow be in violation of the anti-trust rulings? Couldn't Microsoft use their monopoly on desktop OS's to create a monopoly in legal music downloading?

I might be completely wrong, but somehow the prospect of Microsoft owning such a big label seems much scarier than Apple doing the same thing.

Re:Anti-Trust Implications

[IamTheRealMike]

Couldn't Microsoft use their monopoly on desktop OS's to create a monopoly in legal music downloading?

As opposed to what? A monopoly of Windows vs a monopoly of QuickTime. Oooh goody, what a choice.

Because you know, I somehow doubt that even the saintly Apple would be letting me pay for music in the Ogg format. Considering that every trailer they release uses more and more obscure codecs making them actively hard to play on anything other than QuickTime itself (AAC anybody?) I couldn't really care less who owns Universal - I know as a Linux user I'll be shafted anyway.

Windows has always been an afterthought for Apple and Linux, the platform from which they take so much, never gets a lookin.

Re:Anti-Trust Implications

[jackschwarz]

My guess would be that Microsoft would want to do what Apple has already done or will do.

manly_15 wrote: It would be my guess that both Apple and Microsoft would want to do the same thing. . .

Re:Anti-Trust Implications

[wavedeform]

I don't think of AAC as an obscure codec at all. It's been around for a few years. AAC will soon be pretty common, IMO.

It's an integral part of MPEG4. It sounds much better than MP3. What it does have going against it is a strict licensing policy, at least as tough as MP3.

Re:Anti-Trust Implications

[pi radians]

Considering that every trailer they release uses more and more obscure codecs making them actively hard to play on anything other than QuickTime itself (AAC anybody?)

Umm, AAC is a MPEG standard. And considering they ship music with their consumer products encoded in MP3 and their own audio application encodes only into MP3 I'd have to say your comments are pretty far off.

Re:Anti-Trust Implications

[Surak]

Actually, Apple is in the same boat. If Apple buys a record company, it puts Apple in violation of its settlement with Apple Corps, Ltd., the record company (known for, among other things, being the Beatles' label) with which it agreed not to go into the music business with, and possibly also it's license agreement with McIntosh amplifiers.

So the question is: which one is the evil twin? ;)

Re:Anti-Trust Implications

[IamTheRealMike]

Umm, AAC is a MPEG standard [vialicensing.com].

There are loads of standards out there, especially under the MPEG banner. Doesn't mean they aren't obscure. Ever heard of MPEG 7? Thought not.

And considering they ship music with their consumer products encoded in MP3 and their own audio application encodes only into MP3 I'd have to say your comments are pretty far off.

What they do with Macs is of little concern to me, I don't own one. I'm more interested about the format they make their trailers available in, and I know there are video formats that can be played on pretty much any computer in the world that work just fine - whatever it is they use is not such a format. Hence my pessimism for this deal.

Re:Anti-Trust Implications

[Trusted Content]

Apple took nothing from Linux, unless you are under the mistaken assumption that BSD = Linux. Please go ahead and inform RMS and Linus about your stunning revelation.

Apple has GIVEN to Linux, however, in case you've never heard of Quicktime Streaming Server (considered the Apache for streaming media); or, as NeXT, they were the ones responsible for adding Obj-C suppor to GCC. But I guess that's old hat, because by running a UNIX-based operating system, they must be TAKING FROM LINUX.

Idiot.

Re:Anti-Trust Implications

[Malcontent]

I think Ashcroft has demonstrated by now the he is Bill's bitch. The chances of this justice dept pursuing MS is near zero. MS knows this too.

Re:Anti-Trust Implications

[ivan256]

it puts Apple in violation of its settlement with Apple Corps, Ltd

Settlements can be renegotiated. Guilty verdicts can't.

Re:Anti-Trust Implications

[shotfeel]

Just out of curiosity, is it possible Apple Corps, Ltd is part of Universal Music?

Re:Anti-Trust Implications

[Annamite]

Apprently, it uses EMI Records license for now. http://www.thebeatles.com/legalnotice.

More history of this company which causes Apple Computer some headache :

http://www.beatlemoney.com/applecofacts.htm

They have been around since ever ... ancient times (-:

Re:Anti-Trust Implications

[IamTheRealMike]

Hint - the people who worked on KHTML, gcc and so on were not paid by NeXT. Go look at who pays the salaries of these guys, you'll find it's Redhat, SuSE, Mandrake....

Bidding War = Apple loses

[Bendy Chief]

As I understand it, MS' coffers are essentially deep enough to buy anyone they want; witness the state of affairs with the X-Box. (Rare Studios, anyone?)

It doesn't surprise me at all that they want to head Apple off at the pass.

Re:Bidding War = Apple loses

[Anonymous Coward]

"As you understand it"?

Here's a link to the latest MS quarterly report at the SEC: Jan 10Q

It shows about $43 billion in cash and short-term investments. $5.5B in cash. (Why, they could almost afford to pay a RIAA judgement.)

Microsoft isn't a software company. It's a bank... Given that they have such market dominance in their original field, they have no way to grow except to expand into other areas. That's the problem with dominating a market; nowhere to go but down or out.

This is a surprise?

[deanj]

Look, Microsoft seems to think that ANY device with any computational capabilities at all for the mass market is *theirs*.

Is it any surpise that they'd want to get into this too? Imagine if that happened? You thought the RIAA was bad....hoo boy, you ain't seen nothing yet.

Re:This is a surprise?

[Dr_Cornholio]

You thought the RIAA was bad....hoo boy, you ain't seen nothing yet.

Yeah, just wait till Universal CD's start coming out with EULA's in the cover stating that you must update your licence every twelve months, even if you sell the CD

Universal artists?

[chrisseaton]

What artists does Universal have?

Re:Universal artists?

[SILIZIUMM]

Look at UM's webpage, there's a (huge) list : Universal Music Group Artists.

Re:Universal artists?

[utexaspunk]

according to their website they're the biggest selling record label with Ashanti, Erykah Badu, Mary J. Blige, Andrea Bocelli, Bon Jovi, Sheryl Crow, Eminem, Johnny Hallyday , Enrique Iglesias, Jay-Z, Elton John, Ronan Keating, Diana Krall, Limp Bizkit, Nelly, No Doubt, Florent Pagny, Luciano Pavarotti, Sandy & Junior, Shaggy, Sting, Texas, Shania Twain, U2 and Russell Watson. they also own pressplay

Re:Universal artists?

[The Analog Kid]

They also own the rights to Rush music from Rush to A Show of Hands

Re:Universal artists?

[the bluebrain]

Just to make a list of the ones that jumped at me:
- Eminem
- Nirvana
- Garbage
- No Doubt
- Rammstein
- T.A.T.U.
- U2
- The Who

Then, also two opera biggies:
- Luciano Pavarotti
- Placido Domingo

And a couple of others *everyone* has heard of:
- B.B. King
- Beck
- Bee Gees
- Bloodhound Gang
- Bon Jovi
- Bryan Adams
- Chumbawamba
- Counting Crows
- Cranberries
- George Strait
- Elvis Costello
- Guns N' Roses
- Jimi Hendrix
- Leonard Bernstein
- Limp Bizkit
- Lynyrd Skynyrd
- Nine Inch Nails
- Peter Gabriel
- Sonic Youth
- Sum 41
- Suzanne Vega
- Texas
- Willie Nelson

...that alone is quite a bunch, that, copyright extensions being what they are, will be a cash cow for decades.

Re:Universal artists?

[rzbx]

Just a small list of some popular ones:
Beck
Daniel Bedingfield
Bee Gees
blink-182
Bon Jovi
Sheryl Crow
Dr. Dre
Eminem
Jimi Hendrix
Jay-Z

This is just a small list of some I thought most would know. Check out the list, SILIZIUMM put up a link. Just look for the reply below. Anyway, I was wondering, are they signed up with the RIAA? If so, if Apple does buy them, will they still be signed up? Personally, I think we should boycott the RIAA. http://www.boycott-riaa.com

Great...

[MoceanWorker]

and considering the fact that Microsoft practically owns a part of Apple and has MUCH more money than Apple (oh wait.. they're the wealthiest corporation in the world).. we can see where this is pretty much heading..

I'm more upset at the fact that Trent Reznor (Nothing Records licensed under Interscope Records.. licensed under Vivendi/Universal) now has to resort to Windows Movie Maker rather than Final Cut Pro to producing his DVDs :-)

Re:Great...

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft bought a small portion of non-voting Apple stock, then sold it off 2-3 years later. Stop spreading FUD.

just one more step to world domination

[PhrostyMcByte]

is there anything microsoft isn't in? they are beginning to reach pokemon status in saturation, all they need to do now is have pasta noodles shaped like the m$ symbol.

Re:just one more step to world domination

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, I'm sure lots of ./ers would agree that nothing describes Microsoft like "cheesy".

The market cap of Kraft is a bit under $50 billion, so MS could almost completely buy them up with their cash.

MSFT + KFT. Perhaps they could name the new company "Krasht".

Re:just one more step to world domination

[Surak]

One word: MicrosoftiOs ;)

Re:just one more step to world domination

[toastednut]

ah, maybe then microsoft can buy the rights to alphabet pasta and eliminate all the letters except M and S.

Re:just one more step to world domination

[liquidsin]

Introducing MS Breakfast v2.0! Wholesome oat dollar signs with colourful marshmallow Windows logos. Nutritious, delicious, and stays crashy in milk!

My favorite line from the article...

[Surlyboi]

"For some in the beleaguered music industry - which has seen compact disc sales plummet in recent years due to rampant piracy"

Couldn't also be the fact that CDs are still damn
expensive and the recent mainstream music scene has
sucked, could it? Nah, let's blame the pirates!

Still in all, how interested would MS have been if
L'il Stevie hadn't made public his intent to hook up
with a Universal?

Re:My favorite line from the article...

[gl4ss]

and they haven't 'plummeted' as you could expect..

it's funny that they tell on other side that they are losing massive sales to rampant copying and on the other side they are saying that their growth isn't as big as it could be(meaning they are gaining sales..).

Re:My favorite line from the article...

[ablair]

You're probably right about MS not even considering a Universal bid until they heard Apple may be going for it - this is most likely a ploy by them to drive the price way up. They know that if any company with a viable competing platform gains this much access to content, their content control plans will face a hard road. And can you see any of the other major non-Windows payers making this move? It would be a near-impossible fit for both IBM and Sun, and HP is not in a financial position for a move of this size.

While buying Universal Music may or may not end up being good for Apple (the size of the deal would basically mean they are betting the entire company), it does have some strategic benefits. Those constant rumours about Sony or Disney purchasing Apple would be much less likely - antitrust regulators would frown on such a great concentration of content considering their already large music assets. This is actually beneficial to Apple; being bought out by either of these companies would lead widespread changes at Apple and soon to the loss of what makes the company unique, and the division would soon become very unprofitable.

Re:My favorite line from the article...

[imadork]

"For some in the beleaguered music industry - which has seen compact disc sales plummet in recent years due to rampant piracy"

I think this is the very first time that I've read an article about Apple where the word "beleaguered" appeared, and it didn't refer to Apple...

Re:My favorite line from the article...

[mgblst]

This reason is not entirely correct. Sure the current music scene sucks, but this won't affect sales, because it has always sucked. There is no difference in quality over the years. Perhaps you were fooled in the past, like a lot of people are fooled today (perhaps fooled is not the right word, perhaps unenlightened), but that doesn't make it any better.

What about the music?

[pkunzipper]

If they actually buy the company, I'm interested in seeing what stance they will take in the fight against p2p networks and media company's current fight against free sharing of media, knowing M$ can be very rough in the courts.

Re:What about the music?

[fliplap]

I'm sorry, I RARELY defend Microsoft, but they've been far from wildly litigious. I mean, I honestly can't think of a time that MS brought anyone to court for, well, anything. I seem to remember one case where some russian company tried to market something called Windows 95 beer, but I don't recall what happened to that. Please correct me if I've missed some case.

Anyway around it, microsoft has been much more well behaved than Apple when it comes to suing/threatening people. (Recall the themes.org case where apple demanded they remove all OS X alike themes, tho apple did have a vaild claim)

Re:What about the music?

[pi radians]

Yeah, its true that Apple is constantly having to go to court because people are constantly copying and stealing ideas from them.

Weird how that never happens to Microsoft.

Re:What about the music?

[Anonymous Coward]

Too bad it's not true.

Apple isn't a paragon of creativity. It's a Klan of 'Not Invented Here? Not Interested!' political movements all careening each which way. The legal department is all that binds them together.

Re:What about the music?

[squiggleslash]

Well, there's the fuss over Lindows. And there's the time someone posted to Slashdot details of Microsoft's hacks to kerberos, which resulted in lawyers letters to CmdrTaco et al.

Microsoft's hands aren't clean by a long shot. I suspect for the most part they don't have that much original technology to sue over.

Indeed

[psicE]

rampant mac writes "An article over at the New York Post

Silly mac user, use a more reputable news source like the National Enquirer.

Re:Indeed

[Orne]

... or CNN...

Wonder if....

[kewsh]

Wonder if this is just what Apple wanted to happen? Im not usually one for conspiracy theory but Apple may have something up their sleeve here.

Re:Wonder if....

[Anonymous Coward]

did apple also want their stock to plummet?

Interference

[Scrameustache]

Obviously, MS isn't really interrested in buying Universal, but its good buisness to make sure that your competitors have a hard time pulling their deals.

MS makes a bid, forces apple to hike up their bid. In the end, MS doesn't buy anything and apple had to spend way more to get what they wanted, wich hurts them and therefore indirectly helps MS.

Is tricky, its devious, its evil...its Microsoft at its best.

Re:Interference

[Anonymous Coward]

Or maybe, just maybe, Apple never wanted to buy them, just raise Microsoft's interest in them, and Apple won't even try to outbid MS...

Ok, maybe that's just wishful thinking, I never thought it was a good idea for Apple to begin with.

Re:Interference

[plone]

No, it makes terrible business sense. What happens if Microsoft pushes the price up too high, and Apple decides to bail out?
Microsoft ends up with a white elephant, that they will eventually have to sell (possibly to Apple), at a lower price than what they payed for AND what Vivendi was selling it for.

Re:Interference

[Kwil]

Easy.. it's called:

"The fine print"

You really think there won't be some way for MS to back out?

Re:Interference

[Scrameustache]

No, it makes terrible business sense. What happens if Microsoft pushes the price up too high, and Apple decides to bail out?

Wow, you base your argument on incompetance?
Yeah, if they are too stupid to pull it off, it doesn't make sense to try it. Jeeze.

Do you keep that assumption of impending plunders in all aspects of buisness decision making? What if they code windows wrong and it never even boots? What if GM makes a car that explodes when you make a right turn? Gimme a break.

Re:Interference

[Anonymous Coward]

Perhaps I am slow, but it took me a minute of rereading to figure out you meant "blunders" instead of "blunders." Correct me if I'm wrong.

Re:Interference

[Anonymous Coward]

And I meant "plunders" instead of "blunders." Shit on my face.

Re:Interference

[rhizome]

Jesus you suck.

Damm

[quantaman]

I was worried about this when I saw the /. story a couple days ago but didn't want to say anything because I didn't want to give M$ any ideas myself. But I guess they read the /. story too and got the idea anyways. If only Pudge hadn't posted the story M$ would never have found out and Apple would have gotten away with it.
DAMM YOU ?> !!!!

(?> == /. in capitals)

Re:Damm

[the bluebrain]

[...] DAMM YOU ?> !!!!
(?> == /. in capitals)

Hmm ... on my keyboard, capitalising "/." results in "/:" ... I wouldn't mention it, but it just seems so apt :)
(and my keyboard is the way it is, because yes, I do need all those "äöüàéè" et al)

They can afford to burn money.

[saden1]

Smart money shouldn't be going after dying music companies.

I predict

[The Dobber]

A kick-ass soundtrack for Doom 3

Re:I predict

[AyeFly]

To whoever rated the "I predict" post offtopic, its not... you should read the article about MS getting Doom3-- then read this about MS getting a music company... if you still don't get it, think about it for a second more.

Re:I predict

[DirkDaring]

But that would require thought and research...

Re:I predict

[rampant mac]

"A kick-ass soundtrack for Doom 3"

Yeah, knowing Microsoft they'll demo Doom 3 with music from NIN, Eminem, Blink 182 and DMX...

...only to release the final version filled with Banarama, Erasure, Bryan Adams, and Marky Mark music.

Re:I predict

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd say the would demo it with NIN...

...only to release with Eminem, Blink 182, DMX, Banarama, Erasure, Bryan Adams, and Marky Mark music.

Re:I predict

[Anonymous Coward]

Ooh, "Cruel Summer" for the outdoor level :)

Re:I predict

[Anonymous Coward]

Each story needs to get posted a couple of more times before the editors will catch on to this type of joke.

good !

[selderrr]

this means that we'll keep on getting music for free ! I can not see MS create a safe, closed system being hacked in less than a month.

Crap

[dupper]

If you thought the RIAA was bad, wait until we're up against someone who has half a clue about technology!

Re:Crap

[Chicane-UK]

Well that rules out Microsoft... ;)

Re:Dupe!

[Anonymous Coward]

Sorry dude Seattle is Boeing country! I believe we are 125K strong were as Microsoft is only 27K strong. Besides we have been here longer and our cash flow never stops, I mean how could it when you defense contractor?

I Would Love to See Microsof Do This

[tealover]

In fact, I hope they buy movie companies, publishers, etc. Sony has done the same thing and I see Microsoft and Sony as being the two competitors that need to be balanced.

Sony doesn't get a lot of flack in these parts because they haven't made the political mistakes Microsoft has, but they're just as much a threat with their stranglehold on manufacturing and content.

I would love to see Microsoft start spending their money in these areas.

Re:I Would Love to See Microsof Do This

[Anonymous Coward]

So your theory is that if we have two unprincipled b@stards oposing eachother everything will be rosy for those of us in the middle?
Mmmm. :(

And tomorrow on /. ....

[i.r.id10t]

... there will be an announcement about gnu.org, the FSF, a few of the Debian developers, and Linus himself all going in together to buy this music company.

Re:And tomorrow on /. ....

[shadowbearer]

Yeah, then we'd have free gnu music. Let's just hope it wouldn't suck.

SB

Re:And tomorrow on /. ....

[Skater]

Hell, I was thinking about rolling my loose change I have laying around and buying it myself!

--RJ

Re:And tomorrow on /. ....

[Dr_Cornholio]

And if that were to happen, then .ogg may be more than a /. politically correct format

Re:And tomorrow on /. ....

[GregWebb]

Someone had to mention it...

Sorry all :-)

Raising the price.

[Mullen]

The only reason MS is doing this is too raise the price of the music company.

Apple does not have the cash that MS has, and MS has tons of cash. MS can raise the price 30% and not blink, Apple would be hit hard.

Maybe..

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds like horizontal integration to me.

I'm no economist, so maybe I'm wrong.

Meta-post

[Elphin]

I'm sure we can expect the following exciting new releases if Microsoft makes this purchase. Not being much of a shining wit, I will leave the hard part up to you:

<pun involving "windows"> - some artist

<clever parody of blue-screen-of-death> - a band

<clumsy attempt at humurous title> - <artist with "gates" as surname>

<mildly amusing dig at open source> - obscure indie band

Oh the fun you could have. If you had time.

I also want to buy Universal Music

[yuvtob]

In other news, Slashdot is reporting that the 'yuvtob' corporation also wishes to buy Universal Music. Spokesperson for yuvtob said: "at this point the company is only looking at the tires, and from a very long distance".

Re:I also want to buy Universal Music

[An Onerous Coward]

This is pretty much obligatory:

And in further news, Slashdot itself has made a bid for the company, offering fifty bucks and an agreement to never link to their website again. Universal Music is reportedly "seriously considering the new offer."

Wasn't there already a rumor....

[Anonymous Coward]

of MS buying the game division of Vivendi?

Personally (and off topic)I hope MGM picks up Universal Studios, then maybe we may see the return of Farscape on Sci-FI.

Re:Wasn't there already a rumor....

[unclethursday]

Yes. Supposedly Microsoft was looking to buy Vinvedi Universal's game publishing division. The two most notable development companies in that group being Sierra and Blizzard Entertainment.

It was rumored to be over $2 billion if the deal went through.

Between the $350 million for Rare, and the possible $2+ billion for Vinvedi Universal's game division, that'd be a hell of an investment into the Xbox.

Unfortunately for Microsoft, it would be litterally *years* before they saw any sort of return on either buyout.

Rare had stated they could get 5 games out within the first 2 years under MS. They haven't released their first game yet, and it's been nearly 9 months. Anyone who knows Rare's histroy knows they don't get games out fast. They tend to be good when they hit, most of the time, but they sure as hell take forever to get them out. They'll be lucky to get one game out, and have the next one halfway finished by the time that first 2 years is up.

Blizzard is the same way. Starcraft, Diablo, and Warcraft are all fantastic series of games....but they take about forever and a day to come out. Sierra gets games out more frequently, but most of them aren't huge sellers.

I'm not too sure the shareholders would like to see an investment of $2.35+ billion for the Xbox, considering it is losing money much faster than MS had said it would. (They expected to lose about $1 billion over 5 years; they've already lost around $300 million in under a year and a half on the Xbox.)

FLAWED INFORMATION

[kaamos]

Apple had conversations with Universal music divison earlier in march but they left without putting any offers on the taple.

http://www.macwhispers.com - is never wrong, check them out.

This whole thing feels like M$ only did the same thing looking to check out what they could do

Re:FLAWED INFORMATION

[Anonymous Coward]

You'd better spell it out for all the kids who can't be bothered to cut and paste the link:

"Our source confirms today that "all such possible investments into Universal by Apple have been removed from the table as of Thursday," with the focus of continuing talks being restricted solely to elements related to implementing the Apple music service.

We believe strongly enough in the position and credibility of our source to make the following flat statement: The L.A. Times article yesterday was out of date by the time it went to print. There is no Apple purchase of, or investment into Universal Music coming."

Re:FLAWED INFORMATION

[Anonymous Coward]

You must be Jack, the ex con who runs it, since Mac Whispers has not managed to get a single thing right in it's whole lifetime.

Re:FLAWED INFORMATION

[kaamos]

I should have been less implicit in my previous post, I trust hism that he has sources inside. I don't warrant his marketing bullshit but for the inside deals on the marketing side of things, his record is AFAIK clean.

I don't realy care about the hardware deals though

Sorry for the lack of precisions

Apple's new strategy

[artemis67]

...start rumors of their interest in buying out insanely large and bloated corporations, then sit back and laugh while the mindless paranoids at Microsoft fall over themselves to beat Apple to the punch, depleting their coffers.

Re:Apple's new strategy

[otis wildflower]

They'd have to do this quite often to make any serious dent in M$' war chest. And by the time they could get a laugh M$ would own EVERYTHING..

(wait, they don't already? :p)

Re:Apple's new strategy

[Anonymous Coward]

Next rumor: Apple to buy the Des Moines Steam Engine Machine Tool Company, then partners with Spitzbergen Flint Knapping, Inc.

Re:Apple's new strategy

[Anonymous Coward]

Funniest follow-up post I've read all week.

Thanks!

The Ebay Solution!

[Winterblink]

Vivendi Universal should just put itself up on EBay and let all interested parties duke it out in 10 dollar increments :)

LEarn from Vivendi, AOL

[Ars-Fartsica]

These "synerigies" rarely pay off. Both AOL and Vivendi had (at one time) deep pcokets (AOL from dial-up fees, Vivendi from utilities), and they were unable to make the confluence of technology and media, largely because there is no huge profit windfall and no pressing need. Music libraries can be licensed. With the value of the record industry dropping in aggregate, these license fees will only go down.

Fine.

[Anonymous Coward]

Falling Out The Windows, Landing In The .NET - The Allchin Brothers (country, classic rock)

My Baby's Givin' Me The Blues - Bluescreen Traveler (blues, contemporary)

Heaven's Openin' Up For Me - Bill 'Pearly' Gates (gospel, contemporary)

Free is Just Another Word For Nothing Left To Lose (Linux sucks) - Janis Joplin (remixes, classic rock)
Kids these days. Don't even bother doing their own work.

Re:Fine.

[Anonymous Coward]

Money - Blue Screen Floyd (Rock)

Take the Money and Run - The Steve Miller Band, Service Pack 3 (Rock)

We're Only In It For The Money - Frank Zappa and the Licenses (Rock)

Your License Forbids You to Take Me Home Tonight - Eddie Money and the Excels (Pop)

Car - Company analogy?

[SuperBanana]

Microsoft's interest is said to be at the level of "poking around, kicking the tires,"

Vivendi is like a shitbox Ford Pinto. Jokes aside about the dangers of kicking ANYTHING on a Ford Pinto...it seems like cars and companies do have one thing in common- they both attract idiots who think they can fix 'em back up, make 'em stop leaking, polish the fenders, and show 'em off to the world, for a few weekends in the summer, a little elbow grease, and a little bit of money.

It NEVER turns out that way.

Apple's stock took a serious dip when this rumor(and I stress, rumor) hit. Why can't Apple focus on producing hardware that's more up-to-date performance-wise, more durable, more competitive cost-wise, and policies that are more customer-friendly? Apple has the WORST warranty/service policies, the WORST service system(ONE service center in Texas that has a horrible reputation)...and their hardware is pretty and has some neat stuff in it, but isn't up-to-date in processing power, isn't very price-competitive(except maybe the powerbooks), and is far from durable. Example: the very cool TiBook is PAINTED. What #$@!ing moron thought that up? Tough as nails Titanium shell, but then they PAINTED it. Smooth move, guys. Apple continuously demonstrates that they haven't learned from their hardware design mistakes; how long did it take them to make screen clutches that didn't break?(not rocket science- you just make them from something other than cheap pot metal!)

My opinion is that you shouldn't be looking for more stuff to put on your plate when you can't take care of what's ALREADY on your plate; if you can't manage one business successfully, what makes you think you'll manage TWO successfully? Besides, what makes anyone at Apple think they're even remotely qualified to run a media company? Oh, wait, I forgot about Jobs' ego, I guess that makes him qualified- thinks the world revolves around him.

Re:Car - Company analogy?

[repetty]

"Apple's stock took a serious dip when this rumor(and I stress, rumor) hit."

Apple's stock always take a hit at any rumor. If you look hard, you'll see that Apple's stock movement has been a terrible indicator of the wisdom of their dealings.

Remember, stock investors seldom ever understand what the companies they've invested in do. Witness Enron.

Investors don't like to have their boat rocked. What you saw was a bunch of nervous "investors" who should never have bought Apple stock in the first place. They should have bought Proctor & Gamble or General Motors.

--Richard

Re:Car - Company analogy?

[ablair]

You're mistaken in assuming that Apple can't focus on improvements in their core business while also (potentially) changing the music industry through Universal Music. Pixar has focussed succesfully on making great animated films, and an even better example is how Filemaker has retained focus on it's core databases while being a part of Apple. So, more than merely managing TWO companies, Jobs & Co. are managing MANY companies successfully - look at new developments with Spruce, Emagic, Silicon Grail, Nothing Real, Zayante, Prismo Graphics, Raycer, and other companies that have recently joined Apple and are doing well. In short, they are already managing good media companies, and maybe that's one reason they think they are qualified to manage another. They may also have some plans we don't know about that factor into the equation.

BTW, Titanium, though light, strong and a good heat sink, is comparatively soft and easy to scratch. That's why they wisely decided to paint their PowerBooks.

Re:Car - Company analogy?

[shotfeel]

If you look hard, you'll see that Apple's stock movement has been a terrible indicator of the wisdom of their dealings.

Too true. Just watch, if this is just a rumor, Apple's stock will drop again when its reported they aren't buying Universal.

Apple Corps vs. Apple Computer

[Yonder Way]

If Apple does make the buy, as rumoured, I wonder how that will play out with regards to their infamous lawsuit brought by Apple Corps (the music holding company that handles The Beatles properties). My understanding is that the settlement was only good as long as Apple Computer stayed out of the music business.

Re:Apple Corps vs. Apple Computer

[pi radians]

It has been settled long ago, and Apple Computer can do anything it wants to in the music biz.

Linux Quicktime?

[SHEENmaster]

Apple must already have a well-modulated codebase for quicktime, and I'd be willing to bet that someone at Apple ported it to X11 before the in-house builds of OSX went to Aqua.

I'd be willing to buy a Linux version of Quicktime for my iBook if the price was reasonable; the Linux community would port if for free if given the source.

I'd also apreciate a copy of J2DK1.4.1 for Linux on my mac if Sun is listening.

Re:Linux Quicktime?

[IamTheRealMike]

I'd be willing to buy a Linux version of Quicktime for my iBook if the price was reasonable; the Linux community would port if for free if given the source.

That's wishful thinking, it's more a problem of codecs than anything else. Apple could avoid the problem entirely by simply using well known codecs like mpeg2, Ogg Vorbis etc, but they tend not to. QuickTime the file format is already readable on linux.

Good vs. Evil

[Feztaa]

Apple and Microsoft fighting over which one gets to own Universal is truly a fight of Good vs. Evil.

Apple has their "Rip, Mix, Burn" attitude towards fair use: fair use is, well, fair. Apple wants you to buy CDs and then put that legal music onto your iPod. Apple is Good.

Microsoft is pushing DRM. To Microsoft, "fair use" is treated as piracy. If Microsoft buys Universal, you'll be able to play music CDs in your computer, but only in Windows and only with Windows Media Player 9. And you wouldn't be able to rip the CDs, either. Microsoft is Evil.

Unfortunately, Microsoft has much deeper pockets than Apple, so I can't see how Apple could ever seriously hope to purchase Universal is Microsoft is truly interested in it. But, I hope to God that Apple does purchase it, because if they don't, the whole music industry will really go to shit (if you think it's shit now, you ain't seen nothing yet).

CD restart now required

[Anonymous Coward]

once you get 2/3rds of the way into playing a song, your cd player/mp3 player will need to be restarted.

This wasn't totally unexpected

[Dukeofshadows]

Given Microsoft's track record, this is not a total surprise. When they said they wanted their paws into everything a computer can offer (word processors, music, operating systems, etc.), they meant it. I'm surprised they haven't tried to offer a service that allows people to order groceries online and have them delivered, we had one where I am for a while but it went bust due to lack of customers.

I'll start getting worried when Micro-soft gets into fast food, energy trading, agriculture, and steelmaking. As long as they stick to things that can be bundled into windows, at least the Evil Empire of Computing remains visible.

Where the place to donate money to apple

[doormat]

I'll give Steve Jobs and Apple $100 if they make sure MS doesnt get Universal. Maybe even buy an iPod too. Someone ought to get a pledge drive going to help apple combat MS. Hell, MS could pay $10B and still have enough cash to swim.

Neither deal makes sense.

[MsGeek]

This strikes me being one of those consolidations like what was going on during the Dot-Com bubble. To give but one example, Time Warner snarfing up AOL basically weakened both companies. I suppose if there was a company I would like to see get weakened, it would be Microsoft. However, even if the Uni deal went totally sour Microsoft would survive. Apple could go right down the tubes if this happened.

When I first heard about this, I thought that Apple was angling to buy Universal PICTURES on Pixar's behalf. That would make total sense, considering that Disney has not been an especially fair partner in their deal with Pixar, and Pixar has been one of the few bright spots on Disney's otherwise lackluster balance sheet. Even a threat of Jobs leveraging Apple to give Pixar its own friendly distribution path would be enough to scare Michael Eisner into giving Jobs whatever he wanted.

In any event, this deal makes zero business sense, and seems to be turning into a pissing match between Ballmer and Jobs. Jobs should know better...Ballmer is the one who drinks the most beer. He'll win. ~_^ (grinning, ducking and running)

Re:Neither deal makes sense.

[odin53]

I think you're right, but a quibble: AOL bought Time-Warner, not the other way around. Also, Apple would never be able to buy Universal Pictures on Pixar's behalf -- Jobs is CEO of both companies, but Pixar is not related to Apple in any other way. It would be a pretty huge breach of fiduciary duty for Steve to "leverage" Apple for Pixar's benefit.

Re:Neither deal makes sense.

[MsGeek]

Actually that is very true...well then, this makes the deal even more absurd, doesn't it? (shudder)

Re:Universal artists? -- Now it all makes sense!

[telstar]

Dude, they've got Lionel Richie. No wonder Apple and Microsoft are in a bidding war!

Not Likely

[GregBildson]

Microsoft is definitely interested in dominating the content business. However, unlike cable they already have this entire industry in the palms of their hands.

By holding out hope of DRM and locking down content, media companies are very favorably disposed towards Microsoft. Buying a competitor and competing directly is too large a risk for Microsoft to seriously consider.

Then again, they want to get into recurring revenue streams of different types so eventually they need to successfully leverage their desktop dominance directly into the content business. To date, those attempts have mostly failed.

MS' track record in media?

[Anonymous Coward]

No wonder they want to do this, Microsoft has already been a run-away success in its OTHER media excursions, right? MSNBC? Slate? MSN? Not exactly barn burners.

Say it ain't so

[l0ungeb0y]

And we all know who'd win a bidding war.

If M$ got their hands on Universal, we could all pretty much kiss free use good-bye.

And I don't even think it would be a true bidding war, I think a lot of it would be "buddy buddy" talks within the RIAA as a peer consesus that M$ is good and Apple bad. Since I'm sure the RIAA and Universals shareholders would ardently support a greater partnership with a corporation that specializes in proprietary formats and who is heading up a coup d'etat on the users rights to own their machine.

In a twisted sense, such an organization that controlled a major media producer as well as the mechanism for media playback and the operating system for that mechanism to be run on is an easy target for an anti-trust. But, we've already seen how effective the US Federal Judges are at punishing M$...

But maybe, just maybe it will all finally hit close enough to home when a Fed. Judge buys a CD and find they can't play it without having a winCE device with windows media player installed that we might finally see some justice in action. ...just maybe.

Man, I hope this post isn't FUD, but I am feeling fearful of the possible repercussions I as a consumer would experience if the articles speculation were to come true.

So, hey, everyone go help Apple, buy some stock and pump them up! Apple has done more than just say "Rip-Mix-Burn". They have built some great software to make professional quality media production easy and affordable and they are staunchly against DRM on their platform. Though I know many on /. still hold a grudge against Apple based upon the Macs of the mid-90's, OS X is a Unice, Apple has embraced and aided OSS and Apple is a great commercial alternative to wintel.

Personally, I think OS X has a better a chance of replacing Moms desktop that Linux does. And as it should. Let's see Linux replace Windows in the server market and OS X replace windows in the desktop market.

Re:Say it ain't so

[Christianfreak]

The RIAA does not have share-holders, it is an organization of record companies. They don't get a say on what Universal does, Universal gets a say on what the RIAA does. The RIAA may want MS to buy Universal but they don't have the power to make it happen.

Also I don't think that Vivendi really cares who gives them money for Universal, they are horribly in debt and just want to survive. Personally I think the best course of action would be for Universal to simply die (along with the rest of the music industry but I digress) MS doesn't need it for the reasons you mentioned above, apple doesn't need to lose that kind of money.

And finally while Apple has made some things open source what makes you think they would be any better than MS if they had 90% of the desktop? I personally don't want Windows to die, I just want it to lose marketshare to a point where it is forced to compete with both Linux and Apple and everyone will be better off in the end.

lol

[Archfeld]

at least someone is showing interest in it. It certainly isn't the customers these days...
Honestly I really think that the baggage associated with a 'traditional' record company far outweighs any advantages you can get EXCEPT access to musicians, but I am sure existing contracts are bound up somehow in this deal to remain with Vivendi. If a company could get access to musicians WITHOUT all the overhead of the 'brick and mortar' 15th century mentallity the music industry is RIPE for a revolution...

Dont you mean...

[FsG]

GNU/Music? Ya know, free as in song..

Re:Dont you mean...

[shadowbearer]

I write the songs that make the whole world sing
I write the songs you can sing totally free
I write the songs to make Microsoft cry
I write free songs I write free songs

or something like that

now I gotta go install Mandrake 9.1 :-)

SB

Monopoly

[KillerHamster]

Wasn't Microsoft in trouble with the DOJ because they have been using their monopoly in one market (desktop OS) to build monopolies in other markets? If they are serious about this, and not just trying to hurt Apple, it sounds like more of the same, and I hope the government does something this time.

Re:Monopoly

[unclethursday]

Not until Dubbya is out of office. Remember how quickly the DoJ backed off in what appeared to be mere minutes after Dubya was innagurated.

MS plegded about double to Rebulican and, Dubbya's in specific, campaigns than they did to any Democratic campaigns during and after the anti-trust trial. Gates had even met with Republicans and said he felt the Republicans should be in office because they'd "be more understanding" of MS' practices.

Re:Monopoly

[Okonomiyaki]

I guess you didn't notice that we're dealing with a completely different DOJ now. One that's not remotely interested in justice. They let Microsoft off the hook once, do you really expect them to do anything about it now? They've got a lot more important things to do like arresting Californians for buying legal medical marijuana and spying on your phone conversations.

Re:Monopoly

[mgblst]

no, perhaps you are confusing them with IBM. I really don't remember anything about this.

This is about using software to sell hardware

[dubbayu_d_40]

I can't believe no one has pointed this out. Apple is not doing this to help prevent copying - quite the opposite.

With a power house like Universal, Window's media and it's copy protection is dead.

Go Apple! Free music for everyone!

ahh yes

[abhisarda]

you see short term thinking always does'nt pay off. Apple will start its music subscription with songs from 4 out of 5 major labels.

If MS got hold of Universal, then MS would start its own service and effectively lock Apple out from some of the best musicians. Do we want that to happen? NO. There are other music subscription services but most of them are a half-assed effort.

Quite a few people believe Apple will do a lot better in this field. Do you want to subscribe to 2 seperate subscriptions just because Apple and MS don't see eye to eye?

The music industry needs some innovation. It does'nt matter where it comes from. It will give many people who use Kazaa a better piracy-free alternative.

Re:ahh yes

[suyashs]

Correction...Apple now the backing of all 5 music labels for their online music service... http://archive.nytimes.com/2003/04/12/business/med ia/12MUSI.html?th Its full steam ahead for apple!

Re:ahh yes

[Wyatt Earp]

Naw...

I like Apple having cash in hand instead of debt. A lack of debt keeps Apple in business and keeps PowerBooks coming out.

I'd wager that MS is showing interest to nuke Apple's hopes. Push the price up and get Apple into a bidding war and in the end let Apple buy it at a higher price than Apple wanted to. then while Apple scrambles around shoring up finances and cutting small software projects, start cutting support for Apple at MS.

As for this "effectively lock Apple out from some of the best musicians" From looking at Universal's artists, I don't see much that is in the "best" catagory.

Re:ahh yes

[Ryan Amos]

Well, frankly if Apple's service signs the other 4 major labels and not Universal, it will probably be very successful, and Microsoft would be castrating Universal if they didn't sign as well. Like cutting off your nose to spite your face. I don't see Microsoft being able to put down control (in the form of DRM) long enough to make anything they'd offer desirable to the public. Microsoft is starting to remind me a LOT of Disney now, with their goals of control and power over profit. Guess that's what happens when you have $50 billion just sitting there.

Re:ahh yes

[AKnightCowboy]

The music industry needs some innovation. It does'nt matter where it comes from. It will give many people who use Kazaa a better piracy-free alternative.

Unless they're giving me free music it's not a better alternative to Kazaa. Why pay for music when I can get it for free from Kazaa? Plus, whatever subscription service comes out will be cracked and we'll get the free songs from that as well. Double plus good. Christina Aguilera songs want to be free. Our founding fathers fought and died for our rights to pirate crappy teen pop music god damnit.

Re:ahh yes

[Anonymous Coward]

Our founding fathers also fought and died for our rights to pirate ranting inane angst-alternative crap, like TMBG (They Must Be Gay) albums.

Re:Dupe!

[Anonymous Coward]

Boeing country!... our cash flow never stops, I mean how could it when you defense contractor

I dunno. Ask the guys down the hall that used to work for McDonnell-Douglas. And see if they remember anyone from Northrop or Grumman. (We won't even get into Curtiss or Republic.)

PPC 970

[Anonymous Coward]

Most people are forgetting that they'll have plenty of revenue once the 970 becomes public ^_^. Steve's been waiting along time to spend some that cash they have in their reserves, so I say let him go crazy. I read somewhere (Maccentral) that they will have DRM by the way of new mp4. It was suggested that you'll still be able to rip CD's+burn and load them to a mp3 device. Steve's always said that you can't police the people (difficult close to impossible) you have to allow them to do that for them selves. I agree very much with that premise

Consider the source

[Anonymous Coward]

Were you really expecting investigative journalism from the New York Post? The Washington Post they ain't.

cash is king

[sketchkid]

no matter what the packages offer (cash, equity in the acquiring company, junk bonds, convertible bonds, etc.), cash is always preferred. if you were selling your car, would you prefer cash or equity in ZYX company? even though a company may look healthy (especially if theyre buying you out), you do not know everything about it. any microsoft offer would conceivably be smarter economically because it would presumably involved more cold, hard, sweet-smelling, cash. if you dont think taking a lot of equity in the company acquiring you is a bad idea, well neither did Time Warner with AOL.... and neither did Ted Turner

watching his stake's value dwindle to $1.9 billion from $6.8 billion amidst the AOL imbroglio

so, basically, cash cow MS has a far better chance of buying universal

codecs

[SHEENmaster]

It seems to me as if codecs would be the easiest portion of quicktime to port. One of these days I might get around to setting up sound in MoL.

Re:codecs

[Anonymous Coward]

mplayer can use the windows codecs if you can get the binaries (not hard, codec available for download). Only on x86 though.

Damn You!

[Anonymous Coward]

Please don't say anything that funny again. I already have a broken rib and you just set me back about 5 days of healing.

Overheard somewhere in Redmond

[Anonymous Coward]

"Hey look, someone's trying to make money again."

"Do they use, sell or manufacture computers?"

"Yep."

"Stop them. I don't care what it costs."

100 posts and everyone avoided the obvious...

[Eneff]

Does anyone get the feeling that Bill Gates takes his direction from Dr. Evil?

I mean, what could truly make Microsoft more Eveel than getting directly involved with funding the RIAA? Pure Evil Genius!

Re:100 posts and everyone avoided the obvious...

[NedTheNerd]

apple is taking a look at it too does that make them evil or jsut as evil?

those evil evil people damn them for trying to make money! get off it there are worse companys out there than MS.

Re:100 posts and everyone avoided the obvious...

[Anonymous Coward]

If only Steve Ballmer had a habit of sticking his pinkie finger on the side of his mouth, and a "mini-me" sychophant with him...

Lies!

[Mohamm3d Al-Sahaf]

Vivendi is not being sold to microsoft. Vivendi was purchased by Iraq days ago.

BTW, Microsoft is burning in their cubicles.

We have won another war.

Part of a Larger Battle

[Michael_Burton]

On the day that Slashdot ran the story about Apple buying Universal Music, there were also stories about Microsoft authorizing a port of Windows Media technology for embedded Linux [slashdot.org] and high-definition DVD [slashdot.org] at standard DVD bitrates using Microsoft-proprietary technology.

It's all part of the same story. The world is moving toward all-digital media formats. Microsoft wants all those formats to be Microsoft-owned. They sign up media producers with promises of copy control, pay-per-view and other DRM features. Already, some CDs have been released crippled for use on non-Windows computers (and some CD players).

I'm guessing someone at Apple sees a possible future in which new music won't play on any computer not running Windows. If all the major music companies sign on to lock down their content with MS technology, consumers may believe they have no choice but to stay "inside the lines." If Universal Music doesn't sign on to locked-down content, consumers probably won't tolerate severe restrictions from other content providers.

Microsoft makes some good stuff. But I'm hoping that we don't wind up in an all-Microsoft world.

New copy protection from Microsoft!

[aechols]

Plays only on a secure operating system like Windows XP and requires activation over the internet for your protection! Sweet, where can I get mine?

The Post...

[laserlights2000]

can you really consider the post an accurate source of information?

UNIVERSAL OWNS MP3.COM :O

[themusicgod1]

tens of thousands of blossoming independant artists are at least partially owned my universal. i, for one am owned to some degree or other, by universal. if microsoft bought the rights to my music this way, i'd highly consider suicide, or martyrship.

this is horrible. someone please sacrifice some lambs and give the apple ceo[steve jobs?] some good sex so we don't have to be all owend by microsoft. _please_.

Why would microsoft want to buy Universal Music?

[G4scott]

If what I heard was correct, then Vivendi approached Apple because they had something good in the works as far as an online music downloading service. The problem with Microsoft is that we know how they'd handle the DRM, and it would truly suck. You'd be able to download the music however many times you wanted, but you'd have to pay to play it (like a jukebox), and you'd need a special version of WMP that adds another proprietary microsoft codec to the hundreds of different WMP codecs out there already. It'd be a mess. WMP is already bad enough. You could kiss linux and Mac support goodbye, and the second microsoft decides that your windodws OS is out of date, you'd be out of the loop too. An earlier post claimed that Apple needs to handle what's in front of them now before takling something else, but on the other hand, microsoft needs to set their issues straight. They need lots of work on lots of their other products too, and probably more work than Apple. Something about Apple's plans attracted Vivendi, and caused them to go to Apple. Apple understands more than microsoft about how the user should get along with the computer. Apple knows how to make things easy and enjoyable on a computer. Besides, we know that they won't leave the windows world out because they would loose too much money. Whether or not Apple will go for Universal Music is beyond me, but if microsoft goes with it, I'd be really concerned. I don't want to have to buy another computer that doesn't work, just to listen to my music.

Your source is never wrong, huh? Think again...

[Anonymous Coward]

http://www.macwhispers.com - is never wrong, check them out.

Never wrong, huh? I beg to differ. The guy that runs MacWhispers already ruined his own credibility back in February. Clearly embarrassed, he acknowledged the site's failure and announced that MacWhispers was exiting the rumor business . Quitting the rumor game, eh? For how long? 10 minutes? A quick visit to the site clearly shows that the rumor mongering continues unabated.

That rumor site exists primarily to generate traffic for this guy's other business interests (DVForge, MacMice, etc.), which can be seen advertised all over the MacWhispers page. While I do not presume to know much about this person's character, from the detailed descriptions I have read about his business practices, I plan on staying far away from MacWhispers and all his related ventures. Caveat emptor.

With MS, Windows Media might become universal

[aquarian]

...and that's a scary thought.

Stop the Vivendi FUD

[Anonymous Coward]

Vivendi is looking to pay off $8B debt. Universal Music is for sale, however, the music business is not doing that great, and numerous companies try to bid down the price.

Hence the decision to advertise anything, even remote interest, as strong decision to buy Universal Music. If Vivendi has their way, pretty soon stories about hundreds of buyers from General Motors to Wal-Mart asking to purchase Universal Music Group will be posted all over the Net.

In fact, though, there's just one real buyer, and no, it's no Microsoft, it's some other media conglomerate, possible Viacom or News Corp.

You've all missed the point!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

The point is that while everybody was scared that the MPAA/RIAA were going to take over everybody's machine and dictate how the technology sector does business through lobbying and bought politicians, this demonstrates the inevitable result of such an attempt.

The tech industry is MUCH bigger than both the music/film industrys, and will simply neutralise anybody who even thinks about interfering.

The fun game will be to predict who IBM will buy...

I'm also going to buy Universal.

[Anonymous Coward]

omg. I'M BUYING UNIVERSAL. For 100 billllllion dollars (pinky to lip). Please publish an article about me.

Famous Last Words...

[DataPath]

Microsoft Exec to the Board on Apple's move:
"We've analyzed their attack sir, and there is a threat."

"Abandon? In our moment of triumph? I think you overestimate their chances!"

Try hacking microsoft.com first

[melted]

This site has only been taken down once since it appeared on the web despite the herds of hackers attacking it everyday.

Re:Why would microsoft want to buy Universal Music

[PetoskeyGuy]

Even Microsoft doesn't know, but if Apple wants it there must be something good about it. They'll buy it and figure it out later.

Self sustained?

[melted]

You've just put together a list of people whose music I wouldn't listen to to save my life. Great example of "musicians" who would die in their cardboard boxes if it wasn't for multimillion-dollar advertisement campaigns and constant MTV and radio brainwash.

Re:Self sustained?

[SN74S181]

I had a stereo made out of a cardboard box back when I was an angry anti-establishent 'Punk' and all that stuff. Back in about 1979. Now I am 'sold' out like everybody else. It's called 'growing up.'

I got over it. You'll get over what ever shitty music you listen to. Believe me, you'll not want your kids ever knowing what you look like now, when they are teenagers.

Re:Self sustained?

[zilly]

That's wonderful, but nobody gives a shit what music you "wouldn't listen to to save your life." The OP's point, which you seem to have willfully ignored in order to provide you with an excuse to spout your irrelevant moral masturbation for all the world to hear, was that Universal is the biggest selling record label.

I believe Universal is also the label with the widest range of jazz and blues artists, if that helps.

If you're going to be such a whiner, why don't you make your own list? You can start here. Have fun.

yours

Re:Self sustained?

[melted]

Uh-uh. Growing up. Only grownups listen to Shania Twain (pukes) and J.Lo. (pukes again). Gimme a break.

Re:Self sustained?

[melted]

I guess you think only your moral masturbation is important. Enjoy your next Nelly album you sheep.

Re:Self sustained?

[zilly]

Damn straight.

Re:Self sustained?

[chrisseaton]

"You'll get over what ever shitty music you listen to"

I'm a tennager (18) and I wouldn't listen to almost any of those artists to save my life either. But it's not because I'm into some stupid phase of punk or insanely anrgy death rock - I only really listen to classical and some classical style chillout.

I don't think classical is something you "grow up" out of.

Re: Rule Seattle?

[Anonymous Coward]

If Microsoft ruled Seattle, in addition to collecting revenue they would have to provide actual critical and reliable services for people.

They have no track record in that department - they could never pull it off; I mean, those are expenses!.

guess we know who's going to win this bidding war

[AmoHongos]

I bet Steve Jobs, Al Gore, and the rest of the Apple guys are ready to slit their wrists. A deal like this one could make or break Apple, but for Microsoft, it's just another purchase in a long line of acquisitions.

ms is trying to drive the perceived value

[zonker]

of vivendi to make it more expensive for apple to pick it up...

Terrific

[Kylow]

Now they won't have to buy the rights to Lenny Kravitz songs for MSN commercials.

never wrong?

[netsrek]

You have to be kidding me...

You want some background on mr macwhispers?

http://www.macintouch.com/mactable.html

Trust him about as far as I can throw him...

Re:Universal artists? -- Now it all makes sense!

[An Onerous Coward]

Actually, Blackalicious is both companies' main objective.

access to musicians?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't think it's really all that hard to get access to good musicians. There are a lot of them out there. I personally know at least five musicians that are more musically talented than many of the big pop stars. (One of them sort of is a former pop star, in a way -- has a platinum record even.) Good song writers are a little harder to find, but on the whole, there are plenty of people who are willing to work crap retail or phone support jobs so they can spend time on music, and lots of them would love to have their music published.

IMHO, what's happened with the music industry is that the music industry used to have four kinds of value to musicians, and now it only has two, and one of the two is fading. Here's my list of things record companies can (or formerly could) offer to artists:

1. Cash and schmooze access for the expensive process of making a recording. The communists would call this access to the factors of production. You used to need a really expensive analog mixer, a bunch of nice microphones, a bunch of really expensive microphone preamps, a really expensive multitrack tape machine, a really expensive two-track tape machine for mastering, expensive effects boxes, etc. These days, some elements are still expensive (microphones and microphone preamps), but you can replace the mixer, all the tape machines, and most of the effects processors with one $5,000 ProTools box. That's really, really amazing, because $5,000 is nothing compared to the hundreds of thousands of dollars it costs for the electronics that a traditional analog studio needs to buy. You still may need $5000 worth of microphones and a carefully-modded room in your house with good acoustics, but these days it's now feasible to make a good- or even excellent-sounding recording at home for $20,000 or so (maybe less). So, in the past, artists were forced to sign over the rights to an album because without the record company's money it would be impossible to ever pay for the studio time. On the other hand, record companies still can hire you a good producer and a good recording engineer and mastering engineer that you might not otherwise be able to afford.
2. Record companies, in the past, controlled the physical distribution. Computer networks have mostly obviated the burning need (pun intended) for physical media, but physical media is still beneficial because there are still those who find it simpler and/or don't want to play music on their computer.
3. Record companies also control the more abstract aspects of distribution. They have deals with record stores who will carry their stuff. This is important, because not everybody wants to mail order your album from your web site.
4. Lastly, and most importantly, record companies control the massive, super-powerful marketing machine. This machine can make a #1 band out of nothing, or choose to totally stall the career of a band if it isn't excited about (making money off) them anymore. MTV exists (insofar as it still plays music) to be a part of this machine. Record companies can also make deals with radio stations to get albums played, etc. A band that wants to be independent can market their album on their own, but it costs money, and there is no way they can compete with the record companies in that regard.

So, in my opinion, the record companies have partially outlived their usefulness, but partially not. Half of their reason for existence is gone and half of it is still intact, although part of the still-intact part is fading. Unfortunately, most of their reason for existence that's left is stuff that doesn't do much of anybody any good. It doesn't help the bands, and it doesn't help the customers. But, it still is a working economic model to some extent, and I don't think it's going to go away immediately. Most importantly, I don't think it'll go away until there is an alternate way for independent bands to market and distribute their music to a mainstream audience, not just to the 5% (or 2%?) of the people who are willing to look on the Internet for new music and who have MP3 playing capability in their cars.

Re:access to musicians?

[Archfeld]

you make good points, but the technology to bridge the mp3 to mainstream equipment is and has existed for quite sometime. The recording industry has been ACTIVELY supressing it rather than riding it. Why should I need a computer to play mp3's ? If the RIAA had backed a format, it would be the standard instead of CDA. You should get an account, that was some well thought out information.

Boeing Ain't Microsoft

[The Dobber]

How long have you lived in Seattle (or maybe how old are you)

>>Blatently ripped from somewhere else

On April 1, 1971, real estate agents Bob McDonald and Jim Youngren put the words, "Will the last person leaving SEATTLE - Turn out the lights" on a billboard at S. 167th St. and Pacific Highway S. near Sea-Tac airport. The two realtors, who work for Henry Broderick, Inc., put up the billboard as a humorous response to pessimism generated by the national aerospace industry's nosedive, known locally as the Boeing Bust.

The recession was caused as The Boeing Company, the region's largest employer, went from a peak of 100,800 employees in 1967 to a low of 38,690 in April 1971. McDonald said their out-of-town clients, "were amazed that Seattle wasn't a ghost town with weeds growing in the streets. We wanted to counteract that attitude with a little humor" (Duncan). They chose a billboard site that they inevitably passed after picking up their clients at the airport. The men rented the billboard for $160.

The Boeing recovery began slowly: by October 1971 the firm employed 53,300 workers.

Re:Boeing Ain't Microsoft

[Anonymous Coward]

I've only been in Seattle for 1.5 years and wasn't even borne until 1979. I'm sure you are more knowledgeable when it comes to the history of the region then I am.

What if all your friends....

[paiute]

Apple: (Stands of side of bridge, pretends to jump)

Microsoft: AAAAAAAAAA!!!!!!!!!!!

Heheheheheh...

[Sj0]

Overheard in meeting: "I wonder if these boobs realize that we're downsizing the entire company after we own the copyrights?" ;p

The problem is....

[jwilcox154]

If Microsoft buys Universal Music, they will then become a part of the RIAA. Then they will bri^h^h^lobby congress for the CBDTPA. And since microsoft supports the Republican party, they will have republican Support, as well as the other members of the RIAA, which, of course, supports Democrats. In other words, the Conumer Broadband and Digital Television Prevention Act will have Bi-Partisan Support, and we won't have any say.

MS / Vivendi & Anti-Trust?

[KoshClassic]

Will the federal regulators (not to mention regulators in the EU and elsewhere) actually let MS combine with Vivendi?

I realise of course that the White House is now controlled by Dubyah, but it would be awfully two-faced for the Feds to sue Microsoft for anti-trust violations and then turn around and put their seal of approval on this sort of deal.

I also wonder, is MS's interest in this deal related to the opportunity they see for themselves, or the opportunity to deny Apple?

what MS should be really buying...

[hhknighter]

RIAA
To destroy one evil, is to invite a greater evil.

In other news, Music CDs will now only play in Windows Media Player 10.x.
All music CDs will require online activation.
Under DMCA, it is illegal to be able to play these music CDs under Linux, violators will skip prosecution and proceed to Punishment UpU.R.Arse, where users will be forced to sit down and watch the formating of their computer into FAT16 booting Windows 9x.

The future:

[ces]

"Your license for has expired would you like to renew now for the low price of $20/year?"

or

"By clicking OK you agree to allow Microsoft Music to deduct a license fee of $2 from your account for playing this song."

A tech company buying a record company?

[retro128]

With "Microsoft wants everything in their proprietary format" being said, I'd like to put forth something else which crossed my mind.

As we all know, the record industry is ass backwards when it comes to tech. They want to keep doing things the old way, the way which allowed them very tight control over the product they sell. Everything changed, but they've pretty much resorted to outlawing any and all technology with the potential to shake that grip loose.

So what happens if a tech company, whether it's Apple or Microsoft, buys Universal Music? This could be exactly what we've been wanting - the voice of a powerful tech company at the heart of the RIAA. You can bet the way Universal Music does business would change overnight. Thus far, the Big 5 have only dabbled in digital distribution, mostly because of their fear their files will be copied. As we know, it's impossible to keep digital information from being copied. Apple and Microsoft understand this too, being in the software business. I would expect that if this buyout happens, we will see them go all out with digital distribution. It could very well be the best thing that has ever happened to music.

As for what format these tracks will be in, or how much it will cost, that's anyone's guess. The important thing that either Microsoft or Apple must understand if this deal goes though is that when people download the tracks, they are going to want to do whatever the hell they want with them, and that includes burning them onto CD, pushing them around their network, loading them into their MP3 player, etc, or they won't bite.

Microsoft may be anti-consumer, but they aren't stupid. They know how to make money, and they know how to sell. If they get Universal I think they will throw up the entire Universal library for download at a decent price, hopefully in MP3. Whatever they do, they will sell their mothers soul to bring people in, and THEN figure out how to get the return on investment out of them.

If Apple gets the deal, I expect more or less the same thing to happen, only much more slowly. They simply don't have the marketing power of Microsoft. On top of that, the company would be tapped after a buyout like that. Not much extra room in the budget for advertising :)

Regardless of who gets the deal, the other record companies are going to take notice. If Universal is a smashing success, they will follow suit quickly. If it crashes and burns, it will be business as usual. Either way, we have nothing to lose.

emusic anyone?

[xbryanx]

i currently subscribe to emusic (it's the best: flat fees with no download limits and no DRM) and guess who owns this very popular online music distribution network....? vivendi!

so instead of apple re-inventing the wheel maybe they just might buy emusic since they are rumored to be putting out their own music service on the net soon.

this would make sense if these rumors are even remotely true.

microsoft vs apple philosophy

[Anonymous Coward]

Apple only wants to acquire Vivendi Universal because it idolizes Sony who own Columbia. They want to be a chic electronics company with its fingers in the media industry. It wants to exude cool and be trendy with consumers. I imagine Apple's next move will be to create a video game console, possibly a gameboy-like device given their success with the iPod. Vivendi Games will produce games for this new platform and bring more games to Apple's starved OS, which Blizzard (part of Vivendi) already heavily supports.

Microsoft is strictly a mass media company. It wants to be AOL Time Warner. It's beefing up its MSN service and ramping up commercials to go head on with the crippled online provider. It has also invested itself into NBC which competes with CNN. The next move is to get Universal, which will place it toe-to-toe with Warner Bros and fuel Microsoft with media rights it will co-brand its software products with. They will offer movie previews in its proprietary WM format to battle Quicktime. It will force digital theaters to use WM9 for the "optimal" version of Universal movies. As long as Microsoft uses its own software to power its massive infrastructure it will continue to improve, making the battle with Linux meaningless and moot. The power of this feedback loop has not nearly been realized, as it has only just stared with Windows 2000 and the acquisition of Hotmail. Convenienty, they will also acquire Vivendi games, which will be converted to Xbox studios. Anyone that doesn't want to do console games will be gladly folded into the successful Microsoft Games and produce titles based on the latest DirectX platform, incompatible with the lagging winex project and only ported to Mac OS until at least a year after its initial release.

Proof?

[penginkun]

I'd just like to go on record as saying there is still NO proof that any of this is anything other than a rumour.

I'll happily eat my words. Don't misunderstand my pessimism for anything other than a lack of belief. I'd LOVE for Apple to start an online music service, but frankly I doubt I'd use it because I get 99% of what I want for FREE from Usenet and the library. I'm kinda used to the whole not-paying-for-music thing now. ;)

Besides, with the RIAA's recent $98bn lawsuit, I have officially stopped purchasing new CDs. Paying AAPL to dl "officially acceptable" MP3s would mean putting more money in the RIAA's coffers. Not gonna do it.

I've only known about dmusic.com for half an hour and I've already grabbed a LOT of really good music for free and without having to worry about the RIAA's jackbooted shock troops (lead no doubt by the redoubtable Lars Ulrich) kicking in my door and hauling me off to copyright court. Beauty. I'm just bummed they don't have any Britney or Backside Boys. Oh, well. ;)

fuck micro$hit

[Anonymous Coward]

Bill Gate$ is $atan and is a total sack of low life $hit..

Die Bill, die.

P.S. We hate you. More now than ever..

Great! Now I know who I'll need to boycott!

[metamatic]

That's it, if Microsoft buys UMG, I won't be buying any more CDs by... uh...

Wow. I just looked at the list, and I don't have a single UMG CD release. (Peter Gabriel doesn't count, as they only distribute a few of his albums in the US, and I bought the UK releases. Ditto Elvis Costello.) Yup, that's quite an impressively awful roster of artists they have there.

Well, I guess if Microsoft buys Universal I'll carry on not buying CDs by Boyzone and Queen Latifah. That'll show em.

As opposed to their current scheme...

[gosand]

This could really give MS quite a bit of leverage if it ever needed it - "Upgrade now, get 50 free songs for Windows Media Player" or some such thing.

As opposed to their current scheme, "Upgrade now, or we will audit you". Corporate America is their bread-and-butter, they have shown time and time again they don't care about the average consooooomer.

Re:As opposed to their current scheme...

[SocialWorm]

Don't care as much? Maybe. Don't care? Hardly. How many X-boxes are businesses going to buy? How many are going to use MSN for internet access?

Re:As opposed to their current scheme...

[gosand]

Don't care as much? Maybe. Don't care? Hardly. How many X-boxes are businesses going to buy? How many are going to use MSN for internet access?

Sorry, I thought it was implied that I was only talking about their Office software. It pretty much applies to their OSs too.

Pay attention

[bill_mcgonigle]

However, if Microsoft bought Vivendi Music, would that not somehow be in violation of the anti-trust rulings?

Sure, Microsoft will get a slap on the wrist and be asked to please not do it again. They'll do it anyway and ... (repeat and fade).

Why pay?

[John Bayko]

Why pay for music when I can get it for free from Kazaa?

Possible reasons (depending on how its implemented):

• Guaranteed to find the song at all times, if it's available.
• Guaranteed complete download.
• Guaranteed that it's actually what it says it is.
• Videos.
• Superior organization - catalogs by category, artist, date, etc.
• Superior search capabilities.
• Descriptions, reviews, articles and news about new non-mainstream releases.
• Articles about past works that have been forgotten, or were never popular but seserved to be. When companies can make as much from their archives as new releases, there's an incentive to increase exposure to older artists.
• Discussion forums? Chat rooms?
• On-line interviews with the artists.
• Information on tours, purchase tickets to events on-line - or win them for free in contests.
• Live performance recordings.
• Customized streaming audio/internet radio feed (click "No Boy Bands" option... or maybe "All Boy Bands").
• Order T-shirts, fan magazines, other merchandise (and autographed CDs!?).

Some could be free (most artists have a web site now with some of this stuff), the rest would be value-added.

Re:Why pay?

[shotfeel]

Whatever happened to just plain not breaking the law?

Sorry, forgot where I was there for a minute.

Who needs a bidding war?

[alizard]

The major music labels are all in financial trouble. Why bother with a bidding war with Apple when there are several other companies which might be open to reason in the forms of a billion or so in cash?

The other point is that the time for Apple to do this is as soon as MS puts money on the table.

If they start a bidding war with MS and lose this drastically increases the value of the other 4 of the big 5 to the point where the major investors will be able to put up with bad (for tech industry and users) policy decisions of the current label CEOs even if the companies continue to bleed red ink. Remember what investors put up with in the dot.com era?

Incidentally, MS can either outbid Apple or pay far more than they think the company is worth simply in order to bleed Apple white. Money they waste outbidding MS for a property that's declining in value would be better spent on another artist catalogue, perhaps a more listenable one.

The current Universal Record investors and MS are the only ones which profit from a bidding war.

Apple and MS, each with their own labels competing in the music business might be a very, very interesting thing. Imagine "new music from Microsoft".

However, I think both companies are betting "we can do a lot more with this material than these fuckheads can". My guess is that they're buying the catalogues and current artist contracts, and the people who will still be working there will be working infrastructure. The recording engineer jobs and the webserver sysadmin jobs are safe.

Major computer company owned music corporations are going to look a lot like ordinary corporations. Profit margins should go up even in the face of the current profit stream. Artists will get standard contracts much like developer contracts are, and the auditing will be corporate quality. Maybe long-term contracts will include profit sharing in the parent company as well as royalties and standard health and benefit packages.

They can stream 100 music channels from their own content

I don't think the traditional management practices and the traditional "overheads" will be tolerated. Burying the producer's coke bills as "entertainment" Which I have no trouble with, these guys can afford to pay for their own partying.

This is a rare case where "do the right thing" might be drastically more profitable with the

Though there is something of a visceral horror

THis MIGHT be funny if...

[Anonymous Coward]

If MS had not been the one to talk to them FIRST, then decide there was no deal only to have Apple come in SECOND.

So as usual reality is the completel opposite of what 99% of /.ers think.

Last Post!

[alpg]

and if we're playing old distributions... whatever happened to Yggdrasil? :)
\\swing: everybody who tried to pronounce it got their tongue in a knot and choked
-- #Debian

- this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...