Slashdot Mirror


Universal Wants a Slice of Apple's iPod Pie

vought writes "According to a Reuters report, Universal is now taking the precendent set by Microsoft's Zune and moving to force Apple to include a royalty payment with each iPod. In the words of Universal Music's Doug Morris, 'These devices are just repositories for stolen music, and they all know it. So it's time to get paid for it.' Does Microsoft's precedent mean the start of a slippery slope that will add a 'pirate tax' to every piece of hardware that touches digital music?"

20 of 555 comments (clear)

  1. To Doug Morris... by BWJones · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Doug Morris,

    In the regretful, embarrassing, yet immortal words of Dick Cheney...... " Go F$@% yourself ".

    I personally take offense at the allegation that there is *any* stolen music on my iPod or any of my computers. All of my music has been purchased on CD or the iTunes Music store as it is on most of the peoples iPods and computers that I know of. Your allegation suggests that you actually do not know about your potential customers, their desires, technology or most disturbingly, the music industry itself. Apparently, you also don't seem to be able to understand that you need to out-compete the piracy industry by offering a quality product at a reasonable price and in a manner that is easy for people to pay for. Marketing 101 tells us that the way to make money is to create a product people want and then remove any barriers that will prevent people from *willingly* giving their money to you in exchange for those goods or services. The iTMS has shown you how it is done, yet you get in bed with Microsoft who apparently cannot design a device that will compete in the same arena with the iPod, then you force people to buy points that they can then exchange for music *and* you want a slice of the hardware market. If you want into that market, why not create your own hardware? To do anything else is leveraging your monopoly to extort money from another industry and the last time I checked, that behavior is illegal.

    So, quit whining about all the pirates and do something constructive that adds to your product or services rather than placing restrictions on your product that makes it less appealing to the end user or customer. Oh, and while you are at it, you might want to put more energy on finding good musical talent for the music industry. Its out there, but you need to stop focusing on engineered pretty boy and girl acts and put more effort into finding and promoting real talent.

    --
    Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    1. Re:To Doug Morris... by tverbeek · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There isn't a single unlicensed track anywhere on my iPod. Not even one unauthorized sample. If the music cartels start charging me for music that I haven't downloaded, ripped, or otherwise pirated, then I'm going to have to stop spending money at iTMS and my local funky CD shop, and treat that "royalty charge" as a blanket license to their entire library. I've never waded into the content-piracy cesspool so far, but I sure as heck can't afford to pay for music twice, so that may be where I have to go.

      --
      http://alternatives.rzero.com/
    2. Re:To Doug Morris... by AcidArrow · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Actually I have no problem with paying a small extra "tax" with the purchase of an ipod. BUT only if that means I can then fill my ipod 100% with pirated music...

      If I'm paying the "pirate tax" to help them recover the "losses" they have from piracy, there's no problem then, right? If they are still going to sue my guts if I have pirated mp3s on my ipod, then why I am paying extra money with the purchase of an ipod? I'm paying them protection money and they still come after me? If they are going to act like the mob, they should at least do it properly...

    3. Re:To Doug Morris... by Basehart · · Score: 5, Interesting

      "If the music cartels start charging me for music that I haven't downloaded, ripped, or otherwise pirated, then I'm going to have to stop spending money at iTMS and my local funky CD shop, and treat that "royalty charge" as a blanket license to their entire library."

      FWIW I was in a band signed to a UK indie label during the 80's which was had licensing deals with pretty much every major label around the World. Then came the 90's and slowly but surely the CD's started disappearing off Tower Records' shelves. Then came the 00's and we get our own section on iTunes.

      Needless to say if I'd bought my first MP3 player in the 00's I would have gone straight to iTunes and bought my albums from there, but instead I bought my first MP3 player in the late 90's and had to resort to grabbing un-licensed MP3's of my songs from wherever I could find them, basically because I didn't have the orginal CD's (my entire record collection is just that, records, and stored back in the UK) and I couldn't find CD's in used record stores.

      If the record labels had got their shit together to build their own kickass online record store, and made their own kickass players so people could listen to them, Apple wouldn't have seen an opportunity and created iTunes and the iPod.

      So FUCK YOU Universal, and every other label that starts crying about lost revenue.

  2. Sounds good if you legalize file sharing by raitchison · · Score: 5, Interesting

    IIRC Canada has a system like this, where part of the purchase price of blank media goes to royalties for stuff that is assumed to be copied to it.

    If they charged a fee for each device and let us have free, legal file sharing (since we paid for the content with our device fee) it sounds semi reasonable.

    Of course that's not what they are talking about so...

  3. Universal Music, Here is My Reply by KaiserSoze · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Fuck you. I've spent hundreds of dollars at the iTunes Store, and thousands buying CDs at retail over the past 15 years. Again, fuck you.

    --

    "What we elect to call imagination is mere combination of things not heretofore combined." - Frank Norris

  4. Fast forward to 2007 by LaughingElk · · Score: 5, Funny

    Doug Morris: Steve, I think we should get $1 for every iPod you sell.
    Steve Jobs: No.
    Doug Morris: We asked Microsoft for $1 for each Zune sold, and they said "Yes".
    Steve Jobs: They were desperate. We're not. By the way, how has the Zune deal been working out for you?
    Doug Morris: So far, we've gotten $52.

  5. Re:Braindamage? by wass · · Score: 5, Funny
    The *AAs are beyond a pain in the ass, they're thieving not just people, but businesses as well,


    Hey, what did the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics ever do to you? (ducks)

    --

    make world, not war

  6. Fuckin' A Right! by FatSean · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They have this shit up in Canada for recordable media...but the Canadians seemed to have kept the cost and scope reasonable.

    I have too easy a time imagining this 'fee' increasing every year, every time you buy a new music-related device.

    So yeah...they pull this off and I will have ZERO ethical issues about copying every bit of music I can find. Greedy fucks.

    --
    Blar.
    1. Re:Fuckin' A Right! by Telvin_3d · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Yes, we do, and thanks to it the courts told the CRIA (RIAA of Canada) to screw off when they tried to start the same litigation idiocy that is going on in the states right now. It's funny, the industry lobbied really hard to get the levy passed in the 1990's when no one had yet realised how the internet would change things. Now they are lobbying as hard as they can to get it removed so they can start suing people. Not having any luck so far from what I can tell.

    2. Re:Fuckin' A Right! by Chris+Burke · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Offtopic: anything more than $0 (even Canadian dollars) is too much to be 'reasonable' for a 'pirate tax'.

      Would it be too much if it meant that, having already paid the price of your piracy, that you could not be sued for subsequent pirate activity?

      I believe this is the situation in Canada. They pay the tax, yes, but then the Canadian music industry cannot go after any of the Canadian pirates. So in theory, you could just go out and download every song they ever published. I bet it's the recording industry who would think they got the short end of the stick on that one!

      It won't work that way in the U.S. of course. In the U.S., we will end up paying the tax on anything even remotely capable of pirating music (which is soon going to be everything in your house from your computer to your door mat), and you will be emminently sueable (soon to be jailable) if you actually do pirate anything. They'll charge you coming and going, even if you never touch anything they make, and imprison you if you dare not pay them. Because here in the U.S., we hate the idea of government-owned business, but we love the idea of business-owned government.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    3. Re:Fuckin' A Right! by mrchaotica · · Score: 5, Insightful

      No, it's not a good thing in disguise. Why? Because that music tax would only go to RIAA-owned artists. Every other musician would get entirely fucked over.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    4. Re:Fuckin' A Right! by Too+Much+Noise · · Score: 5, Informative
      Because that music tax would only go to RIAA-owned artists.


      There is an interesting argument here that even Universal's artists might not get a cut from that money - namely, if their contract with the label doesn't explicitly stipulate a cut from licensing electronic devices, they're all fucked over. At least if the current behavior (i.e. iTunes licensing splits) are something to judge by.
  7. And how would they make that happen exactly? by nick_davison · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Does Microsoft's precedent mean the start of a slippery slope that will add a "pirate tax" to every piece of hardware that touches digital music?

    Supply and demand applies here:

    85% of all MP3 players are iPods.

    After briefly debuting as the 7th most popular MP3 player, the Zune dropped to 13th most popular.

    Universal gets three choices here:

    Put up (only sell music through the Zune store as that is, let's face it, the only influence they have) and deal with only having the 13th most popular MP3 player market to go after... Not going to happen.

    Shut up... Also not likely to happen.

    Neither... They'll whine loudly, whilst sensibly not daring to cut their noses off to spite their faces, and occasionally create hype inducing headlines.

    The previous MP3 taxes on hardware got through five plus years ago when MP3s were something weird the kids do. Passing laws to fine people who don't get a vote is really easy. In the half decade since, huge numbers of middle Americans have bought iPods and they're a part of mainstream society. The ignorance and "aren't l33t pirates bad!" claim doesn't work so well when middle American voters realize it suddenly applies to them and they'd be voting to make their toys more expensive.

    So, Zune is such an embarassing joke it can hardly be called a trend setter, Universal won't dare actually boycot iTunes in order to make a point and MP3 players are so popular that the laws that got snuck through in the past now get soccer moms outraged. They can't affect it through business models or laws... Game over.

    In much the same way, I want endless women. However, I control such a small part of the dating market that even if I boycot women, I doubt it'll bother them half as much as it'll bother me. I can't get a law passed that forces women to like me because it'd be political suicide for politicians. So, much like universal, that leaves me whining loudly about how things should be and yet nothing actually changing.

  8. Re:Seriously by AcidArrow · · Score: 5, Funny

    If they are going to legalize piracy, I can see them putting "pirate taxes" to a lot more things...

    "ADSL modems! They all know they are being used to download illegal mp3s (well, and porn)"
    "Monitors! Everybody knows people use them to find songs to download illegally"
    "Mice! Everyone knows that they are mainly used to download songs illegally"
    "And don't even get me started on chairs, food and houses. They are only being used to maintain themselves so they can download more music!"

  9. Re:YES! This makes PERFECT sense! by bprime · · Score: 5, Insightful
    "These devices are just repositories for stolen music, and they all know it,. So it's time to get paid for it."

    I RTFA looking for this juicy little quote and couldn't find it anywhere. Am I blind or did the submitter make up a quote for Mr. Morris?

  10. Re:YES! This makes PERFECT sense! by Finn61 · · Score: 5, Informative

    The quote is not from the article but something Doug Morris has been quoted as saying.

    It seems to have come from a Nov 10 Billboard piece:
    http://billboard.com/bbcom/news/article_display.js p?vnu_content_id=1003380831

    --
    "Looking good Vern."
  11. Re:Canadians not-sued by Baorc · · Score: 5, Informative

    Being Canadian and all, I have read about this law for the "media tax" and so on, basically they compared downloading music to going to the library and making a photocopy of a book or its pages and so on. But what they explicitly said was wrong was "advertising" your shares. Or basically saying openly "Hey I have music, come download from me!". That is illegal.

    So basically, you can download but you can't share.

  12. I don't have music on my iPod by roseblood · · Score: 5, Insightful

    My iPod is used for audiobooks and mp3 of class lectures. Does this mean that Universal will owe me whatever pirate-fee they want on each iPod?

    --
    There are lies, damned lies, and statistics.
  13. Re:Your straw man is on fire. by The+Mad+Debugger · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The biggest irony is this:

    1) Universal wants more money for their music

    2) Apple (who really doesn't profit much on iTMS itself) tells them to fuck off

    3) iTMS user can no longer buy tracks legally, so they go pirate it instead

    Now, Universal, instead of getting some money for their music, gets zero dollars.

    Nice.