Slashdot Mirror
Apple Negotiates For Unlimited iTunes Downloads
Hugh Pickens writes writes "Bloomberg reports that Apple is in talks with record companies including Vivendi SA (VIV)'s Universal Music Group, Sony Music Entertainment, Warner Music Group Corp. (WMG) and EMI Group Ltd. to give iTunes music buyers easier access to their songs on multiple devices. The deal would provide iTunes customers with a permanent backup of music purchases if the originals are damaged or lost and would allow downloads to iPad, iPod and iPhone devices linked to the same iTunes account. The negotiations come as iTunes is facing competition from new Web-based services such as Spotify Ltd., Rdio Inc. and MOG Inc. that focus on letting customers listen to songs from anywhere with an online connection, instead of downloading tracks to a hard drive. 'Long-time iTunes users know that one of the more obnoxious differences between music and app downloads on the iTunes Store is the fact that apps can be re-downloaded a seemingly infinite number of times,' writes Jacqui Cheng. 'In contrast, users can only download music tracks once — if you find yourself without backups and your music disappears, you must beseech the iTunes gods to let you re-download all your music—a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity, should they hear your prayers.""
But can I still listen to my music after Apple, Spotify and Universal have gone out of business?
I just got an iPhone 4. I really don't know why I waited so long. I suppose I was just happy with my previous phone.
But one of the key reasons I bought the iPhone was because of its MP3 capabilities. I have a lot of CDs and wanted to listen to them on the road, so I decided to burn all the CDs to the iTunes.
Anyway, what I'm getting at is that buying the CD gives me something that iTunes music downloaders don't get. That is unlimited access to my music without DRM and without having to pay some online service for it.
I really like the Genius automatic playlist generator. I use it to all the time. If you're buying an iPhone, I recommend you also buy CDs so that you don't have the DRM problem mentioned in the article.
a move in the right direction.
As long as they make it harder to be legit then not, I'll never be in the basket with the other apples...
I don't use iTunes and I did not know that. What a scam.
This is why I stopped using iTunes completely a few years ago, other than to put podcasts on my (now defunct) iPod nano.
You know who lets you download your songs as many times as you want?
The Pirate Bay
...So, how come they want to negotiate with the music cartels?.... Whats in it for them, they're only after are hard earned money, with their rip off ipads/macs/music store... as we all know.
(/sarcasm!.... I'm actually an Apple lover... but, this is directed at all the haters that seem to frequent Slashdot these days).
Since you only have a license for the content, then there is no reason why you should not be able to re-download it again. That license that you bought and paid for should not disappear just because you didn't perform a back up. If you have a physical copy such as a CD then there should be a replacement cost, but you can also sell and give away that CD, unlike a digital purchase which is tied to the account.
I don't think I've ever bought music from iTunes. Free downloads from Starbucks cards, sure. Bought? Don't think so. I'm still conditioned that buying media digitally is pointless from when they had DRM on everything.
I have, however, purchased apps. And I like the ability to easily re-download. And, if I had bought music, would have assumed I could do that too. And would have been EXTREMELY upset if I ended up finding out that they don't let you.
Erm, you seem to think iTunes has DRM. It doesn't.
You are correct about CD rips, Amazon MP3 purchases, and newer iTunes Store music purchases. But older iTunes Store music has DRM, and the iTunes Plus deal with the record labels doesn't include converting existing m4p files to m4a. Movies on iTunes Store still have DRM because of the six major movie distributors' wishes. Applications on iTunes Store still have DRM despite some developers' wishes.
I just got an iPhone 4. [...] one of the key reasons I bought the iPhone was because of its MP3 capabilities. [...] I really like the Genius automatic playlist generator. I use it to all the time.
I was under the impression that all Android-powered phones could play MP3 music as well. So of all the advantages that Android has over iOS, it appears you gave them up for Genius playlists. I acknowledge that you may have found it worth it, but my priorities happen to differ.
A lot of new and interesting factoids appeared today regarding the battle between the smartphone operating systems. At this juncture, it appears as if the Google Android OS is beginning to move ahead of the competition while RIM has actually maintained pace with the Apple iPhone. Microsoft Phone 7 and Symbian are in the back of the pack. Way in the back. This is appropriate, since Nokia will be swapping Symbian for Windows Phone 7.
In older columns, I predicted that the scene will boil down to two players: probably Android and Apple. But I'm not surprised that the Blackberry hangs tough. Users love that phone.
Overlooked in the commotion, though, is the transformative nature of the entire market. The whole world is looking at these changes. Wherever you go, the hip, trendy phone users around the globe will most often be seen with one of these North American smartphones. And to be honest the hippest of the hip will have an iPhone.
I find this particularly amusing, because I recall a constant barrage of anti-American accusations during the late 1990s, whereby we were told that the mobile phone world has passed us by. When I was doing Silicon Spin, a cable show for TechTV, guests would often arrive having just visited Japan, carrying some dingbat phone, such as the Docomo, and singing its praises.
Whenever you read International tech media, you'd hear about all the great things going on with mobile technology everywhere in the world, except in the U.S.
You'd go to meetings and conferences and hear speakers lament about how the U.S. was so far behind in mobile phone technology. The common accusation was that we were pathetic laggards. Losers. This mocking and teasing continued right up until the announcement of the iPhone. Then everything changed.
The fact is we were never really that far behind, and most of the "great" phones around the world were gimmicky and often just plain dumb. The Docomo comes to mind. The first time I saw one its earmark seemed to be a lot of animated gifs for icons. All that was missing was the cat running back and forth at the bottom of the display.
Whatever the case, I can assure you that it was a little more than annoying to listen to what seemed like the entire universe deriding Americans about cell phonesâ"a technology we invented. We were the redhead stepchild of the tech world because our phones were not doing much more than making phone calls. How lame is that? Thus, we were world class losers.
Gee, I guess that's changed, eh? If you aren't using an iPhone in London, then you are probably using an Android phone. That's unless you are a loser, laggard, or slow-poke.
This particular leapfrog is because of American ingenuity and was led by the folks at Apple. It's kind of been overlooked, however, in all the confusion and classic fighting for market share. Most people seem to have forgotten the history and don't even realize that they witnessed one of the great tech come-from-behind victories ever.
To be honest about it, it even surprised me. It was like a sporting event where one whole team was replaced with another team to "show them how it's done." The new guys then decimate the competition.
It's expected that within just a few years the entire market will consist of varieties of smartphones, whose designs and operation were all invented in the U.S. and Canada. And we won't have to gloat about it.
DoCoMo, hah! Well, maybe gloat a little, el chupacabre.
I just got an iPhone 4.
Congratulations! For being so brave!
Have you told your family yet?
Anyway, I applaud you for being so brave and coming out!
Not gonna happen. I've seen people attempt to negotiate unlimited redownloads, the big four labels will balk at this like mad, and then they'll demand that this only be enabled on DRMed content, and only for a limited amount of redownloads (7 or so).
The big four labels will see this as an attempt to renegotiate the royalties, and they'll fight tooth and claw to let royalties drop further.
Experiments and other stuff
My experience represents just one customer but I have never had an issue getting Apple to reissue downloads to me after losing all my data. They happily obliged after a hard drive failure and after my computer was stolen. Shame on me for not having backups, but Apple has always been very accommodating.
Thank you Apple
And when those words come from me you better take them seriously, as i generally hate your very existence and [now only mostly] everything you stand for. HOWEVER this time a big and warm hearted thank you is in its place. No doubt about it.
This big thank you is not because i think what you are doing is anything special, quite the contrary. I think this should never even have been an issue. No, i thank you this much simply because you are the standard snobs of the trade.. thus, if Apple gets this deal home everyone wants to do exactly the same.
So on the bottom line we arrive at an army of macfags going "omfg doesn't your music site let you download your songs to all your devices?!? you should get a mac!", which will, despite being really annoying to listen to, over time create a better music downloading experience for everyone.
Again, thank you faggots - for once you contributed to the world... feels nice doesn't it?
I use Mog and couldn't be happer. I listen to a lot of new releases and it's a lot better to just download however much I want. I used to buy and rip CDs but that's kind of a waste of time IMO. I hate using iTunes to manage and sync files.
I remember, and I'll bet the record executives remember, a certain MacWorld keynote. If memory serves, an nVidia exec spilled the beans about the new Power Macs the night before the speech. When Steve got on the stage, those new Macs had ATI cards in them. It might not be a bluff, if they decide to kick one or more labels out of the iTunes store.
...what zune has essentially been offering since it launched
on the assumption apple is going subscription model
also assuming what they actually mean by 'unlimited downloads' and 'allowing download to ipad, ipod, etc' is that it's the same as steam / zune in that there's a record (read drm license) of what you've downloaded (not purchased mind you) so that once those devices are loaded with your latest license it'll let you access your library.
or in semi-reverse, don't expect to be able to listen to your itunes music library on another device that hasn't been hooked up with your itunes account. think of it as a nice way to stay attached to the apple eco-system. for a monthly fee of course. stop paying the subscription and lose the library til you renew.
I never understood the appeal of buying one song. I'm much more comfortable with a subscription service like spotify (which i use) and wimp where you pay a sum each month and can listen to whatever song you want. I wish the movie and tv industry would go for this model as well and let you play anything as long as you subscribe on any device you want.
I used to have to visit MacRumors.com separately - thank you for saving me time by cross-posting all the latest Apple scuttlebutt here!
#DeleteChrome
eMusic has been doing this forever and to be honest, it's one of the reasons I stay a subscriber. When I go into my account, I see a complete list of everything I've ever purchased there. Nice.
Wake up Apple, this isn't revolutionary, it's been done for years and years now. It's just the right thing to do.
You mean "like eMusic did", unfortunately. They changed it recently - you are no longer able to re-download things.
Try going to one of those albums from your list. Notice how the button above the album now reads "re-purchase album".
Another advantage of subscription services. If I get a new computer or a new player. I add it as an authorized device (you can have 3 computers AND 3 portable devices registered at a time). Plug it in and it copies down all of my playlists and songs which for me is currently 3 different players each with 16GB of songs on them.
If I am not sitting at "authorized computer", I can still listen to any of my playlists or any of what Rhapsody has available online by logging on with just about any web browser (works in Linux and even things like the N800 as well).
Sure, I don't "own" the music and if I stop paying $14/month I lose access to everything but that $14/month is well worth it to me for the convenience and the choice of what devices and where I can use them.
Also, she's having an affair...with an iPhone-owner.
The problem with your argument is that this old paradigm applied to both CDs with application software and CDs with music. The new paradigm of online purchase with unlimited download is being applied by Apple to applications, the logical next step is to apply this to music as well.
Once in a lifetime ought to be enough for anybody.
What do the Slashdot crowd think of how the Music industry is playing one company off against another?
Since about Day One "The Labels" have been pure evil, while surely its understandable that they DO NOT want Apple to control the present and future of music, should they be able to severely disadvantage one player for being stronger as of the present?
I'm curious after reading some of our other comments. That Apple shot ahead, no questions about it, and dominated the music industry with iPod, but now things are very slowly (for mainstream) swinging to "streaming" services, is it fair to basically hold Apple back, and let all the other smaller companies suddenly shoot ahead? Due to nothing but a grudge against Apple's past success? This almost sounds like Apple would have won a "small victory", owning music since the mid 2000's until now, but the entire future will be streaming, they'd have been forced into losing "the war" by being too successful early on? It seems utterly BS if Apple can shoot ahead, working through innovation and low prices, and then held back by the failing music labels, while others can then copy and knock off the Apple approach after seeing how it should be done, and then offer additional services. Imagine iPod, iPhone, iPad etc, really ground breaking new products, and then one day, lets say a Facebook or Netflix type company can just decide, "nah, you cant use it on iOS devices now, hey little company making knockoffs, come with us!"
Surely its better if all music providers, Apple's iTunes etc are offered the same terms and conditions for the same music? And that they compete based on their own profit margins, offerings?
I say this as an Apple user, but also a consumer. I dont like the idea of a cartel blackmailing the services and companies I support.
---
eMusic subscription credits not rolling over was a deal-breaker for me though, whatever other intriguing aspects of their service.
I tried for a few months, got some nice albums out of it, but still...
I listen to both RIAA and non-RIAA stuff if I like the music, tangential business/politics nonwithstanding.
CDs don't cost too much to manufacture, package, and ship, but labels don't get much bang for their buck selling CDs... and record stores post obscene margins on the CDs they sell in order to pay for their physical infrastructure and labor. The music business is driven by concert revenue-- an album going platinum only brings in a couple million dollars to the company and less to the artist. In 2009, Metallica earned $22.8M from concert revenue and $1.6M from their most recent album that sold 300,000 copies ($5/cd). With everything being digitally sold, the cost of infrastructure (including the hosting and distribution costs) is close to zero. The gross revenue may decline, but the margins are most definitely going up.
It's not like he was spending *your* money. He was spending *his* money.
The situation I fear is that so many people buy iPhones that non-Apple phones and/or non-phone media players lose their economies of scale, or so many people buy iPads that netbooks lose their economies of scale. At that point, people for whom splurging is irresponsible or who require features that Apple is known to deny end up with no options other than tough shit.
I'm really not surprised at this. One big business ploying against another. IMO both Apple and sony entertainment have lived up to their big names in my experience. Kind of sad to see how things work below the scenes but thats business for you i guess.