Universal Refuses To Renew On iTunes 287
UnknowingFool writes "It appears for the moment that Universal will not renew its long term contract with Apple for content on the iTunes store. While the details are not known about the exact nature of the dispute, many speculate that it has to do with Apple's stance on fixed pricing and Apple's refusal to license their DRM. The worse case scenario may include Universal pulling its entire catalog from iTunes. Both sides stand to lose out with 1/3 of of new releases coming from Universal and an estimated 15% of Universal's sales coming from digital downloads. Apple's market share is about 75% of digital downloads, and digital downloads are growing while CD sales are shrinking."
Worst case? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Worst case? (Score:5, Insightful)
HAH. don't hold your breath... and it _will_ be more expensive than iTunes, and it _will_ be more DRM-crippling than iTunes.
Yeah, competition's great.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
I see this as definitely a good thing.
BTW, Magnatune with Amarok is far better deal then iTunes. Just in case somebody is interested.
But do not let me spoil the party - let Apple whoring begin.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd also like to add ambient.us too... (with props to eMusic if you are into subscriptions... but they're crippleware-free!)
Re:Worst case? (Score:4, Insightful)
There IS the issue of just how large their respective inventories are: I believe iTunes wins there.
Hey, there are many sources of cheap, independent music. I use them. I like them. But to say that 500 albums at 5 bucks each represents "a far better deal" requires some suspension of reality.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If Universal thinks that people will buy from another online source than iTunes, let them try. That's competition. EMI felt differently, and will win and grab a larger market share. Honestly I've never paid any attention to which labels musicians signed with before. But now it'll becoming blindingly obvious who's in what camp.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
iTunes have established a download market. They've served their purpose and are now surplus to Universal's requirements.
Re:Worst case? (Score:5, Insightful)
If they want to keep the DRM, good look trying to sell it on anything other than iTunes with Fairplay. They'd be excluding themselves from the biggest market.
If they're prepared to sell DRM-free, and want more than Apple's $1.29, they're screwed too, cause customers don't like being fucked by price hikes.
The fact is that by breaking their relations with the biggest distributor of downloadable music, they're only screwing themselves.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Universal is going to demand DRM with their new provider. They will be cutting themselves out of that market (which I doubt is actually a huge consumer of online music since those players probably contain mostly ripped CDs, but that is besides the point) no matter what.
They just want more money and they dont want to give up DRM to get it. If they went somewhere else and sold their music DRM free I would probably buy it (assuming they have anything I want) but if its got some other DRM I wont buy it, becaus
Re: (Score:2)
Because the iPod is over 78% of the DAP market thats why.
Re:Worst case? (Score:4, Informative)
I'd like to know who is selling less crippled music? With Microsoft's solution, to play on the PC, you need Windows Media Player, correct? Music from the Zune store only plays on the Zune. Allofmp3 is closed.
Apple does let you burn their DRM'd songs to CD, meaning you can play them in any CD player. You can also rerip. It's a crappy solution to get it onto a non-iPod player, but it's possible. Do other solutions offer this?
Re:Worst case? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Worst case? (Score:5, Informative)
Right. And what exactly do they not like about their deal with Apple?
They want to charge you more for their music. They'd like you to purchase multiple tracks for each device you own, and they'd really like it if you couldn't burn those tracks to CD.
Your post makes no sense because Apple has no say in the dealings that Universal does with other on-line retailers. Yes, competition is great. Theoretically, if Universal was uncomfortable with iTunes' dominance in the marketplace they would make sweetheart deals with other on-line retailers to provide cheaper music with more freedom to drive people away from iTunes, and the consumer would win. But that is not what is happening, because they're just too greedy, and the other tech companies too easily roll over to the whims of the entertainment industry. iTunes is successful in part because they're the only ones who have stood up to the record companies.
Instead, Universal uses its dominant position to strong-arm more money out of companies like Apple and Microsoft -- you'll recall that Universal stayed out of the Zune music store until Microsoft agreed to give then a cut of the Zune hardware sales. That's all that this is about.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Worst case? (Score:4, Informative)
Anyway, I believe that DRM-free iTunes tracks can be converted to MP3 by simply right-clicking them and selecting "convert to MP3" in iTunes.
DRM-free tracks are the ultimate compatibility to other players.
The reason Apple wouldn't license their Fairplay DRM is because that would endanger the "safety" of the DRM, and the record companies would be angry if it was easily cracked (or so they say)
No-DRM is better than licensed-DRM, however you put it.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think that's the case, actually. That would only increase iTunes' market share and Jobs' clout, which is the real issue at hand.
From the article, Universal wants out of its long-term blanket licensing agreement, and instead wants to license music to Apple on a release-by-release basis, which would give them the option to negotiate the terms for a specifi
Re: (Score:2)
You're thinking the Fairplay DRM, which is proprietary to Apple, and built on top of AAC.
Re:Uh... what are you thinking? (Score:3, Insightful)
Universal wants to be able to up prices where it thinks it can get more money. Apple isn't letting them do that. How do you see it as a positive that they're going to go to someone who does?
Uh, this is what I'm thinking. (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Try emusic. (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Uh... what are you thinking? (Score:5, Insightful)
Not to mention, Universal wants money from each iPod sold [slashdot.org], just like they get from the Zune [slashdot.org], (and they've been asking for that since before the Zune deal was announced). For some reason, they think that they deserve that, even though they didn't design the electronics, or the UI, and iPods are not sold with any Universal Music on them, and don't in any way require Universal Music to function correctly.
Re:Uh... what are you thinking? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
I think Apple should demand money from Universal for each CD purchased. After all, chances are that it's going to end up on an iPod anyway.
Re:Uh... what are you thinking? (Score:5, Funny)
That's like what -- a buck fifty total now?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Aren't companies legally obliged to try to maximise profits? I seem to recall this being used to justify bad behaviour, why isn't it used for good behaviour?
Well, I don't know if that is true really...sure they have a long term obligation to shareholders, but in the case of bad behaviour, choosing the "bad" route may lessen profits in the long term if it harms their reputation.
As for your "good behaviour" scenario...well, you haven't exactly offered proof that going DRM free will maximize their profits, except with regard to your purchases specifically. Not every music consumer happens to be a slashdot-reading anti-DRM advocate who makes purchasing decision
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Aren't companies legally obliged to try to (Score:3, Interesting)
maximise profits?
No. Companies, whether corporations, proprietorships, or partnerships, have the responsibility to do what the owners want as long as it doesn't break the law. In the case of partnerships and proprietorships it's usually the owner(s) who run the business. Corporations on the other hand have the responsibility to fulfill the requirements of the charter the corporation has been given as well. And since the first corporate charters were granted, to amoung others the Dutch East India Com [wikipedia.org]
Re:Worst case? (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Worst case? (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, remember back when CD's came out...there really was no way to rip them...hell, not many people had a harddrive big enough to hold all a CD's data. At that time, a CD was a safe, one use medium...you could record off it to cassette, but, that was lossy and they didn't care that much about it.
Then...came larger harddrives, cd burners and cd drives on computers...and compression techs (mp3, etc). Well, what was once 'secure' to do consumer's hardware limitations, wasn't any more.
The music companies hate that...and with digital music and DRM, are trying to close that hole. They'd fix the CD's to be read only if there were only some way they could...trust me. They're gonna be happy to get rid of CD's if ONLY they can lock the users down in a way they screwed up on and didn't do with CD's.
They do not want to repeat the non-DRM mistakes they made with CD's.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd like to see Universal sign with ... hopefully a ... DRM-free deal.
Uh, that would be Apple, sport. Jobs is the one publically urging the labels to drop DRM.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Universal? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Universal? (Score:4, Interesting)
Personally, I think it's a bit early to be deciding who is doomed and who isn't. I think it's just as likely that both formats are doomed and there will be a "winner" only in the same way that laserdisc "won" the battle to be the next video medium after VHS. It was the format to use, there were just a low percentage of people interested in it.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
In terms of standalone Blu-ray vs HD DVD player sales, HD DVD has a wide lead
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Secondly, who the hell buys porn on hard media anymore? Far far far more people download porn than get it any other way. The internet is, indeed, for porn.
The whole "Porn decides all format wars" line would be a lot more useful and relevant if we had a pool of results that was larger than, you know, one. Just because adoption followed porn once, doesn't mean it will ever do so again.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Porn was the bulk of what drove the penny arcades, which in turn promoted the old silent movies (themselves started mostly as a vehicle for porn). Most of the visual entertainment media used throughout history either started out, or was heavily fininanced at the start by porn.
And they've decided today as well. You youself made the point without realizing it.
BOTH formats have lost, it's not about har
This is nothing more than (Score:5, Insightful)
My long-term prediction? More of the status quo. Both sides are winning, and there is no external stimulus that seems like it might upset the equilibrium that has developed. Apple doesn't want to lose a third of its collection, and Universal doesn't want to be tied to the misfits and rejects that compose the rest of the playing field.
Re:This is nothing more than (Score:4, Insightful)
It isn't enough to show Apple that they're serious, they want the rest of the industry to see that these steps can be taken without ruining their business. The ultimate goal is to restructure Apple's relationship with the entire music industry, not just with Universal.
If you see this as just an empty threat, then you aren't looking very far down the road.
Re: (Score:2)
Most likely negotiation tactics or... (Score:5, Insightful)
The other possibility is that Bill Gates, in utter desperation because the Zune is such a piece of crap, has offered to pay Universal for exclusive content for the Zune. I would seriously not put it past Bill G and Steve B to do something like this. It would be a really bad day for Apple if this did happen, because it would make the Zune more popular and the iPod less popular.
Of course, it could backfire heavily against both Microsoft and Universal if Zune sales don't grow significantly.
Re:Most likely negotiation tactics or... (Score:5, Insightful)
1) Oh, Universal's music is no longer available on iTunes. I'll buy this piece of crap Zune instead of the cool new iPod Femto
or
2) Oh, Universal's music is no longer available on iTunes. I'll have to <strike>pirate it like there's no tommorrow</strike> rip it from CD onto my iPod
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I think that's a reasonable bargaining chip to bring to the table - imagine the launch of ipod compatible, variable priced music on Amazon - launched with a live concert by universal artists such as U2 & Elton John....
Re:Most likely negotiation tactics or... (Score:4, Interesting)
or
2) Oh, Universal's music is no longer available on iTunes. I'll have to <strike>pirate it like there's no tommorrow</strike> rip it from CD onto my iPod
3) Oh, Universal's music is no longer available on iTunes. Hey, here's a cool song on iTunes, from some other label, I was thinking about getting this one too, I guess I'll just buy it instead. I don't really need that other song I wanted.
or
4) Universal conspires with two or three other big labels to also drop iTunes if their collective demands aren't met. Apple accuses the labels of forming a dangerous anti-consumer cartel, while the labels accuse Apple of being a dangerous anti-consumer monopoly, and because the labels have deeper pockets and are much more experienced at spreading ridiculous lies and deceit, few people hear Apple's side.
or, as another poster pointed out,
5) Universal sets up an iTMS competitor selling DRM-free tracks; they offer an introductory price of $0.89/track for the first three months, then jack it up to $1.99 per track for the tracks more than a handful of people want, while still offering crap nobody likes for $0.89/track (which is the price they'll advertise, of course). Throw billions of dollars at promoting it, and they'll convince some people to switch away from iTMS.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
It looks like Universal is a full fledged 'partner' of Microsoft in both music and video and they are drawing the line in the sand with regards to other partners because of their deals with Microsoft.
LoB
Re: (Score:2)
If people cannot buy what they want, they will find other ways. More than 100 million iPods have been sold and more are still going out the door every day. Do you think all those users will just drop the iPod and buy a Zune? If they wanted a Zune, they would not have gotten an iPod. So having MS Zune-only stuff that people want will just make people either go and and buy and rip a C
That'll sure help the A/R folks out... (Score:5, Insightful)
Universal A/R dude/dudette: "Yep, that's right."
Unsigned Band with break-out potential: "So any unit sales revenue we see from you will be from Wal-Mart and Best Buy sales, nothing else?"
Universal A/R dude/dudette: "Uh huh."
Unsigned Band with break-out potential: "Losers. Next!"
Re:That'll sure help the A/R folks out... (Score:5, Insightful)
You're assuming major labels are still out there trolling nightclubs for "unsigned bands with break-out potential".
More often what they're doing is hitting up their local malls and "recruiting" teenage girls (or in the case of boy bands, teenage boys) to actively "break" as the next pop star. These girls and guys had nothing going for them (except cheerleader looks) before, so why would they turn down the promise of riches just because the songs some producer wrote for them to lay their heavily processed vocals over won't be on iTunes? If they do, hey, there's plenty more at the mall they came from.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
To your point...the recruiting/packaging you ment
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Universal A/R dude/dudette: "Yep, that's right!"
Unsigned Band with break-out potential: "We'll loose all creative control and have next to no say in what we put out, but we're guaranteed to have at least one initial single because you own all media outlets like radio stations, television and most stores?"
Universal A/R dude/dudette: "Uh huh."
Unsigne
Re: (Score:2)
I do think more unsigned acts are becoming savvier in general these days regarding the mechanics of their business. If nothing else, they're certainly aware that there's more than one label in town to ply their services to. My point was Universal would just be putting themselves at a disadvantage with this, compared to their competition. And all it
Re: (Score:2)
This is definately a negotiating tactic, but its almost certain to backfire on them. When I decide to buy a song these days, unless its for some group I definately want several songs from, I automatically go to iTunes (even before I had
Re: (Score:2)
Minor correction(s) (Score:5, Insightful)
Universal A/R dude/dudette: "No, of course not. You will never see sales revenue because we will cook the books so that you never see a penny. But you are othewise correct - the unit sales revenue you will never see will only come from Wal-Mart and Best Buy."
Unsigned Band with break-out potential: "Where do we sign?"
Re: (Score:2)
A/R dude/dudette: But we will put your face in every record store in America and play an overproduced, bland version of music on six radio stations in every market 19 times a day. You'll be completely broke but you'll get laid a lot.
Unsigned Band: "Sold American!"
Re: (Score:2)
Universal A/R dude/dudette: "Oh well, we were going to give you this big check and this mansion we rented for you, but if you just want to go back to your grungy nightclub and living in your van, go right ahead."
Unsigned Band with break-out potential: "Should we spit or swallow?"
Re: (Score:2)
What you want to sign us??? AWESOME!!!!! where do we sign??
Bands dont bother to read the contract. Most get pissy after they discover that the record company is screwing them hard and they actually owe them several million after their record goes platinum.
BAND: what do you mena we're broke?
RECORD EXEC: you are out of money and because you are not writing a new album we are cutting off your credit line.
BAND: that's not fair! we want out!
RECORD EXEC: no problem, just ab
Re: (Score:2)
Any unsigned band would be better off going straight to the Internet. Record companies can't do any more these days than an independent record producer in terms of recording quality, and since the cost of distribution is essentially nil, the only thing they'd be getting from a "normal" record company is promotion and songwriters. And if they don't mind doing their own promotion and write their own songs, this isn't a problem.
Case in point: Jonathan Coulton. He has said he makes as much as a signed band lik
Re: (Score:2)
They stock the Top 40. And Country. That's it. I've actually come to appreciate my local independent record store, and started shopping there a few months ago, after a few years hiatus. They treat you well, and usually throw in a free poster or sampler if you spend more than ten bucks.
I think saying "worst case" is very shortsighted (Score:2)
Re:I think saying "worst case" is very shortsighte (Score:2)
Universal shoots itself in the foot. Film at 11. (Score:3, Insightful)
They think this is good for them HOW?
Re:Universal shoots itself in the foot. Film at 11 (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
But those European prosecutors are upholding the laws of their own country, not US law. It is quite possible that what is legal in the US is illegal in the country of those `overzealous prosecutors'.
Re: (Score:2)
The point is, Universal want an alternative online market, they don't like the one provided by iTunes. Unless they're prepared to drop DRM as a requirement and have whoever sells their music sell it as straight unencumbered MP3s (or something else the iPod can easily be persuaded to play), they're essentially cutting off online sales from most of the portable MP3 players out there. Why?
FWIW, I wouldn't be surprised if they are trolling f
Doesn't really mean much for Apple (Score:2)
There are two likely scenarios should Vivendi/Universal drop iTunes:
1) They switch to a competing DRM format with no compatibility with iPods: Users download content from peer-to-peer services / ri
Load of Hooey (Score:5, Insightful)
And yet you sell all your CD's at $16.99 regardless of that fact now, don't you?
At the same time, Mr. Jobs has refused the industry's calls for Apple to license its proprietary copy restriction software to other manufacturers. Music executives want the software to be shared so that services other than iTunes can sell music that can be played on the iPod, and so that other devices can play songs bought from iTunes.
Another load of crap. iPods can play music from any other DRM-free music seller. This joker wants you to believe iPods only play iTMS music, which is a lie. And iPod owners would likely buy music from other sources if: 1) It didn't have yet another, incompatible, version of DRM; 2) It was priced right; 3) It was the music they wanted to hear; 4) It had a nice interface to easily purchase and load said music onto their iPod. The record companies themselves are the ones to blame here.
You know, It's the DRM, stupid!
Re: (Score:2)
I see no inconsistency: their CDs have JUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUST the right mix of crap and non-crap to make the calc come out to...$16.99
Comment removed (Score:4, Insightful)
Whoda thunk? (Score:2)
Companies much bigger than Apple caved in to the MPAA on region encoding, encryption, etc.
Jobs is a clever, clever man.
Re:Whoda thunk? (Score:5, Insightful)
short term vs long term (Score:5, Insightful)
As ATi learned, he has absolutely no problem with damaging his company in the short term if he thinks it will strengthen its position in the long term.
Though I don't have an opinion on whether Steve Jobs is doing this, I do prefer a company executive that looks, years down the road, to the future instead of to this or the next quarter. That's a shortsightedness it seems too many corporations have now.
FalconOK - Here's a thing (Score:5, Funny)
But some music executives have been chafing at the flat rate
Well, Universal, here's *my* new flat rate for any of your artists.
$0.00
I call it the Interwebs Discount.
Happy now?
And there isn't a damn thing you can do about it.
Re: (Score:2)
Nose, meet spite (Score:2, Insightful)
Truly hilarious.
Which DRM to use? (Score:5, Interesting)
The problem with music DRM, from the music distributor perspective, is that it's too closely tied to player vendors. There's the iPod and the Zume, and in both cases the player manufacturer takes a cut of the revenue. UMG, reasonably enough, wants to cut the player manufacturer out of the revenue stream.
Microsoft has orphaned "PlaysForSure", which, for a while, looked like an option. Or at least Microsoft tried. WalMart went with PlaysForSure, and they might insist that Microsoft keep supporting it.
What really matters is what WalMart does. If the music industry doesn't come up with a good solution, Bentonville may dictate one. Their site currently says The Apple iPod and Microsoft Zune digital media players do not currently support protected WMA-format files, and will not play Wal-Mart Music Downloads. Walmart.com has a large selection of WMA-/DRM-compatible digital music players available at great prices.
WalMart, remember, sells online music at $0.88/song, below Apple and Microsoft. And they're not going to raise their prices.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If anything, music companies benefit revenue-wise from digital sales. Unlike physical medium like CDs, the distribution and manufacturing costs are minimal. And any infrastructure costs are borne by these
Re: (Score:2)
I'm guessing that to support a lower cost to customers, Wal-Mart has negotitated lower per unit royalties with the recording company. I don't see them seeing this as a must-get market which makes it worth losing money. So, if the real news is that sales of physical cds have declined and digital revenues have not fully replaced lost cd revenues, selling exclusively at Wal-Mart looks like a classic digging deeper to get out of the hole tactic.
Meanwhile, if cost is what matters, why has Wal-Mart not become th
Re: (Score:2)
Now, if a person purchased a Zune and another PlaysForSure device, they would have to subscribe to the Zune Marketplace and URGE to have unlimited all you can download subscriptions.
I wish MS could merge Windows Mobile and the Zune codebases, mainly because WM5/WM6 already has all the functionality of the Zune i
Record industry is dying (Score:3, Insightful)
vivendi/universal is an idiot outfit (Score:2)
it may or may not be noteworthy to consider that Bronfman had the Seagrams liquor business almost whole, a
Middlemen (Score:4, Insightful)
dear music industry morons: (Score:2)
so some tech compnay reinvented it, instead of a music distribution company
oops
guess what? YOU could have controlled 75% of music downloads. instead, you have to kiss up to steve jobs. didn't have to be that way. the only reason it is that way, is because of your shortsighted stupidity on the future of the internet and music
oh well, you fucked up, you lose. deal with it
and your little game of brinkmanship here can only m
DRM Licensing (Score:4, Interesting)
Oh, if only Apple would license their cross-platform DRM! I know this will be modded as off-topic BUT I wish Apple would license its DRM to the BBC! That way, the BEEB would have an easy way of distributing their content in a non-Windows environment and still satisfy their perceived DRM need. It still would not make a native Linux method of playing BBC content, but it is pretty easy to get iTunes (for example) to run under wine. So, though it is not a perfect solution, at least it would be better than what the BEEB is doing now
So, go ahead, mod me off-topic, but I am hoping to at least also get to be modded as interesting as well.
Big surprise... (Score:2)
What if Apple Signs Recording Artists? (Score:2, Interesting)
Poor Universal (Score:5, Informative)
* Baby Boy Da Prince
* Bee Gees
* Drake Bell
* Black Child
* Brandon
* Big Tuck
* Big Tymers
* Blak Jak
* Bloodhound Gang
* Mutya Buena
* Vanessa Carlton
* Jamie Cullum
* Domination
* Down AKA Kilo
* Dispatch
* Drake Bell
* Godsmack
* Gotan Project
* Chris Gotti
* Pat Green
* Harry O.
* Heavy D.
* Infinite Mass
* Ja Rule
* Elton John
* Jack Johnson
* JoJo
* Juvenile
* Jordan Flynn
* Kaiser Chiefs
* Brie Larson
* Murphy Lee
* Lindsay Lohan
* Lloyd
* Damian Marley
* Stephen Marley
* Mika
* Mushroomhead
* Mystic
* Natalie
* Pharoahe Monch
* Prince
* Rakim
* Rammstein
* Scissor Sisters
* Strive Roots
* Sunland
The rest are here [wikipedia.org].
I'm not a fan of iTunes and have never bought anything off them, but Universals reasons for ditching them can only be nefarious. Okay so Prince isn't going to care, and Elton probably won't either. But if anyone knows the other artists it might pay to tell them what their label has done and that now might be a good time to think about their future with Universal.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, and what MS marketing droid came up with the term "squirt"? Seriously, how could some MS marketing drones think that people would "dig" the phrase, "squirt"? Hey babe, wacha listening to? Cool, could you "squirt" that to me?... Slap! "Squirt" a song and 3 days later the "squirt" is gone! "Squirt"... every time I think of that and the Zune I laugh.
Yo dog, what ya doin?.... Not much, just "squirting" with my
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)