- Joined
- Apr 28, 2011
- Messages
- 34,159
- Reaction score
- 37,643
- Location
- With Yo Mama
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
Bruce Willis to fight Apple over music rights after his death | The Sun |Showbiz
When it rain's it pours for Apple.. more bad PR and this one will hit everyone on the pocketbook when they realise they actually dont own their music they "bought" through iTunes.... they are in fact only renting it. Might actually be a bigger problem in Europe since here we have truth in advertising laws... which means when Apple says you can buy XXXXX on iTunes, then they are lying.
It is The Sun too. Can't expect much of European news, Just not nearly up to the standard of US news sources. Sensationalist crap and tabloid journalism.
One of the advantages of being famous and wealthy is that you are in a much stronger position to resist things about society you dislike.
Bruce Willis could have just quietly died and left his music to his kids. Nobody would have said anything or so much as suspected. However, publicity whores will be publicity whores. Setting up a "trust" for music? Good grief. Are we really that bored?
The world is going to hell and Bruce Willis is worried about passing down his iTunes account to his children "Tweedle, Jazzbo and Dazzle" or whatever their names are. Bruce Willis always seems limited to me. In fact the worst movie ever produced was Hudson Hawk, a movie he wrote and directed. After seeing that I became convinced that Bruce pretty much functions on his brain stem. It doesn't surprise me in the least that he is concerned about his iTunes after he is dead.
And you would be breaking the terms of the license.
How would Apple know I broke the term of the license agreement? I could have got the songs from other sources.
You dont get it.. the music you buy on iTunes is not yours. You dont own it.. you just borrow it from Apple. Once you die or give it to another (which you would be able too if you owned it), then Apple can and does seize the music... since you do not own it, and they do. Point is, you are in reality being scammed by Apple. Just think.. you buy a house, pay off the loan, and yet when you die, your house does not go to your kids, but to the building company that built the house, because you only were "borrowing" it.
Leave it to PeteEU to raise a stink over not only a non-issue but a false story.
At an Apple financial analyst conference on Wednesday CEO Steve Jobs admitted that Apple makes no revenue from the online download service, the iTunes Music Store, that he launched in April. As iTMS is the leading download service, with 80 per cent market share (or so Jobs claimed), where's your 99 cents per song going?
"Most of the money goes to the music companies," admitted Jobs.
"We would like to break even/make a little bit of money but it's not a money maker," he said, candidly.
So now we have it on record: the music store is a loss leader. Jobs said Apple would pay its dues to the RIAA, then seek to make money where it could, from its line of hardware accessories...
They had started to make cashflow from the Store years ago now, actually.
Notwithstanding, their basic premise was not to be in the music industry, but, to sell there own product using the music industry as a vehicle.
More or less correct, but not as record label, instead as storefront which was to then propel the iPod forward. This is why Apple Records started up the suit, and Apple had to settle with them, because this marked an actual entrance into the music market, more or less violating the agreement reached in the 1980s.
Nevertheless, the intellectual property standards, minus the DRM scheme involved at the time (FairPlay), revolve around the RIAA's concept for intellectual property protections and use.
I agree ................
Anything to trash Apple, worthy or not. Again, any contention with these matters belongs to the RIAA and related outfits that place these restrictions of legality upon its users.
That is not entirely correct. The RIAA may be the driver of the policy, but nobody is forcing Amazon or Apple to deceive their customers. They have made a deliberate choice to fool people in thinking they are buying music when they are not and they should be held accountable for it. Furthermore, since apple has the direct relationship with customer that makes them the entity to file legal action against.
Pete may have a somewhat irrational hatred of Apple, but in this case he isn't wrong, especially since this sort of behavior applies to not just Apple but nearly all popular digital music services.
How would Apple know I broke the term of the license agreement? I could have got the songs from other sources.
Leave it to PeteEU to raise a stink over not only a non-issue but a false story.
Bruce Willis to fight Apple over music rights after his death | The Sun |Showbiz
When it rain's it pours for Apple.. more bad PR and this one will hit everyone on the pocketbook when they realise they actually dont own their music they "bought" through iTunes.... they are in fact only renting it. Might actually be a bigger problem in Europe since here we have truth in advertising laws... which means when Apple says you can buy XXXXX on iTunes, then they are lying.
Please, this has been the policy of the Recording Industry since the physical medium. The products themselves, if I recall correctly, still state that you are essentially only purchasing a limit license that permits playback and lending. Does Target or Walmart tell their customers this when they become a storefront? With the digital medium, they argued further restrictions upon the idea of what it is exactly you "own."
The fact that pulling bait and switch scams on consumers has a long and storied history does not make it any less wrong. Digital products also have much worse restrictions, as at least physical mediums can at least be transferred between owners. Apple and Co abuse consumer rights beyond the requirements demanded of them by the RIAA.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?