iTunes Match generates 'magic money' for music copyright holders

Posted:
in iPod + iTunes + AppleTV edited January 2014


As the first iTunes Match royalties trickle in, online music distribution company TuneCore says that the service created money "out of thin air" as it monetizes music whether pirated or not.



In a blog post on Wednesday, TuneCore President Jim Price announced that he received over $10,000 for the first two months of participation in Apple's iTunes Match, a fee-based cloud service that allows users to stream or download any song in their collection from the iTunes library regardless of its origin.



Price explains that the more times a song is re-downloaded or streamed, the copyright holders of that track get paid.



"iMatch (sic) monetizes the existing behavior of the consumer for copyright holders and artists," Price writes. "Consumers don’t need to do anything new­—they just need to listen to their pre-existing music."



When a user signs up for Apple's $25 per year music matching service, their computer's catalog is scanned and any songs that are available on iTunes are then made available for streaming or re-download through iCloud on demand. If a song in a user's library is not in iTunes, subscribers have the option to upload that track to iCloud for streaming and syncing.



"A person has a song on her computer hard drive. She clicks on the song and plays it. No one is getting paid," Price says. "The same person pays iTunes $25 for iMatch. She now clicks on the same song and plays it through her iMatch service. Copyright holders get paid. Same action, same song, one makes money for the copyright holder, and one does not. This is found money that the copyright holders would never have gotten otherwise."





TuneCore President Jeff Price.







Apple's iTunes Match debuted in the U.S. in November, 2011, and was followed by an international rollout in December. As of January, the service has been activated in a total of 37 countries.



[ View article on AppleInsider ]

«1

Comments

  • cbrownx88cbrownx88 Posts: 3member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post


    As the first iTunes Match royalties trickle in, online music distribution company TuneCore says that the service created money "out of thin air" as it monetizes music whether pirated or not.



    In a blog post on Wednesday, TuneCore President Jim Price announced that he received over $10,000 for the first two months of participation in Apple's iTunes Match, a fee-based cloud service that allows users to stream or download any song in their collection from the iTunes library regardless of its origin.



    Price explains that the more times a song is re-downloaded or streamed, the copyright holders of that track get paid.



    "iMatch (sic) monetizes the existing behavior of the consumer for copyright holders and artists," Price writes. "Consumers don?t need to do anything new*?they just need to listen to their pre-existing music."



    When a user signs up for Apple's $25 per year music matching service, their computer's catalog is scanned and any songs that are available on iTunes are then made available for streaming or re-download through iCloud on demand. If a song in a user's library is not in iTunes, subscribers have the option to upload that track to iCloud for streaming and syncing.



    "A person has a song on her computer hard drive. She clicks on the song and plays it. No one is getting paid," Price says. "The same person pays iTunes $25 for iMatch. She now clicks on the same song and plays it through her iMatch service. Copyright holders get paid. Same action, same song, one makes money for the copyright holder, and one does not. This is found money that the copyright holders would never have gotten otherwise."





    TuneCore President Jeff Price.





    Apple's iTunes Match debuted in the U.S. in November, 2011, and was followed by an international rollout in December. As of January, the service has been activated in a total of 37 countries.



    [ View article on AppleInsider ]



    Now if they would just take the money and shut up.
  • webfrassewebfrasse Posts: 145member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cbrownx88 View Post


    Now if they would just take the money and shut up.



    Why? You think he revealed an unknown side effect of iTunes Match?
  • sdw2001sdw2001 Posts: 16,121member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by cbrownx88 View Post


    Now if they would just take the money and shut up.



    I wonder if I'm the only one who has a problem with this. What's really happening is that people are paying multiple times to listen to music they already own (assuming it's not pirated). When it comes to paying Apple for that service, that's fine. After all, you're paying for convenience and to help Apple defer the costs of providing the service. At least, that's what it's supposed to be. It turns out that what's actually happening is copyright owners are getting paid EVERY time someone listens to the music they've already purchased.



    Think about that. You buy a track for $1.39. You listen to that track 100 times in a year through the cloud. Why the hell does the copyright owner get money for that? You bought a license to listen to that track whenever you want to. And now, just because you're paying Apple for the ability to listen to that track in the cloud, the copyright holder gets another cut?



    Thoughts?
  • just_mejust_me Posts: 591member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post


    I wonder if I'm the only one who has a problem with this. What's really happening is that people are paying multiple times to listen to music they already own (assuming it's not pirated). When it comes to paying Apple for that service, that's fine. After all, you're paying for convenience and to help Apple defer the costs of providing the service. At least, that's what it's supposed to be. It turns out that what's actually happening is copyright owners are getting paid EVERY time someone listens to the music they've already purchased.



    Think about that. You buy a track for $1.39. You listen to that track 100 times in a year through the cloud. Why the hell does the copyright owner get money for that? You bought a license to listen to that track whenever you want to. And now, just because you're paying Apple for the ability to listen to that track in the cloud, the copyright holder gets another cut?



    Thoughts?



    From the story yes they are, but Apple pays that you dont. Its the cost of the service that you have already paid for.
  • cutykamucutykamu Posts: 211member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post


    I wonder if I'm the only one who has a problem with this. What's really happening is that people are paying multiple times to listen to music they already own (assuming it's not pirated). When it comes to paying Apple for that service, that's fine. After all, you're paying for convenience and to help Apple defer the costs of providing the service. At least, that's what it's supposed to be. It turns out that what's actually happening is copyright owners are getting paid EVERY time someone listens to the music they've already purchased.



    Think about that. You buy a track for $1.39. You listen to that track 100 times in a year through the cloud. Why the hell does the copyright owner get money for that? You bought a license to listen to that track whenever you want to. And now, just because you're paying Apple for the ability to listen to that track in the cloud, the copyright holder gets another cut?



    Thoughts?



    why do i think you sounds like consumer have to pay for all that times? cos consumers have to pay only once when they buy a song and apple is paying to the copyright owners for that many times not consumer…
  • jbfromozjbfromoz Posts: 91member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post


    And now, just because you're paying Apple for the ability to listen to that track in the cloud, the copyright holder gets another cut?



    Thoughts?



    This appears on the face of it to be an amnesty, allowing the pirated libraries users might have to be one time brought into their "current valid songs" list.



    I can foresee that after a period of time the "amnesty" may go away, and as there is a "better" managed version of your songs, the ability to play your old "pirated or cd sourced" music may be hampered.



    Another direction that may occur is that the music that is presently not available and on iTunes, will not be known about unless a service like iMatch determines a "Demand".



    what better way to bring more producers into the fold than to say "Oh hi, we're apple, we happen to have a bajillion copies of your new song being uploaded to our iMatch service, so we thought we'd give you some money. We don't presently have a distribution agreement with you, care to supply your catalogue to us and get more money?"
  • bigmac2bigmac2 Posts: 616member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post


    Think about that. You buy a track for $1.39. You listen to that track 100 times in a year through the cloud. Why the hell does the copyright owner get money for that? You bought a license to listen to that track whenever you want to. And now, just because you're paying Apple for the ability to listen to that track in the cloud, the copyright holder gets another cut?



    Thoughts?



    The iTunes Match service have 3 states for songs put in the cloud: Purchased, matched and uploaded. I think only matched song is concern here.
  • apple ][apple ][ Posts: 7,547member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JBFromOZ View Post




    I can foresee that after a period of time the "amnesty" may go away, and as there is a "better" managed version of your songs, the ability to play your old "pirated or cd sourced" music may be hampered.



    I don't think so, as iTunes Match basically legitimizes anybody's music collection and you can even swap your crappy, pirated, bad quality version with a higher quality AAC from Apple.
  • hill60hill60 Posts: 6,952member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by JBFromOZ View Post


    This appears on the face of it to be an amnesty, allowing the pirated libraries users might have to be one time brought into their "current valid songs" list.



    I can foresee that after a period of time the "amnesty" may go away, and as there is a "better" managed version of your songs, the ability to play your old "pirated or cd sourced" music may be hampered.



    Another direction that may occur is that the music that is presently not available and on iTunes, will not be known about unless a service like iMatch determines a "Demand".



    what better way to bring more producers into the fold than to say "Oh hi, we're apple, we happen to have a bajillion copies of your new song being uploaded to our iMatch service, so we thought we'd give you some money. We don't presently have a distribution agreement with you, care to supply your catalogue to us and get more money?"



    eg AC/DC, I uploaded all my ripped CD's to iTunes Match.



    This should work for Google's pirate music service, i.e. rip the MP3 from a Youtube clip (which seems a popular way of acquiring free music these days), import to iTunes and upload to iMatch.
  • irnchrizirnchriz Posts: 1,383member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by hill60 View Post


    eg AC/DC, I uploaded all my ripped CD's to iTunes Match



    Yeah, I noticed that iTunes don't have AC/DC albums as they were in the few songs I had to upload in my collection. Other than that it matched 6200 tracks. Which I have redownloaded twice now in higher quality (51gb in total each time) onto my MacBook Pro and iMac.
  • euphoniouseuphonious Posts: 303member
    So Apple is paying the copyright holders from Match revenue. Do you think Apple would be giving up a single cent of that income to record companies if it didn't have to?



    Match basically legitimises pirated music. That isn't a good thing from the perspective of a record company. Apple had to give the record companies some fairly significant incentive in order to get them on board for this. If Apple doesn't pay them then there's nothing in it for them, so they wouldn't allow their catalogues to be used.
  • Quote:
    Originally Posted by hill60 View Post


    eg AC/DC, I uploaded all my ripped CD's to iTunes Match.



    This should work for Google's pirate music service, i.e. rip the MP3 from a Youtube clip (which seems a popular way of acquiring free music these days), import to iTunes and upload to iMatch.





    It is a lot easier just to download a good quality file in the first place.



    None of this would be an issue if mp3 players still came with gobs of disk space, like they used to with mechanical drives.



    Within the next several years, it may be less important to store things in the cloud, if TBs (or even hundreds of gigs) of storage become available in your pocket device.
  • chaickachaicka Posts: 38member




    When is iTunes and iTunes Match service coming to Asia? It's so sad that the services are available in so many countries but almost non-existence in Asia.



    Com'on, there are consumers in Asia who do support legitimate music if such services are make available to us.
  • chaickachaicka Posts: 38member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Euphonious View Post


    So Apple is paying the copyright holders from Match revenue. Do you think Apple would be giving up a single cent of that income to record companies if it didn't have to?



    Match basically legitimises pirated music. That isn't a good thing from the perspective of a record company. Apple had to give the record companies some fairly significant incentive in order to get them on board for this. If Apple doesn't pay them then there's nothing in it for them, so they wouldn't allow their catalogues to be used.



    Any decent corporations will... And I am sure Apple will, even if record labels didn't ask for it. That's how a healthy ecosystem can be build and sustainable.
  • chris_cachris_ca Posts: 2,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post


    Think about that. You buy a track for $1.39. You listen to that track 100 times in a year through the cloud. Why the hell does the copyright owner get money for that? You bought a license to listen to that track whenever you want to. And now, just because you're paying Apple for the ability to listen to that track in the cloud, the copyright holder gets another cut?



    and?

    You listen to the same hit song on the radio 14 times a day. The artist gets a cut for every time you hear it. Then you hear it again 5 years later, The artist gets paid again. and again and again.
  • chris_cachris_ca Posts: 2,510member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Euphonious View Post


    So Apple is paying the copyright holders from Match revenue. Do you think Apple would be giving up a single cent of that income to record companies if it didn't have to?



    Match basically legitimises pirated music. That isn't a good thing from the perspective of a record company.



    Since the record companies were getting absolutely nothing (from the pirates) before iTunes Match and now they are, how is that not a good thing?
  • cutykamucutykamu Posts: 211member
    there is a solution for this, you can ask your bank to provide you to access your card in U.S which is what i have done… i'm in china and can use U.S store accounts with my credit card and most of the purchases i do by using iTunes gift card….
  • cutykamucutykamu Posts: 211member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by chaicka View Post






    When is iTunes and iTunes Match service coming to Asia? It's so sad that the services are available in so many countries but almost non-existence in Asia.



    Com'on, there are consumers in Asia who do support legitimate music if such services are make available to us.



    there is a solution for this, you can ask your bank to provide you to access your card in U.S which is what i have done? i'm in china and can use U.S store accounts with my credit card and most of the purchases i do by using iTunes gift card?.
  • orlandoorlando Posts: 601member
    Quote:

    "A person has a song on her computer hard drive. She clicks on the song and plays it. No one is getting paid," Price says.



    Complete crap. I bought the song that is on my harddrive. The artist was paid! Wanting to be paid a second, third, forth, ... time is just pure greed.
  • gtrgtr Posts: 3,157member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post


    you can even swap your crappy, pirated, bad quality version with a higher quality AAC from Apple.



    ...that your friend has.



    That's what you meant to say, right?
Sign In or Register to comment.