Talks to bring The Beatles to iTunes break down

[AppleInsider]

Negotiations to bring the music catalog of The Beatles to Apple's iTunes Store have entered into an indefinite state of limbo with the band's multimedia corporation and former record label disputing the terms of digital distribution.

Speaking at the launch of his new album Electric Arguments, Beatles guitarist Sir Paul McCartney said he's eager to see his former band's catalog made available for sale on digital download sites, but once "heavy negotiations" between Apple Corps and former record label EMI have since "stalled."

According to a report published by the BBC Tuesday morning, EMI still owns the rights to the Beatles recordings and therefore must enter into an agreement with Apple Corps -- the company set up by the band to look after their catalogue -- before the tracks can be released for digital distribution.

"EMI want something we're not prepared to give 'em. It's between EMI and The Beatles I think - what else is new?," McCartney said. "Last word I got back was it's stalled at the moment. But I really hope it will happen because I think it should."

Rumors (1, 2, 3) that the Beatles and Apple were close to wrapping up an iTunes deal have swirled ever since the two sides ended their three decade-long trademark dispute almost two years ago. However, those plans apparently took a back seat last month when the band announced a landmark deal to have its legendary catalog form the foundation of a new video game from the makers of Rock Band.

When asked about the current situation surrounding iTunes, an EMI spokesperson said the label is "working hard to secure [an] agreement with Apple Corps to make the Beatles' catalogue available in digital form" but added "the various parties involved have been unable to reach agreement."

EMI hopes both sides can make some progress "soon."

[ View this article at AppleInsider.com ]

[samurai1999]

i think the Beatles need iTunes more than iTunes needs the Beatles
- the Beatles are missing out on a whole new audience that could discover the music
- but if it's not available in a modern, convenient form, then I think it's going to get forgotten about.

[hillstones]

Originally Posted by samurai1999

i think the Beatles need iTunes more than iTunes needs the Beatles
- the Beatles are missing out on a whole new audience that could discover the music
- but if it's not available in a modern, convenient form, then I think it's going to get forgotten about.

They have been forgotten long ago. Who cares. I already have the songs I like from CD's so having them on iTunes does nothing. I am sure most fans already have The Beatles in their iTunes libraries, so what would be the point?

[Rot'nApple]

Originally Posted by AppleInsider

but once "heavy negotiations" between Apple Corps and former record label EMI have since "stalled."

According to a report published by the BBC Tuesday morning, EMI still owns the rights to the Beatles recordings and therefore must enter into an agreement with Apple Corps -- the company set up by the band to look after their catalogue -- before the tracks can be released for digital distribution.

"You never give me your money."
"You only give me your funny paper."
"And in the middle of negotiations,
I break down."

Whoever said that, knew what they were talking about!

Oh wait...

[monstrosity]

oh god not this one again, Apple should just give up, the bloodsucking beatles have had too much money from them as it is.

EDIT: my bad , I didn't read the article at first, and my post should have been aimed at EMI.

[JS29]

Who cares? Anyone who does, isn't waiting for iTunes. Those that want Beatles on their iPods already got the music somewhere else. I get the feeling Steve Jobs considers the Beatles his white whale. When they finally get them on iTunes, I bet they are surprised by how few songs they sell.

[paxman]

Originally Posted by samurai1999

i think the Beatles need iTunes more than iTunes needs the Beatles
- the Beatles are missing out on a whole new audience that could discover the music
- but if it's not available in a modern, convenient form, then I think it's going to get forgotten about.

The Beatles' music will never be forgotten. But as the Beatles generation dies out so will the relevance of their music. I mean, the music will always be relevant but more from a historical perspective than a current social perspective. Musicians will always listen to the Beatles and so will lots of 'music geeks', but your average teenager? Forgeddaboudit. Young kids may listen and sing along because of their parents and so they will always know about the Beatles but then they move on. (When I was a kid the fact that my parent liked something was reason enough for me to reject it out of hand!) But I do think NOT to have the Beatles represented makes any comprehensive music store / library incomplete.

[bdkennedy1]

Who cares anymore.

[monstrosity]

OK , I have been meaning to question you lot on this for a while, and this thread is close enough in relation so here goes...

What do you think to Apple buying EMI?

I believe it's about time Apple owned some content. Though it may cause licensing issues with the others, I think in the long term its going to be beneficial.

[bigdaddyp]

Originally Posted by monstrosity

OK , I have been meaning to question you lot on this for a while, and this thread is close enough in relation so here goes...

What do you think to Apple buying EMI?

I believe it's about time Apple owned some content. Though it may cause licensing issues with the others, I think in the long term its going to be beneficial.

I think it highly unlikely that apple would go that route. Why would apple want all the baggage that would come from buying an existing label when they have the power, cash and distribution necessary to start their own label?

[Ireland]

Originally Posted by bdkennedy1

Who cares anymore.

Nobody.

[Galley]

The Beatles' entire catalog has been available in a DRM-free, lossless digital audio form for 20 years now. They're called "CDs".

[Kishan]

Meh...

[RidleyGriff]

but Paul was the bassist, not the guitarist.

Just sayin.

[BuzDots]

Let me start off by saying that I don't know anything about the music business.., but

I think what iTunes needs/wants is the clout that the Beatles songbook gives them. Once again it pulls them a little step farther ahead than any of the other download services. Led Zepplin wouldn't hurt either...

Sure the songs are available in other places like Limewire, but look at all the crap you have to sort thru to get the song/quality/information you need. I like Limewire too, but there is a massive amount of s--t on there from folks that don't know their butt from a hole in the ground about music.

What really needs to happen is for Apple to get Apple Corps to release to iTunes all the "lost tracks", Christmas greetings, studio tapes and relevant interviews that are out there of which Apple Corps retains control. - That is one thing Limewire is OK at (but not good) if you have enough patience.

iTunes needs to be able to offer a little something more than all of our CD collections. - "oh, one more thing..."

[nace33]

I could care less. How about NIN special edition iPhone. That would get me excited!

[Shaun, UK]

Originally Posted by paxman

The Beatles' music will never be forgotten. But as the Beatles generation dies out so will the relevance of their music. I mean, the music will always be relevant but more from a historical perspective than a current social perspective. Musicians will always listen to the Beatles and so will lots of 'music geeks', but your average teenager? Forgeddaboudit. Young kids may listen and sing along because of their parents and so they will always know about the Beatles but then they move on. (When I was a kid the fact that my parent liked something was reason enough for me to reject it out of hand!) But I do think NOT to have the Beatles represented makes any comprehensive music store / library incomplete.

You are assuming that iPod/iTunes is targetted exclusively at teenagers. What about the rest of us? I don't know about the US but in the UK at least if you look at the CD charts you will see that sales to over 35's is a significant proprtion of CD sales. I presume iTunes has or will have a similiar profile. As such adding 'older' bands such as The Beatles increases iTunes profile and acceptability amongst otherwise exclusively CD music buyers, encouaging them to switch from CD to iTunes. Plus imagine the free publicity iTunes would get around the world.

I hope The Beatles never become irrelevant just as I hope the great classical composers never become irrelavant. Truly great music is timeless.

[elroth]

Originally Posted by hillstones

They have been forgotten long ago. Who cares. I already have the songs I like from CD's so having them on iTunes does nothing. I am sure most fans already have The Beatles in their iTunes libraries, so what would be the point?

The fact that you have the songs shows they are not forgotten. I think you'll be surprised at how many people will buy the Beatles on iTunes once they're available. It's easy to criticize and make blanket statements, but it's a lot bigger world than you seem to think.

[Adjei]

Who cares about the Beattles, there are bigger problems in the world to deal with. If you want to get Beattles music on your ipod, there are ways to do it, besides the only song of theirs I liked is Hey Jude.

[teckstud]

Originally Posted by bdkennedy1

Who cares anymore.

AppleCare.

[teckstud]

Sounds like Bad Karma for stealing their name- ssshhhhhhh!!!

[macFanDave]

When the Beatles finally decide to get their songs on iTunes, both of the people who still give a shit will be thrilled.

Yeah, a NIN iPhone would be cool, I guess, but I'm holding out for a Bo Donaldson and the Heywoods version!

[macFanDave]

Originally Posted by Adjei

Who cares about the Beattles, there are bigger problems in the world to deal with. If you want to get Beattles music on your ipod, there are ways to do it, besides the only song of theirs I liked is Hey Jude.

That's a good song -- until the shrieking at the end!

[TBaggins]

Originally Posted by Galley

The Beatles' entire catalog has been available in a DRM-free, lossless digital audio form for 20 years now. They're called "CDs".

Ah yes, I've heard tell of those 'ceedees' you mention. They're from a fascinating and prehistoric time, the reports say.


...

[TBaggins]

Originally Posted by BuzDots

I think what iTunes needs/wants is the clout that the Beatles songbook gives them. Once again it pulls them a little step farther ahead than any of the other download services. Led Zepplin wouldn't hurt either...

I would LOVE to see Led Zep on iTunes. That would rock beyond words.



...

[JeffDM]

Originally Posted by bigdaddyp

I think it highly unlikely that apple would go that route. Why would apple want all the baggage that would come from buying an existing label when they have the power, cash and distribution necessary to start their own label?

I think that's a last resort. I can't really explain it, from my vague impressions, I don't see the necessary chances in the record industry happening with the current major labels. Even Apple might not be able to do it if they owned a label. One specific thing I would like to see is globalized distribution rights. Right now, distribution is sold off or otherwise broken down by country, so each digital distributor has to make separate negotiations for each country.

One major problem with owning a label is that Apple would be a competitor, and I think that would make it harder to make deals.

Originally Posted by nace33

I could care less.

So you do care?

Originally Posted by elroth

The fact that you have the songs shows they are not forgotten. I think you'll be surprised at how many people will buy the Beatles on iTunes once they're available. It's easy to criticize and make blanket statements, but it's a lot bigger world than you seem to think.

I think you missed the point by misinterpreting the statements. The problem being highlighted is that most of the people that do care already have the music imported into iTunes, be it legally or illegally. I don't doubt that there will be plenty of sales, but I think they could have gotten a lot more if their music was allowed to be sold five years ago.

[Virgil-TB2]

Originally Posted by RidleyGriff

but Paul was the bassist, not the guitarist.

Just sayin.

He played the "bass guitar."

[parky]

You all seem to have missed the point to this story.
The hold up is nothing to do with Apple Computer.

The negotiations are currently stuck between the Beatles own company Apple Corp and EMI who own the rights to the Beatles recordings. Once they agree to the terms Apple Computer will simply publish the music on the EMI terms they already have in place.

My guess is that Apple Corp (Beatles) does not want the music to be DRM free (iTunes Plus) but EMI probably does as that is the preferred route they use with iTunes now.

Don't blame Apple Computer for this delay, it is not down to them this time!

[William John]

Originally Posted by TBaggins

I would LOVE to see Led Zep on iTunes. That would rock beyond words.



...

Led Zeppelin has been on iTunes for several months now, try looking once in awhile.

[Ireland]

Originally Posted by teckstud

AppleCare.

Oh do shut up

[emig647]

Why are they even trying anymore. These talks are stupid... if they can't do it, then move on. It's not like it isn't easy to get their music.

[MacJello]

Why are so many dismissing the relevance of the Beatles? The Beatles catalog was never remastered for CD, but that's been going on behind the scenes over the last several years. When the albums are reissued, along side the new Rock Band game and iTunes access, the Beatles will shoot to the top of the charts. We'll see yet another wave of Beatlemania, and a whole new generation of fans. Do not underestimate the power of their music.

[-cj-]

Originally Posted by parky

You all seem to have missed the point to this story.
The hold up is nothing to do with Apple Computer.

The negotiations are currently stuck between the Beatles own company Apple Corp and EMI who own the rights to the Beatles recordings. Once they agree to the terms Apple Computer will simply publish the music on the EMI terms they already have in place.

My guess is that Apple Corp (Beatles) does not want the music to be DRM free (iTunes Plus) but EMI probably does as that is the preferred route they use with iTunes now.

Don't blame Apple Computer for this delay, it is not down to them this time!

Thank you Parky, for reading this article correctly.

The current disagreement has nothing to do with Apple (computers) so all those snarky comments directed at Jobs and the iPod maker are a bit silly.

[TBaggins]

Originally Posted by William John

Led Zeppelin has been on iTunes for several months now, try looking once in awhile.

Holy CRAP! You are RIGHT! I had GIVEN UP on that!!

*does a happy dance, despite the poster's snarky tone*

'Kashmir' here I come. *runs to the iTMS*


...

[Kolchak]

Originally Posted by JS29

Who cares? Anyone who does, isn't waiting for iTunes. Those that want Beatles on their iPods already got the music somewhere else.

Yup. I advised someone on the best way to convert CDs (bitrate, album covers, etc.) after which he went to the library, borrowed all their Beatles CDs and ripped them all to 160kbps DRM-free AAC files he can play on many devices. They snooze, they lose.

[mcloki]

Apple getting the Beatles on iTunes will be the "Jump the Shark Moment" for digital music. It is that moment that will be latched onto by the press to come to symbolize the rise to prominence of digital content.
For most of us "technologically savvy" people it's not a big deal. For the media and mainstream it's going to hold the same significance as colour TV surpassing B/W. It will signify to regular people that Digital Content is here to stay. That the real significance.
You already know it. I know it. But regular people need symbols and this will be a big one.

[kerryb]

Originally Posted by Rot'nApple

"You never give me your money."
"You only give me your funny paper."
"And in the middle of negotiations,
I break down."

Whoever said that, knew what they were talking about!

Oh wait...

The dumb under 30 crowd that thinks the Beatles are not worth listening to are missing so much.

[nace33]

Originally Posted by JeffDM

So you do care?.

Ahhh, no.

[monstrosity]

Originally Posted by MacJello

Why are so many dismissing the relevance of the Beatles?.

This "will it wont it" story has been going on for ages. I think people were originally looking forward to having the beatles on itunes, but it's turned into such a bore that many would rather they simply buggerd off altogether.

[BuzDots]

Originally Posted by William John

Led Zeppelin has been on iTunes for several months now, try looking once in awhile.

Damn, YOU are right!

I hate that

Actually I did an iTunes search as I wrote the response on "zepplin" and it just returned all the crap cover songs. As they say on XM "only the song retains the name" - cute!

My day has been made too!!!