or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Pink Floyd songs could be removed from iTunes after court ruling
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Pink Floyd songs could be removed from iTunes after court ruling - Page 2

post #41 of 114
Well...

Good thing I have their entire catalog on both vinyl and compact disc.

"Why iPhone"... Hmmm?
Reply
"Why iPhone"... Hmmm?
Reply
post #42 of 114
Blimey all the 70's prog lovers are out today! Just be careful when you tarnish a lot of 'da youth' music today as irreverent, its a tad narrow minded.
I do appreciate that the album as an art piece is in some sense a dying form, but you've got to put it into context of the death of vinyl, large gatefold artwork and a lack of obvious portability back in the days of Vinyl decks was always going to shape the nature of listening habits. The 'album' was a late 60's invention anyway.

The walkmen and eventually the iPod have changed how we consume music, on the go, bitesize chunks, criticise the system not the people who are the products of it!

Oh dear I've rambled, anyway I dig a bit of floyd but was always a post-punker myself.

And if you think the albums dead go listen to 'The Horrors - Primary Colours', an 'album album' in the truest sense.

Now back on topic..... whoops
Powerbook G4 1.67 now with a cracked screen. Somebody is hinting I need an upgrade. FAST
Reply
Powerbook G4 1.67 now with a cracked screen. Somebody is hinting I need an upgrade. FAST
Reply
post #43 of 114
Not a PF fan, but you have to agree, if they own the music and it was in their contract with EMI, PF is right. It might mean less sales for PF on the whole as there are people who only want to download a few songs per album. I usually buy the CD if I want a majority of the songs. If I want only one or two songs, then I download those that I like.
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
無心 The idea of wilderness needs no defense, it only needs defenders., Wilderness is not a luxury but a necessity of the human spirit__Edward Abbey
Reply
post #44 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by lightstriker View Post

what are radio stations?

Only thing thats good about radio anymore in my opinion is public radio like NPR and the BBC.

I wish I was a kid back when they had the old radio shows like X Minus One
MacBook Pro 17" Glossy 2.93GHz, iPad 64GB, iPhone 4 16GB, and a lot of other assorted goodies.

If you're a troll and you have been slain. Don't be a Zombie.
Reply
MacBook Pro 17" Glossy 2.93GHz, iPad 64GB, iPhone 4 16GB, and a lot of other assorted goodies.

If you're a troll and you have been slain. Don't be a Zombie.
Reply
post #45 of 114
I have come across a couple of albums on iTunes where you can't purchase individual tracks. I think the most recent one was the Haiti relief one or something like that. I am not a PF fan anyways, but I feel they also have the right to do what they want with their music, as long as it fits in the context of their contract.
post #46 of 114
Don't get me wrong here, I'm a big Pink Floyd fan, and I believe I've got everything they've ever released... However, it's pretty damn rare for me to sit down and listen to an entire album of anything, no matter how much it might "flow together" or whatever. No matter how much you might like to listen to Dark Side of the Moon, don't you want to, sometimes, just listen to Money?

The single, in my opinion, has always been like a movie trailer. When exposed to a new band, you check it out first. I always used to buy a single and then listen to the B side. If I didn't like that, then I figured I probably wouldn't like the rest of the album... You don't suddenly go out and buy their entire catalogue. While I appreciate Floyd's hard-line stance on artistic integrity (and, lets face it, Pink Floyd have done some very strange things in the past in the name of art), I can only hope that this isn't too much of a precedent for other bands out there.

If it really is this issue that is preventing The Beatles from selling on iTunes, well, more fool them. Seriously, are they trying to tell us that "I Want To Hold Your Hand" needs to be listened to in context to be appreciated? Give me a break!
post #47 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by SoundCity View Post

Blimey all the 70's prog lovers are out today! Just be careful when you tarnish a lot of 'da youth' music today as irreverent, its a tad narrow minded.
I do appreciate that the album as an art piece is in some sense a dying form, but you've got to put it into context of the death of vinyl, large gatefold artwork and a lack of obvious portability back in the days of Vinyl decks was always going to shape the nature of listening habits. The 'album' was a late 60's invention anyway.

The walkmen and eventually the iPod have changed how we consume music, on the go, bitesize chunks, criticise the system not the people who are the products of it!

Oh dear I've rambled, anyway I dig a bit of floyd but was always a post-punker myself.

And if you think the albums dead go listen to 'The Horrors - Primary Colours', an 'album album' in the truest sense.

Now back on topic..... whoops

vinyl is far from dead

It is harder to find good music today. It is not like Nick cave, the ass ponys, sisters of mercy the lemonheads or the handsome family get much airplay
post #48 of 114
Really if the band wants the album sold as an album and not individual tracks then IMO that's their call. They did make the music after all, and providing they didn't sell the rights they can do what they want.

That being said, its a completely stupid argument. Let be honest here Pink and step in to the REAL WORLD where what ACTUALLY happens exists. People who buy the album will listen to the songs they want, when they want. If they don't want to listen to the whole album they wont, in fact a lot of people wont. Why? It's called a shuffle button.

When I see things like this I can't help but think its about money. I just have a hard time believing that PF is stupid enough to think that selling an album in it's entirety == listening to an album in it's entirety.
post #49 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by DCno10 View Post

If he had taken an artistic position that an album is an art form that should be experienced in its entirety then yes. Look at The Beatles as they said in the article: their early music was the catchy, boybandy hook music (Hard Day's Night, I Want to Hold Your Hand, etc). They evolved into a band that focused on the album as a work of art (Abbey Road, Revolver, etc).

I'm not saying that you can't listen to a single song from one of those artists and be happy about it, but you should respect the artist's request to release their work as it was intended.

You wouldn't read chapters 1, 9, 16, and 42 from a book without reading the entire book would you?

I CAN CHOOSE to do just that. Just like I can choose to appreciate a painting by only focusing on a part of it. It is MY choice how to interpret a piece of art. If Pink Floyd considers their music to be "high art" that is fine, but they DON'T get the right to tell me how to appreciate it. If I am forced to buy an entire album just to satisfy their viewpoint then I will simply find other art to appreciate instead.
post #50 of 114
Seems like a poor business decision to me. Now, if I just want a song or 2, I'll Google the album, download it and transfer what songs I want to iTunes. Money earned for Pink Floyd=$0.
post #51 of 114
Just get it for free on Limewire. I am sure that will make them a lot more money.

Pink Floyd my ass!!!!
post #52 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Yawn. Decent, but overrated in their prime; but now definitely a has-been, band.

This is news!?

Enjoy your Menudo music.
post #53 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by l008com View Post

Just make sure you also shuffle the dvd chapters when you watch the wizard of oz.

Is there any other way?
post #54 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by lamewing View Post

I CAN CHOOSE to do just that. Just like I can choose to appreciate a painting by only focusing on a part of it. It is MY choice how to interpret a piece of art. If Pink Floyd considers their music to be "high art" that is fine, but they DON'T get the right to tell me how to appreciate it. If I am forced to buy an entire album just to satisfy their viewpoint then I will simply find other art to appreciate instead.

You missed his point, yes you can choose to read any chapter you want, but you have to buy the whole book first.

Quote:
Originally Posted by OC4Theo View Post

Just get it for free on Limewire. I am sure that will make them a lot more money.Pink Floyd my ass!!!!

Have fun with all those fines and possible jail time. I prefer supporting the artists and staying on the legal side of the law.
MacBook Pro 17" Glossy 2.93GHz, iPad 64GB, iPhone 4 16GB, and a lot of other assorted goodies.

If you're a troll and you have been slain. Don't be a Zombie.
Reply
MacBook Pro 17" Glossy 2.93GHz, iPad 64GB, iPhone 4 16GB, and a lot of other assorted goodies.

If you're a troll and you have been slain. Don't be a Zombie.
Reply
post #55 of 114
why is it always the "youth" who don't get it.

the reality is the OLD BAGS don't get it. anyone who subscribes to that theory is .... an O L D F A R T.

i can guarantee that these OLDSTERS were put down in their youth as well. For listening to such great stuff as The Beatles and Pink Floyd.

It's a tired arguement indeed.


someone name dropped THE HORRORS --- brilliant! and Green Day, bravo!!

let's not forget MEW - their album "Mew and the Glass Handed Kite" is a modern masterpiece from start to finish. "singles" were released from the album, but it's one long musical suite meant to be heard in it's entirety. Their latest album "No More Stories Are Told Today I'm Sorry They Washed Away No More Stories The World Is Grey I'm Tired Let's Wash Away" also falls along those lines, but it's more loose.

the "youth" are alive and well and as artistic as ever. just have to make an effort to find it!

cheers!
post #56 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleZilla View Post

Enjoy your Menudo music.

Ouch. I guess your feeling got hurt.... ah well, it happens when it comes to the topic of music. What can you do.

Fwiw, I can't stand Menudo. But that's OK. There are people who feel as passionate about it as some do about Pink Floyd.
post #57 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by l008com View Post

Why is this even an issue when it comes to iTunes? There have been Album-Only songs since day one. If Pink Floyd want it so you must buy their whole album, let em? I don't see how it's an issue?

Did you read the article?
EMI, the label, agreed with Pink Floyd that singles could not be sold without the band's permissions, yet EMI allowed singles to be sold without the band's permission on iTunes.
post #58 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by kruge View Post


If it really is this issue that is preventing The Beatles from selling on iTunes, well, more fool them. Seriously, are they trying to tell us that "I Want To Hold Your Hand" needs to be listened to in context to be appreciated? Give me a break!

Would have been a valid point if "I Want To Hold Your Hand" was actually released on an album
post #59 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by DCno10 View Post

You wouldn't read chapters 1, 9, 16, and 42 from a book without reading the entire book would you?

Probably not but you are not going to purchase only chapters 1, 9, 16 and 42. You WILL purchase the entire book.
post #60 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by MsNly View Post

Have fun with all those fines and possible jail time.

Copyright infringement is civil, not criminal. No jail time will happen.
Quote:
I prefer supporting the artists and staying on the legal side of the law.

Absolutely!
post #61 of 114
This is just plain greedy! If the whole CD is truly amazing listeners would buy it anyway. They just trying to get as much money out of every song possible.
Apple had me at scrolling
Reply
Apple had me at scrolling
Reply
post #62 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram View Post

Yawn. Decent, but overrated in their prime; but now definitely a has-been, band.

This is news!?

I beg to disagree - along with 35 million who have purchased the 'Dark Side of the Moon' album and many millions more that listen to & enjoy via radio, individually downloaded songs via iTunes, etc...

I suppose you think Led Zeppelin, The Beatles, The Who, Genesis, Yes (to name just a few album oriented bands) were probably overated in their prime and are now has-beens. I'm afraid all your taste is apparently limited to you mouth.

Well, I guess everyone is entitled to their own taste (no matter how poor) even you!

Rock On!
post #63 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnnyb0731 View Post

This actually makes sense for Pink Floyd as they really did care about how the songs flowed together in an album. I'd expect the songs to still be on iTunes but in an album only format

Quote:
Originally Posted by ToomeyND View Post

Simple fix, make the album one long song. Sell it for a 1.29, just like all the other songs, only this one is an hour long.

According to their stance, no one should be able to skip to the next "song" on their album anyway.

Quote:
Originally Posted by azazel- View Post

Blasphemy!

OT: sell them as album-only. Problem solved.

The issue was they were not allowed to sell it as a single album length track. Now with the iTunes album format they probably will allow it, but previously, they asked and were denied.
post #64 of 114
Why would anyone want to purchase an entire album by a no talent group like Pink Floyd? As I recall they've had zero good songs and one passable average song (the Wall) in their entire history.

They're nothing like the Beatles who had nothing but good songs.

They're in the same category with other untalented groups who've maybe had one or two good songs in their entire career (eg: Steely Dan, Grateful Dead, Moody Blues, etc.) along with a ton of garbage.

I might pay 99 cents for the wall but I wouldn't pay $1.10 for their entire collected works.
post #65 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by DCno10 View Post

To anyone that disagrees with the position of listening to/releasing only whole albums: go listen to The Dark Side of the Moon in its entirety.

Then come talk to me.

Once was enough, thanks. This isn't about artistic integrity, it's about greed.
post #66 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by davesmall View Post

Why would anyone want to purchase an entire album by a no talent group like Pink Floyd? As I recall they've had zero good songs and one passable average song (the Wall) in their entire history.

They're nothing like the Beatles who had nothing but good songs.

They're in the same category with other untalented groups who've maybe had one or two good songs in their entire career (eg: Steely Dan, Grateful Dead, Moody Blues, etc.) along with a ton of garbage.

I might pay 99 cents for the wall but I wouldn't pay $1.10 for their entire collected works.

That'll explain all the sales then!
post #67 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by grking View Post

There is no use arguing. The youth of today has never developed the listening skills to appreciate music, or true talent.

Music these days is not generally viewed as an art form, but simply as either background music or entertainment, hence the death of the (concept) album and the rise of the single that can be digested in roughly 2.5 minutes.

What a totally bone-headed thing to say, and offensive too. Maybe you want to make some generalisations about "blacks" too? Or some other group you can put a big label on and shit all over?

What's true, is that no one who truly appreciates music would ever say what you just said. So to me, you simultaneously removed any credibility you have as a critic as well.

Lots of "the youth" appreciate music and lots of todays music is fantastic, and yes "an art form."

I am old enough to remember sitting in the audience watching Pink Floyd perform "Dark Side of the Moon" (their second best album IMO), LIVE. But I still like music, so you know what? I listened to some other stuff in between then and now. Music evolves. I rarely listen to anything older than 2000 these days, even though I have owned and enjoyed music from almost every decade.

To have some old goat who still listens to Dinosaur Rock and hasn't opened his eyes since the 1970's go on about how "today's youth has no musical appreciation" is just laughable.

In case you didn't hear, the 1980's had some pretty brilliant music also, and while the 90's was perhaps not as interesting, there are hundreds of very, very, interesting groups out today that put most of the 70's to shame. There is good music in every era from "Benny Goodman" to "Bitter:Sweet" and from "Sha-Na-Na" to "Starfucker."

Open your eyes and ears and stop letting the past be your only guide to life.
post #68 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by davesmall View Post

Why would anyone want to purchase an entire album by a no talent group like Pink Floyd? As I recall they've had zero good songs and one passable average song (the Wall) in their entire history.

Mmmm. Millions of people would beg to differ.

Quote:
They're nothing like the Beatles who had nothing but good songs.

Are YOU the walrus?

Quote:
They're in the same category with other untalented groups who've maybe had one or two good songs in their entire career (eg: Steely Dan, Grateful Dead, Moody Blues, etc.) along with a ton of garbage.

You can't really be serious. I am sure you're taking the p*ss.

Quote:
I might pay 99 cents for the wall but I wouldn't pay $1.10 for their entire collected works.

telling.

EDIT: shouldn't have written this. music is a personal thing.
post #69 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaHarder View Post

[CENTER]Well...

Good thing I have their entire catalog on both vinyl and compact disc.


[/CENTER]

And of course you bought them all as single tracks.
post #70 of 114
First, why couldn't the tracks be marked and sold as "album only"? It makes no sense to just withdraw everything, sounds too hyperbolic to me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DCno10 View Post

You wouldn't read chapters 1, 9, 16, and 42 from a book without reading the entire book would you?

The problem is that creating an album as a cohesive work is not common, and I don't think it's comparable to books. For the occasional concept album, sure. Most albums are more like a collection of short stories bound into the same book. Whether it matters to read in a particular order depends on the editor.

Quote:
Originally Posted by grking View Post

vinyl is far from dead

Let's say dead in the mainstream, every day sense. There are people that do blacksmithing as a hobby too, but that doesn't mean it's widely practiced.
post #71 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by iVlad View Post

This is just plain greedy! If the whole CD is truly amazing listeners would buy it anyway. They just trying to get as much money out of every song possible.

Musicians are called artists just as painters, sculptors, and photographers are.

Few would argue that you have to buy an entire painting as opposed to some fraction of a print. I doubt Michaelangelo would've wanted to sell only the arms of a sculpture. No one would argue that the photoessays of the 'world in a day' should be cut up by region.

Shouldn't musicians be allowed the same right - to sell their latest collection of songs together instead of selling them separately.

This has nothing to do with greed - it is about the right to express yourself and to have control over your work. If you do not want to buy you do not have to.
post #72 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by alkrantz View Post

Really if the band wants the album sold as an album and not individual tracks then IMO that's their call. They did make the music after all, and providing they didn't sell the rights they can do what they want.

That being said, its a completely stupid argument. Let be honest here Pink and step in to the REAL WORLD where what ACTUALLY happens exists. People who buy the album will listen to the songs they want, when they want. If they don't want to listen to the whole album they wont, in fact a lot of people wont. Why? It's called a shuffle button.

When I see things like this I can't help but think its about money. I just have a hard time believing that PF is stupid enough to think that selling an album in it's entirety == listening to an album in it's entirety.

I couldn't disagree more. As an artist, you produce music to your vision. If people want to listen to it differently, that doesn't concern you any more. The important thing is that you presented it as you wanted to, and you appreciate the people who accept it that way.

And PF would undoubtedly make more money selling individual tracks - they could sell a hundred copies of the song "Brick In The Wall" for every entire album ("The Wall") they sell. Probably even ten thousand to one. The money is in selling singles, which is why EMI is fighting them.
post #73 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by lamewing View Post

I CAN CHOOSE to do just that. Just like I can choose to appreciate a painting by only focusing on a part of it. It is MY choice how to interpret a piece of art. If Pink Floyd considers their music to be "high art" that is fine, but they DON'T get the right to tell me how to appreciate it. If I am forced to buy an entire album just to satisfy their viewpoint then I will simply find other art to appreciate instead.

I really like one line in "Atom Heart Mother." Why can't I just buy that?
post #74 of 114
Imagine if the Lone Ranger show, age is showing, had to play the entire William Tell Overture, and not just the 4th movement. Hi Ho Silver, Away.
post #75 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by elroth View Post

I couldn't disagree more. As an artist, you produce music to your vision. If people want to listen to it differently, that doesn't concern you any more. The important thing is that you presented it as you wanted to, and you appreciate the people who accept it that way.

And PF would undoubtedly make more money selling individual tracks - they could sell a hundred copies of the song "Brick In The Wall" for every entire album ("The Wall") they sell. Probably even ten thousand to one. The money is in selling singles, which is why EMI is fighting them.

What are you disagreeing with? As I said PF can do whatever they want to do, it's their music. I completely agree with that. Thats not what's stupid. What's stupid is BELIEVING that people will listen to an album in it's entirety, because it simply isn't true. No matter how much they want it to be.

Here is an analogy that represents this: I sell coffee, but only to people who like disco. So people tell me they like disco so I will sell them coffee. in the end, this is intentional disillusionment. I don't really believe that everyone who buys my coffee likes disco, and they don't believe that I believe it. It's an exercise in futility. PF knows not everyone who buys there album will listen to it in it's entirety, they even know most people wont.

Again though, if they want to believe that somehow the integrity of the album is maintained by selling it in it's entirety only, though they may be disillusioned, thats totally their prerogative. I hope it makes them feel better. Clearly they don't need the money. Which is why a new artist will give their music away and a rich famous artist can be picky, a.k.a Metallica.
post #76 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by l008com View Post

Why is this even an issue when it comes to iTunes? There have been Album-Only songs since day one. If Pink Floyd want it so you must buy their whole album, let em? I don't see how it's an issue? It will probably mean fewer Floyd songs sold, and people who buy the whole album will still listen on shuffle anyway.

Yep. several sites are acting like the band won the right to yank their music completely from itunes and such. they didn't. Just to require 'album only' which is what we will likely see

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply

A non tech's thoughts on Apple stuff 

(She's family so I'm a little biased)

Reply
post #77 of 114
In other news, sales of Pink Floyd songs on iTunes momentarily spiked before falling over 50% due to the removal of single track downloading. Toshiba EMI's stock fell 2 points while Apple (APPL) closed at yet another all time high.

Funny how people keep accusing Apple of being the ones who take away options. All I ever hear about is content companies and artists shooting their own selves in the foot like this.

Give the morons a gun, go ahead, maybe this time they'll hit themselves somewhere vital.
"Picasso had a saying, 'Good artists copy, great artists steal.' And we've always been shameless about stealing great ideas."
Reply
"Picasso had a saying, 'Good artists copy, great artists steal.' And we've always been shameless about stealing great ideas."
Reply
post #78 of 114
If one million people want to download just one song off of a Pink Floyd album, the artists and labels should take their money and wish they come back for more and encourage more of the same behavior.

The one sure way to to encourage piracy it is to keep on destroying the ala-carte business model that has worked so well as it brings the price point down to a level nearly all can participate in.

All it take is one unhappy customer to turn them into permanent pirates.

So what if the album is a complete work?, the only reason albums exist in the first place is because of the medium designed to transfer the music to a customer.

Now that medium is individual electronic files and should be sold as such.

I sure this isn't used by other artists thinking they are going to make more by forcing albums with one or two good songs and the rest crap, because they are in for a wake up call.
post #79 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gazoobee View Post

What a totally bone-headed thing to say, and offensive too. Maybe you want to make some generalisations about "blacks" too? Or some other group you can put a big label on and shit all over?

What's true, is that no one who truly appreciates music would ever say what you just said. So to me, you simultaneously removed any credibility you have as a critic as well.

Lots of "the youth" appreciate music and lots of todays music is fantastic, and yes "an art form."

I am old enough to remember sitting in the audience watching Pink Floyd perform "Dark Side of the Moon" (their second best album IMO), LIVE. But I still like music, so you know what? I listened to some other stuff in between then and now. Music evolves. I rarely listen to anything older than 2000 these days, even though I have owned and enjoyed music from almost every decade.

To have some old goat who still listens to Dinosaur Rock and hasn't opened his eyes since the 1970's go on about how "today's youth has no musical appreciation" is just laughable.

In case you didn't hear, the 1980's had some pretty brilliant music also, and while the 90's was perhaps not as interesting, there are hundreds of very, very, interesting groups out today that put most of the 70's to shame. There is good music in every era from "Benny Goodman" to "Bitter:Sweet" and from "Sha-Na-Na" to "Starfucker."

Open your eyes and ears and stop letting the past be your only guide to life.

with all due respect, you need to read what was written, and this is not the first time you have projected your feelings on to what I have written, and not responded to what I actually wrote. First, you do understand the term "in general" do you not. The term refers to the majority, more than 50%, and the statement stands. Few youth will put on some music and sit and listen to it, without doing something else. For most, music is an addition to an activity, listening is not THE activity.

Second, I never said modern music was not an art form, I said it was not appreciated as an art form. If you cannot see the difference, so be it.

Third, you have no idea what my musical tastes are, again, you jump to invalid conclusions based on an emotional response to my post. Indeed, a few posts above, I listed several acts that I listen to on a regular basis. I also listen to classical, Miles Davis, Aretha Franklin, Bob Dylan, The Dead, Phish, String Cheese Incident, Elvis Costello amongst others. My tastes are rather eclectic.
post #80 of 114
Quote:
Originally Posted by elroth View Post

I couldn't disagree more. As an artist, you produce music to your vision. If people want to listen to it differently, that doesn't concern you any more.

They're not telling you how to listen to it. What they want is to make sure you get the entire work, not just some random bits and pieces of it. If you only liked one section of a painting, would you be arguing that the artist should allow you to buy only that section? Really, this is no different.

Quote:
And PF would undoubtedly make more money selling individual tracks - they could sell a hundred copies of the song "Brick In The Wall" for every entire album ("The Wall") they sell. Probably even ten thousand to one. The money is in selling singles, which is why EMI is fighting them.

Clearly, it's NOT about the money. Unless they've pissed it all away, I'd imagine every surviving member is a multi-millionaire.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Pink Floyd songs could be removed from iTunes after court ruling