Looks like Jobs will be back on the news calling the record companies greedy.
Jobs is one of the best negotiators alive today. There is no way that he will give them any percentage of iPod sales.
Jobs knows for a fact that Universal can't afford to pull out of iTunes. The revenue loss for them would be too great. He also knows that he cannot afford to pay a percentage to Universal as that will set precedent and all the rest of the record companies will want a piece of the action.
Universal will never get a percentage of iPod sales.
I also don't have a single illegal song on my iPod or my computer for that matter. The great majority were ripped from CDs which I own, the rest were bought from iTunes or are from up and coming artists who freely give their music away in hopes of building awareness.
Music sharing actually benefits the record companies and the artists. For instance, many times a CD a friend burned me a copy of has led me to discover a band, buy more of their CDs and go to a concert. All because I was able to listen to something for free. This is the strategy used by friends I have in bands who play shows for free, then give away CDs which they paid to produce to people who go to their shows.
In fact, I think I should be compensated by the record companies for all the CDs I have bought because I knew it had one song I liked, which after listening to the entire album, I realized that I just paid $15 for the one good song which I could have copied from the radio while everything else on the album was crap. (This doesn't bother me too much now, but it made me really mad when I was 12 and spent what was a large portion of my discretionary income at the time for something that turned out to be junk, but hey if they want to call me a thief, I will do the same to them.)
Steve Jobs should take a playbook from the Godfather when dealing with Universal.
Jobs to Universal: "You can have my answer now of you'd like... 'Nothing'. ...I offer 'Nothing'. And I fully expect that from now on, Universal will pay Apple $1.00... no... $2.00 for every iPod we sell."
What a big cocksucking prick that Morris is. Saying that an iPod is a repository for stolen music and "they know it."
Fuck you, asshole.
I paid for every fucking song on my iPod, not to mention having to pay for a whole CD worth of crap to get to one good song.
It's the shit your company pumps out to us that has caused the proliferation of stolen music, you smug cocksucker.
If you put out a decent product that had the same return policies as, let's see, a car, then maybe we wouldn't be so hesitant to drop money on your sorry-ass industry.
Morris, you prick. I hope you end up driving a Pinto due to the degeneration of your company's outdated business model.
Is Ford going to start asking for a share of the groceries I haul in the trunk?
I'm not entirely sure that that's analogous. It's more like shops seeking royalties from coat makers as that's what shoplifters use to conceal items they are stealing.
Let's just hope the Zune fails, and for MS to tell Universal that their imposed limitations hinder good design. But then again given how much MS is bending backwards to please big media and screw the unwitting consumer, I doubt this will happen.
If Apples ends up paying $1 per iPod, as a 'music theft tax', then stuffing it full of stolen music should be legal. I think this really sends the wrong message.
I am still trying to work out the differences betwen big media and the mafia.
Well, it's like 3 cents per megabyte. So I am PAYING for it... sort of. It ends up costing around a dollar or two for a whole album.
They are legal for Russians through a loophole in Russian law which seemed to be intended to allow for radio stations over cable infrastructure, not the sale of copyrighted files. I don't believe for a second that it's legal outside Russia, they simply left that responsibility up to the buyer.
I'm not entirely sure that that's analogous. It's more like shops seeking royalties from coat makers as that's what shoplifters use to conceal items they are stealing.
True. I'm sure lots of people store their pirated songs on their hard drives, and on other media as well. Hell, Universal's got tons of targets to go after for royalties.
True. I'm sure lots of people store their pirated songs on their hard drives, and on other media as well. Hell, Universal's got tons of targets to go after for royalties.
Next up, homebuilders and automakers. Those bastards KNOW that people steal stuff and then put it in their cars and houses. In fact Scientific Fact magazine states that over 99% of stolen goods are stored in houses or cars. Universal needs recompense!!
Next up, homebuilders and automakers. Those bastards KNOW that people steal stuff and then put it in their cars and houses. In fact Scientific Fact magazine states that over 99% of stolen goods are stored in houses or cars. Universal needs recompense!!
Better buy Vivendi stock; If they capitalize on all these royalty opportunities, they're profits are going to go through the roof. Hell, they could stop signing talented artists and just focus on gathering royalties. Oh wait, they've already done that.
Next they will be going to the CD, DVD and VHS player manufacturers to ask for a cut because, no doubt, someone WILL be playing pirated content on those players.
Next up, homebuilders and automakers. Those bastards KNOW that people steal stuff and then put it in their cars and houses. In fact Scientific Fact magazine states that over 99% of stolen goods are stored in houses or cars. Universal needs recompense!!
Fair enough man, half our paychecks should go out to the conglomerates. It's not their fault our houses are just jampacked with stuff we've stolen from them.
Now that Universal has accused everyone that owns an iPod of stealing and let it be known that they themselves are stealing, since we know that they're not paying artists a royalty for every zune sold, let me be the first to ask the big question.
Why should Universal get any money at all?
Artists have their own studios, do their own tours, book their own gigs, and ultimately have to pay for all promotional funding out of their share of any collected royalties. Universal used to control access to musicians through payola to radio stations and mtv, but now most artists are discovered through online friend networks, radio is in decline and mtv fixes cars up nice and shiny and runs contrived teenage Jerry Springer shows.
Musicians create the music. Apple distributes the music to the public at a very reasonable price.
For myself as a musician and businessman, I see no need for anyone else in this equation.
As the price of music production continues to decrease and distribution becomes basically free, the need for Universal (music anyway) continues to diminish.
Now that Universal has accused everyone that owns an iPod of stealing and let it be known that they themselves are stealing, since we know that they're not paying artists a royalty for every zune sold, let me be the first to ask the big question.
Why should Universal get any money at all?
Artists have their own studios, do their own tours, book their own gigs, and ultimately have to pay for all promotional funding out of their share of any collected royalties. Universal used to control access to musicians through payola to radio stations and mtv, but now most artists are discovered through online friend networks, radio is in decline and mtv fixes cars up nice and shiny and runs contrived teenage Jerry Springer shows.
Musicians create the music. Apple distributes the music to the public at a very reasonable price.
For myself as a musician and businessman, I see no need for anyone else in this equation.
As the price of music production continues to decrease and distribution becomes basically free, the need for Universal (music anyway) continues to diminish.
First off it is nice to see the shoe on the other foot with regard Microsoft. It is clear that MS is weak and is in no position to negotiate. For all of us who have dealt with MS in the past, this is better then a cold beer.
It is also obvious that MS is used to imposing rather then negotiating agreements and this lack of experience will trip them up more and more as we move beyond their reach.
Finally, as for Apple having to accept similar terms, Steve should tell Universal to kiss the Pods' collective derriere.
Comments
Jobs is one of the best negotiators alive today. There is no way that he will give them any percentage of iPod sales.
Jobs knows for a fact that Universal can't afford to pull out of iTunes. The revenue loss for them would be too great. He also knows that he cannot afford to pay a percentage to Universal as that will set precedent and all the rest of the record companies will want a piece of the action.
Universal will never get a percentage of iPod sales.
I also don't have a single illegal song on my iPod or my computer for that matter. The great majority were ripped from CDs which I own, the rest were bought from iTunes or are from up and coming artists who freely give their music away in hopes of building awareness.
Music sharing actually benefits the record companies and the artists. For instance, many times a CD a friend burned me a copy of has led me to discover a band, buy more of their CDs and go to a concert. All because I was able to listen to something for free. This is the strategy used by friends I have in bands who play shows for free, then give away CDs which they paid to produce to people who go to their shows.
In fact, I think I should be compensated by the record companies for all the CDs I have bought because I knew it had one song I liked, which after listening to the entire album, I realized that I just paid $15 for the one good song which I could have copied from the radio while everything else on the album was crap. (This doesn't bother me too much now, but it made me really mad when I was 12 and spent what was a large portion of my discretionary income at the time for something that turned out to be junk, but hey if they want to call me a thief, I will do the same to them.)
Jobs to Universal: "You can have my answer now of you'd like... 'Nothing'. ...I offer 'Nothing'. And I fully expect that from now on, Universal will pay Apple $1.00... no... $2.00 for every iPod we sell."
That's how to deal with them.
SJ: roiiiight. *repeatedly pushing button to open trap door*
Fuck you, asshole.
I paid for every fucking song on my iPod, not to mention having to pay for a whole CD worth of crap to get to one good song.
It's the shit your company pumps out to us that has caused the proliferation of stolen music, you smug cocksucker.
If you put out a decent product that had the same return policies as, let's see, a car, then maybe we wouldn't be so hesitant to drop money on your sorry-ass industry.
Morris, you prick. I hope you end up driving a Pinto due to the degeneration of your company's outdated business model.
UMG is worse than Hitler! And Saddam! Combined!
At least they're not BROWN like PoO!11
Is Ford going to start asking for a share of the groceries I haul in the trunk?
I'm not entirely sure that that's analogous. It's more like shops seeking royalties from coat makers as that's what shoplifters use to conceal items they are stealing.
If Apples ends up paying $1 per iPod, as a 'music theft tax', then stuffing it full of stolen music should be legal. I think this really sends the wrong message.
I am still trying to work out the differences betwen big media and the mafia.
Well, it's like 3 cents per megabyte. So I am PAYING for it... sort of. It ends up costing around a dollar or two for a whole album.
They are legal for Russians through a loophole in Russian law which seemed to be intended to allow for radio stations over cable infrastructure, not the sale of copyrighted files. I don't believe for a second that it's legal outside Russia, they simply left that responsibility up to the buyer.
I'm not entirely sure that that's analogous. It's more like shops seeking royalties from coat makers as that's what shoplifters use to conceal items they are stealing.
True. I'm sure lots of people store their pirated songs on their hard drives, and on other media as well. Hell, Universal's got tons of targets to go after for royalties.
True. I'm sure lots of people store their pirated songs on their hard drives, and on other media as well. Hell, Universal's got tons of targets to go after for royalties.
Next up, homebuilders and automakers. Those bastards KNOW that people steal stuff and then put it in their cars and houses. In fact Scientific Fact magazine states that over 99% of stolen goods are stored in houses or cars. Universal needs recompense!!
Next up, homebuilders and automakers. Those bastards KNOW that people steal stuff and then put it in their cars and houses. In fact Scientific Fact magazine states that over 99% of stolen goods are stored in houses or cars. Universal needs recompense!!
Better buy Vivendi stock; If they capitalize on all these royalty opportunities, they're profits are going to go through the roof. Hell, they could stop signing talented artists and just focus on gathering royalties. Oh wait, they've already done that.
Next up, homebuilders and automakers. Those bastards KNOW that people steal stuff and then put it in their cars and houses. In fact Scientific Fact magazine states that over 99% of stolen goods are stored in houses or cars. Universal needs recompense!!
Fair enough man, half our paychecks should go out to the conglomerates. It's not their fault our houses are just jampacked with stuff we've stolen from them.
They need to head us off at the pass.
Why should Universal get any money at all?
Artists have their own studios, do their own tours, book their own gigs, and ultimately have to pay for all promotional funding out of their share of any collected royalties. Universal used to control access to musicians through payola to radio stations and mtv, but now most artists are discovered through online friend networks, radio is in decline and mtv fixes cars up nice and shiny and runs contrived teenage Jerry Springer shows.
Musicians create the music. Apple distributes the music to the public at a very reasonable price.
For myself as a musician and businessman, I see no need for anyone else in this equation.
As the price of music production continues to decrease and distribution becomes basically free, the need for Universal (music anyway) continues to diminish.
Why should Universal get any money at all?
Artists have their own studios, do their own tours, book their own gigs, and ultimately have to pay for all promotional funding out of their share of any collected royalties. Universal used to control access to musicians through payola to radio stations and mtv, but now most artists are discovered through online friend networks, radio is in decline and mtv fixes cars up nice and shiny and runs contrived teenage Jerry Springer shows.
Musicians create the music. Apple distributes the music to the public at a very reasonable price.
For myself as a musician and businessman, I see no need for anyone else in this equation.
As the price of music production continues to decrease and distribution becomes basically free, the need for Universal (music anyway) continues to diminish.
It is also obvious that MS is used to imposing rather then negotiating agreements and this lack of experience will trip them up more and more as we move beyond their reach.
Finally, as for Apple having to accept similar terms, Steve should tell Universal to kiss the Pods' collective derriere.