Extended iTunes song samples stalled due to licensing issues
Apple's plan to announce extended iTunes song samples on Sept. 1 met with late opposition from publishers, according to a new report.
Greg Sandoval of CNET reported Tuesday that a rollout of longer iTunes samples may have been blocked by the National Music Publishers Association. In an earlier report published just days before Apple's Sept. 1 event, Sandoval predicted Apple would bump iTunes song samples from 30 seconds to 60 seconds, but the announcement failed to materialize at the event.
According to Sandoval, Apple's agreements with just the four major record companies to provide longer song samples weren't enough. When both the NMPA's general counsel and chief executive learned of Apple's plan by reading CNET's report, they contacted the Cupertino, Calif., company with their objections.
"We believe that a license is necessary, and conversations must occur before song samples are extended," NMPA general counsel Jay Rosenthal told CNET last Wednesday.
Several publishers have felt that they're not getting their fair share from iTunes, as they believe Apple should pay performance rights for song samples. Apple had countered with the argument that a 30-second sample is promotional, but its push for longer samples has reopened the debate.
Hanna Pantle, a spokeswoman for BMI, which collects royalties for songwriters and publishers, said the organization is currently in "active negotiations" with Apple about the length of song samples.
Music industry insiders say Apple "tried to rush a deal through" without securing agreements from all the necessary parties.
As the "number one music community in the world" with over 160 million users in 23 countries, iTunes certainly has leverage with the labels and publishers. But, it may face stiffer competition this fall as Google readies its own online music store.
Greg Sandoval of CNET reported Tuesday that a rollout of longer iTunes samples may have been blocked by the National Music Publishers Association. In an earlier report published just days before Apple's Sept. 1 event, Sandoval predicted Apple would bump iTunes song samples from 30 seconds to 60 seconds, but the announcement failed to materialize at the event.
According to Sandoval, Apple's agreements with just the four major record companies to provide longer song samples weren't enough. When both the NMPA's general counsel and chief executive learned of Apple's plan by reading CNET's report, they contacted the Cupertino, Calif., company with their objections.
"We believe that a license is necessary, and conversations must occur before song samples are extended," NMPA general counsel Jay Rosenthal told CNET last Wednesday.
Several publishers have felt that they're not getting their fair share from iTunes, as they believe Apple should pay performance rights for song samples. Apple had countered with the argument that a 30-second sample is promotional, but its push for longer samples has reopened the debate.
Hanna Pantle, a spokeswoman for BMI, which collects royalties for songwriters and publishers, said the organization is currently in "active negotiations" with Apple about the length of song samples.
Music industry insiders say Apple "tried to rush a deal through" without securing agreements from all the necessary parties.
As the "number one music community in the world" with over 160 million users in 23 countries, iTunes certainly has leverage with the labels and publishers. But, it may face stiffer competition this fall as Google readies its own online music store.
Comments
What a sad joke of an industry. In a few more years, these guys/gals will be all gone. Finished.
In a few more years, these guys/gals will be all gone. Finished.
Really?
Just where are they going?
Do you ever have any knowledge about the topics you're posting on?
Or do you just reflexively post anything that pops into your head?
Bring on the longer samples, music publishers. It's really a no-brainer. 30 second song preview is like a movie trailer--a tiny sampling and what you actually get could be quite different when you see (listen to) the whole thing.
Really?
Just where are they going?
Do you ever have any knowledge about the topics you're posting on?
Or do you just reflexively post anything that pops into your head?
Well, when there is a change in the technology and an impacted profession refuses to adapt, or isn't needed anymore, it disappear, as did the lamplighters when we shifted from gas to electricity for lightening.
Digital music sales are a tiny, tiny slice of what the music companies were making at their peak. So, yeah, you can see how they'd want to stand in the way of something that might sell more music.
I swear to god, these companies are nakedly suicidal.
Really?
Just where are they going?
Do you ever have any knowledge about the topics you're posting on?
Or do you just reflexively post anything that pops into your head?
Really. Here's an excerpt from Wikipedia on the recent fate of industry:
"In the 21st century, consumers spent far less money on recorded music than they had in 1990s, in all formats. Total revenues for CDs, vinyl, cassettes and digital downloads in the world dropped 25% from $38.6 billion in 1999 to $27.5 billion in 2008..... Same revenues in the U.S. dropped from a high of $14.6 billion in 1999 to $9 billion in 2008. ...... the downward trend is expected to continue for the foreseeable future —Forrester Research predicts that by 2013, revenues in USA may reach as low as $9.2 billion. This dramatic decline in revenue has caused large-scale layoffs inside the industry, driven retailers (such as Tower Records) out of business and forced record companies, record producers, studios, recording engineers and musicians to seek new business models."
I have no idea where they're going, maybe join the ranks of the unemployed? (Did this post hit home?).
Music publishers are stupid.
What a sad joke of an industry. In a few more years, these guys/gals will be all gone. Finished.
Bring on the longer samples, music publishers. It's really a no-brainer. 30 second song preview is like a movie trailer--a tiny sampling and what you actually get could be quite different when you see (listen to) the whole thing.
I swear to god, these companies are nakedly suicidal.
What they said.
It is hard to believe that they are anything but a bunch of blowhards trying desperately to turn back the clock. Times have changed and they can't/won't see it...
I hope radio returns to support it. I liked it better when I was a punk. small halls, small labels, bands fighting it out for out attention at college radio stations. Great for us, crappy for them.
I have never purchased a song based on hearing 30 seconds of it on iTunes, or any other online seller.
Digital music sales are a tiny, tiny slice of what the music companies were making at their peak.
Call me cynical, but that massive share of CD sales has got to be because they issued almost all music only on complete CDs at the time, with very few CD singles. If you wanted even one lone track, you had to buy the whole CD, which artificially inflated the market. Essentially, they often had $16 songs. Part of the reason for the small digital market is because people can buy songs individually now at sane prices. Another part is undeniably the piracy angle.
In my case, a third reason is that today's music just does nothing for me and I basically own all the songs I like. I have several thousand songs from three centuries, from classical through the 1980s, but the acts nowadays don't seem to have much creativity or talent. Lady Gaga is a warmed-over Madonna who gets attention by acting even more outrageous on and off stage. Hip hop all sounds the same. Rap all sounds like crap.
Dear Music Industry:
I used to buy hundreds of dollars worth of actual CDs and song downloads every year - _after_ I listened to them at my local Virgin Records store (I bought CDs there about half the time, downloads from iTunes). I'd spend an average of 3 hours a month just browsing music at stores - and this led me to buying. Rarely did I buy a song on the basis of a 30 second clip on iTunes, because it just wasn't enough to gauge if I would want to listen to it more than once.
Now Virgin and Tower have closed, and the only way I get to hear new music is on Pandora (which actually very rarely plays new music) and from a few podcasts, which are not "monetized" in any way. I'm losing touch with new music and getting less and less interested in popular music as a result. Being able to listen to a longer clip, if not the whole song, on line before I buy is maybe the _only_ possible way I would start buying more music. I'm not alone.
Best regards,
A Former Good Customer
Really?
Just where are they going?
Do you ever have any knowledge about the topics you're posting on?
Or do you just reflexively post anything that pops into your head?
Why would you be so aggressive. It was just a little comment. Would you talk to someone like that face to face.
Call me cynical, but that massive share of CD sales has got to be because they issued almost all music only on complete CDs at the time, with very few CD singles. If you wanted even one lone track, you had to buy the whole CD, which artificially inflated the market. Essentially, they often had $16 songs. Part of the reason for the small digital market is because people can buy songs individually now at sane prices. Another part is undeniably the piracy angle.
Are you sure about your statement regarding CD singles, as I have an absolute tonne of them that I have purchased over the years.
And to be truthful, there is a very large digital market for music, CDs are digital and have been available for ages, did you mean digital download market?
Call me cynical, but that massive share of CD sales has got to be because they issued almost all music only on complete CDs at the time, with very few CD singles. If you wanted even one lone track, you had to buy the whole CD, which artificially inflated the market. Essentially, they often had $16 songs. Part of the reason for the small digital market is because people can buy songs individually now at sane prices. Another part is undeniably the piracy angle.
In my case, a third reason is that today's music just does nothing for me and I basically own all the songs I like. I have several thousand songs from three centuries, from classical through the 1980s, but the acts nowadays don't seem to have much creativity or talent. Lady Gaga is a warmed-over Madonna who gets attention by acting even more outrageous on and off stage. Hip hop all sounds the same. Rap all sounds like crap.
Ah that's known as getting old. My dad and his dad used to say the same thing to me in my youth. Now I find myself repeating it to my kids.
What a sad joke of an industry. In a few more years, these guys/gals will be all gone. Finished.
Really?
Just where are they going?
Do you ever have any knowledge about the topics you're posting on?
Or do you just reflexively post anything that pops into your head?
It wouldn't surprise me at all if they became extinct, what with their unprogressive attitudes - always 2 or 3 steps behind the requirements of their market and users, all of whom they seem to regard as thieves and opportunists.
Remember that Apple almost single-handedly had to drag the Record Labels and Movie Industry "kicking and screaming" into embracing digital downloads, and in return they started to favour Amazon and other online shops with DRM-free downloads and longer samples, all in an effort to play the "Kingmaker" role and artificially game the market to their advantage.
One of these bonehead moves will be a step too far, you'll see...