Top music industry legal executive leaves Warner for Apple
Apple's legal team for iTunes and MobileMe services in Europe will be run by someone with a great deal of expertise on the digital music industry -- a senior vice president with Warner Music Group.
Billboard reported this week that Elliott Peters, Warner's senior VP and head of digital legal affairs, will leave the company in the next month to work at Apple. There, he will be the corporate attorney director for iTunes and Internet services, based in Luxembourg.
Peters has been with Warner since 2000, where he eventually became the company's first digital lawyer. A memo sent to Warner employees noted that Elliot "has had a hand in almost every major WMG digital deal."
Those negotiations, undoubtedly, involved Apple a great deal, as iTunes is the top music retailer in the U.S., and is expected to eclipse CD sales entirely by the spring of 2011.
Elliott was credited with his involvement in a range of "important corporate transactions," including Columbia House Music and Video Clubs, Word Entertainment, and Warner Bros. Publications. He also helped to build Warner's Digital Legal Affairs team.
Apple has been working behind the scenes in an effort to launch a cloud streaming music service that would allow customers to access their iTunes library from any connected device. It is believed that those plans have been delayed by legal hold ups with the music industry.
Billboard reported this week that Elliott Peters, Warner's senior VP and head of digital legal affairs, will leave the company in the next month to work at Apple. There, he will be the corporate attorney director for iTunes and Internet services, based in Luxembourg.
Peters has been with Warner since 2000, where he eventually became the company's first digital lawyer. A memo sent to Warner employees noted that Elliot "has had a hand in almost every major WMG digital deal."
Those negotiations, undoubtedly, involved Apple a great deal, as iTunes is the top music retailer in the U.S., and is expected to eclipse CD sales entirely by the spring of 2011.
Elliott was credited with his involvement in a range of "important corporate transactions," including Columbia House Music and Video Clubs, Word Entertainment, and Warner Bros. Publications. He also helped to build Warner's Digital Legal Affairs team.
Apple has been working behind the scenes in an effort to launch a cloud streaming music service that would allow customers to access their iTunes library from any connected device. It is believed that those plans have been delayed by legal hold ups with the music industry.
Comments
Apple's legal team for iTunes and MobileMe services in Europe will be run by someone with a great deal of expertise on the digital music industry -- a senior vice president with Warner Music Group.
.
But, but...music industry executives are morons!
No?
Apple should add the 'song store' along the lines of the app store where musicians can submit their own music and get 70%. Apple could have clear rules and conditions pertaining to audio quality and content (i.e. lyrics) and an approval process (not taste but adherence to rules).
Or does the agreement with Apple Corp prohibit this?
Someone like this should head up a new division, the Apple Song Store:
Apple should add the 'song store' along the lines of the app store where musicians can submit their own music and get 70%. Apple could have clear rules and conditions pertaining to audio quality and content (i.e. lyrics) and an approval process (not taste but adherence to rules).
Or does the agreement with Apple Corp prohibit this?
I think that the agreement with Apple Corp likely explicitly forbids this... which just means that Apple should team up with them to do it.
I think that the agreement with Apple Corp likely explicitly forbids this... which just means that Apple should team up with them to do it.
Yep, they should. Can you imagine how many bands would move from traditional labels? 70% Helloooo. It would be huge. Plus a whole new life for independent recording studios both large and small to facilitate the process for those artists not wanting to use Garage Band (although I can see many could do exactly that). I truly believe the music industry would come alive with this outlet with no hurdles in the way of talent just as the apps store has done for programmers.
I see the argument that this would piss off the labels and possibly hurt the iTune store but one could argue the same could be said about software and I don't see software companies refusing to create or distribute Mac software simply because of the soon to be apps store although this may not be a valid comparison.
Yep, they should. Can you imagine how many bands would move from traditional labels? 70% Helloooo. It would be huge. Plus a whole new life for independent recording studios both large and small to facilitate the process for those artists not wanting to use Garage Band (although I can see many could do exactly that). I truly believe the music industry would come alive with this outlet with no hurdles in the way of talent just as the apps store has done for programmers.
I think you may be on to something here. I don't think that labels would mind Apple having a place for unsigned acts - likely they are unsigned for a reason, such as a lack of blockbuster commercial potential.
Indie studios and bands could make a good living with this sort of thing. Especially if Apple got behind it big time. With the proper execution, it could revitalize regional and cult bands, and it could be the primary distribution for singer-songwriter types.
I think that the agreement with Apple Corp likely explicitly forbids this... which just means that Apple should team up with them to do it.
Why hasn't an independent label who already has access to iTunes not set up a portal for unsigned artists to publish their music to iTunes through them? Perhaps they take a 10% cut, but hey, 60% is better than 0. Then it isn't Apple doing it and they aren't violating their agreement with Apple Corps.
Yep, they should. Can you imagine how many bands would move from traditional labels? 70% Helloooo. It would be huge. Plus a whole new life for independent recording studios both large and small to facilitate the process for those artists not wanting to use Garage Band (although I can see many could do exactly that). I truly believe the music industry would come alive with this outlet with no hurdles in the way of talent just as the apps store has done for programmers.
Unsigned artists can already get their music on iTunes for around $40 through websites such as CD Baby or TuneCore. Im not sure why you think the music industry would suddenly come alive? There are already tons of bands out there making great music, but finding it is a whole other story. I dont see that allowing people to upload their Garageband "music" loops would really add much value to an already saturated music store. What it really boils down to is promotion, either in the traditional sense or self promotion on Youtube (Justin Beiber????).
But, but...music industry executives are morons!
No?
Obviously not this chap if Apple is hiring him.
And
HI STEVE-J HOW R U
Someone like this should head up a new division, the Apple Song Store:
Apple should add the 'song store' along the lines of the app store where musicians can submit their own music and get 70%. Apple could have clear rules and conditions pertaining to audio quality and content (i.e. lyrics) and an approval process (not taste but adherence to rules).
Or does the agreement with Apple Corp prohibit this?
I think that the agreement with Apple Corp likely explicitly forbids this... which just means that Apple should team up with them to do it.
I think you may be on to something here. I don't think that labels would mind Apple having a place for unsigned acts - likely they are unsigned for a reason, such as a lack of blockbuster commercial potential.
Indie studios and bands could make a good living with this sort of thing. Especially if Apple got behind it big time. With the proper execution, it could revitalize regional and cult bands, and it could be the primary distribution for singer-songwriter types.
Unsigned artists can already get their music on iTunes for around $40 through websites such as CD Baby or TuneCore. Im not sure why you think the music industry would suddenly come alive? There are already tons of bands out there making great music, but finding it is a whole other story. I dont see that allowing people to upload their Garageband "music" loops would really add much value to an already saturated music store. What it really boils down to is promotion, either in the traditional sense or self promotion on Youtube (Justin Beiber????).
I know but it isn't quite the same as having the dedicated store along the exact same lines as the apps store. I think the impact would be greater this way. Just MHO.
In an epic moment on Appleinsider... Looks like we all agree on something. Great idea.
Can I patent the idea? LOL
My ideas was born of a little experience (I stress little). I owned an 1" 8 Track studio and acted as an agent in the 1970's as a part time business and recorded local bands. I even had a few minor successes (a number one in Ireland on some chart lol). However all my trips to meet with the London studios was eye opining to say the least. What ever week I had appointments to push a band they wanted to hear something exactly like what ever was number one that particular week. When 'that number one hit' was 'Radio killed the radio star' I gave up! If something like what I suggested was there then I would have gone full time for sure.
(Matter of fact, I even mailed a letter to Apple Cupertino, with the idea of them getting together with Apple England). I suggested that they could open up Studios in the bigger cities where they could have new acts or existing have-beens, record their music for a price. Then they could offer it up on iTunes for a specific time. If it started selling something within a month, they would continue on sale. If not they would be dropped out of the store. Apple would keep their 30%. The studio could keep 20%. And the Artist would keep 50%. Not bad compared to what they get know.
As far as the idea I tried to send to Google. It was a little bit different. YouTube does not make any money for them.
They could make a separate unit as a trial run for a year or two. 'Groove Tube', (or something).
Anyone can see how popular American Idol is. And perhaps their singers are what is keeping some Labels making money.
Well with 'Groove Tube', Acts could record and place their music on there. This would cost them some money. Perhaps $500.00, (or more). Sort of a deposit. (Keep it a serious offering).
Others could join, sort of as associate Judges. They would have to agree to listen to the full song before casting their vote. (Piers Morgan can't apply). Anybody else would just be listeners.
With this, we could get the Carrie Underwoods, Chris Daughtry, etc. to be discovered long time sooner. (Can you imagine how much real talent is out there).
Also with this it could be a more collaborative thing. A High School could perhaps have their Glee Club perform their own song. Maybe even the School Band could be involved. It opens up the possibility for so many things.
With the money deposited. The Judges could determine the rating of the offering. 5% would make so much. 50% would make more. Anything above that goes straight to iTunes to make more serious money. And Google could keep a small %.
Win for Google (Money). Win for Artists (Exposure; perhaps some Money). Win for some of us
(Seeing and Hearing some serious effort by a new Taylor Swift).
Anyways. It would at least be a Little Something Different
Sweet! Hopefully his talent can only help Apple's ability to get the terms they need to make the iTunes Music Store more successful.
More successful! In what way?
Apple has been working behind the scenes in an effort to launch a cloud streaming music service that would allow customers to access their iTunes library from any connected device. It is believed that those plans have been delayed by legal hold ups with the music industry.
I think it is irresponsible journalism to state as fact, what can only properly be referred to as speculation. I don't doubt that it is accurate, but I do feel that stating things as though that have been officially substantiated when they clearly have not falls short of the duty that journalists owe their readers.
I have noticed it a lot more frequently on AI as of late, and couldn't hold my tongue any longer.
Just my .02 worth.
Its like hiring a ex congressman to be your lobbyist.
This is no different than what Google has already done:
http://techcrunch.com/2010/07/21/goo...music-service/
I have been wondering for some time when Apple would wake up and hire someone from the industry to facilitate getting deals done. While business is business, it is amazing what a handshake or a slap on the back between colleagues can do to get things moving.