Apple's planned Internet radio service held up by talks with Sony

Posted:
in iPod + iTunes + AppleTV edited January 2014
A Pandora-like streaming music service from Apple reportedly remains in limbo after talks with Sony hit what has been called a "last-minute snag."

The details come from "sources close to the situation" who spoke with the New York Post. They said that Sony/ATV, the world's largest music publisher, couldn't reach an agreement wih Apple on a per-song rights fee.

Such rights are usually a fraction of a cent per stream, but Sony/ATV was allegedly seeking a higher royalty rate from Apple.

But Apple is seeking more flexible licensing than the deals that the current dominant Internet radio service, Pandora, has inked with record labels. Apple's licenses would allow users to play a selected artist more times than Pandora, and would allow the company to point people to the iTunes Store to generate music sales.

"While Pandora serves up songs based on algorithms, Apple's talks with the labels involves an element of promotion based on what music labels are pushing in any one month, sources said," the Post reported.

iTunes


Apple's apparent Internet radio plans were first reported earlier this month by The Wall Street Journal. It was revealed that Apple is looking to create a streaming radio service to rival current offerings like Pandora.

The new radio service from Apple is expected to focus on virtual stations to play music on a Web browser or through dedicated applications on iOS devices. Advertisements from Apple's iAd platform are expected to be incorporated into the service in exchange for free user access.
«13

Comments

  • Reply 1 of 45
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,283member


    Wasn't Pandora one of those big highlight apps, introduced at one of the Apple keynotes? Personally I don't think there's any such thing as a long-term Apple applications partner. I believe at some point Apple will develop their own version of any popular feature rather than depend on any "partners". It's in their DNA to control their platform as tightly as it's makes sense to do. Pandora shouldn't be surprised.


     


    EDIT: I missed that the Apple service is expected to be ad-supported. Will users have to agree to be served targeted ads in the TOS? It will be interesting to see how it's accepted if that happesn. Personally I signed up for Pandora One, paying a yearly fee to avoid ads.

  • Reply 2 of 45
    Flame on Sony!
  • Reply 3 of 45
    apple ][apple ][ Posts: 8,432member


    Why can't Apple be more reasonable and reach an agreement with Sony? Why does Apple have to be so stubborn and arrogant?


     


    Why do Apple users have to be such fanboys?


     


    I was just about to buy an iPhone 5, but now, with no internet radio service, this is the final straw, and I'm gonna have to go with a Samsung Galaxy S III, instead.


     


    And believe me, when I tell you that I am no Apple hater. I've been using Apple's products since 1971, and I have 13 Apple desktops and 9 Apple laptops at home. Steve Jobs wouldn't have let this happen. 

  • Reply 4 of 45
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,283member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post


    Why can't Apple be more reasonable and reach an agreement with Sony? Why does Apple have to be so stubborn and arrogant?


     


    Why do Apple users have to be such fanboys?


     


    I was just about to buy an iPhone 5, but now, with no internet radio service, this is the final straw, and I'm gonna have to go with a Samsung Galaxy S III, instead.


     


    And believe me, when I tell you that I am no Apple hater. I've been using Apple's products since 1971, and I have 13 Apple desktops and 9 Apple laptops at home. Steve Jobs wouldn't have let this happen. 



    LOL!!


     


    /s  /s  /s /s


    :)

  • Reply 5 of 45


    I'm sorry, but I just don't get the purpose of this. I prefer to own what I pay for, I guess. 


     


    Yeah, Pandora, yeah, whatever the other one is, we already have the radio in iTunes. Hundreds upon hundreds of stations. And they're free. Why would I use this thing?

  • Reply 6 of 45

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


    I'm sorry, but I just don't get the purpose of this. I prefer to own what I pay for, I guess. 


     


    Yeah, Pandora, yeah, whatever the other one is, we already have the radio in iTunes. Hundreds upon hundreds of stations. And they're free. Why would I use this thing?



     


    Effectively being able to 'genius' any of the songs you have or listened to, and build a 'radio station' around that genius query from any song in the iTunes store (not just your library).   Think of being able to call a radio station and say "Can you play 3 hours of songs that pair well with Muddy Waters"


     


    I'd pay $25 a year for that. (and from Apple's standpoint, having a 'buy now' button when a particular gem is played). 

  • Reply 7 of 45
    gatorguygatorguy Posts: 20,283member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by TheOtherGeoff View Post


     


    Effectively being able to 'genius' any of the songs you have or listened to, and build a 'radio station' around that genius query from any song in the iTunes store (not just your library).   Think of being able to call a radio station and say "Can you play 3 hours of songs that pair well with Muddy Waters"


     


    I'd pay $25 a year for that. (and from Apple's standpoint, having a 'buy now' button when a particular gem is played). 



    "The new radio service from Apple is expected to focus on virtual stations to play music on a Web browser or through dedicated applications on iOS devices. Advertisements from Apple's iAd platform are expected to be incorporated into the service in exchange for free user access."

  • Reply 8 of 45
    I'm sorry, but I just don't get the purpose of this. I prefer to own what I pay for, I guess. 

    Yeah, Pandora, yeah, whatever the other one is, we already have the radio in iTunes. Hundreds upon hundreds of stations. And they're free. Why would I use this thing?

    Because Apple would have made it better- made you see what you never thought you needed before.
    But now they can't.
    And you won't know what it is. Neither will I. (sad face)
  • Reply 9 of 45


    Originally Posted by iSheldon View Post

    But now they can't.


     


    Right, Apple has always been stopped by the record industry. They've never innovated anything there.

  • Reply 10 of 45
    Right, Apple has always been stopped by the record industry. They've never innovated anything there.

    And how exactly can you innovate streaming music without the rights to that music therefore nothing to stream?
  • Reply 11 of 45


    Originally Posted by iSheldon View Post

    And how exactly can you innovate streaming music without the rights to that music therefore nothing to stream?


     


    By leaving those that won't come to the table in the dust until they realize how much they're losing and inevitably cave, just like Apple has done in the past.

  • Reply 12 of 45
    I'm sorry, but I just don't get the purpose of this. I prefer to own what I pay for, I guess. 

    Yeah, Pandora, yeah, whatever the other one is, we already have the radio in iTunes. Hundreds upon hundreds of stations. And they're free. Why would I use this thing?

    Pandora is a pretty fantastic service, quite unlike anything you've described above.
    It is worth giving it a shot if only to discover why it is different.

    I personally like to control my own music, but I've discovered a lot of fantastic music through Pandora.
  • Reply 13 of 45
    macrulezmacrulez Posts: 2,455member


    deleted

  • Reply 14 of 45



    #next_pages_container { width: 5px; hight: 5px; position: absolute; top: -100px; left: -100px; z-index: 2147483647 !important; }
    Ah, yes. Sony. Along with Nintendo, they need to wake up and smell the coffee.


     


    Your days are numbered.


     


     
  • Reply 15 of 45
    gazoobeegazoobee Posts: 3,754member
    You're really just confusing things by referring to this as "Internet radio" which is already a thing, has been for years, and is not this.

    Apple has never, ever done internet radio in a way in which it's actually useable by the consumer even though it's technically been a feature of iTunes for years. I would absolutely love it if they would do an Internet radio app that was actually useful as at the moment we have to rely on apps from the stations themselves which all kind of suck so far.

    This sounds more like a streaming music subscription service, but "free" because it's actually loaded with ads an promotional material. That is not "Internet Radio," or anything close to it.

    The closest model to this service would actually be AM radio from the early 1960's.
  • Reply 16 of 45

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Gatorguy View Post


    Wasn't Pandora one of those big highlight apps, introduced at one of the Apple keynotes? Personally I don't think there's any such thing as a long-term Apple applications partner. I believe at some point Apple will develop their own version of any popular feature rather than depend on any "partners". It's in their DNA to control their platform as tightly as it's makes sense to do. Pandora shouldn't be surprised.


     



     


    What's funny, is when this started, Steve suggested the opposite. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=RnkXa3eTV88


     


     


    On topic, Spotify and Pandora have this pretty well covered. I'll no doubt check out Apple's offering, I'm sure it'll integrate perfectly and be easier, but it does sort of beg the question of why?

  • Reply 17 of 45
    sflocalsflocal Posts: 4,498member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by iSheldon View Post





    And how exactly can you innovate streaming music without the rights to that music therefore nothing to stream?


     


    Quote:

    Originally Posted by Tallest Skil View Post


     


    By leaving those that won't come to the table in the dust until they realize how much they're losing and inevitably cave, just like Apple has done in the past.





    Isn't it a chuckle when trolls try spinning their iHating propaganda with complete disregard to history?

  • Reply 18 of 45


    Originally Posted by sflocal View Post

    Isn't it a chuckle when trolls try spinning their iHating propaganda with complete disregard to history?


     


    Indeed. It's worse, though, when history starts to corroborate what they're saying, but as a failing on their part in a different way.

  • Reply 19 of 45
    I'd be all for a Spotify type service with access to the whole iTunes library. I haven't bought a song on iTunes in months because of Spotify, but there are still a handful of songs/artists missing.
  • Reply 20 of 45
    gazoobeegazoobee Posts: 3,754member

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by thataveragejoe View Post


     


    ...  On topic, Spotify and Pandora have this pretty well covered. I'll no doubt check out Apple's offering, I'm sure it'll integrate perfectly and be easier, but it does sort of beg the question of why?



     


    Why is the easiest question to answer of all.  Streaming music services are not actually as popular with consumers as those that promote them would have you believe, but there is a significant value for the music labels like Sony.  


     


    Anyone who is in the media business needs to have a streaming service as part of it's offerings because streaming music services are primarily promotional tools for the labels.  That's why they exist and why Apple should probably have one as part of it's offerings.  

Sign In or Register to comment.