mouseketter
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Sep 2004

0

11/09, 12:46pm | report spam | close Reply |
Big Mistake

If Disney and Apple can set aside the differences they have regarding Pixar then I think EMI, the reaming Beatles and/or their executors of their estates should set aside their differences as well.

iTunes is the number one legal download music store. They are quickly becoming a significant market share holder in all music sales (downloaded or store bought).

It would seem to me that if the catalog of The Beatles as well as the works of the individuals were released on iTunes that sales would be through the roof. And really what does Yoko Ono care where the sales came from. Money is money.

By not offering music on iTunes is like not offering CD's at Walmart.

trevc
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Mar 2000

0

11/09, 12:52pm | report spam | close Reply |
well...

I guess one can always resort to limewire ;-)

ZinkDifferent
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jan 2005

0

11/09, 01:13pm | report spam | close Reply |
It's Yoko

.. she doesn't understand a thing about current technology, and most likely uses a PC. She probably feels that:
- By cutting APple off, she's somehow hurting them and contributing to getting them to a settlement.
- That she'll make a mint on the ringtones (wrong).

porieux
Baninated

Joined: Mar 2001

0

11/09, 01:16pm | report spam | close Reply |
greatest hits

Oh, so we can't participate in raping Lennon's corpse? What a shame...

Last time I checked he wasn't working on any new music, unfortunately.

riverfreak
Mac Enthusiast

Joined: Aug 2001

0

11/09, 01:18pm | report spam | close Reply |
Yawn

s**** The Beatles, or what's left of 'em. What is the problem with embracing a new, legal technology? And the bizarre legal battles over Apple was just ridiculous.

Here's a better idea than buying anymore beatles CDs. Go to the library. Check out the Beatels CDs. Rip and enjoy. Then Yoko doesn't get any more money. Maybe she'll end up getting evicted from NYC.

kentuckyfried
Senior User

Joined: Jan 2002

0

11/09, 01:25pm | report spam | close Reply |
*sigh*

man, this shiet just doesn't end, does it?

Feathers
Grizzled Veteran

Joined: Oct 1999

0

11/09, 01:40pm | report spam | close Reply |
Yoko Ono

Doesn't "Yoko Ono" translate as something like "look after number one"? Nuff said!

Geobunny
Mac Elite

Joined: Oct 2000

0

11/09, 01:48pm | report spam | close Reply |
How Ironic

"I wake up to the sound of music, mother Mary comes to me,
speaking words of wisdom, let it be."

Let it be, eh? Sounds like good advice to me.

Ikon
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: May 2005

0

11/09, 02:11pm | report spam | close Reply |
iTunes store

I've three ipods, and don't care about the iTunes store.
They have too little small labels.

alephOne
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: May 2004

0

11/09, 02:20pm | report spam | close Reply |
Apple vs. Apple

Apple Records really needs to just get over itself. The lawsuit is stupid. Nobody's going to confuse the two companies. People will still buy Beatles and solo-former-Beatles songs and albums and give their hard-earned money to Michael Jackson or Yoko Ono.

To quote a few dozen people over the course of history: it's the music, stupid! People don't care about who owns what; they just want to listen to the music they like.

JohnnyFive
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Feb 2003

0

11/09, 02:24pm | report spam | close Reply |
Odd.

Didn't Apple use John and Yoko's picture on their Think Different campaign?

Bogartte
Forum Regular

Joined: Jun 2000

0

11/09, 02:37pm | report spam | close Reply |
the music business...

I suspect that the original agreement regarding the name Apple, specified that the computer company Apple, could use the name Apple, if they stayed out of the music business. The interpretation at that time, had nothing to do with downloading music, even for a fee, as it didn't exist, but specifically to do with "making music," which Apple, the computer company isn't doing...

For Apple, the Beatles company, to re-interprete the agreement, with the help of their lawyers, and stretch the wording to include the technology which wasn't even in their vocabulary at the time of the agreement, is just a breach of ethics, and probably illegal, not to mention pure BS. For Ono and McCartney, and their record company, it's the money, and for me, I could never take any of their songs, music, or words, seriously, without thinking about the money they are raking in, with complete lack of sincerity...

lazarus001
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2005

0

11/09, 03:06pm | report spam | close Reply |
Bah

So many thoughts. I like how they aimed this at the holiday season and try to tell people you're not going to be able to have any Beatles music from the iTMS for Xmas. Bah.

I've always held to the hey, if I want the whole album I'll probably get the physical disk. If I want a song or two I'll grab it from iTMS, after all it is convient too. However, if it's not on iTMS YET and I really want it, I'll just get the disk. I have to imagine, and hope, that most of the music enjoying populace have a similar way of doing things. We'll find what we want where we ant to buy it. However sometimes we have some morals/scruples/etc. Which brings me to my next point.

The more I hear about this c*** coming from whats left of the owners both old and new I have to stop and think everytime I want something from them. I like the iTMS, I like what it offers, how it offers and most definitely the platform that it was based on. I have certain beliefs and I do try to hold to them as I wonder through life. I don't shop at certain places because of who they support, I do shop at other places because perhaps they offer something special and are a local company, etc. Now when I want an older Beatles song, I find myself stopping and wondering, is it really worth it to support the current owners of this music? I don't think it's worth it anymore.

trevc
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Mar 2000

0

11/09, 03:12pm | report spam | close Reply |
re:Apple vs Apple

They don't need to get over themselves ... the courts have to lower the gavel and say ... um ... excuse me ... this is bullsh**, you've been more than compensated, but then again, I believe Apple signed something at one time so probably is binding and all that legal shtuff?

YangZone
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: May 2000

0

11/09, 04:21pm | report spam | close Reply |
EMI - Apple Corp

Apple Corp is a big entity... annual revenue or profit ('forget which?) can be in the region of $250M. They recently had their best year ever. The way to deal with this is to boycott Apple Corp products and EMI's products. This can be organized. Obviously this means making do with other versions of Beatles music etc.

iPod users are hugely numerous and can definitely punish these entities and make them see the light.

BobK
Forum Regular

Joined: Nov 2001

0

11/09, 04:40pm | report spam | close Reply |
F-Apple(the Record Label)

I get all my Beatles/Lennon off LimeWire.

testudo
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

0

11/09, 04:56pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: the music business

I suspect that the original agreement regarding the name Apple, specified that the computer company Apple, could use the name Apple, if they stayed out of the music business. The interpretation at that time, had nothing to do with downloading music, even for a fee, as it didn't exist, but specifically to do with "making music," which Apple, the computer company isn't doing...

Gotta love people spouting off opinions and saying basically "I have no idea what I'm talking about, but my guess is this is the contract, and as such I'll make my opinions on my guesses"!

You say apple doesn't make music, but they produce equipment that does, which can easily be argued as being the same thing. Also, Apple is distributing music (albeit not their own). Apple Records also distributes music. How you can argue "They're completely different!" is just you're "How dare anyone think Apple is doing wrong!" bias.

Oh, and everyone who's whining that its about the money. Well, guess what. Its ALWAYS about the money. Why the h*** do you think people choose music as a career. To make money (oh, and to meet chicks). If it weren't about the money, well, then, all music would be free, concerts would be free, etc. And just because they have money doesn't mean they should just let what they feel is a trademark infringement pass.

Finally, and most important, why isn't anyone commenting on this statement:

Lennon's greatest hits album "Working Class Hero"--to be released on December 5th--will not be available to iTunes shoppers this holiday season,

Who exactly buys albums from the iTMS for gifts? "Oh, that's so touching, a CD-R with 'Working Class Hero' scribbled on the top!" Yeah, classy! Just don't be cheap, and buy the freakin' overpriced CD. (Keeping in mind that since it is the Beatles and Lennon and all, I'm sure that if it were on the iTMS, it would be overpriced there, too, like Springstein's music is).

Dark Goob
Forum Regular

Joined: Aug 2001

0

11/09, 05:09pm | report spam | close Reply |
Jeez, just buy the CD...

iTunes music store is crappy, I don't know why people like it so much. They don't put any indie stuff on there. Course of Empire is not on there. New Model Army is not on there (OK, one album, but that's it). They don't have Lords of the New Church. They have hardly any decent punk music from the last 20 years.

My suggestion is, go support your local record store. Buy a CD!

-=DG=-

GORDYmac
Mac Elite

Joined: Dec 1999

0

11/09, 07:28pm | report spam | close Reply |
Just ask Michael Jackson

He owns most of the Beatles' stuff anyway.

briandunning
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jun 2003

0

11/09, 07:31pm | report spam | close Reply |
Apple is wrong

iTunes clearly owes much (or all) of its success to its theft of the Apple Corps trademark. Nobody would have bought any music online unless they were duped into thinking that the Beatles were behind it.

No doubt Apple Computer would have called it iBeatles instead of iTunes if they'd only thought of it.

Bogartte
Forum Regular

Joined: Jun 2000

0

11/09, 08:24pm | report spam | close Reply |
Thanks, testi...

Thanks for loving me, testi!! You may be right, what do I know? I'm only guessing, true, but it is obvious the time's have changed, so have the words, and so has the means. When Apple Computer "maintains that iTunes lies beyond the scope of the restrictions previously agreed upon," obviously there is something to my guess, huh?

legacyb4
Mac Elite

Joined: May 2001

0

11/09, 09:08pm | report spam | close Reply |
Lame

All this furor over rehashed released music so that Yoko can earn more money?

LouZer
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Nov 2000

0

11/09, 10:15pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: thanks, testi

When Apple Computer "maintains that iTunes lies beyond the scope of the restrictions previously agreed upon," obviously there is something to my guess, huh?

Yeah, and we all know Apple tells the truth 100% of the time, never spinning anything in their favor. Meanwhile, on the other side of the fence, we know that Apple Corps is twisting language to just try to steal money. [For the mentally challenged, this is called sarcasm. What do you expect Apple to say? "Yes, we've broken the agreement, but we don't want to pay all those old fogies!"]

And who does care, anyway? I mean, the only people who would be interested in this over-rated musician's collection are Lennon's fans, who theoretically already have all this music. The problem that the labels aren't seeing (or are trying to prevent from happening) is that with music downloads, you can just get the music you want, and with MP3s, iPods, etc, I can make a playlist from all my albums that matches what's on a "greatest hits" album, burn my own CD for the car if that's what I want, and thus making all these money grab 'hits' collections pointless. Esp. since half of the songs on these albums tend to be 'hits' only in the artist's minds.

LouZer
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Nov 2000

0

11/09, 10:16pm | report spam | close Reply |
Oh, sorry

My mistake, I forgot that some people will still buy these "Hits" CDs. You know, those same people who whine about how the iTMS doesn't give you the liner notes and such. Like people with lives really spend their time reading about the exciting history behind some lame song.

Show More Comments

Login Here

toggle

Network Headlines

05/25	Sotheby to auction Jobs Atari memo,...
05/25	Apple hiring new chip engineers for...
05/25	Third-gen iPad coming to Philippines...
05/25	Apple to integrate Baidu search into...
05/24	Apple submits surprise optical stylus...

Show All

05/25	Sotheby to auction Jobs Atari memo,...
05/25	Apple to integrate Baidu search into...
05/25	Google picks up webOS Enyo team, Open...
05/24	Apple submits surprise optical stylus...
05/24	Yahoo releases Axis 'visual search'...

Show All

05/25	Sotheby to auction Jobs Atari memo,...
05/23	Google launches redesigned Search app...
05/22	Leaked next-gen iPod touch part hints...
05/22	Hulu Plus updates with iPad Retina...
05/22	TiVo Stream to push TV to iPhones,...

Show All

03/02	Save $330 on refurb. 15.4-inch, 2.4GHz...
03/01	Pre-owned 8GB iPod touch 2G, drops...
02/29	$150 off Nikon Coolpix S80 Compact...
02/28	Plantronics BackBeat 903 Bluetooth...
02/27	Refurb. Seagate 1.5TB GoFlex Portable...

Show All

toggle

EMI bans Lennon classics on iTunes

updated 12:10 pm EST, Wed November 9, 2005

EMI bans Lennon on iTunes

Big Mistake

well...

It's Yoko

greatest hits

Yawn

sigh

Yoko Ono

How Ironic

iTunes store

Apple vs. Apple

Odd.

the music business...

Bah

re:Apple vs Apple

EMI - Apple Corp

F-Apple(the Record Label)

Re: the music business

Jeez, just buy the CD...

Just ask Michael Jackson

Apple is wrong

Thanks, testi...

Lame

Re: thanks, testi

Oh, sorry

Login Here

Register for our weekly email newsletter:

Connect tools:

Subscribe

to our RSS

Follow us

on Twitter

10 Most Read

10 Most Discussed

MacNN Marketplace

EMI bans Lennon classics on iTunes

updated 12:10 pm EST, Wed November 9, 2005

EMI bans Lennon on iTunes

Related Articles

Recent Articles

Big Mistake

well...

It's Yoko

greatest hits

Yawn

*sigh*

Yoko Ono

How Ironic

iTunes store

Apple vs. Apple

Odd.

the music business...

Bah

re:Apple vs Apple

EMI - Apple Corp

F-Apple(the Record Label)

Re: the music business

Jeez, just buy the CD...

Just ask Michael Jackson

Apple is wrong

Thanks, testi...

Lame

Re: thanks, testi

Oh, sorry

Login Here

Register for our weekly email newsletter:

Connect tools:

Subscribe

to our RSS

Follow us

on Twitter

10 Most Read

10 Most Discussed

MacNN Marketplace

sigh