toggle

AAPL Stock: 493.42 ( 0 )

MacNN News

The Beatles sing more than just iTunes

updated 06:30 pm EST, Mon February 12, 2007

Beatles not just on iTunes

Apple may soon be offering songs and albums by The Beatles, but not as an exclusive arrangement with iTunes. Contradicting several previously published rumors, Roger Friedman of Fox News reports that the popular pop band's songs and albums will be released via several different digital music services. Speaking with Neil Aspinall, head of The Beatles' label Apple Corps, Friedman learned that all 13 Beatles LPs are being remastered with the expectation of an online release "soon" and that none of them are limited to iTunes or any other specific music store. The report also claims that the recent Apple brand name agreement between the two firms includes a royalty agreement for every iTunes song or iPod bought, guaranteeing revenue for the music label regardless of perceived losses due to brand confusion.

Speculation about an agreement with The Beatles (and its Apple Corps label) first started when Steve Jobs showed several images of the iPhone with artwork from The Beatles during his Macworld Expo keynote in early January. The companies did not, however, announce their Apple brand name agreement until early February--before which speculation began on an announcement during the Super Bowl and on a rumored exclusive iTunes promo expected for Valentines Day.

Apple did not hold an event during the Super Bowl, but announced the agreement the day following the event.

by MacNN Staff

(16)

TAGS :

industry, digital music/video

Share the Article

Facebook Twitter Delious Slash Dot Digg

toggle

Comments

dashiel
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Sep 2001

0

02/12, 06:46pm | report spam | close Reply |
jebus that's a sweet deal

for apple (corp) and a bad deal for us, it's basically what that a-hole head of warner bros wanted, now the door has been opened. grrr.

climacs
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Sep 2001

0

02/12, 06:51pm | report spam | close Reply |
it's universal

it's the head of universal who's trying to shake down Apple and geez-us, now what is Jobs going to tell them? If he's paying Apple Corps a cut from every iPod sold, he can certainly do the same for the majors.

climacs
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Sep 2001

0

02/12, 06:52pm | report spam | close Reply |
consider the source

faux news.

danviento
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Dec 2005

0

02/12, 07:42pm | report spam | close Reply |
those albums & songs

Could just have easily been imported off of the CD's or even off of vinyl. Album art is a simple matter of dropping in an image found on google imafe search or scanning in an album cover. Seriously people, I'd like some more facts with speculation, please.

bigpoppa206
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jun 2003

0

02/12, 07:47pm | report spam | close Reply |
Apple's deal

with sharing a profit on the iPod with Apple Corp is NOT the same thing as sharing profits with the music industry on using their products. One is over the use of the name and in this case its probably a fair deal, and one is over music. Pay attention people!

nat
Junior Member

Joined: Mar 2002

0

02/12, 09:19pm | report spam | close Reply |
uh

it's fox news. i'll wait for a reputable news organization to say it.

chotty
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jan 2003

0

02/12, 10:26pm | report spam | close Reply |
Yeah...

I won't believe it until a "reputable" news org covers the story, like MSNBC or the NYT... umm, on second thought...

LouZer
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Nov 2000

0

02/12, 11:07pm | report spam | close Reply |
Re: sweet deal

for apple (corp) and a bad deal for us, it's basically what that a-hole head of warner bros wanted, now the door has been opened. grrr.

How is it a bad deal for 'us'? Is it somehow s******* us?

And keep in mind that Apple's recent deal with Apple Corps gives Apple Inc. complete rights to the Apple name, with some licensing going back to the Corps. This would seem to be part of the payment for all that. To think this is anything like paying for 'stealing music' is completely missing the point.

dimmer
Mac Enthusiast

Joined: Feb 2006

0

02/13, 01:15am | report spam | close Reply |
Doubtful

Nope, sorry, Apple will not pay someone else for every iPod sold. I think the guy saying so must have been a little too much "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds". He's thinking Zune, if he's thinking at all.

Peter Bonte
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

0

02/13, 02:31am | report spam | close Reply |
Beatles iPod

Yellow Submarine edition with special box etc. :)

fsauer1
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2002

0

02/13, 08:04am | report spam | close Reply |
Don't Believe It

Apple doesn't "share" profits with anyone, esp on iPods. I could see a deal on a branded Beatles iPod for a limited period of time, as that would be trackable.

And with Apple's marketshare, exclusivity would be nice, but isn't that big a deal for Apple, as long as they can sell Beatles tunes.

Typical Fox reporting!

jhorvatic
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Apr 2005

0

02/13, 09:44am | report spam | close Reply |
iTunes will get the major

iTunes will get the majority of the business because 80% of downloads will go on iPods. Let the rest squander for the measely 20% left overs.

Inkling
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Jul 2006

0

02/13, 11:38am | report spam | close Reply |
Celebrity Class Hypocrisy

I noted with amusement this: "The report also claims that the recent Apple brand name agreement between the two firms includes a royalty agreement for every iTunes song or iPod bought, guaranteeing revenue for the music label regardless of perceived losses due to brand confusion."

Remember the Beattle's song "Imagine," where all the ills of the world are eliminated by destroying religions, nations and private property. Forgetting the perhaps 2 billion people you'd have to murder to even begin to apply its principles, it's beyond a doubt the most hypocritical song ever penned by human hand. No one clings to "their property" like the Beattles. Take away your religion--fine. Take away even a penny of their millions--no.

What that song said was intended for all the little peasants (us) who don't deserve rights and must pay this Apple Corps tax on our iPods. For the Celebrity Class, the rules are different. Property as copyright and trademark exists, even at the ugly, greedy level of getting money for doing nothing and for an alleged confusion in the marketplace that doesn't exist. Greed, greed, greed.

This also why Celebrities posture about global warming, while flitting about in private jets and living in climate-controlled 20,000+ square foot homes. Living a low CO2 footprint is for peasants. So what if these Celebrities generate more CO2 in a year than much of the world's population generates in their lifetime.

No cruel ruler in ancient India, living in luxury while those under him starved, was more vain, egotistical and greedy than the members of this Celebrity Class.

At least the remaining British Beattles, to my knowledge, aren't as phony as Ireland's Bono. They may evade every tax they can and exploit every possible source of income, but they don't also lecture governments about feeding the poor with other people's taxes. In hypocrisy, it's hard to beat Bono.

testudo
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

0

02/13, 12:04pm | report spam | close Reply |
Big deal

Wow, they go to all the trouble to remaster the albums, and then give them to digital download services so they can compress them up and make them sound just like they used to...

notehead
Fresh-Faced Recruit

Joined: Aug 2001

0

02/13, 03:12pm | report spam | close Reply |
perhaps not, testudo

Your point is a good one - it would seem silly to remaster a recording just to apply compression to it. But this should be obvious to everyone, and hopefully the remastering is being done with the specific intention of optimizing the material for this process. On the other hand, we have certainly reached a point where every time a company re-releases a recording, they "remaster" it. The term has become a buzzword that causes the consumer to think that it MUST be better than before. And that's simply nonsense.

On the issue of iPod profit-sharing, I think this is simply another revenue opportunity for Apple. By offering 50 cents or a buck to a partner for every iPod sold, Apple would get a helluva committed partner. The question is: has the market reached a point where Apple needs to play this card, or will they continue to make more money by keeping all iPod sales to themselves? It seems that they do NOT need to share iPod sales since the labels are starving and need to get the best possible deal with Apple for online music that they can get right away.

Person Man
Professional Poster

Joined: Jun 2001

0

02/13, 03:24pm | report spam | close Reply |
Hey inkling...

Get your music knowledge straight.

"Imagine" is NOT a Beatles song. It was written by John Lennon and sung by John Lennon as a SOLO artist. Not the Beatles.

Show More Comments

Login Here

toggle

Network Headlines

02/13	Samsung unwraps Galaxy Tab 2 with Android...
02/13	Rumor: Pegatron squeezed by Apple on...
02/12	Google said building huge facilities...
02/10	Apple sells scaled-back 13-inch MacBook...
02/10	Apple sues Motorola over alleged Qualcomm...

Show All

02/13	Samsung unwraps Galaxy Tab 2 with Android...
02/13	Rumor: Pegatron squeezed by Apple on...
02/13	HTC Endeavor leaked ROM reveals Tegra...
02/13	PlayStation Vita OS may spread to other...
02/12	Google said building huge facilities...

Show All

02/09	Apple explores environment-sensitive...
02/08	Paul McCartney to perform live concert...
02/06	Microsoft prepping Dynamics CRM apps...
02/03	iBooks Author update clarifies EULA...
02/02	Bug in iTunes Match may switch 'explicit...

Show All

02/10	$380 off refurbished 2.8GHz Mac Pro...
02/09	iHome Dual Alarm Clock for Apple iPod...
02/08	Save 69% on SanDisk Cruzer 32GB USB...
02/07	Refurb. Olympus 14MP Digital Camera...
02/06	17-inch, 2.2GHz MacBook Pro, cut to...

Show All

toggle

The Beatles sing more than just iTunes

updated 06:30 pm EST, Mon February 12, 2007

Beatles not just on iTunes

jebus that's a sweet deal

it's universal

consider the source

those albums & songs

Apple's deal

uh

Yeah...

Re: sweet deal

Doubtful

Beatles iPod

Don't Believe It

iTunes will get the major

Celebrity Class Hypocrisy

Big deal

perhaps not, testudo

Hey inkling...

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

The Beatles sing more than just iTunes

updated 06:30 pm EST, Mon February 12, 2007

Beatles not just on iTunes

Related Articles

Recent Articles

jebus that's a sweet deal

it's universal

consider the source

those albums & songs

Apple's deal

uh

Yeah...

Re: sweet deal

Doubtful

Beatles iPod

Don't Believe It

iTunes will get the major

Celebrity Class Hypocrisy

Big deal

perhaps not, testudo

Hey inkling...

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