Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

“AppleMusic will pay artist for streaming during customer’s free trial period”

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 145 posts

Re: “AppleMusic will pay artist for streaming during customer’s free trial period”

#91

Post by calibwam »

jen729w wrote: post #20
socrates1998 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, this analysis just seems right. They sign a deal with TS, get her to be "outraged" then Apple does a 180 and then says it will pay the artists. TS looks good and Apple gets a shitload of free press for their new music service. I feel dumber everyday I don't see this stuff happening.

You don't really think this is the case, do you? It's like any conspiracy theory: think about how many people would have to be "in it" to make it work. Then think, what are the chances of none of them, ever letting anything slip. To anyone. Ever. The chances are almost zero. People talk. The damage - to Swift, to Apple - it's just too large. Therefore, this is not what you think it is. There is no deeper story here.…

I don't think Swift is so influential as everybody thinks. Apple turned so fast after her open letter, it makes me think they were already thinking about it. Not that Swifts letter was meaningless, but stuff usually takes a bit longer in the corporate world.

Re: “AppleMusic will pay artist for streaming during customer’s free trial period”

#92

Post by golergka »

jen729w wrote: post #20
socrates1998 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow, this analysis just seems right. They sign a deal with TS, get her to be "outraged" then Apple does a 180 and then says it will pay the artists. TS looks good and Apple gets a shitload of free press for their new music service. I feel dumber everyday I don't see this stuff happening.

You don't really think this is the case, do you? It's like any conspiracy theory: think about how many people would have to be "in it" to make it work. Then think, what are the chances of none of them, ever letting anything slip. To anyone. Ever. The chances are almost zero. People talk. The damage - to Swift, to Apple - it's just too large. Therefore, this is not what you think it is. There is no deeper story here.…

Oh, they could easily let things slip: but it's not the kind of information that would create a sensation from an anonymous tip. If someone would go on record and tell the journalists the whole story, yes — but Apple is known to successfully avoid this kind of disclosure. And if some PR person would tell it a friend over a drink in a bar, I don't believe that this could potentially explode.

Re: “AppleMusic will pay artist for streaming during customer’s free trial period”

#93

Post by M4v3R »

JohnTHaller wrote: post #34
batmanthehorse wrote: post #15

First sentence of her letter was "I write this to explain why I’ll be holding back my album, 1989, from the new streaming service, Apple Music." So now, she needs to allow it on Apple Music or she'll look like a jerk. Apple will have this album that no other streaming service has, and they got a ton of press for it. Probably worked out pretty well for them.

If she's smart, she'll still hold out. 1/2 a cent per play won't add up to anywhere near as much as her sales are. Correction: That estimate was based on the average Spotify rate over the last few years. Apple has now said that the rate will be different during the trial and isn't being made public.

It might add to an even bigger number, now, that she had so much publicity from her open letter and tweets. People will listen to her album just out of curiosity now.

Re: “AppleMusic will pay artist for streaming during customer’s free trial period”

#94

Post by tomkwok »

geofft wrote: post #53
ratfacemcgee wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

but did Apple ever say that? posting text from an article doesn't mean jack shit. Show me where Apple themselves said "We will not pay you during the free trial". the ONLY thing i can find is: http://beggars.com/group/pressrelease/90/with-regards-to-app... which says: > In many ways the deal structure is very progressive, but unfortunately it was created without reference to us, or as far as we know any independents.…

Why is it plausible that Recode and every other news site and Taylor Swift all made this up (or that someone fed this to them) and that Apple did not correct them but instead acted as if they are making a change in policy? I mean, it's also possible that Eddy Cue's Twitter account was hacked by Taylor Swift, well known infosec thought leader that she is. Why is nobody reporting on the real story here??

Because the intelligent minds of us, humans, are wired to create and somewhat believe in conspiracy theories.

And here's the 'real story' you're talking about[0]. [laugh] It seems like Infosec Taylor Swift has changed her(his) Twitter handle...

[0]: https://twitter.com/SwiftOnSecurity/status/61261084849478451...

Re: “AppleMusic will pay artist for streaming during customer’s free trial period”

#95

Post by madeofpalk »

jrs99 wrote: post #59
madeofpalk wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, over at /r/apple it became 'fact' that it would actually be illegal for Apple to have a three month free trial due to anti-competitive behaviour - it could be seen as them using their large cash resources to dump or flood the market to gain an unfair advantage. Wearing my altruistic tin-foil-hat, I would argue that Apple wanted to pay indie artists all along (because it's art and they respect them!), but were a…

that they wouldn't pay artists initially is pretty bad press, to me, at least. Even with the 180, apple doesn't look good here, in my opinion. swift has a lot of influence on her fans. It's not a minor threat that apple is facing.

Oh I agree. Occam's razor gets in the way when I try and consider that this giant conspiracy happened.

Re: “AppleMusic will pay artist for streaming during customer’s free trial period”

#96

Post by laumars »

MCRed wrote: post #69
JohnTHaller wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right. But the trial could be significantly lower. They're not saying. It's worth nothing that by "higher rates" we are talking about a hundredth of a cent per stream.

Yep. And it appears that the Artists, like the music industry, really don't get that things have changed. Hey, I'm old school. I can identify with them. I like to buy my music. I don't get subscriptions where if I stop playing I can't listen to anything.... but I find myself listening to podcasts-- 2 hour long podcast of EDM. My favorite one has several YEARS of podcasts and despite skipping months at a time I'm stil…

EDM follows a different model that has existed since the birth of house et al DJs: demo sets are given away free because:

1) most producers are DJs as well, and often (or at least historically) singles were used as much to promote the DJ as they were a revenue stream.

2) the few producers that weren't DJs were also engineers for other DJs who weren't very good in the studio. Thus they made their money engineering

3) most clubbers wouldn't be interested in a 7 minute unmixed single of their favourite club track. So the single sales generally go to other DJs (and there's thousands of DJs who never make it out of their bedroom - so the DJ scene is considerably bigger than it sounds).

The modern EDM scene is likely a little different these days since many EDM DJs are now also pop artists. But I think they still essentially follow this model.

Re: “AppleMusic will pay artist for streaming during customer’s free trial period”

#97

Post by h_o »

Apple must have calculated that her influence potential is greater than the value of if the free streaming wasn't paying the artists.

I mean, she has almost 60M followers on twitter - ~20% of the US' total population.

Now Apple can recalculate and pay them barely just enough to have their original projections corrected. The free press is great - and they'll probably even gain from it!

Re: “AppleMusic will pay artist for streaming during customer’s free trial period”

#98

Post by jevgeni »

xname wrote: post #49

"Music is art, and art is important and rare. Important, rare things are valuable. Valuable things should be paid for. It's my opinion that music should not be free" - What a capitalist.

Is everyone's art equally valuable?

Re: “AppleMusic will pay artist for streaming during customer’s free trial period”

#99

Post by pluma »

culturestate wrote: post #61
JohnTHaller wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right. But the trial could be significantly lower. They're not saying. It's worth nothing that by "higher rates" we are talking about a hundredth of a cent per stream.

I'm sure the new trial rates will be broadly similar to Spotify's per-stream rates, which average[1] between $0.006 and $0.0084. Apple Music has no advertising; you can't pay a percentage of revenue that doesn't exist. 1. http://www.spotifyartists.com/spotify-explained/

They're licensing the music. Whether they make any revenue or not doesn't matter.

You can't hand out other people's stuff for free and then refuse to pay anything because you didn't make any money from it. And I'm saying that as someone who thinks the current copyright system is incredibly broken.

Re: “AppleMusic will pay artist for streaming during customer’s free trial period”

#100

Post by lips »

jrs99 wrote: post #59
madeofpalk wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, over at /r/apple it became 'fact' that it would actually be illegal for Apple to have a three month free trial due to anti-competitive behaviour - it could be seen as them using their large cash resources to dump or flood the market to gain an unfair advantage. Wearing my altruistic tin-foil-hat, I would argue that Apple wanted to pay indie artists all along (because it's art and they respect them!), but were a…

that they wouldn't pay artists initially is pretty bad press, to me, at least. Even with the 180, apple doesn't look good here, in my opinion. swift has a lot of influence on her fans. It's not a minor threat that apple is facing.

And yet I bet people wouldn't consider Ian Mackaye to be "whining."
Post reply on HN