Posted on 06/21/2015 11:11:24 AM PDT by dennisw
The superstar said Sunday that she will not allow her album '1989' on Apple's new streaming service
She explained on Tumblr that this was because the tech giant will not pay for songs streamed during free trial period
These are the echoed sentiments of every artist, writer and producer in my social circles who are afraid to speak up publicly because we admire and respect Apple so much.'
Swift's '1989' was by far the top-selling US album last year and remains high on charts - insisted that she was speaking for all artists and not just herself.
Swift found the move 'disappointing and completely unlike the historically generous company' Last year, she withdrew her music from Spotify which offers a free tier that is supported by advertisements
Pop superstar Taylor Swift said on Sunday she will not allow her latest album on Apple's new streaming service.
The move by Swift, one of the most outspoken critics of streaming leader Spotify, delivers an early blow to Apple's bid to dominate the booming sector.
Swift said that the tech giant, which is launching the new Apple Music on June 30, will not pay for songs streamed during a free three-month trial period for new subscribers.
'This is about the new artist or band that has just released their first single and will not be paid for its success. This is about the young songwriter who just got his or her first cut and thought that the royalties from that would get them out of debt.
'This is about the producer who works tirelessly to innovate and create, just like the innovators and creators at Apple are pioneering in their field…but will not get paid for a quarter of a year’s worth of plays on his or her songs.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
TALK ABOUT CHEAP AND ultra GREEDY!!!
This is why I refuse to buy anything Apple related.
>> in my social circles who are afraid to speak up publicly because we admire and respect Apple so much
Afraid to speak up because they admire and respect?? Prog Celebutards really don’t know the meaning of “afraid”, “admire”, or “respect” do they?
She’s absolutely right, the decision to offer a free period is theirs, not hers. Hope others join her boycott.
Apple, headed by a gay, cheats artists.
Well I think that they should be paid but that is between the musicians and the company. I will continue to support Apple only because they have the best products. Until that changes then perhaps I will go with another company. My family is exclusively Apple in all electronics. The only thing I can’t bring myself to get and nobody in my family is interested at the moment is the Apple Watch. I don’t wear a watch myself so I can’t ever see myself getting one. My wife wears a watch but likes the one she wears. A couple kids wear a watch but have so far shown zero interest in having an Apple Watch. My youngest will not get an Apple Watch. We don’t even allow them cell phones until they are 10 much to the dismay of the ones who are not ten yet.......Every single one of the kids hated that rule and after 4 kids, my wife and I have NOT relented on that rule. I think it is crazy for a kid to have a cell phone under 10 but some look at us like we are horrible because it can be used to keep kids safe which is true but again 10 for our family. What other families do with their kids is their business.
Good for her
However for all our just on the left side of the perspective protesting these things
all their work should be held in common if there true socialist
so they have no right to complain about you taking it for free.
in a communist socialist world
there is no property
there is no property rights
there is no copyright
there is no intellectual property rights
I don’t care how much you like Crapple products, in the larger scheme of things Crapple is a bad actor.
Nothing is free. Pay up, Apple.
Correction. Nothing is free except Salvation.
John 3:16
I have Samsung — phone, tablet and “Smart TV” — and I'm happy with all three.
Just being good socialists - willing to give away other people’s stuff as long as it doesn’t cost THEM anything.
Why not moan and groan about the millionaire artists? Apple is giving a free trial period for folks to see if they like it. The artists do they same thing with snippets and previews and other ‘promotional’ stuff.
Sorry Taylor Swift that you can’t earn even more money for a few weeks
or not....It is not as if she won’t be making money hand over fist from Apple.
Rich liberal celebs feuding with a rich liberal corporation. Glad to see these tools eating each other.
Apple is a stupid busybody. I never buy Apple anything but someone asked me figure out and show them how an 8GB Apple iPod mp3 player works. I was shocked that I had to install stinkin iTunes on me computer to load some tunes on the Crapple mp3 player.
I have a few Sanasa mp3 players and they are simple and straightforward. No software needed to load some songs on it. Just drag and drop from hard drive to Sansa mp3 player
An observation:
I can always listen to free music. But if I want to listen to the music I want to hear when I want to hear it and where I want to hear it, I have to pay. If somebody thinks they’ve come up with a different scheme that satisfies the needs of all the interests involved, I’d be interested to hear it. But if you’re leaving someone out of the pay-scheme, they’re going to stop participating. End of the day, no one — no matter how clever, respected, admired, liberal, progressive, or utopian-minded — no one can defy the fundamentals of economics.
Performers of Taylor Swift's stature can still make some money off of selling music, perhaps, but smaller groups never do - and she is being disingenuous in saying so. Small bands have to make money the way they always have - from live performances.
Once the paid service kicks in, Apple will pay 72% of revenue, not net, gross, to the artists — minus what the record companies keep.
Historically, the money paid by free services is very tiny in comparison.
Apple is trying to get people hooked on their new service which would increase future revenue for the artists.
Would you give away three months of your labor for free?
Sure, Swift can afford to give hers away, She's worth $200 million and climbing. But why should she?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.