Top
70°

iPhone/iPod to lose Universal Music Group?

Universal Music Group of Vivendi last week sent notification to Apple indicating that it would not renew its contract to sell music on Apple's iTunes store. The move comes after much negotiation between UMG and Apple. Unfortunately, music industry experts say that the grip that Apple holds on online music sales is what's discouraging UMG.

Instead the company said it will allow Apple to sell its music on a month-to-month basis with the possibility of pulling the plug altogether unless Apple comes to certain agreements on pricing and other terms.

Read Full Story >>
dailytech.com
The story is too old to be commented.
MK_Red3737d ago (Edited 3737d ago )

Are they crazy? First they become the first and the only major studio that doesn;t support Blu-ray and now iTunes?
UPDATE: Its not totally abandoning iTunes I see. Still I think they shouldn't do this to Apple.
The Lawyer representing such artists as Beyonce and Black Eyed Peas warned against going up against Apple directly.

Mr_Kuwabara3737d ago

What's next for them? Revive Betamax?

dikturbo3737d ago

I read on the original post a good comment about having different pricing levels based on the bit rate. This is an excellent compromise to the standard 128k download. If you want the 160, 192 or even 320k rate then simply pay a reasonable increase. Record company, artist and provider will all profit.

Charging more for 'hits' seems to be UMG's objection. Increase the fee for hits and reduce the overall price to download the entire album. You might sell more than just the hits.

BIadestarX3736d ago

Before it was apple or nothing. now there are other alternatives i.e. Zune and others... now apple have to be the one negotiating and not the other way around. I know mac lover will hate and complain... but this can only mean good news for the consumer and companies... the price of music can drop or you may get deals like montly subscription like zune users are getting where the pay a flat fee for get all you want for a low price.

PS360WII3736d ago

That's silly. So we have Universal mad at Apple for not charging enough for the songs...

This is like MS getting mad at Epic for wanting to give the maps out and not charge them...

BIadestarX3736d ago

well... this may sound odd to you... but company producing their own intellectual property should have the right to charge wherever they want and we should be able to evaluate if the content is worth it and vote with our wallets. Who named apple the lord of the industry to dictate how much a company should charge for the content they create.
Obviously none of us want to pay more... but you don't sense anything wrong with apple being the one controlling how much you pay? this goes both ways.... if a company wants to charge less.. they can't.

"This is like MS getting mad at Epic for wanting to give the maps out and not charge them... " I think you got it all the other way around....

MS would be apple in this situation and Epic would be Universal...

is like you are saying.... MS is mad because Epic wants to make money of their games.

PS360WII3736d ago

oops what I was getting at was Epic is more like Apple and MS is more like Universal for wanting to charge more.

I understand that the company wants to make more for said IP. We all know how upset every music studio was when iTunes suddenly became the hugh thing it is now. When they first signed the contract they said 'psh yea charge .99 for a song you won't be doing much business anyway' then iTunes, as I said, became this hugh phenomenon and all the studio's said 'hey I want more money'
This is capitalism at it's finest. I'm not against it by any means that's how they make money by selling it for more than it's worth. I just thought it was funny the excuse they gave verses what they really want to say.