Mikey Campbell
In a blog post on Wednesday, TuneCore President Jim Price announced that he received over $10,000 for the first two months of participation in Apple's iTunes Match, a fee-based cloud service that allows users to stream or download any song in their collection from the iTunes library regardless of its origin.
Price explains that the more times a song is re-downloaded or streamed, the copyright holders of that track get paid.
"iMatch (sic) monetizes the existing behavior of the consumer for copyright holders and artists," Price writes. "Consumers don’t need to do anything new—they just need to listen to their pre-existing music."
When a user signs up for Apple's $25 per year music matching service, their computer's catalog is scanned and any songs that are available on iTunes are then made available for streaming or re-download through iCloud on demand. If a song in a user's library is not in iTunes, subscribers have the option to upload that track to iCloud for streaming and syncing.
"A person has a song on her computer hard drive. She clicks on the song and plays it. No one is getting paid," Price says. "The same person pays iTunes $25 for iMatch. She now clicks on the same song and plays it through her iMatch service. Copyright holders get paid. Same action, same song, one makes money for the copyright holder, and one does not. This is found money that the copyright holders would never have gotten otherwise."
TuneCore President Jeff Price.
Apple's iTunes Match debuted in the U.S. in November, 2011, and was followed by an international rollout in December. As of January, the service has been activated in a total of 37 countries.
Charles Martin
Malcolm Owen
William Gallagher
Christine McKee
Wesley Hilliard
36 Comments
As the first iTunes Match royalties trickle in, online music distribution company TuneCore says that the service created money "out of thin air" as it monetizes music whether pirated or not.
In a blog post on Wednesday, TuneCore President Jim Price announced that he received over $10,000 for the first two months of participation in Apple's iTunes Match, a fee-based cloud service that allows users to stream or download any song in their collection from the iTunes library regardless of its origin.
Price explains that the more times a song is re-downloaded or streamed, the copyright holders of that track get paid.
"iMatch (sic) monetizes the existing behavior of the consumer for copyright holders and artists," Price writes. "Consumers don?t need to do anything new*?they just need to listen to their pre-existing music."
When a user signs up for Apple's $25 per year music matching service, their computer's catalog is scanned and any songs that are available on iTunes are then made available for streaming or re-download through iCloud on demand. If a song in a user's library is not in iTunes, subscribers have the option to upload that track to iCloud for streaming and syncing.
"A person has a song on her computer hard drive. She clicks on the song and plays it. No one is getting paid," Price says. "The same person pays iTunes $25 for iMatch. She now clicks on the same song and plays it through her iMatch service. Copyright holders get paid. Same action, same song, one makes money for the copyright holder, and one does not. This is found money that the copyright holders would never have gotten otherwise."
TuneCore President Jeff Price.Apple's iTunes Match debuted in the U.S. in November, 2011, and was followed by an international rollout in December. As of January, the service has been activated in a total of 37 countries.
[ View article on AppleInsider ]
Now if they would just take the money and shut up.
Now if they would just take the money and shut up.
Why? You think he revealed an unknown side effect of iTunes Match?
Now if they would just take the money and shut up.
I wonder if I'm the only one who has a problem with this. What's really happening is that people are paying multiple times to listen to music they already own (assuming it's not pirated). When it comes to paying Apple for that service, that's fine. After all, you're paying for convenience and to help Apple defer the costs of providing the service. At least, that's what it's supposed to be. It turns out that what's actually happening is copyright owners are getting paid EVERY time someone listens to the music they've already purchased.
Think about that. You buy a track for $1.39. You listen to that track 100 times in a year through the cloud. Why the hell does the copyright owner get money for that? You bought a license to listen to that track whenever you want to. And now, just because you're paying Apple for the ability to listen to that track in the cloud, the copyright holder gets another cut?
Thoughts?
I wonder if I'm the only one who has a problem with this. What's really happening is that people are paying multiple times to listen to music they already own (assuming it's not pirated). When it comes to paying Apple for that service, that's fine. After all, you're paying for convenience and to help Apple defer the costs of providing the service. At least, that's what it's supposed to be. It turns out that what's actually happening is copyright owners are getting paid EVERY time someone listens to the music they've already purchased.
Think about that. You buy a track for $1.39. You listen to that track 100 times in a year through the cloud. Why the hell does the copyright owner get money for that? You bought a license to listen to that track whenever you want to. And now, just because you're paying Apple for the ability to listen to that track in the cloud, the copyright holder gets another cut?
Thoughts?
From the story yes they are, but Apple pays that you dont. Its the cost of the service that you have already paid for.
I wonder if I'm the only one who has a problem with this. What's really happening is that people are paying multiple times to listen to music they already own (assuming it's not pirated). When it comes to paying Apple for that service, that's fine. After all, you're paying for convenience and to help Apple defer the costs of providing the service. At least, that's what it's supposed to be. It turns out that what's actually happening is copyright owners are getting paid EVERY time someone listens to the music they've already purchased.
Think about that. You buy a track for $1.39. You listen to that track 100 times in a year through the cloud. Why the hell does the copyright owner get money for that? You bought a license to listen to that track whenever you want to. And now, just because you're paying Apple for the ability to listen to that track in the cloud, the copyright holder gets another cut?
Thoughts?
why do i think you sounds like consumer have to pay for all that times? cos consumers have to pay only once when they buy a song and apple is paying to the copyright owners for that many times not consumer…