McCartney: Talks to get Beatles on iTunes stalled
Talks to make The Beatles' catalog available on Apple's iTunes have "stalled," according to Paul McCartney.
Apparently the impasse is between the band's representatives and record label EMI, McCartney told the Associated Press in London on Monday. EMI, the smallest of the four top recording companies can't close a deal with iTunes or any new music formats without the authorization of the Beatles: McCartney, Ringo Starr, and the estates of the late George Harrison and John Lennon.
McCartney made the comments at an event to kickoff his new album, Electric Arguments, the AP reported.
"The last word I got back was it's stalled at the whole moment, the whole process," McCartney said. "I really hope it will happen because I think it should."
Apple Corps has long declined to allow Beatles music to be offered over the Web and things looked bleakest after Apple Corps sued Apple over a trademark dispute. The case was resolved last year.
An EMI representative told CNET News late Monday that it hopes to have an agreement soon.
"We have been working very hard to secure an agreement with Apple Corps to make The Beatles' legendary recording catalog available to fans in digital form," An EMI spokesperson. "Unfortunately the various parties involved have so far been unable to reach agreement, but we really hope that everyone can make progress soon."
Greg Sandoval covers media and digital entertainment for CNET News. He is a former reporter for The Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times. E-mail Greg, or follow him on Twitter at http://twitter.com/sandoCNET.
Thank you! I come from that era, when the Beatles were the "Fab Four." Their music was okay, but most of it was not great, in my opinion, and there were better musical artists around at that time. They were pop at best and got worse when they got on drugs, they were just in the right place at the right time.
Gotta run and eat supper while my guitar gently weeps.
The remasters the albums have been in the works for far too long. As long as they will be released within the next year...or two...or three, I'll be patient.
Moto
Right, the Beatles were pop music, and then stoner music.
I am a fan of classical, jazz, and progressive rock primarily and have little tolerance for most pop. All the same, I am a Beatles fan. If you take the time to listen to the music, even much of it from their heavy drug using days is actually not too poorly written and contains plenty of musical sensibility.
Although I think iTunes should be able to sell the Beatles catalog, I also think that the sound quality would be done another disservice by getting compressed in a lossy format. For listening to music in a digital format I buy compact discs.
Oh, wait, comment on the topic. Right.
Why don't Paul and Ringo and the rest of the Apple Corps get a clue and let Apple sell their music. What might be lost to piracy is nothing compared to what they lose by not being on iTunes.
Me? I'll buy used Beatles CDs on Amazon until they wise up I suppose.
Just because current law doesn't give you the right to steal music doesn't make it insane. In fact, your desire to own it for nothing rather makes you greedy and unappreciative. You are NOT entitled to the creative work of others simply because you are too cheap to purchase it.
As to the quality of the Beatles' catalog, it speaks for itself. The fact that the group owns a very large number of the top songs ever recorded and enjoys more worldwide recognition than any band before or since trumps any adolescent assessment of their musical abilities, and the sense of entitlement that demands people sacrifice their hard work at the feet of a group of drooling Philistines. The Beatles do not, at any point, require your endorsement in order to be legitimate. Now go coo over the newest Slipknot album and ****.
-I pay for my music. If you'd like to see iTunes/Napster/CD receipts, just ask.
-I don't believe that copyright should be modified to allow for the unreciprocated trade of music.
That said, I've got two questions for you:
1. What do you believe that you pay for when you purchase a song/album?
2. Do you believe that there is such a thing as a public domain, and do you believe that it is something worth contributing to?
I believe that when I purchase a song, I have paid for the right to listen to it anytime, anywhere. Copyright laws, in their present form, make many means of doing this illegal. For example, iTunes has a way of seeing my laptop as a different computer each time i install Windows. The system they use to enforce copyright, independent of any checks and balances, is just as heinous as the acts it's used to protect against.
Why do you assume that those opposed to present copyright restrictions are all MP3 swappers, and anyone who doesn't swap should be fine with them? Honestly, take a look at the heinous restrictions put on media today. Is it really a sane system?
For extra credit, consider this. Take a look at the Billboard charts from just five years ago. Have even half of the artists released a new song or album in the past five years? There's a select handful that have, but the vast majority release a hit or two and that's it. The public domain is a means of ensuring that artists continue to contribute to our culture. You and I don't get to just work for a day or two, then get residuals for the rest of our lives. Such is the trend in the industry these days, and a reasonable time limit on copyrighted works (say 10-15 years) works all around.
Joey
Visit your local record store.
It's just hasn't been possible to maintain the level of output achieved by the early POP music artists and especially the Beatles. Even contemporary industry pundits admit that much of what's produced today is dross by comparison.
Something akin to comparing food at McDonalds to a Michelin starred resturant. You can't!
Oh...a band? Really? Oh yeah...I kinda remember them now...Sgt. Pepper's and all that...you know, Tomorrow Never Knows....now shut up and pass the hash pipe, please...(ah, the memories).
As for the music, iTMS or any other digital media delivery outlet SHOULD have their music by now. For all of those people who have the attention span of a...uh, beetle...and who can't bring themselves to order their CDs on Amazon or hop in the car for a trip to the CD store...or are feeling guilty about their carbon footprint, downloads is the only way to go, never mind the sonic consequences. EMI and AppleCorps has waffled too long on this; perhaps they'll see the (Inner) light before the Paul and Ringo become worm feed themselves.
As for the younger generation listening to Beatles music, I don't blame them considering the other rubbish which is being released today. By comparison, it even makes the Beatles overplayed, overrated music tolerable (although the album "Revolver" is the *****).
-
by vmlenigma
November 29, 2008 1:38 AM PST
- Only Good thing about the Beatles is that there are only 2 Left,
-
Reply to this comment
-
Showing 1 of 2 pages (29 Comments)I'm taking Bets on who kicks the bucket Next.
She loves you, yeah yeah yeah, she loves you, yeah yeah , She loves you, yeah Yeah yeah
Why in the hell would anyone want crappy music like that with cheesy lyrics like that?