RSSiTunes may finally get The Beatles
By Tim Conneally | Published March 10, 2008, 11:52 AM
6:25 pm EDT March 10, 2008 - In a response to an inquiry by Billboard magazine, a spokesperson for Apple Inc. issued what Woodward or Bernstein might famously call a "non-denial denial" of press reports that Paul McCartney has finally made an arrangement for Beatles digital content on iTunes.
"This is not news nor is it a scoop," reads the entire comment from the spokesperson from Apple Inc., which is the former Apple Computer and not to be confused with Apple Corps, the Beatles' co-owned record label.
By stark contrast, when iTunes landed a contract with Led Zeppelin last October, Apple Inc. was literally beside itself with fanfare.
United Press International posted a report on Saturday stating that a $400 million agreement had been reached between ex-Beatle Paul McCartney and Apple's iTunes over the distribution of The Beatles' back catalog.
Profits made from the deal and subsequent sales will be split between McCartney, Ringo Starr, the estates of George Harrison and John Lennon, Sony, EMI, and pop star Michael Jackson, each of whom owns some form of rights to the songs, be it in publishing, recording, or reproduction.
The Cupertino company and The Beatles' media conglomerate of the same name settled their trademark dispute over "Apple" over a year ago, but both parties denied rumors that settlement terms included releasing songs from The Beatles on iTunes.
Rumors intensified, however, when Paul McCartney's newest solo recording was released to the digital music store, followed soon after by the late John Lennon's body of solo work.
Saturday's announcement still has not received validation from either side, and a statement from iTunes dismisses news reports as "rumor and speculation," so fans must continue to wait for an official announcement.
Who uses iTunes anyways?
Score: 0
|lol me unfortunately. Stupid exclusivity with the iPod. Good thing I don't purchase music online!
Score: 0
|I'm struggling to understand (again) how something like this relates to the genre of this web site. Sorry if I missed the memo.
Score: 0
|Apple and iTunes.
Sure, it's a tenuous link, but I've seen worse.
Score: 0
|I thought maybe it was a play on spelling. Like Be[a]t[les]+a or something
Score: 0
|Haha. Like it, like it.
Perhaps an anagram:
Les Beta
Score: 0
|Look at the top of the site, what does it say?
BetaNews.
Not "Beta" news; Not Betanews; or even "News abotu Beta's"...
It's meant to imply that it is both a news site, and the place to go to find out about unreleased products.
For an even deeper glance into that meaning, take a look at the window title on the homepage:
"Inside information; Unreleased Products"
Notice the semi-colon?
Don't mean to be snarky about it, but hey, you started it.
Score: 0
|Personally, I think it's a sneaky anagram.
Score: 0
|"Bean Stew?"
Score: 0
|Heh. That is also good.
Though 'Les Beta' at least has Beta in it, and means 'the beta' in French.
*Edit* D'oh! I see what you did there.
Perhaps 'A New Best', or 'New Beast'.
Score: 0
|Yay for asinine amounts of money being paid for something that should be public domain under sane copyright laws!
Score: 0
|*Psst* They nearly are now, but don't tell anyone.*
50 years after recording is the UK copyright term currently I believe, though quite what happens after that I'm not entirely sure.
*I think
Score: 0
|Their music is, I believe, also covered by US copyright...
...which can be extended indefinitely.
Score: 0
|Oh joy.
Well I can have fun here in the UK then, surely?
Score: 0
|Only if the UK wants to battle the WTO...
Score: 0
|Bah humbug.
Score: 0
|Hahaha. $400M
They're getting rinsed if this is true.
Score: 0
|