Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 26 to 35 of 35

Thread: Apple to release 59 new Beatles tracks

  1. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by Mister Triscuits View Post
    So I was not wrong--they really were just put up on iTunes and taken down immediately. What a dick move.
    People might argue which move was the dick move. I would argue that forcing them to release their own material in order to protect it is the dick move. That being said, they could have kept them up. But, to the earlier point, they're readily available through other means.
    "The White Zone is for loading and unloading only. If you got to load or unload go to the White Zone!"

  2. #27
    It's back up. The studio outtakes are significant upgrades to avalable boots. The BBC stuff is great for completionists. Lotsa really great performances.
    And in the end, the love you take, is equal to the love you make.

  3. #28
    Member rcarlberg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    7,765
    Quote Originally Posted by ronmac View Post
    I would argue that forcing them to release their own material in order to protect it is the dick move.
    The band -- or what's left of them -- should have the right to control what's out there under their name. Unfortunately, the way the law is written, if they didn't "renew" the copyright those tracks would pass into the public domain and they'd no longer have any legal control over them.

    Given the volumes of execrable dreck released under the Beatles logo since John's death it kinda surprises me that Yoko and Paul aren't milking these 59 tracks for everything they can -- maybe a brand new $400 Beatles box with two discs containing these 59 tracks -- but I don't think we as consumers get to call any of this a "dick move."

  4. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by rcarlberg View Post
    Given the volumes of execrable dreck released under the Beatles logo since John's death
    Like what?
    "The White Zone is for loading and unloading only. If you got to load or unload go to the White Zone!"

  5. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by Mister Triscuits View Post
    These two points contradict each other. What Apple just bought themselves is the right to shut those "other means" down. (I'm sure what they're really concerned about is actual unauthorized releases of the recordings if they go into public domain, but they have plenty of other recourse there--trademark on the Beatles' name, copyright on the songs themselves for the Lennon-McCartney compositions.) And they did it by using the letter of the law to subvert the intent of the law. That's the dick move. They may have technically "published" the recordings, but they didn't really make them available to the public in any meaningful way. And they have "protected" the recordings for 50 years. Now they get another 20. Is 50 years not enough but 70 years is? Or would you argue for perpetual copyright?
    Well the point is that they were taken down. But they are up again, which renders ronmacs comment "out of context" now.
    And in the end, the love you take, is equal to the love you make.

  6. #31
    Jazzbo manqué Mister Triscuits's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Utopia
    Posts
    5,390
    Quote Originally Posted by Kim Olesen View Post
    Well the point is that they were taken down. But they are up again, which renders ronmacs comment "out of context" now.
    Whoops! Then I withdraw my comments. This is good news.

  7. #32
    Member rcarlberg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    7,765
    Quote Originally Posted by ronmac View Post
    Like what?
    Not going to open that can o' worms. Doubt that anyone can't think of several tho --

  8. #33
    ALL ACCESS Gruno's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Dio, Alabama
    Posts
    3,167
    Quote Originally Posted by rcarlberg View Post
    Given the volumes of execrable dreck released under the Beatles logo since John's death
    Quote Originally Posted by ronmac View Post
    Like what?
    Quote Originally Posted by rcarlberg View Post
    Not going to open that can o' worms.
    Didn't you already open it when you first posted of it above…?

  9. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by rcarlberg View Post
    Not going to open that can o' worms. Doubt that anyone can't think of several tho --
    Quote Originally Posted by Gruno View Post
    Didn't you already open it when you first posted of it above…?
    Seriously. I'm not looking for a fight. I'm just curious what you think is dreck. I'm guessing it's the Lennon anthology release with the outtakes and demos, which are GREAT, IMO.
    "The White Zone is for loading and unloading only. If you got to load or unload go to the White Zone!"

  10. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by PeterG View Post
    I recently noticed the sudden appearance of Led Zepp on Spotify, perhaps Beatles will be next then. But still not even a single King Crimson track on Spotify.
    Because fripp refused to allow his music to be made available in a format where everyone but the artist benefits. I respect him for not putting his music on spotify; most big names do it because they feel they have to when the truth is they don't. And if they didn't,perhaps it would encourage others not to, and ultimately fix a business model that is horribly wrong.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •