Apple in talks to buy Universal Music

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=802&e=1&cid=599&u=/nm/20030411/media_nm/media_universal_dc

Horace Mann (Horace Mann), Friday, 11 April 2003 18:47 (twenty-two years ago)

I just read this myself. Don't know what to think. As always, I'm pulling for Apple.

Sean (Sean), Friday, 11 April 2003 18:57 (twenty-two years ago)

I totally thought this had something to do with Neil Aspinall.

mike a (mike a), Friday, 11 April 2003 19:00 (twenty-two years ago)

My reaction was benevolent Apple becoming evil media conglomorate does not compute bllzzzzzzzzzrp... #$#@#@@@@@@@@@.....

Seriously, is this a good or bad thing? Or will it just mean that all new iPods come loaded "Beautiful Day"?

Aaron W (Aaron W), Friday, 11 April 2003 19:04 (twenty-two years ago)

Apple == very much Pro the "Sharing" of MP3s
Universal == very much Against the "piracy" of MP3s

We'll have to wait and see whos corporate theology infects the other.

Lord Custos Epsilon (Lord Custos Epsilon), Friday, 11 April 2003 19:07 (twenty-two years ago)

does this mean we'll be seeing Eminem in those "Think Different" ads?

Horace Mann (Horace Mann), Friday, 11 April 2003 19:10 (twenty-two years ago)

I knew going was going on, but this was possibly the least likely option.

Chris Barrus (Chris Barrus), Friday, 11 April 2003 19:13 (twenty-two years ago)

(*play goofy music*)
"I used to be this misgnystic asshole who hated his mom, but then I got a Mac...and it didn't do a damned thing for my effin' attitude problem..."
(*show apple logo*)
"My name is Em, and I'm a bad ass mofo, and I use a Mac."

Lord Custos Epsilon (Lord Custos Epsilon), Friday, 11 April 2003 19:14 (twenty-two years ago)

apple + universal = very much for the renting of mp3's via files that only play on apple hardware that automatically time out when you don't pay your bills

scared of apple.

milton, Friday, 11 April 2003 19:22 (twenty-two years ago)

Hrm hrm hrm...hrm. I will wait and see.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 11 April 2003 19:46 (twenty-two years ago)

That's an interesting scenario, milton. I wonder if they could actually make it work. I don't see why it scares you though, unless you're just morally opposed to the idea of anyone actually making money off of music on the internet.

o. nate (onate), Friday, 11 April 2003 19:49 (twenty-two years ago)

Well, such a scheme would fail anyway. Each time someone tries a technique like that, the haX0rs break the encryption|write a patch|discover a work-around|invent a shell script that defeats the lockout.
Look at Microsofts masterplan "Remote Activation"...that was broken a month before XP even hit the OEMs.

Lord Custos Epsilon (Lord Custos Epsilon), Friday, 11 April 2003 19:58 (twenty-two years ago)

Given there's more money to be made from blank CDRs and the like than from music these days, it seems, maybe they'll just make all the back catalog free and rely on selling iPods. Oh how I can dream. ;-)

Ned Raggett (Ned), Friday, 11 April 2003 20:00 (twenty-two years ago)

Well, such a scheme would fail anyway.

But Apple would have one ace in the hole that Microsoft didn't have - they control the hardware as well as the software environment. Presumably, a hardware-based security scheme would be harder to defeat.

o. nate (onate), Friday, 11 April 2003 20:03 (twenty-two years ago)

'sometimes I think culture has just been a loss leader for technology...'

that's the main reason I'm scared. apple sells computers and they're acquiring music to sell more computers. more than ever, music is going to be treated/seen/handled as mere added 'content'. I mean, at least with the music industry, the music itself is the product that's being sold.

milton, Friday, 11 April 2003 20:07 (twenty-two years ago)

firmware, o.nate...the magic is in the firmware. Defeat the firmware, and the system is 0wnz0red.

Lord Custos Epsilon (Lord Custos Epsilon), Friday, 11 April 2003 20:07 (twenty-two years ago)

I smell a Universal-heavy "US" festival celebrating this.

Charles McCain (Charles McCain), Friday, 11 April 2003 20:10 (twenty-two years ago)

Defeat the firmware, and the system is 0wnz0red.

I was thinking more along the lines of an internal security chip that would use something like asymmetric-key encryption to communicate with Apple's verification server. Hacking the firmware would be ineffective in this case, because you cannot spoof the verification system unless you know the private key, which is embedded in the chip.

o. nate (onate), Friday, 11 April 2003 20:19 (twenty-two years ago)

But Apple would have one ace in the hole that Microsoft didn't have - they control the hardware as well as the software environment. Presumably, a hardware-based security scheme would be harder to defeat.

If this comes to pass then there's be serious antitrust issues here; if your Universal MP3s will only play on an iPod, you can bet that someone will start legal action.

Sean Carruthers (SeanC), Friday, 11 April 2003 20:26 (twenty-two years ago)

see the related thread on slashdot.org

bigger crowd there, more techies (and I don't think custos posts)

Millar (Millar), Friday, 11 April 2003 20:30 (twenty-two years ago)

If this comes to pass then there's be serious antitrust issues here; if your Universal MP3s will only play on an iPod, you can bet that someone will start legal action

This wouldn't have any effect on MP3s. MP3s would still be around and would still work the same way they do now (anyhow, Apple doesn't own the MP3 technology, so they couldn't legally mess with it). What this would be would be a new proprietary music distribution system that required Apple hardware to work. I don't think there would be any antitrust issues there. There are lots of proprietary networks that require dedicated hardware - e.g., cable tv.

o. nate (onate), Friday, 11 April 2003 20:44 (twenty-two years ago)

Yes, but that's what's scary about this; if they actually create a copy protection scheme with Universal CDs that would mean they could only be used with iPods or with other hardware technology licensed from Apple, what would the implications be. Calling in "MP3" was obviously off the mark somewhat; think of it as a modified digital format. There are some MP3 players out there already which will only play digital files that have been modified with a very specific encryption, meaning that you wouldn't be able to offload them onto another machine afterwards. If Apple buys universal and makes that encryption part of even getting it off of the CD itself then it's another ball of wax. But I suspect that Custos is right; such a hardware solution would probably be hacked fairly quickly. I mean, EMI's new copy controlled CDs (here in Canada) are easily defeated just by closing the application the pops up via autorun, and opening up your regular MP3-ripping software.

Sean Carruthers (SeanC), Friday, 11 April 2003 21:43 (twenty-two years ago)

I seriously doubt Apple would pursue any kind of DRM system, hardware or otherwise. It's not the business model. You make people buy the cool hardware and then give away the software - it's the reverse of the standard Gilette-style IT business model, but it seems to be where the future is headed. Apple's built that way from the get-go. Enforcing DRM and limited use on media would run against the grain of everything they do (Quicktime movie trailers, anyone)

Apple could stand to profit a great deal if they turned the Mac into the ultimate home multimedia platform - and access to the massive music libraries of Universal would go more than a little bit towards this end.

Man, the future is gonna be so WEIRD. (just finished reading about the 2003 IEEE mobile conference, whoo jeebus)

Millar (Millar), Friday, 11 April 2003 21:51 (twenty-two years ago)

bigger crowd there, more techies (and I don't think custos posts)
Nope. I started contaminating Slashdot around the same time I started contaminating ILM. (I've only posted about 30 times there though.)

Lord Custos Epsilon (Lord Custos Epsilon), Saturday, 12 April 2003 22:33 (twenty-two years ago)

Yes, but that's what's scary about this; if they actually create a copy protection scheme with Universal CDs that would mean they could only be used with iPods or with other hardware technology licensed from Apple, what would the implications be. etc.

I can totally understand the degree to which people will not trust Microsoft.. but I'm far more frightened of the degree to which people will trust Apple...

donut bitch (donut), Saturday, 12 April 2003 22:55 (twenty-two years ago)

Because Macs are cuddly and PCs are not.

just finished reading about the 2003 IEEE mobile conference, whoo jeebus

Oh yes? And what's up there?

Ned Raggett (Ned), Sunday, 13 April 2003 00:13 (twenty-two years ago)

I can totally understand the degree to which people will not trust Microsoft.. but I'm far more frightened of the degree to which people will trust Apple...
Speaking of Gatezilla...Microsoft just jumped into the fray. They say THEY want Universal Vivendi now. Question is...Do they want Universal Vivendi to:
a) Be the tool in some new masterplan devised to fuck with my life.
b) Just piss off Steve Jobs and piss all over Apple one more time.

Lord Custos Epsilon (Lord Custos Epsilon), Sunday, 13 April 2003 16:15 (twenty-two years ago)

if Microsoft wants a piece of it too then they must be assuming that Apple wants to use the Universal library to make DRM (and by extension Windows Media Player) worthless. If Apple starts letting people actually own things, Microsoft will be hard pressed to convince people to buy into their scheme, which is more like paying rent.

Personally I think if Microsoft gets ahold of Universal then major-label music is going to die a slow, painful death as people hack their way around progressively more annoying DRM schemes and refuse to pay up for unusable hard copies and watermarked softcopies that 'can't be duplicated'. If Apple gets a hold of it, assuming their business model doesn't radically change, I think the music business might be on the way to a healthy transformation.

Microsoft is all about the status quo and preserving the PC Gillette model for revenues. Apple is becoming more and more about selling you a fantastic razor at a premium price and then giving away replacement blades (until new models make yours obsolete, and then you pay the premium price all over again). I really don't see why anybody thinks Steve Jobs would want to implement hardware DRM - Apple is in no position to make those sort of demands from the current market. It's not whether I 'trust' Apple or not - it's because of what (to me) seems like the only good business decision they can make.

Millar (Millar), Sunday, 13 April 2003 18:48 (twenty-two years ago)

Personally I think if Microsoft gets ahold of Universal then major-label music is going to die a slow, painful death

Aw, you make it sound so bad.

donut bitch (donut), Sunday, 13 April 2003 19:17 (twenty-two years ago)

b-b-but re-issues!!

Millar (Millar), Sunday, 13 April 2003 19:19 (twenty-two years ago)

My personal feeling re: Microsoft in this issue is that they'll try to get a piece of the pie in DRM technology, by just providing what they offer to the record companies, and see who uses it or not. MS knows better (one would hope) than to try and look like the bad guy, or try to enforce any RIAA-level war on file-sharing.

Given recent signs of Apple business practices, I'm more worried about a clip on file sharing (even 'reasonable' sharing) if they have a say in it. But they don't want to look like the bad guy either.

As long as we're all allowed to record analog sound signals on our computers or at least (god forbid) be able to record onto blank cassettes again, i'm not gonna worry too much all of this.

donut bitch (donut), Sunday, 13 April 2003 19:31 (twenty-two years ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.