“Steve Jobs has his own idea and he’s a brilliant guy,” says Yoko Ono of that guy with the sweater. “There’s just an element that we’re not very happy about, as people.” She’s referring, of course, to the Beatle’s continued absence from the iTunes Store.
It’s almost ludicrous that the band’s catalog hasn’t reached the store – this is the goddamn Beatles we’re discussing. But Yoko doesn’t sound very optimistic. “Don’t hold your breath… for anything,” she says.
Frankly, one has to wonder: it’s safe to say at this point that the Beatles’ appearance in the iTunes store would primarily benefit a new generation of ‘fans’, right? Like, this is just for posterity’s sake, yeah? Surely all the die-hard Beatles fans would’ve simply ripped their own collections by now.
You’re missing the boat, Yoko. At this rate, there’ll have to be some pretty fancy special features or something to entice anyone who’d give a damn to actually purchase the Beatles collection yet again. Maybe an exclusive album remix of Let It Be by Junkie XL. I’d buy that for a dollar.
Who owns the Beatles catalog? I thought Michael Jackson did but then I think he sold it to Paul McCartney during his financial problems. What does Yoko have to do with any of this?
I can assure that apple hipsters don’t listen to that.They prefer to listen to cooler bands like Fallout boy or Jonas brothers…
I am sure Beatles fans have already ripped their music and have it as MP3s any way. It isn’t like they are coming out with new stuff.
Kelly has it right; Beatle fans in 2010 have already downloaded every single album in 320kbps off some torrent website.
Source for those quotes?
Michael Jackson owned the majority percentage of the Beatles “sheet music” rights. In other words, he received a healthy chunk of the royalties that were paid whenever a Beatles song was performed (including played on the radio). The Beatles still retain ownership of their actual performances of the songs, and that’s what iTunes can’t have.
As I understand it, there is a pissing contest at work. Back in the 1960s, the Beatles created a company called Apple Music. A completely different company called Apple Computer was formed some 10 years later and, after a lengthy lawsuit between the two Apples, Apple Computer was allowed to use the “Apple” name as long as it stayed away from music. Then iTunes came along and lawyers started packing their briefcases. What’s left of the Beatles (and Yoko Ono holds John Lennon’s share in the partnership) is furious that Apple Computer has wormed its way into the music business, so no Beatles for Apple Computer.
You can get Justin Bieber singing “Yesterday” but you won’t get Paul McCartney singing “Yesterday.” Which would you rather have?