Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: Lurker
Translation: “We got caught with our johnsons exposed. Now please excuse us while we zip up.”

No, Apple had always intended to pay, just when the revenues were booked. That's a standard practice in business. This was KNOWN, and specified in the agreements. When Apple charged the cards for subscriptions made during the trial period, the artists would be paid. This was an argument from people who wanted their money NOW, not later. The agreements even stated that they would received GREATER compensation because of the delayed payment. This is a idiotic kerfuffle about not much of anything. Now Apple has decided to go ahead and pay them now AND still pay them the extra money.

5 posted on 06/22/2015 8:03:02 PM PDT by Swordmaker ( This tag line is a Microsoft insult free zone... but if the insults to Mac users continue...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies ]


To: Swordmaker

That’s not how I read his response, but your comparison to revenue recognition is hogwash. A company’s obligation to pay its suppliers is totally separate from when it receives payment from its customers. Apple can provide free trial service as long as it wishes, but in no way does that imply their content providers also agree to such terms.


8 posted on 06/22/2015 8:18:32 PM PDT by bigbob (The best way to get a bad law repealed is to enforce it strictly. Abraham Lincoln)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Swordmaker
Hi Swordmaker. I'm puzzled by something.

Apple> Once the trial period is over, they [trial users] would [either] convert to a paying customer or they would decide that the service is not for them...

Sword> Apple had always intended to pay, just when the revenues were booked... When Apple charged the cards for subscriptions made during the trial period, the artists would be paid.

What about the trial users who "decided the service is not for them"? All they wanted was a freebie deal. Their cards were not charged, and they didn't make any subscriptions during the trial period. They got three months of music for free and then walked away.

We both know there would be LOTS of people who would do that.

So... Who was going to pay the artists whose music was taken for three months by the freebies who walked away? I haven't read that Apple intended to fund that loss, but that seems to be what they've agreed to do now.

What am I not understanding about the handling of the walk-aways?

10 posted on 06/22/2015 8:21:19 PM PDT by dayglored (Meditate for twenty minutes every day, unless you are too busy, in which case meditate for an hour.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

To: Swordmaker

“When Apple charged the cards for subscriptions made during the trial period, the artists would be paid.”

What a crock! Yes, those who subscribed will pay but how about all of those who recorded these free songs and have no intention in subscribing? How much money was lost to the entertainers there?

Most will record (or purchase) as song only one time....period.


42 posted on 06/23/2015 5:36:59 AM PDT by DH (Once the tainted finger of government touches anything the rot begins)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson