“The Who’s Pete Townshend says Apple Inc.’s iTunes is a ‘digital vampire’ that profits from music without supporting the artists who create it,” The Associated Press reports.
“Townshend says that faced with the Internet’s demolition of copyright protection, iTunes should help artists by giving space to allow them to stream their music, and pay smaller artists directly rather than through a third party aggregator,” AP reports.
“Townshend asked if there was any reason iTunes ‘can’t provide some aspect of these services to the artists whose work it bleeds like a digital vampire’ to make money,” AP reports.
Read more in the full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Without iTunes – iTunes Store, to be exact – there would be no music business. Unless he was massively misquoted, Pete Townshend should brush up on his facts before opening his mouth again. Apple not offering a streaming service currently hardly makes them a “digital vampire.” Besides those who torrent, the real vampires are the often unnecessary middlemen (the music labels) standing between Apple and the artists with their greasy palms ever extended for their too-large cut. As is typical, these artists who complain about the oh-so-evil iTunes generally aren’t the world’s greatest businesspeople, nor do they seem to really understand how the music business works. You’d think someone like Pete Townshend would have a firmer grasp of things by now.
As for his “pay smaller artists directly rather than through a third party aggregator” idea: Yes! Yes! Yes! If he’s talking about artists going directly to Apple’s iTunes Store without a music label, but it seems that smaller acts would need the labels more than established acts who already have fans. It can be done, but even someone like Lights had a record deal before establishing her own personal label.
““The Who’s Pete Townshend says Apple Inc.’s iTunes is a ‘digital vampire’ that profits from music without supporting the artists who create it,””
So pretty much like the rest of the music industry. Maybe Pete should work to blow up the current music industry structure so they can get a bigger cut of the sales through iTunes instead of letting that go to the real vampires.
How about Google who wants all music to be free? Isn’t this more or less vampiric than sucking free blood from victims to extend its shelf-life selling loads and loads of nickel-and-dime ads.
Without the music business, there would still be music, but the reverse is not true. People get too hung up over the big labels, like they were crucial or something. They are just parasites.
Enormous *DING* factor. 10 points.
Kill the RIAA.
Nothing stops artists from selling their work directly to their fans. I’ve bought several albums that way, notably Terra Naomi, who launched her career with a couple of home-brew YouTube videos. AT this point, I can’t imagine why bands would want to go to record labels, since the #1 music distribution channel (iTunes) offers few (if any) advantages for record labels over individual artists.
Agreed. A lot of the book publishers and music labels have increasingly offered less and less value to writers and musicians — this going back decades. The digital revolution has only accelerated that process.
One industry that has been more resistant to it has been TV and film, but even those have been showing certain cracks.
Exactly my sentiment. The artists with label contracts must have known from their labels that their music is being placed on iTunes and they get the same percentage from the sale. If the label’s pie is smaller ‘cuz iTunes take 30%, then the artists should demand a bigger slice from their labels since they don’t do that much anymore in marketing and merchandising the artists’ music.
For those who are not under label contract, the artists can always sell directly through their own website or label (good luck to that) and bear the costs of making their music available to their fans. I wouldn’t be surprised if their take is about the same as those artists under label contract.
For every “Pete Townshend” detractor there are dozens of musicians that are supporters. It is impossible to make everyone happy.
Who’s Pete Townshend?
…kinda says it all
Only if you’re a Glee or Justin Beiber fan. Or maybe you prefer Barbra Streisand? Still, I do think he’s remarkably out of touch on this, I would have expected a musician of his experience to be much more aware of what opportunities are available for young musicians now. iTunes has no need to have any kind of streaming function, not when there’s LastFM, Soundcloud and Bandcamp. The last two are heavily used by people to promote music, and iTunes is great for bands with no labels, like a new band from Northern Ireland, called Wonder Villians. I heard a song of theirs played on a late night BBC Radio2 programme, looked them up on Facebook, where they announced the song was on iTunes. Had a look and found a three track EP, which I bought straight away. No intermediaries, and I don’t have to faff around trying to find someone selling a CD. Instant gratification, and the band gets an instant sale. Pete, how the fuck is that vampirism?
Are you serious?
If the article didn’t say he was part of the who… I wouldn’t know who he is either.
I honestly couldn’t care “who” are in a band… If the music is good, it’s good.
I can name a handful of people in bands… I listen to music (rarely anymore) not follow some drugged out member of a band.
You’ve got to be an ignorant, culturally deprived, narrow-minded son of Tricky Dicky to not know Who Peter Townsend is or to compare Barbra Streisand to Justin Beiber. There’s a difference between personal taste and brainless snobism.
I didn’t compare anyone to anyone…
Reading comprehension?
And I don’t give a shit WHO is in a band. Or who they are. I only know of one who song honestly… Ask me a van halen question and I’ll know.
The who was nobody I gave a shit about.
Outside the bestbuy commercial, I have no clue who beiber is, except some kid everyone seems to hate.
Ask me to name the Beatles… I’ll say Lennon. The rest? I never liked them so I don’t know.
SRV, BB king, VH, Metallica, megadeth, ac/dc. Them I know.
I like some music, could really give a shit about the people IN the bands…
Wow, that’s sad. Van Halen & Metallica but no Who. There would be no VH or the others without The Who, The Beatles or The Kinks (I’ll throw that one in too).
Every serious rock fan knows who Pete Townshend is. You can argue whether he good or bad, but you’ve got to know him.
@Billy
I am NO Fan of music… people, band, genre, nobody, nothing.
Half of the music world could OD on drugs tomorrow… Meh.
however *some* of their music I listen too. My “library” is small… And I listen maybe 1-2 times a week to something.
Music has Zero effect on me.
Honestly I have heard his name before, but in reading some of the other comments… I’m thinking it was from the Child Porn stuff.
the CSI song is the only Who song (at least one that I know of anyway) that I kinda like.
I can’t fill up half of a 16GB iPod.. hell, the playlist I actually play.. has 197 songs in it. I have the same CD I made in my Car for almost 2 years.. MP3 CD with like 130ish songs.
I’m sitting here typing this in complete silence… First time all day I could tune the world out. I know there are people that this would drive them insane, I love it.
I’m fishing tomorrow, nothing but the sound of my fly line. Now thats Musical Bliss.
I know many bands I “listen” to got their inspiration from others, I don’t care.. It means nothing to me what some band listened to.
Heard of the Kinks, I know VH covered them. have NO clue of any names..
Obviously heard of the Beatles.. I just don’t like em. as I said before, couldn’t name em.
I have heard of the Who, I just don’t care for the “music”. I now know of one guys in the band…
Main reason I know VH stuff, My Brother in law was a huge VH fan and thats all i’d hear around him. I was 10 when we first met (he’s 10 years older than me) so he was like a big brother, I did everything and listened to everything he did.
That phase passed, but I still like VH.
Ok, since everyone will ask at some point.. Sammy.
I liked them Both, both Dave ranks a tad lower than Sammy IMO.
and besides, Dave’s a nutcase… and Sammy has a Bar. 😉
Same goes for Gaming.. People go nuts when I say I have an xbox, but don’t like Halo. (any FPS on a console is an instapass for me)
Now everyone can bash me for not being like them… or liking what THEY like..
“”It would be better if music lovers treated music like food, and paid for every helping, rather than only when it suited them,” he said.
“Why can’t music lovers just pay for music rather than steal it?” he said.”
uh….yeah.
Apple DOES PAY those with a legal right to the money. They cannot unilaterally decided to pay certain parties, but not others.
Some of these old rock & roll types (remember the Stevie Nicks rant) seem to not understand what they are talking about.
Or maybe they really are so stupid that they don’t know that it is the record contracts they signed that determines the royalty payments?
Mr. Townshend got his facts from a dubious source (some (Middle)Bronfman character, no doubt).
My current old band has had an album on iTunes for at least five years. Services such as CDBaby make it simple, easy and rather quick to sell independent music on iTunes without going through a label. Artist receives approximately 72 cents, from the 99 that Apple charges, for each sold track. This is better than app store (for apps), as well as iBook Store (for books), where the commission is 30%.
While it might possibly be even better if Apple had the facilities to do this directly, rather than through a middle man (CDBaby, in my example), it is still vastly superior to the standard music label, which takes lion’s share of those 99 cents, and pays artists no more than 10-15%.
As I said, Mr. Townshend must have received his talking points from some big label suit.
WTF is he talking about? With iTunes people can easily release independent albums which means artists get 5 times what they’d get with a label.
MDN Take – “Without iTunes – iTunes Store, to be exact – there would be no music business.”
Perhaps the biggest pile of BS I’ve ever read on this site in the five or so years I’ve been visiting; so big that it’s not even worth discussing. Talk about hubris…
were it not for iTunes- people would still be “stealing” music via torrents. There is a direct correlation between people purchasing music based on the .99 a song model and less free downloading of music. Given all the major labels have seen physical media sales plummet over the years, and their bumbling business tactics on top of it- they’d surely be bankrupt hoping lawsuits would bolster their plummeting profits.
“were it not for iTunes- people would still be “stealing” music via torrents”
So. . . people no longer “steal” music via torrents? Nonsense.
We can be thankful that Jobs and Apple provided such an elegant, ground-breaking solution to SOME of the problems plaguing the industry, but to suggest that the entirety of the music biz would no longer exist – which is EXACTLY what the MDN take asserts – is poppycock.
If you read the second sentence you’d have no choice but to agree with my entire factual statement.
And do you agree with MDN’s statement that if it were not for the iTunes store, there would be NO music biz anymore? Piracy shows no signs of abating; in fact, there are far more avenues for pirating now than there were when iTunes began.
Also, correlation does not imply causation.
iTunes saves the image of the music labels. Prior to that, they were like rampaging gangsters demanding disproportionate million of dollars from schoolboys who took free of hundred of dollars of their stuff from the Internet.
Now they are more respectable and have learnt that people would be willing to pay for their stuff if they treat their customers with respect.
“Now they are more respectable and have learnt that people would be willing to pay for their stuff if they treat their customers with respect.”
HA! There is absolutely nothing “respectable” in the slightest about the majors, as anyone who’s had to engage with them on any level greater than the Columbia Music Club will tell you. The suits took over and completely sullied the industry in the late 70s-mid 80s era and it was no garden party before that, either.
Let’s not have a bunch of “Who’s Townshend”. That’s not clever and only shows your ignorance.
Also, let’s not have a bunch of old wankers posting lyr… what?
Oh, well then, nvm.
oops, too late.
Reign o’er me…..
of course, “same as the old boss.”
No one knows what it’s like to be the sad man…
He’s entitled to his opinion. As a music industry (former) titan, his opinion carries weight.
But I’m entitled to mine: Baby boom whites discovered music copyright protection only after shamelessly ripping off blues, R&B and early rock and rollers who were almost exclusively black and poor. They stole ideas, riffs, lyrics, beats, chord progressions, and even entire songs.
Magic Bus is a great tune. Did Bo Diddley get anything for that beat? No, when Peter Townsend was in his 20s he was none too concerned about compensating others for stealing their ideas.
There are hundreds of other examples.
Yup. And Led Zeppelin who stole just about every song they ever recorded.
Say what you want about Pete, but when you mention Zep in a negative light…well you better Ramble On!
What Pete fails to realize is that Who records aren’t selling, not because of iTunes, but rather that the Who haven’t written anything relevant in over 30 years. The majority of the music buying public are teenage girls. And I’m sorry Pete, teenage girls don’t give a rats ass about you or your generation.
As a musician I respect the man. But the respect ends there, for obvious reasons.
“iTunes is a digital vampire, that I can’t use to find kiddy porn”
Pete Townsend
Has he finished that book that he was researching yet?
Another drugged out old Limey has been. He’s delusional.
Pete Townsend is a digital vampire!
Silly rant, Pete. When I want a song, e.g., I hear a song on the radio and want to get it, I fire up iTunes either on my iPhone or my Mac and I BUY IT. I don’t torrent it, burn if from a friend’s CD, etc.
The truth is, Pete, iTunes does a lot to promote artists. Just look at the albums and tracks offered for free, or at special discount prices, or the promotion given to new albums being released, or allowing people to pre-order a new album. I don’t see your record labels doing any of that.
Until artists sell their music on their own, or directly through iTunes, there will always be middlemen who take money away from artists. However, let’s be real, artists make their money playing live, not selling tracks or albums.
iTunes refired my love of music.
Townsend is way out of line.
I thought a “digital vampire” would be closer to hat he is.. you know.. an internet pedophile.
Well then, Pete Townshend is an ACTUAL vampire!
How does THAT feel, Mr. Townshend?
Happy Halloween everybody.
Hey, Pete, stick to your area of expertise: child porn.
Like I value the thoughts of Pete ‘ kiddie’ Townsend
Um, I’m an indie musician with albums on iTunes. Last I checked, TuneCore pays me 100% of the purchase price minus Apple’s modest cut. Not a bad deal.
Meanwhile, Spotify and other services stream my music for free or close to it. I get paid almost nothing. Who’s the digital vampire here??
Glad to hear from someone with real world experience with this topic.
Interesting; I thought Spotify was working pretty much on the up-and-up, unlike, say, Grooveshark. A shame to hear that’s not the case.
Wanker.