“Bruce Willis is preparing to take Apple to court over who owns his huge digital music collection after he dies,” Fran Wetzel reports for The Sun.
“The Die Hard actor, 57, wants to leave the haul to his daughters Rumer, Scout and Tallulah,” Wetzel reports. “But under iTunes’ current terms and conditions, customers essentially only ‘borrow’ tracks rather than owning them outright.”
Wetzel reports, “Chris Walton, an estate specialist at Irwin Mitchell, told a newspaper: ‘Lots of people will be surprised on learning all those tracks and books they have bought over the years don’t actually belong to them. It’s only natural you would want to pass them on to a loved one.'”
Read more in the full article here.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “David E.” for the heads up.]
MacDailyNews Take:
Remember those annoying “terms and conditions” you have to click “agree” to? And besides, suppose they don’t want Dad’s music.
Turns out the story isn’t true:
http://9to5mac.com/2012/09/03/bruce-willis-dietunes-yippikayee-story-refuted-by-wife/
I think some ppl have spent too much time in the sun this Labour Day weekend… First off, the Macbook Air already does not have a DVD/CD…
Second – WTF – not wise for Bruce Willis not to do something(?). Who cares – he has to spend his money somehow – the IRS just announced you cannot pass money along now – its just a long term rental agreement or lease – they’ll tell ya when someone sues or reads the fine print…
As for kids names some have had to be refused by the government those are the stupid ones… Who cares if a Hollywood kid whose rich has an odd name just change it… Besides ‘Moon Unit’ takes top prize in my estimation…
Oh wait I was thinking of April Fools Day not Labour Day… Wonder why I got confused… Must be the sun… High UV index & all…
Bruce Willis is right. This is a sham (and a shame)
Apple’s contract on this subject (that they made with the music industry) is as wrong.
There IS NO GRAY AREA on this!
Let me get off of my high horse for a minute to clarify.
If Bruce is right and he is legally not allowed to bequeath his songs then everything I said above stands.
If it is just legal talk for not-buying-publication-writes, then that may be a different story.
Music companies never liked the ability of people to re-sale CD’s and LP’s. Jpeg’s can be copied over and over, that’s not right. But you should be able to bequeath or even sale an Apple ID.
Why are people so down on Bruce Willis on this. He has a great point. If you buy CDs, DVDs, and books, you can give them to other people. You should be able to leave your collection. Apple should have a mechanism to transfer the license in the event of your death. I hope he wins.
Fake story planted by British tabloids and now denied by Willis’ wife herself.
The papers are the ones that should be sued for pulling these stunts (incidentally Samsung seems to enjoy leaking BS anti-Apple stores to the British press).
The whole story was wrong anyway, iTunes music doesn’t have ownership transfer restrictions (only restrictions on the T&C are for apps). just shows how no journalist/blogger has actually read the T&C (apart from Macrumours who stated this when they ran the story)
I hope Bruce doesn’t die hard or die hard twice. When he ides Die Hard with a Vengeance I hope everyone else can Live Free or Die Hard and then I hope Bruce has A Good Day to Die Hard.
There’s no way Bruce Willis will ever die.
Have you seen the Die Hard movies?
He’s immortal, but only because Chuck Norris allows it.
thought he was bald.
Well, now the Willis family is denying the story.
I agree with BW. There should be a method in place to allow transferring of purchased items to someone else as part of an estate. Although there are other ways to transfer things, if one has a truly enormous number of items, he shouldn’t have to go through all that.
Fake? Oh. Well then…
Whether he sued Apple® over this or not, I believe the point is still a valid one. We should be able to transfer large numbers of items to others as part of an estate settlement.
Don’t confuse the content of the data files with the physical media which stores it. When people start saying things like “How is this any different from bequeathing books or LP’s?” It appears they are confusing ideas with physical objects. If I buy a shovel, I own it. I can do whatever I want with it – modify it, use it in ways it wasn’t intended, give it away, etc. Songs, movies, books, software and other forms of content are not the same type of objects. Older storage technology, like books, have the advantage of being able to functionally transfer their content for long, long periods of time. Modern digital files reside on much more impermanent media, but they have many more interesting characteristics. For example, unlike my shovel, I can give my digital files to you and retain them at the same time, for no cost.
Older media was self regulating, It was difficult and expensive to make comparable copies of the original media. While I would have dreaded inheriting my father’s massive library of books, I would love to have access to all of it’s content digitally. How should copyright law correctly deal with this very new reality?
wow.
this is a hot topic!
bound to be controversial.
but not really controversial.
since in the end, it’s simply corporate greed vs. the people’s rights.
Bruce Willis is dumb this time:
1. if every one of us who buys music from iTunes, sues Apple, we would kill only worthy company out there that gave us so much pleasure for so long. So Brucy – you’re pointless.
2. sue the real culprit: RIAA!!! they are the biggest bastards. Apple can not change the conditions/policies that belong to the music industry. plus have some respect for Apple: before iTunes we paid dearly for entire albums. since iTunes Store we pay for individual songs and less at that than prior. plus iTunes enables small bands or single unknown musicians to upload their music minus the middleman or corporate greedy studios. So Bruce – you’re suing the wrong source!
you’re a dangerous man Bruce, people like you, will follow suit. it will be a disaster. you have not sued yet, so please sue the RIAA! THEN you might be a national and international HERO yet again – only a real one for once, unlike in the movies!
Did you not understand.
THIS STORY IS FAKE.
YOU CAN TRANSFER YOUR MUSIC WITHOUT RESTRICTIONS.
READ THE TERMS OF SERVICE FOR ITUNES.
ARE WE DONE WITH THIS BULLSHIT NOW!
And yes I am aware of the caps all you upity have nothing better to do then complain losers.
Even if this story is true, it would be far, far less expensive for Bruce Willis (or anyone else) to simply burn their music, etc. to disc and hand it to their heirs than to sue Apple over the restrictions placed on Apple by the RIAA.
BTW, no one announces they’re going to sue a company like Apple over such an issue. They file the lawsuit, then it becomes public knowledge. So I doubt this “report” is true.
Bruce Willis needs to realize, he doesn’t “own” the music in his collection. You don’t own anything unless you bought the rights to the song.
When you buy music, you buy rights to use it. Be it on a CD or a download. You own the rights to listen to it, carry it on an iPhod, CD or 8-Track. You don’t own it.
So, if Bruce dies, his oddly named kids can copy the music and not tell about it or be limited by the legal limits as imposed by the music rights holder or by the RIAA that is transferred via iTunes or any other music outlet. You bought a license.
Bruce, don’t get all, “I’m rich and I can do whatever I want!”