New in OS X: Get MacRumors Push Notifications on your Mac

Resubscribe Now Close

Apple Inks Deal With Warner Music for Cloud-Based Storage Rights?

Just as Apple's cloud-based music storage service has been said to be ready to go amid claims that Apple has inked two of the four major record labels to deals permitting the service, CNET now reports that Apple has reached a deal with Warner Music Group (WMG) in support of the plan.

Apple has an agreement with Warner Music Group to offer the record label's tracks on iTunes' upcoming cloud-music service, music industry sources said.

In the race to the cloud, Apple is apparently stepping on the gas. All Things Digital reported Thursday that Apple has signed two of the top four record companies. ATD reported that Apple content chief Eddy Cue was due to fly to New York on Friday to try and finalize agreements with the two labels that were still unsigned.

It is unclear whether Warner was one of those two that had previously licensed Apple or whether the label inked a new agreement on Friday.

The report notes that WMG is the third largest record label in the United States, joining Universal, Sony, and EMI in the group of major players that sets the tone for the industry. WMG may be the most important agreement, however, as the label has reportedly been the "fly in the ointment" that has caused both Spotify and Google issues in neogtiating their own music deals.

It is not yet known when Apple plans to introduce the new cloud-based service, but the company appears to be racing full speed ahead toward a launch.

Top Rated Comments

(View all)

47 months ago
That's the $1,000,000 question, isn't it? Most of use have lots of music from other than iTunes sources, so it remains to be seen exactly how, or if, this rumored music locker will be implemented. I wonder how Apple will coordinate the varying tags we have put on our music. In other words, I have some music that was tagged as World Music that I later retagged differently, as it made more sense to me with respect to the way I want to organize my music. If these tags don't match up with what Apple holds, will that become a problem? We'll just have to wait and see what Apple introduces.
Rating: 3 Votes
47 months ago

Typical MacRumors. Milk a story to DEATH in one day. Yeah, we get it!

Tony


then if you already got it, why are you replying?
Rating: 2 Votes
47 months ago
News news and more news about this... Just make it official already!
Rating: 2 Votes
47 months ago
Reality check...Apple, like Amazon, like Google are businesses and they are out to make money in some form or another. Having said that, it is likely they may charge for this service but it is more likely they will offer this as a free service to entice you to sign up for something like an enhanced version of mobile me.

Besides, the service is not required. it is optional. If you don't want to use it, the answer is don't. That simple.

One thing missing from all the rumours.

The amount Apple will rip you off for it!

Rating: 2 Votes
47 months ago

Yup, same for me.

Have never bought a single tune from iTunes and never will.
Have never bought a single video from iTunes and never will.

I have bought Apps, as that's the only legal way to get software onto my iPad.

I've never bought any video from the Xbox Marketplace, and only every bought 1 cheap game from the Xbox marketplace.

I've never bought one thing from the PS3 Playstation online store.

I've never bought anything from STEAM online either.

I've never bought any eBooks either.

Sadly however, I will just have to stand back and watch the sheep buying virtual media blindly taking us all to the slaughter house, where eventually the media will be in full control of all the date we own, and eventually there will be almost no physical media left for sale, to give to friends/family/charity, swap with friends/family, or sell on to people/shops to get money back to purchase a new item.

As we do with cars, houses, computers, anything else we buy.

Sadly this seems so far away for many (well it's not happening today) that they can't see this inevitable outcome.


Just because you don't believe in something, doesn't make everyone who does a "sheep".

Your views, while interesting, may be a bit misguided. You can download an album, copy it to a CD and share it with friends and family. Charity? Really? Do you really donate CD's to charity?

As far as books, you can look at it a few different ways. No, you can't sell them back. But if we are talking about new releases especially, you are also paying half the price for an e-book. So the investment, even if you are able to sell back to a used book store ends up being about break even. For me, and a lot of people I know, including my baby boomer mother, e-books have made it easier to read. I've read more on my iPhone and iPad in the last year than in the previous decade probably. And that is a good thing.

Of course, everyone has different uses for these things. But just because you don't doesn't make it worthless for everyone else.

And frankly, I'm in more control over my e-books and music than I am over my house, which technically the bank owns for another 25 years. Same with my 2 cars. Good for you if you own your house and cars outright...but not the best example in the world.
Rating: 2 Votes
47 months ago
Its not stupid to seek and obtain rights to hold music and stream it because in the end when the music is uploaded to the Apple sky pie, you are essentially placing the content you purchased, burned, etc. in their digital hands. They were not the original purchaser of the content and therefore are required to obtain permissions to hold this music as a third party for you.

It makes perfect sense. Please think it through before you post.

Sorry, but if Apple inked deals with Warner and others to allow me to put music I own into a cloud so I can stream it, they are stupid.

Amazon has it right, do it, don't ask permission, don't look back.

Rating: 1 Votes
47 months ago

I think the uploading of ripped CD's is a compromise they are going to have to make. They may not be able to directly profit from it, but if they don't allow it they are definitely going to lose money over it. I can imagine it would be a deal breaker for a lot of us. Especially if we are going to be paying for this service. I wouldn't pay for it if I couldn't store all of my music...including my rips.


I think this key. I don't know anybody who uses iTunes that doesn't also have a lot of music ripped from CDs; without the whole library, any kind of music streaming service would be nigh-on useless.
Rating: 1 Votes
47 months ago

Sorry, but if Apple inked deals with Warner and others to allow me to put music I own into a cloud so I can stream it, they are stupid.

Amazon has it right, do it, don't ask permission, don't look back.


Amazon's attitude is probably why Apple has been able to lock these deals down, because they did it the right way.

After the Apple deal is done and released, Amazon will suffer the reprecussions for their actions.
Rating: 1 Votes
47 months ago

Just because you don't believe in something, doesn't make everyone who does a "sheep".

Your views, while interesting, may be a bit misguided. You can download an album, copy it to a CD and share it with friends and family. Charity? Really? Do you really donate CD's to charity?

As far as books, you can look at it a few different ways. No, you can't sell them back. But if we are talking about new releases especially, you are also paying half the price for an e-book. So the investment, even if you are able to sell back to a used book store ends up being about break even. For me, and a lot of people I know, including my baby boomer mother, e-books have made it easier to read. I've read more on my iPhone and iPad in the last year than in the previous decade probably. And that is a good thing.

Of course, everyone has different uses for these things. But just because you don't doesn't make it worthless for everyone else.

And frankly, I'm in more control over my e-books and music than I am over my house, which technically the bank owns for another 25 years. Same with my 2 cars. Good for you if you own your house and cars outright...but not the best example in the world.


Yes, I know things are not as I state "Now"
"Now" we can still buy music on CD's, Films on DVD's and BluRays, Books make from tree's etc etc.

Now, outside the "Apple tech" corner of the world, things are still happily as they were and people who work hard, buy things, get physical things for their money, and when they have finished with them, they are free to do with them as they wish.

I can, for example, on a Sunday go down to my Car Boot Sale, in the US I believe it's called a Flea Market, and buy from other individuals their unwanted CD's, Movies, Games, Books second hand.

We are free to do this.

Many old people (and yes we will all be old one day) don't have the money to spend $5, $10, $15 on one book to read at home for example.

I admit, it's all cool, hip, trendy and sci-fi to pay online, stream from the cloud in your wifi enabled area's ect ect.

I just don't like what I can see as the inevitable future of all of this.

Companies will love the ideas of virtual media that costs them nothing to duplicate, many people made unemployed who have livings all tied up with physical items, and every single person has to pay the full new price for every single item they want, and perhaps also pay again when they wish to change from one make of device to another.

Will we be given free rights to move on-line purchased content onto other makes/models of viewing device in the future, or will be be expected to buy the same thing again? And, or course, not be able to sell our old collection as it's non transferable.

So, (as a real world example) you would not be allowed to sell your DVD collection to partially fund a new BluRay collection. Your BluRay player, would of course still be able to play your DVD's if you wanted to keep them.

It's not so much that I don't "Believe" in it. I just think that many people are blind to the inevitable end result and only then will they actually realise when it's too late.

I am all for online purchased of data, but there are safeguards and rights for consumers that need to be put into place that don't exist now.

Your right to use the data on different devices once you have purchased it.
If data is locked to one makers device, then that data should be very very cheap to compensate you for this limitation.
Rating: 1 Votes
47 months ago
If I can upload my ripped CDs, then great. If not, then this will be worthless.

Nothing against Apple, but I really admire Amazon's latest FU stance on this issue. They refuse to get any streaming license from any company, and instead are doing it anyway. I know this seems reckless to some, but I for one am pleased to see someone stand up to the record companies. I think that the fact that they demand streaming rights is disgusting, and the perfect example of how horribly greedy they are. I understand the need to buy the CD, the album or track download, but one yo've bought it, you should be able to "stream" it from your CD player, AppleTV, Discman, iPod, iPhone, or cloud based service. I fail to see why the record companies should get paid to stream the song they already sold once. It is the cellular and internet providers who will carry the bandwidth of the stream songs, and yet the record companies want to be paid twice. Once for the purchace of the song. A second time for a clound to ear stream. When will it end? Will a new charge be made when I "stream" if from my CD player to my ears? What about my iPod to my ears? How about my car's CD player to my ears. It's terrible.

Again, nothing against Apple for trying to "do it the right way", but sometimes "the right way" isn't always the right way. Kudos to Amazon. Fight it guys!
Rating: 1 Votes

[ Read All Comments ]