On Mon, 22 Jun 2015 12:31:40 -0400, nospam
wrote:

In article ,
Sandman wrote:

they're paying a higher royalty rate than usual, which means the
artists are going to make more money long term, even if they
didn't get paid during the free trial.

it's the artists who are greedy bitches.

and now that apple is going to pay during the free trial, the
whining taylor swift still won't allow her album to be streamed.

now who is the scum?

PAS:
If you work and expect to get paid then you are a greedy b*tch
too.

Apple expected the artists to support their market expansion. They
were shocked into submission when the artists said "Fund your own
program!".

Haha, "Shocked into submission". They revealed the service three weeks ago.
Taylor Swift criticized them *yesterday*, today Apple changed the policy as a
direct response.

This was, at best, and "Ooops, she's probably right" rather than a greedy
business being "shocked into submission" by an artist.

There's plenty of things Apple has done wrong, this is not one of them.

yes it is.

"Yes it is" what? "Yes it is one "of things that Apple has done
wrong"?

I don't think that is quite what you meant to say.


They
handled this as perfectly as they could.

that part is true.

apple figured that in exchange for a higher royalty (which everyone is
ignoring), apple would not pay during the free trial. that's what was
*negotiated* with the music industry, so if you want lay blame, you
have to blame *both* parties.
--

Regards,

Eric Stevens