Filed under: iTS
Radiohead returns to iTunes
If you haven't been keeping track of the whole Radiohead/iTunes drama it went something like this TUAW summary:
iTunes: "You must sell the tracks"
RH: "We won't sell the tracks!"
iTunes: "You must sell the tracks"
RH: "We won't sell the tracks!"
iTunes: "Then don't sell the tracks!"
RH: "We are so out of here. Whole albums or nothing baby."
iTunes: "Laters."
Time passes
iTunes: "You must sell the tracks"
RHEvil Suit-Wearing EMI Folk: "Well...okay then."
RH: Curses! Foiled again!
Radiohead albums (including individual track sales) are now available for purchase at iTunes.
Thanks, Clancy
_thumbnail.jpg "Take a stroll down memory lane")
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
david said 3:40PM on 6-03-2008
...
iTunes: "You must sell the tracks"
RH: "Well...okay then."
Me: While you're at it, iTunes, why not make all tracks available individually so I don't have to buy the whole stupid album for some "Album Only" content. Sometimes, especially with soundtracks, you only would get three or four good songs, and the rest is junk.
iTunes: Well... okay then. (probably not)
Reply
XLM said 10:27PM on 6-03-2008
iTunes: Would love to David, 'cept the lable dictates how it is packaged and sold.
franko said 3:54PM on 6-03-2008
hooray! i was hoping they'd come around. not that i don't own all their albums on CD anyway, but it's nice to have them back in the fold.
Reply
Alec Feld said 4:04PM on 6-03-2008
Lies. This isn't them, this is EMI, who they're no longer signed to. By downloading their stuff off of iTunes, you're not supporting them in any way, just EMI and their bastardly plans to take advantage of ex-signed artists. Single tracks makes me sad, their albums were meant to be listened to as a whole.
Reply
bsrjunk said 4:27PM on 6-03-2008
Not being "with" EMI doesn't mean they don't get paid - they still get the exact same amount for every album sold (as set forth in their contract, their -seperate - publishing contract with BMI, etc). When a band "signs" with a label it is for future records, not the old - many artists that have not had a record deal in decades still get some $ from their old contracts. If you hate labels, OK, but it the deal is no worse (or better) for the old stuff just because they have left the lable.
jtsnyc47 said 12:58AM on 6-04-2008
I believe the last time someone - artist or whoever - mandated that I experience art the way they wanted it to be appreciated was the last time I used the term "GFY".
The album is a construct that forces listeners to pay for more than the content is worth. The idea that the album is some kind of storytelling arc is nice, and yes, I can see how it applies to Radiohead. But if I want to experience fragmented RH and receive only a minor epiphany, then that should be a choice left to the person experiencing it, not something dictated by its creators.
I think some people are losing the thread about this being a net benefit to the consumer. For people that don't, buy the album.
Gary said 4:15PM on 6-03-2008
Alec has it right - clearly none of you have the faintest idea about the situation. This is definitely not a band who would just cave on something they believed in.
And god forbid you take the time to listen to someone's artistic vision as a whole - would you read three out of 20 chapters of a book?
Reply
TomWBrowning said 4:24PM on 6-03-2008
It would appear that the album is dying. Which is a shame.
Johnny said 4:34PM on 6-03-2008
As for the situation. Agreed. This sounds more like the act of an evil record company than Radiohead.
Otherwise, I respect the artists decision to not sell individual tracks, but I don't agree that it is the same as reading a book. It's more like listening to an aria from within an opera, which is done all the time. If you've never seen or heard the entire opera, then you may not fully understand the aria, but I'm certainly not going to listen to the entire opera every time. I'm also not going to listen to an entire pop/rock/alternative album just to hear the few songs I really like. I also almost never read an entire book in one sitting and rarely have time to listen to an entire album in one.
Maha10k said 4:23PM on 6-03-2008
Agreed #3 Alec. This is the label cashing in. Doubt the band sees much of anything out of this. Sarcasm is far more entertaining than actual research and facts though.
Reply
Maha10k said 6:26PM on 6-03-2008
I don't believe Radiohead had any digital rights on their EMI contract. At least that's implied by Thom Yorke in a Wired interview. http://www.wired.com/entertainment/music/magazine/16-01/ff_yorke?currentPage=2
Doubt there are many bands tied to deals signed before mp3 era. For Radiohead, it's gotta feel good to own and control distribution of their work now though.
Josh said 4:35PM on 6-03-2008
That totally just made my day.
Reply
Galley said 4:39PM on 6-03-2008
All of the albums except "Pablo Honey" are available in the DRM-free iTunes Plus format. Why that album has DRM on it is beyond me.
Reply
Andrew said 8:30AM on 6-04-2008
Probably because Thom had it put in their contract that he hates Creep now and doesn't want you to download it.
Kyle said 5:50PM on 6-03-2008
This is more or less retaliation against Radiohead for not signing back to EMI for In Rainbows. They've been doing things like this ever since Radiohead announced that the record would be released on TBD.
Reply
BooBoo said 7:54PM on 6-03-2008
Wow. Some of you have no clue how this works. The "evil" label just positioned themselves and RH to make more money. (making money doing what you love and sharing it with the people that made it possible...sooooo evil.) Anytime you buy anything (new) that RH has recorded, or at least put their name on, RH makes money. That supports the band. (Once again.... sooooo evil.)
****rolls eyes and heads off to to continue making a living from his passion... music****
Reply
DJP3DRO said 11:06PM on 6-03-2008
I always respected Radiohead's decision to stay off iTunes - selling songs individually has really ruined the integrity and cohesiveness of a good album (which Radiohead makes plenty of), because then all people do is just buy the singles. With this, and the crap they pulled with brokering "In Rainbows" to the major labels while doing the whole independent angle, and saying to Rolling Stone that they were so glad to distance themselves from "an industry they no longer felt a part of"... Well, these guys aren't the Radiohead I knew.
Reply
Warren said 6:30AM on 6-04-2008
this is not the radiohead you knew because EMI did this.
the In Rainbows move was genius to me and i don't think it was brokering... more like social commentary on the music industry.
Radioboy said 5:54AM on 6-04-2008
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Reply
Warren said 6:30AM on 6-04-2008
EMI is horrible for doing this.
Radiohead has artistic integrity, and EMI doesn't respect the guys enough to abide by their philosophy of keeping the albums intact. Nothing but greedy.
Reply