Apple and Taylor Swift are every greater successes at the moment than ever earlier than. 10 years in the past although, they discovered themselves on reverse sides of a serious challenge that would have unraveled the profitable launch of Apple Music. Right here’s what occurred.
Apple’s transition to streaming music confronted a crucial last-minute problem
10 years in the past, Apple was gearing up for its extremely anticipated launch of Apple Music.
The corporate had spent $3 billion to amass Beats, with a serious motivator being the buzzy Beats Music streaming service.
On the time, Apple had a protracted historical past of innovation within the music area, as evidenced by the success of the iPod and iTunes. Each got here at crucial factors within the trade’s transition to digital.
However Beats Music and particularly Spotify had been on the chopping fringe of one other enormous transition: the change to streaming.
Although Apple usually prefers to construct its personal options somewhat than buying them (see: Apple TV+), its splashy, costly Beats acquisition was the uncommon exception.
Apple Music was constructed on the inspiration of Beats Music, and aimed to propel Apple to success within the streaming period.
However shortly earlier than its launch, Apple had an issue: Taylor Swift was not completely happy.
Apple and Taylor Swift fought and made up 10 years in the past
A few week earlier than Apple Music’s June 30 debut, Swift revealed a really public critique of Apple.
She introduced she was withholding her latest album, 1989, from the streamer.
Why? Due to Apple’s choice to not pay artists for streams throughout Apple Music’s preliminary three-month free trial interval.
The argument was easy. Swift wrote:
We don’t ask you without spending a dime iPhones. Please don’t ask us to give you our music for no compensation.
Thus arrived a whirlwind of controversy within the lead-up to Apple Music’s launch.
The stakes had been excessive, with Apple eager to place itself as a extra “artist pleasant” streamer than Spotify.
In the end, it didn’t take lengthy for Apple to concede.
In a number of posts shared on Twitter, companies boss Eddy Cue shared the excellent news that Apple Music could be altering its deliberate cost coverage.
Apple will all the time be sure that artist are paid #iTunes #AppleMusic
#AppleMusic can pay artist for streaming, even throughout buyer’s free trial interval
We hear you @taylorswift13 and indie artists. Love, Apple
The transfer was applauded by many within the artist neighborhood, and averted what may have been a serious distraction from Apple Music’s launch.
It additionally prompted Taylor Swift’s personal pivot relating to her standard album.
A couple of days after Cue shared the replace, Swift introduced that 1989 could be coming to Apple Music in any case—and proceed being absent from Spotify.
10 years later, Swift and Apple have each gotten greater than ever earlier than. And Apple Music, whereas nonetheless very a lot trailing Spotify in subscriber rely, has prevented any such large artist controversies ever since.
Finest iPhone equipment
FTC: We use earnings incomes auto affiliate hyperlinks. Extra.
