Apple wants to prevent Steve Jobs testimony from being made public
We have no idea who is in a better position there, but of possible interest to our readers is the fact that Apple is moving to block the release of video testimony of Steve Jobs (and some other senior executives) to the public. The testimony apparently contains many of the details of Apple’s negotiations with UMG. Opposed to this is a cadre of musicians, who feel they have a right to know what sort of deals were cut between Apple and the label, and how it impacts the share of the pie that musicians receive.
So Apple, reigning king of the music download, is in the somewhat unpleasant position if trying to prevent musicians from understanding the negotiations that directly impact their livelihood. Apple says there are very important trade secrets that were revealed from their “highly private” negotiations, and point to the fact that when the testimony was first played the judge cleared the courtroom before it was shown to the jury.
Did Apple negotiate in bad faith in a way that served their needs over those of musicians? Most likely…they are a corporation, and corporations tend to put their own profitability ahead of the needs of others. But would that really shock anyone? Is there something more revealing in the Jobs testimony that they feel could permanently injure their reputation with recording artists? To be honest, it's hard to believe that there could be a bombshell large enough to disrupt their ironclad grip on the digital music industry. Perhaps they are less worried about what musicians think, and more concerned about whether it will cause other music labels to question the deals they struck with Apple?
Whether we ever find out what is distressing Apple here depends on how the judge rules on the motion.
source: Hollywood Reporter via TUAW
1. quryous (banned) (Posts: 106; Member since: 07 Mar 2012)
If I were apple, I'd run and hide under the toilet, too.
2. -box- (Posts: 3470; Member since: 04 Jan 2012)
Considering how many musicians are affected, some details should be revealed. Perhaps not the whole thing, but some info. If I had (or an agent representing me) had agreed to something that affects my income and livelihood, especially in such a competitive business, I'd sure want to know what to expect, and if things went bad, what options I had. I'd expect it of any company I did business with, be it a distributor, advertiser, or other business-related entity representing my interests
3. theBankRobber (Posts: 630; Member since: 22 Sep 2011)
How can they talk about trade secrets when they want Google to just hand over they Galaxy nexus source code? How sad .
4. christianqwerty (Posts: 456; Member since: 05 May 2011)
Because Steve jobs is a human and the nexus is just a phone. I think there is a little difference between the two, don't you?
5. PhoneArenaUser (Posts: 4487; Member since: 05 Aug 2011)
"Because Steve jobs is a human..."
But there is more HUMANS which are alive and they want-need-should to know!
6. Rangers (Posts: 12; Member since: 19 Apr 2012)
What are you talking about? It's all about business.
12. Penny (Posts: 895; Member since: 04 Feb 2011)
The video in question is not a human. The agreements between Apple and the record companies are not human.
If you want to compare Steve Jobs to Google's source code, than anybody else can compare Larry Page to Apple's video and use the same argument against you.
13. jmoita2 (Posts: 929; Member since: 23 Dec 2011)
Here; I am going to negotiate with your employer to rip you off...
But you can't know anything,because it's my trade secret.
22. roscuthiii (Posts: 1602; Member since: 18 Jul 2010)
Ah, so basically the same thing they did at Foxconn then.
21. parkwaydr (Posts: 571; Member since: 07 Sep 2011)
look at that even matured and sober slim shady is still causin a ruckus
38. Whateverman (Posts: 3056; Member since: 17 May 2009)
Silly question here...what the h*ll does this article have to do with the iPhone? Can anyone please explain that to me, because I'm lost as h*ll as to how an article about Apple/SJ's testomy regarding label negotiations turned into winning about Android users and reps hating the iPhone! A product that was never mentioned in this article! Grow up!
43. shreyasdilip (Posts: 8; Member since: 24 Apr 2012)
I think they're doing the right thing! When they have such an influence over the digital music industry they must have a few secrets as to how they got where they have, and they should protect their secrets! Think if it like coke, we don't know their formula and we don't see that becoming a huge issue right? Apple has and always will be a secretive company!
48. remixfa (Posts: 13882; Member since: 19 Dec 2008)
HOW they conduct business should remain a trade secret. However I feel the deals that involve the artists' pay and their percentages should be divulged to them... not to the public. It directly affects them.