Apple wants to prevent Steve Jobs testimony from being made public

Apple wants to prevent Steve Jobs testimony from being made public
It turns out that smartphone manufacturers aren’t the only companies that sue one another. We know, that’s shocking, isn’t it? As Apple has learned over the years, music companies also sue people, including Apple. Apple is embroiled in one such case right now, where companies that own, among other things, the rights to Eminem’s music albums, are asserting that Apple still owes them a lot of money.

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

FEATURED VIDEO

53 Comments

1. quryous

Posts: 106; Member since: Mar 07, 2012

If I were apple, I'd run and hide under the toilet, too.

2. -box-

Posts: 3991; Member since: Jan 04, 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: 682; Member since: Sep 22, 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: 467; Member since: May 05, 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: 5498; Member since: Aug 05, 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: Apr 19, 2012

What are you talking about? It's all about business.

12. Penny

Posts: 1859; Member since: Feb 04, 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.

20. thedarkside

Posts: 654; Member since: Apr 30, 2012

was human.

13. jmoita2

Posts: 930; Member since: Dec 23, 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: 2383; Member since: Jul 18, 2010

Ah, so basically the same thing they did at Foxconn then.

21. parkwaydr

Posts: 572; Member since: Sep 07, 2011

look at that even matured and sober slim shady is still causin a ruckus

38. Whateverman

Posts: 3295; Member since: May 17, 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: Apr 24, 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: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 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.

* Some comments have been hidden, because they don't meet the discussions rules.

Latest Stories

This copy is for your personal, non-commercial use only. You can order presentation-ready copies for distribution to your colleagues, clients or customers at https://www.parsintl.com/phonearena or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit https://www.parsintl.com/ for samples and additional information.