Bruce Willis might sue Apple: his girls can't inherit his iTunes collection

Bruce Willis might sue Apple: his girls can't inherit his iTunes collection
Hollywood superstar Bruce Willis, the one you’ve seen in Die Hard and Pulp Fiction, might just launch his own legal war against Apple and its iTunes store. Turns out, Willis has a massive digital music collection that he wants his girls to inherit, just as that would happen if he had purchased physical copies of the music, but Apple’s current iTunes terms flabbergastingly don’t allow for that.

The reason is somewhat absurd - in reality, Apple considers you’re borrowing the music under iTunes license and not own them. This shocking revelation seems to have angered Bruce Willis.

Basically, this means that all of the music you buy on iTunes is worthless once you pass away.

The 57-year-old actor is said to be considering setting up a trust that would allow his daughters to use his music collection.

And no, this obviously isn’t about money - we’re pretty sure Willis and his daughters can afford buying all the tracks on iTunes. The actor is defending a right that might have been taken from unaware users to own the music they buy. Despite his muscles, it seems the action hero would need some help in breaking Apple’s corporate rules about that, don’t you think? And did you know about this? What’s your reaction - let us know below.

source: The Register



1. Non_Sequitur

Posts: 1111; Member since: Mar 16, 2012

Lol. Yep, that's Apple. xP You don't wanna mess with Bruce Willis. Yippie-ki-yay.

15. Droid_X_Doug

Posts: 5993; Member since: Dec 22, 2010

If Bruce files suit, it will be an interesting case. On another, related matter, what if Bruce were to transfer his Apple ID to the trust? The trust would go forward and purchase iDevices (and iTunes downloads) and so on for each of the trust beneficiaries. Is Apple saying that scenario can't occur?

17. JeffdaBeat unregistered

I'm a bit confused. I have no problem sharing my music with anyone I want. I thought that was the point of them getting rid of the DRM. Or is this in the case that he dies and they want to re-download the songs under their Apple ID? If it's the second case, I'm more on Apple's side of this. How do they verify that someone has indeed passed away and that this second person is now able to download all iTunes content? I'm not saying it isn't wrong...but I feel like unless there is some way to verify death, A LOT of people would take advantage of something like this.

19. doubleD

Posts: 78; Member since: Dec 13, 2010

Yeah, I'm also confused. When you purchase a song from iTunes, does it not d/l the song to your computer in which you could then just transfer that file and use on any device?

31. Droid_X_Doug

Posts: 5993; Member since: Dec 22, 2010

Not sure which scenario is in play. If it is the proof-of-death issue, a simple solution is for the heir(s) to provide a death certificate and a probate ruling to support their assertion. If there is a clause in the iTunes contract that prohibits the transfer, that is where it gets interesting. In the U.S., there is a general principle (especially in California) that you can't circumvent laws and court rulings through contract terms. There is a whole body of trust law and court rulings establishing the validity of the trust law, so if Apple wants to go Mano-e-Mano with Bruce, it will be on the losing side of that issue.

32. Victor.H

Posts: 1056; Member since: May 27, 2011

Right, but figuring a way for this to work should be Apple's problem, and one solved before the service launched, not the user's problem, don't you think?

33. remixfa

Posts: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 2008

I think its more of passing it all to another account. And how do they verify? The same way reps have to verify death in store.. with a death certificate. Also, if you have had your account for a while, its going to be filled with DRM. Dont you have to pay extra per song to be DRM free? A lot of people probably dont realize that and go for the cheaper DRM filled version. Either way DRM is BS. If I buy a song digitally, I should have the same access to it as if i bought the CD. I'm doing the world by making one less piece of trash (the CD), so I shouldnt be punished for it. All music and media should be DRM free. Just like those moronic "digital copies" of movies you buy.. that work on so few devices that its pointless. I hope Willis uses his fame, muscle, and money to take Apple to task. Maybe he will help push for the end of DRM. What a dream that would be. I'd totally watch every movie he put out no matter how bad as a thank you. Expendables 3: Taking down the mega-fruit!

41. Droid_X_Doug

Posts: 5993; Member since: Dec 22, 2010

It ultimately is Apple's issue to sort out. I suspect there will be a revised iTunes agreement plus some in-store procedure established (at least in the U.S.).

64. downphoenix

Posts: 3165; Member since: Jun 19, 2010

Why are you an Apple fanboy? You seem to be a smart and articulate person, but your logic here is very flawed. Willis paid for his music, it should be his to keep and divvy out to someone else if he passes away or decides to go crazy and give his stuff away. Hopefully he will no longer utilize Itunes for his music purchases and will go with a true DRM free solution like Google Music instead.

89. Forsaken77

Posts: 553; Member since: Jun 09, 2011

You would have to present them with a death certificate, much the same way any inheritance works.

23. phitch

Posts: 214; Member since: Mar 06, 2012 If you purchased tracks prior to them becoming DRM free you need to repay, otherwise they are still DRM. The other thing is while you purchase the music and it contains no DRM legally speaking you can't simply give a copy of those songs away. You can only use them on devices you own. Under this agreement Bruce can't just give his mp3 collection to his daughters like he could if he had just purchased a physical copy. The lesson here: always buy a physical copy.

68. juanyunis

Posts: 73; Member since: Aug 31, 2012

i don't agree with buying physical copies because if you just like or love 1 song of an album, that maybe cost you about $0.99 instead of the whole set for $10 or more, why paid for the others songs? and besides in this age everything is moving digitally.

70. remixfa

Posts: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 2008

if you have already bought the copy, why should you have to buy it again to be DRM free from the same service you bought it from the first time. Thats stupid. Also, if you can put it on anything you own, then he only needs to will him the hard drive/ ipod/whatever that has the music on, and your legal issue is solved. However, with DRM its still coded to just his account, which is the part he has an issue with. If I willed you a CD, you would not need to know my account and password to play it. Digital music needs to be the same.

78. jroc74

Posts: 6023; Member since: Dec 30, 2010

This I agree with.

2. prototype

Posts: 23; Member since: Jul 06, 2012

Yes Bruse Yippie-Ki-Yay M F Apple ! Sue this Evil company

27. Mxyzptlk unregistered

Bullcrap. It's the written rules. He agreed to them when he signed for an account. Sounds like Willis is just trying to get attention.

39. iami67

Posts: 333; Member since: Oct 18, 2011

ya cause bruce willis is having a hard time getting attention lol

42. phoenix225

Posts: 2; Member since: Sep 03, 2012

Your serious? He agreed to them when he signed? He's just looking for attention? Are you dumb? Bruce Willis doesn't look for attention nor does he have any reason to. Take whatever vendetta you have against the man and post it someplace else. I'll bet a lot of people didn't read the terms of agreement when they started their account. But I bet you did. So you mean to tell me the songs are basicly rented the songs til your dead? Thats another bunch of crap and way for Apple to try and make money. This is why I tell a lot of people that android and google is much better. Apple cost you so much money. Its sad really. Apple is horrible for this economy right now. The applecare+ is crap. I have to pay for the full version of apps if I want them. I can't customize it the way i want. You have to by everything for it. And the supposed iPhone 5 thats coming out is gonna have a new charging port? So now if I want that I have to get new chargers and cases. No. Apple became as bad as Xbox with that. Their as bad as the government with gas prices.

57. 305Bucko

Posts: 506; Member since: Aug 07, 2011

Im sure everyone reads the Terms and Conditions window before clicking "I agree" button. SMH@Mxyzptlk

3. frydaexiii

Posts: 1476; Member since: Dec 01, 2011

Sigh, Apple, where everything you pay for don't really belong to you.

8. jove39

Posts: 2145; Member since: Oct 18, 2011

Wonder...if all of Apple gear is actually evil Decepticons!!!

13. mariosraptor

Posts: 174; Member since: Mar 15, 2012

yeah. and they eat the brains of their users. that is why you can't say Apple is brain-washing people. they have none anymore.

43. shandesilva

Posts: 105; Member since: Mar 28, 2012

yeah..the tiny skinny type with large eyes, orange or purple coloured hair and multiple instruments...:)

28. Mxyzptlk unregistered

It's not Apple's fault. It's DMCA copyright. The music industry is at fault here.

36. frydaexiii

Posts: 1476; Member since: Dec 01, 2011

Yes, when Apple sues everyone for generic stuff, it's the patents office fault, not the fact that Apple is abusing it. When Apple is not giving their customers what they pay for it's the music industry's fault, not Apple's for abusing it again.

61. jroc74

Posts: 6023; Member since: Dec 30, 2010

This is one of the few times I will agree with And folks talking about Amazon and Google...they both have the similar terms....maybe the same terms...

69. remixfa

Posts: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 2008

you obviously have not ever used google music to speak such nonsense. When you buy a song off of google music, not only is it in a MUCH MUCH higher quality bit rate, its also 100% DRM free with no limits on usage. You OWN it free and clear.

76. jroc74

Posts: 6023; Member since: Dec 30, 2010

Here are the ToS for Google Play and Amazon: Read under 6. Rights and Restrictions Read 2. Music Content, down to 2.2 Isnt that the same thing Bruce Willis wants to do? DRM free and being able to whatever you want with it is 2 different things. DRM free means you can do whatever you want with it...for yourself. Passing on to others....unless you burn a physical disc.....I dont think its that clear cut with Google and Amazon. I really dont think the music industry woulda gave their blessing to Google and Amazon for music downloads if we could just do what Bruce wants to do.

79. remixfa

Posts: 14605; Member since: Dec 19, 2008

your misunderstanding some things rule 6 is a general Google Play statement, meant for apps and such. Google music, books, and movies all have their own section. There is nothing under the google music section that says they retain rights on music purchased at all. DRM free MEANS Digital Rights Management free.. aka, no restrictions on use. Their generic warnings are the same ones you will find in a CD cover. Not a big deal, and not what Apple's DRM enhanced itunes library says. What Bruce is arguing is that he should be able to will his DRM locked music to his kids when he dies. Apparently there is no stipulations for transfering from one account to another upon death. With google music, I can easily just email you an MP3 from my list at any time without issue.. its DRM free.

81. jroc74

Posts: 6023; Member since: Dec 30, 2010

"Sale, Distribution or Assignment to Third Parties. You may not sell, rent, lease, redistribute, broadcast, transmit, communicate, modify, sublicense or transfer or assign your rights to Products to any third party without authorization, including with regard to any downloads of Products that you may obtain through Google Play. Use of any tool or feature provided as an authorized part of Google Play (for example, “Social Recommendations”) shall not violate this provision so long as you use the tool as specifically permitted and only in the exact manner specified and enabled by Google." That to me says Bruce cant just legally give his download to his daughters....without permission. Under has nothing about this..none of ther other section really do..and IMO it doesnt need it with what is stated above.

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 or use the Reprints & Permissions tool that appears at the bottom of each web page. Visit for samples and additional information.