apple to buy universal??

[CV]

The Cupertino, Calif.-based computer maker's surprise play for Universal Music could alter the dynamics of the bidding for Vivendi's entertainment assets. The French giant, in a move to reduce debt, seeks to raise $7 billion this year by selling assets that probably would include some or all of its Universal film, television, theme park and music units.

[...]

Defying conventional wisdom, Jobs apparently is betting that music is finally on the verge of becoming a profitable presence on the Internet. Apple has been quietly testing a service that some music business insiders believe could pave the way for widespread online distribution of songs.

People who have tried the service, expected to debut by the end of April, say it makes downloading and purchasing music as simple and nontechnical as buying a book from Amazon.com. It allows users to buy and download songs to their computers with a single click and to transfer the music automatically to their portable MP3 players.

[wheezer]

the funniest part is that apparently microsoft have "thought about it" too ...

here's an interesting summary of these developments

http://maccentral.macworld.com/news/2003/04/12/msuniversal/

[Mui]

I thought universal was vivendi-universal, with the french company buying a large chunk of universal in the first place (aparrenly they were losing money, so possibly they sold it back I dunno....vivendi should just stick to making water treatment plants I say).....and also apple registered appleuniversal.com the other day supposedly...

[wheezer]

yes universal belongs to vivendi - apparently there's also a group of investors looking in to buying vivendi for a cool 15 billion dollars, but that offer is only good if they get everything including universal music...

[lucid rinehead]

the beatles' apple records sued apple computer back in the 80s or early nineties, and the settlement included the condition that apple (computers) couldn't use the name within the record industry... which wouldn't have seemed like much of a problem then.

i suppose they would just have to pay the beatles off again

[wheezer]

haha, I totally forgot about that one!

well apple has since gone on to deny their interest in universal...

[grobelaar]

Apple doesn't have to use its name - its buying a business - doesn't mean it will suddenly become Apple Music - this would confuse the Apple brand for starters...

This should be interesting because Apple's philosophy about on-line music is somewhat contrary to the RIAA - difference being this isn't some start-up filesharing company - Apple have clout to find protracted legal battles - should be fun :-)

[lucid rinehead]

true, but they would still have an interest in the music business... would it not depend on the exact terms of the settlement?

Mui: is it just me or does your avatar have his knob out? and if so why is it black when his face is white? :-p

[antipolis]

branding is not a problem for a corporate giant like Apple(computers). The thing is, what will happen regarding the legislation over topics like "file sharing over the (now broadband)internet" RIAA-->DMCA-->EUCD (European equivelant of DMCA).

[tjackalko]

I think microsofts initial interest was because of vivendis videogame licenses. They own rights to the lord of the rings books (not the movies) transition to videogames as well as Blizzards Warcraft and Diablo. Microsoft would need big franchises to strengthen the Xbox lineup. But they probably realised that it was no use, Sony wins anyway.

[Mui]

@lucid
nar it's his belt dude....he's a black belt obviously, so get your mind above my navel!

vivendi-universal are also responsible for tomb raider as far as vid games are concerned

[wheezer]

@tj

according to the article I posted, ms has only considered buying universal music, not the parent company vivendi...

[Loz]

Apple seemed to have registered AppleUniversal.com last week.

Make of that what you will.

[lowtide]

not gonna happen