The Beatles on iTunes at last?

0

LOS ANGELES
— The refrain of “Don’t Let Me Download” from the Beatles may come to
end as the Fab Four’s catalog reportedly will be coming to iTunes
shortly, according to the Wall Street Journal.

An agreement for legal downloading of the group’s
cherished catalog of more than 200 songs recorded from 1962-1970 is
about to be announced by Steve Jobs’ Apple Inc., the Beatles’ Apple Corps and EMI/Capitol Records, the Journal reports.

Representatives for EMI/Capitol, surviving Beatles Paul McCartney and Ringo Starr and Apple Corps did not respond immediately to requests for comment. A spokesman for Apple Inc.
said Monday that the company had no comment on the report. The company
is making what it claims will be an “exciting” announcement on Tuesday
morning.

A source close to the Beatles camp told the Los
Angeles Times on Monday that such an agreement would not be surprising
given the recent posting on iTunes of the entire Apple Records catalog
of recordings, excluding the Beatles’ music. That consists of 15 albums
by acts the Beatles signed and recorded in the late ’60s and early
1970s after creating their own Apple Records label, among them
Badfinger, James Taylor, Mary Hopkin and Jackie Lomax.

“The working relationship between Apple (Corps) and
iTunes started with the remastered versions of songs by Apple
recordings artists other than those named John, Paul, George and
Ringo,” the source said. “What Paul has done with his own (solo) stuff,
or what anyone who owns their own masters has done is not nearly as
significant because these non-Beatle Apple artists are
truly what Apple owns. With Apple going in that direction, it’s a
significant clue as to what lies ahead” for the Beatles’ own recordings.

The Beatles have been the biggest holdout from the
iTunes world, but several other major acts still have not licensed
music to the downloading service, including Garth Brooks, Kid Rock, AC/DC, Def Leppard, Tool and Bob Seger.

Shortly after the 2007 resolution of a long-standing dispute between the Beatles’ Apple Corps and Steve Jobs’ Apple Inc., another lawsuit was settled between Apple Corps and EMI Records dispute over royalty payments that Apple said was owed by EMI.

Last year Paul McCartney said the
only hurdle to posting the group’s music online was remaining
differences between EMI and Apple Corps’ “principals”: himself, Ringo Starr, John Lennon’s widow, Yoko Ono, and George Harrison’s widow, Olivia Harrison.
The settlement of those issues led to the posting on iTunes in recent
weeks of the non-Beatles Apple Records catalog, which led to
considerable speculation that the Beatles music wouldn’t be far behind.

No details were reported of whatever deal may have been reached between the Beatles, Apple Inc and EMI, but speculation immediately began as to how much Beatles downloads will cost.

“They will likely take the position that the Beatles
made some of the greatest music ever recorded,” the source said. “I
suspect it will be at a premium price.”

Most Beatles watchers felt it was just a matter of
time until the group’s music became available for downloading following
the digital remastering of the entire catalog last year. That music was
released on individual CDs and in two box sets that sold strongly
during the final quarter of 2009. EMI and Capitol also recently
reissued two hits “best-of” compilations that originally appeared in
1973: “The Beatles/1962-1966” and “The Beatles/1967-1970,” aka the
“Red” and “Blue” albums.

“It’s great to see Apple finally joining civilization here in 2010,” said Chris Carter, host of the long-running “Breakfast with the Beatles” program on KLOS-FM (95.5) in Southern California
and on Sirius XM Satellite radio. “I don’t think there’s a downside to
it. Where else are you going to be able to find a copy of ‘Beatles for
Sale’ when you need it late on a Friday night?'”

———

(c) 2010, Los Angeles Times.

Visit the Los Angeles Times on the Internet at http://www.latimes.com/.

Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services.