Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Shivetya

macrumors 68000
Jan 16, 2008
1,669
306
Funny, I'd consider a "sale" to be more distasteful.

THAT sounds like cashing in...trying to spur sales, as it were.

Simply making a list seems more respectful to me.

having a free viewing of any one movie of your choice would have been a good tribute
 

Monique1

macrumors regular
Aug 6, 2014
156
43
So Tim Cook and go against the movie industry and release a free Robin Williams movie, break contracts, and get Apple sued without ANYBODY else involved? Yeah right.
Where did I say a *free* movie. Comprehend much?

So Tim Cook can only make employees earn $1 / hour maximum and breaking laws without ANYBODY else in the company knowing?
Wow. Just wow.

So Tim Cook can go against all the shareholders, CFO and others by setting up a charity in secret and coding where all Robin Williams movies go to that charity? Get real.

In secret? LOL! He wouldn't have to be secretive about anything... he can just do it. (Yes, I'm saying exactly that) Do you really think CEO's go sniffling and whining to the BOD for every nickel they spend?

Cook can even order a new Apple Store in your trailer park if he wanted.
 

Solomani

macrumors 601
Sep 25, 2012
4,785
10,477
Slapfish, North Carolina
To those who are talking profiteering and Apple's big conspiracy. Way to take a tragic event, losing one of the greatest people this world has ever known and twisting it to fit your own pathetic life. Who gives a damn why Apple has done this. The fact is they have dedicated a section of the store so people can easily find what they love.

Go put your tinfoil hat back on, flip on good ole Rush and shut up!

I think that Apple truly had every intention to respect and remember RW. Many Apple execs (like Cook) know that he was a very strong pro-Apple ally (he did commercials for Apple recently). The fact that they did the iTunes promotion was taken the wrong way by many. I doubt that Apple is trying to be evil or trying to be an exploiter here.

The most likely explanation is that bringing up the iTunes listing so quickly was done in haste and was not given thorough consideration. They simply put it up as a knee-jerk reaction to the tragic news of Robin's death. And they probably did so without deliberating how people could take it the wrong way.

And yeah, so much drama here. I can imagine the "angry" posters here who are so upset with Apple over this "greedy exploitation" it's like they suddenly have the fiery rage and the urge to join al-Qaeda or ISIS so that they can learn to blow up Apple headquarters or something. :mad: They feel so personally offended, it's like Tim Cook somehow drowned and killed their puppy dog or something. Such drama!
 

Ethosik

Contributor
Oct 21, 2009
7,820
6,725
Where did I say a *free* movie. Comprehend much?

Wow. Just wow.



In secret? LOL! He wouldn't have to be secretive about anything... he can just do it. (Yes, I'm saying exactly that) Do you really think CEO's go sniffling and whining to the BOD for every nickel they spend?

Cook can even order a new Apple Store in your trailer park if he wanted.

Um I didn't say you said "free movie", can you comprehend much? You said "Cook can do whatever he wants in the company and deal with the fallout later". I listed things he absolutely cannot do. One of the things I listed, is what other people have wanted in this thread: Apple to make a RW movie free. Look at my post, I did not say that YOU said you wanted a free movie. I just listed things Cook cannot do and just "deal" with the fallout later. So no, you need to comprehend what I said.

Yes, Cook cannot setup a charity and do whatever he wants. He does not OWN APPLE. The shareholders do. It is a public company. Shareholders want to know where Apple is spending their money, where they are losing profit, ... Cook cannot just do this without anybody else noticing and stopping him. It would be different if it was a private company and Cook OWNED Apple. Cook is just the CEO. it is a publicly owned company.

And no Cook cannot just demand a Apple Store in a trailer park. You know their are building zones, permits, government regulations, ...

A CEO cannot just do whatever they want. I listed things they cannot do, as in break laws and only offer employee's $1/hr, ordering money to be put elsewhere besides in the company/shareholders.

----------

To be fair Apple could give away anything from itunes for free if they wanted to, just like any other shop can, they would just have to cover the studios lost share for every copy given.

Why people think it would be some kind of tribute is what I don't understand....

I doubt that. I am sure there are laws, contracts, and other things to prevent this. The shareholders would have a fit. So you suggest it would cost apple MORE money just to release a free movie to please some of these guys that suggest that is the only way to honor his memory? Get real. It will make Apple lose money off every sale. And already being some of the top downloads/purchases currently, that would probably be A LOT OF MONEY at a loss. Being free means apple would get nothing from the movie. Therefore Apple would have to pay for the loss out of their own pocket. Therefore, they would lose money off every sale since they gain none, and need to pay from their own pocket. Tim cannot order such an action, the shareholders would have a fit.
 
Last edited:

CelestialToys

macrumors 6502
Aug 4, 2013
359
168
up above the streets and houses
I doubt that. I am sure there are laws, contracts, and other things to prevent this. The shareholders would have a fit. So you suggest it would cost apple MORE money just to release a free movie to please some of these guys that suggest that is the only way to honor his memory? Get real. It will make Apple lose money off every sale. And already being some of the top downloads/purchases currently, that would probably be A LOT OF MONEY at a loss. Being free means apple would get nothing from the movie. Therefore Apple would have to pay for the loss out of their own pocket. Therefore, they would lose money off every sale since they gain none, and need to pay from their own pocket. Tim cannot order such an action, the shareholders would have a fit.

Reading comprehension goes a long way, I said Apple not Tim Cook, if the Apple board decided to give something away free from iTunes then they could, in fact they already do it....All the movie studios are interested in is getting paid, they don't care if that money comes from the consumer or if Apple covers it.
 

Ethosik

Contributor
Oct 21, 2009
7,820
6,725
Reading comprehension goes a long way, I said Apple not Tim Cook, if the Apple board decided to give something away free from iTunes then they could, in fact they already do it....All the movie studios are interested in is getting paid, they don't care if that money comes from the consumer or if Apple covers it.

It doesn't matter. Have you read their contracts? It might very well state in the contract that the money has to be from the movie itself. It could very well state that THEY control when it is on sale, free, or even to pull it from the iTunes store. The BoD cannot do anything, just like Tim cannot. So it really doesn't matter that I said Tim and not BoD. I have not seen their contract and I doubt anybody here has. I doubt that it is within the contract to even modify the price of the movie even if they get the same money.

It could very well state the following (note I am not a lawyer so this might be horrible wording from a legal point of view):

Under no circumstances can the price of the content be modified without permission from <MOVIE STUDIO NAME>. Any violation of this would be considered a breach in contract and will result in all movies from <MOVIE STUDIO NAME> removed.

It also still doesn't matter. Releasing content for free, yet still providing money to the movie industry and studios means Apple would be paying from their own pocket. BoD still cannot order such an action blindly. It takes a lot more than just:

Well RW passed away.

Can we release one of their movies for free?

Yes.

It takes a lot more time than that. Time, discussions, negations, checking with the legal team about contract issues, ...

The BoD would not release something for free that Apple would have to spend money to make up for.

And I know they have already done free stuff. But you have to remember that not all contracts are the same and not all movie studios are the same. The last time I remember them giving something away for free were albums (as in stream it now for free) or the 12-days of christmas app. In each event, it required the content producer (in the case for RW movies the movie studios and everybody else involved) for approval.
 
Last edited:

derek4484

macrumors 6502
Apr 29, 2010
363
148
I'm glad to see your life is so perfect and you know no depression and sorrow. May you live a long happy life in your bubble. Just hope it doesn't get popped some day.

Thank you, and I hope the same for you.

Live long and prosper.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.