27 ms·

Have you actually looked at the rules? Which one do you find objectionable? I red the article with the idea that I am going to snap at Apple for starting with

Have you actually looked at the rules? Which one do you find objectionable? I red the article with the idea that I am going to snap at Apple for starting with "Express yourself" and then placing a bunch of restrictions, but then I red the restrictions and I can't find anything that I could object to. Even when they say "No blurry, pixelated, tilted, or cropped images" they clarify "unless intended". There is infinite freedom within the rules. There is no need for you to spam my phone screen with additional hashtags, handles or copies of information that I already have on my screen.

mkj 5y ago
"Only include relevant information such as artist name, release title as text, and the exact song title or album as released" seems to imply no other text is allowed. "No dates" - would Pulp Disco 2000 be allowed? Who knows? Maybe their machine learning was all getting confused. edit: I will add - I really couldn't care if it were just Apple blocking some music from their store - appleid is too much of a hassle anyway! But it'll drag the whole music industry into having to work with the lowest common denominator bland cover art.
spacemanmatt 5y ago
That would seem to rule out a very high percentage of the music I listen to, which frequently has abstract or fully image-processed content on the cover. I have a feeling I know what they're trying to avoid in their catalogs, and that's looking like a crate of records in a dusty music shop. They are merchandising the hits, not trying to even make it feasible to find the market-losers later.
- insickness 5y ago
  How do their rules exclude abstract images? If this is the one you're referring to: > No blurry, pixelated, tilted, or cropped images unless intended. Notice the 'unless intended.' I imagine they're trying to avoid hastily or poorly uploaded artwork.
  - spacemanmatt 5y ago
    > hastily or poorly uploaded I would say that is often a good description of the artistic intent.
  - ginko 5y ago
    I wonder if Viper is on Apple Music
    - neurobashing 5y ago
      Assuming you mean the artist with albums titled "Trap Lord 2" and "Life Is Fair 4 Me II", yes, they are.
      - spacemanmatt 5y ago
        thanks for this subthread =)

mkj 5y ago

"Only include relevant information such as artist name, release title as text, and the exact song title or album as released" seems to imply no other text is allowed. "No dates" - would Pulp Disco 2000 be allowed? Who knows? Maybe their machine learning was all getting confused. edit: I will add - I really couldn't care if it were just Apple blocking some music from their store - appleid is too much of a hassle anyway! But it'll drag the whole music industry into having to work with the lowest common denominator bland cover art.

spacemanmatt 5y ago

That would seem to rule out a very high percentage of the music I listen to, which frequently has abstract or fully image-processed content on the cover. I have a feeling I know what they're trying to avoid in their catalogs, and that's looking like a crate of records in a dusty music shop. They are merchandising the hits, not trying to even make it feasible to find the market-losers later.

insickness 5y ago
How do their rules exclude abstract images? If this is the one you're referring to: > No blurry, pixelated, tilted, or cropped images unless intended. Notice the 'unless intended.' I imagine they're trying to avoid hastily or poorly uploaded artwork.
- spacemanmatt 5y ago
  > hastily or poorly uploaded I would say that is often a good description of the artistic intent.
- ginko 5y ago
  I wonder if Viper is on Apple Music
  - neurobashing 5y ago
    Assuming you mean the artist with albums titled "Trap Lord 2" and "Life Is Fair 4 Me II", yes, they are.
    - spacemanmatt 5y ago
      thanks for this subthread =)