i got the full discography of mandy moore why the hell would i want this? face the facts: mandy moore trumps the beatles.

The Beatles.... rings a bell... I think they used to play the fiddle back a century or two ago.

Honestly, I don't think anyone cares.

"Unfortunately, Yoko Ono has thrown her own two cents in."

Thanks for telling me how I should approach her opinion. =/

I was more labeling the confusion "unfortunate" as opposed to her opinion.

LOL. What were you guys born in the 21st century? I've never seen so many people who don't like the Beatles. Come to think of it this is the same group of people who oppose camera's on their MP3 players just on principal so I suppose this isn't too surprising. The Beatles are one of the most popular bands of all time so to make a statement such as "I don't think anyone cares" is just laughable. If no one cared there wouldn't be an entire Rock Band game devoted just to the Beatles and this article wouldn't have been written in the first place. A very large number of people care and they want the Beatles on iTunes and on their iPods.

It doesn't matter. I still have the old LP's (large 12 inch cd's)

Well, if EMI don't want to sell the Beatles albums it's their loss...
Meanwhile I guess we have to download them for free instead:
http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/48 [...] _320_kbps_[vtgarcia]

Beetles is so over rated. They are famous simply because they are early in the game of rock'n roll. Their works can't connect with people who are born earlier or later who didn't got the hype. Funny thing is that how their popularity rose and fell with drug abuse in the 60s. Elvis, Rolling Stone and Pink Floyd are more memorable artists that will endure the test of time, while Beetles will go into oblivion and remembered merely as hype.

Stop hyping Beetles, most of us don't care at all.

Huh, lets see, and insider with knowledge says yes, its coming. Apple and EMI (or just EMI at this point?) says "Absolutely 100% no way, and there's nothing behind the curtain". Seems to me the Beatles are coming to iTunes very soon.

Since when has Apple denied a rumor that didn't turn out to be true (other than multiple reports of Steve Jobs' untimely death, of course, they've yet to prove the guy in the turtle neck isn't an android or something).

hahaha i really cant believe so many people think the Beatles arent popular anymore lol. They are the most influential band of all time. Name just 1 band that is as old as they are and still so popular. The Rolling Stones are the only other band that comes close.

michael jackson is up there in the 'influential' echelon to make the point that popularity doesn't mean their product is worth listening to... like the first person said, mandy moore has more influence on today's youth than your precious beatles... they fell out of favor for a reason... the idea that they keep coming back because they are timeless is retarded.. the truth is people forget where music comes from and it's not hard to remix, or alter in someway, old music and push it as new and great! the sheeple will buy whatever they're told to so as to be hip and trendy so give it a rest... i'm surprised people even find their music interesting sober since it is only half way tollerable on powerful seditives...

and another thing... Kayne West... enough said...

+1. I was just wondering how so many people could not care about the beatles. I'm unfathomable what such an awesome and influential band could be reduced to. ...especially:




Are you f***ing insane? That's one of the most rediculous things I have ever heard in my life. I mean that's about on par with saying "Bush was a good president". No seriously. You better have been using that as a hyperbole but even then that's uncalled for.

To anybody that says they don't have good music: two words: "Eleanor Rigby". I love that song. For me, it's up there with "Ride the Lightning" by Metallica, "Brain Stew" by Green Day, and "Freebird" by Lynyrd Skynyrd

Have you had internet or stepped out of your cave recently? They made a entire game based around the Beatles, they are still selling albums, they aren't just hype, they were ahead of the curve. Also, drugs is what makes this country believe it or not. I'm 18 and I love the Beatles. I can connect with them, just eat some mushrooms and listen to the Beatles, it all just comes together.

Yet another evidence of drug abuse and affinity to Beetles.

I've been sober all my life (which is about twice your age) without influence from drugs, alcohol or any chemicals, and I find watching Yellow Submarine at age 18 is one of the most torturous mental pollution I've ever experienced in my life. It was worse than recruit training in Taiwanese Army.

The only thing I care about when it comes to the beetles, is I want to see the albums actually become public domain. If they keep extending how long stuff takes before that happens, it defeats the entire point of having such rules in the first place.

You dont have long to wait, the first Beatles album is public domain in 2012, but I think that is stupid, the 50 year rules should only be enforced if the artist is dead. Paul McCartney is alive and kicking, still writing, still performing and to those who think he isn't relevant because of what he did in the Beatles, his tours command the same worldwide audience and enduring appeal as any tours done by any artist anywhere. He equals if not exceeds tours such as Eric Clapton, Madonna, Elton John, The Rolling Stones, Bruce Springsteen. Need I say more. It's easy to say the Beatles were rubbish and pick out Yellow Submarine, when they had released twelve original studio albums, thirteen EPs, and twenty-two singles (mainly featuring original music not found on their albums) in eight years. The fact that this issue divides opinion is one of true artistry staying the test of time versus ignorance. I am sure that Mozart or Beethoven had detractors that said their music would be forgotten.

If industry experts who have access to demographics and actual data are to be believed, such as Rolling Stone magazine, who in 2004 listed them as No1 in its list of 100 Greatest Artists of All Time, and had 4 of their albums appeared in the top ten of the magazine's 500 Greatest Albums of All Time. Their influence on other artists is still evident today, across all music styles, such as Kurt Cobain in Nirvana, Oasis, even as far as Dangermouse mixing Jay Z's Black Album with the Beatles White Album.

So as far as the Beatles go and as far as History will record they were, are and will remain the greatest band ever.

Period.

Also, in the 10 years since Mandy Moore released her first record, she has sold 10 million. Pretty impressive.

By the time the Beatles had got to be just 1 year from their first record they had sold over 100 million, and held twelve positions on the Billboard Hot 100 singles chart, including all the top five positions. Neither feat has been matched by any other artist to date. In the 8 years the band were together they sold over 545 million record and to todays date sales are up over a billion.

So in all fairness, I have to ask the question, who the fuck is Mandy Moore?

Apple and the Beatles management has had constant and famous legal battles over the the Apple trademark, that belonged to the Beatles management first. after the first bout, apple computers were able to use the trademark as long as they had nothing to do with the music industry. in a second case, after apple introduced cd drives and other audio related stuff, they won the right to keep the trademark as long as they never entered the music industry. then a third fight came when apple created itunes and the ipods, apple won this too, but the Beatles tracks have remained absent from itunes.

further more, anyone who would wait for this Beatles release cause "its remastered and will sound great, ima gonna get mono for extra purity" and then buys them off of itunes in a compressed form, is a f***ing idiot. (but i suppose its understandable for anyone too lazy to go to a shop, or can't be bothered ripping)

Does any of these "Beatle-haters" realize that even if they don't like the music, they have undoubtedly been listening to music/bands that were inspired by the fab four?

A band who played their own instruments, who wrote their own songs, whose hair (at the time) was long, white boys who covered R&B, the classic four-man-band with drums, bass, rhythm and lead guitars that is still the norm for today. Pre-1963, all you had was the likes of Paul Anka, Bobby Vinton, or some other performer from the same mold.

The Beatles broke that mold and nearly all popular music today was inspired, in some way, by them. It's OK if you don't like their music, but you are kidding yourself if you think any of the music you DO like today doesn't have roots with the Beatles.

I had to wikipedia Mandy More. Somehow I doubt that Mandy More is more influential than the Beatles. I'm 15, so you really can't say that the Beatles aren't relevant and aren't popular.

LOL. That's your opinion. But damn no drugs? no nothing?
Not even that green stuff?
I'm sorry.

Yoko Ono was a %$@#! back then and she's still one today. I love the Beatles and she was one "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds" trip a way firth then the band.

They are relevant and popular because music industry/media complex were hyping them for the last 5 decades. I had enough of them shoving mediocre and bad works to the public, and some uneducated people with utterly no taste fell for their trap and willfully give money to them. You want good music? Good, start from Bach, Mozart, Beethoven and all the way to Coltrane and Armstrong, then you will know what's good R&R and what is music industry/media complex hype. Given your age, you shouldn't listen to anything before 1900 yet, throw away your junk pop music and replace them with Mahler and Tschakovsky.

There is an old saying, "You can't polish a turd"

There is only so much that media hyping a product will go before the actual content stands up on its own. There is probably ten times the amount of media money and hype surrounding the average boy band today because they need all the help they can get. After a couple of albums the band splits up because they have no lasting appeal, (New Kids On The Block anybody?). What some people call media hype is in fact industry recognition of achievement, and rightly so, because if the Beatles were so bad then no amount of media exposure would have made people go out of their way to buy over a billion records over half a century.

you guys can't take a joke! i was just trying to lighten up everyone's day. i guess mandy moore wasn't the way to go about it.

You got that right, if you were going to make a joke comparison, maybe someone who had sold less than 10 million records and had a 10 year career. In all fairness, I think I agree with this website
http://www.blender.com/lists/67198 [...] story.html
And maybe comparing the Beatles to Insane Clown Posse would have been a slightly more obvious sarcasm. They sold 6.5 million records, I didn't realise they stacked shit that high!

The beatles, couldn't care less.

The Beatles of course! With Jacko out of the way, the new copyright holders have been very forthcoming!

Yeah BTW who took over the copyright after MJ.