Bruce Willis Sues Apple Over His iTunes Library [Updated]

What do you want to leave to your family when you die? Your car? Your laptop? Your collection of amazing pornography? For movie star Bruce Willis, it's his iTunes Library. It seems he finally got around to actually reading his iTunes Terms of Service and is now suing Apple for the rights to his library, which technically he's only "borrowing".

Image: Andrew H. Walker/Getty Images

Update: We've been had.

According to The Sun, Wills wants to leave his collection of sweet beats and smooth grooves to his three daughters, Rumer, Scout and Tallulah.

He's decided to sue Apple for the rights to his library. As one does. He's only following the example Apple seem to have set for dealing with problems, at least? [The Sun]



    What a top bloke!! :D

      If he dosnt win in the court, he could always jsut go kick in the iTunes servers :D

    Let the puns begin!

    It's a shame they are fighting, he seemed to get on really well with his Mac in Die Hard 4

    Why can't he just give them the music files? There's no DRM on them.

      It might be easy, but it'd still be breaking the law.
      Wanting transferable licenses for digital stuff sounds like a fine thing for customers to push for. Not just for music, but for any games you've bought on Steam or have tied to your Google account or any other number of online repositories.

        Digital property is still property. A right consumers have regarding the property is the right of resale.

    Yeah good luck with that Buck Buck, doesn't He make like $20Mill a movie?Cheepskate.

      Yeah good luck with that Samsung lawsuit Apple, don't they make like $20Mill an hour? Cheepskates.

      Cheapskate, no the fight he is about to go through is for every consumer. If the court rules in his favour it benefits all iTunes users.

      I am glad he is standing up to them, it takes someone who earns 20Mil a movie to make this happen.

      I dare say it will probably go to out of court settlement, or they will create a Bruce Willis level of iTunes account that only he can join or something.

      Hes already paid for the music, why cant he keep it legally. If its renting music (which is actually stupid) Apple should make that clear. It's just outright abuse.

      So good on yah Brucie, i hope you stomp the totalitarian pigs.

      Well actually he is using his time, money and popularity to give yourself some rights.... yeah he is definitely a douchebag


    None of us own "our" music collection the way we might own a fork or a biro (creators and copyright owners notwithstanding).

    What we could claim ownership of, however, is the unique listing and arrangement of our particular music collection. That could easily be characterised as an ongoing work in itself, which Bruce would clearly have ownership of. I would argue that the license to use *should* follow any permitted physical copies (as they do with a CD), so perhaps he could mount a similar argument? Really not sure what justification he'll use here...

      I own all of my music on physical CD's. It's still the way I prefer to buy music and really dislike buying digitally. I can legally pass those CD's down to my daughter when I die, or at any other time of my choosing.

      The end.

        +1, i am the same and do not buy anything digitally unless it is bandcamp/beatport etc, i.e something that is not released on CD in store. long live actually owning something physical rather than some 1 and 0's

          I applaud your stance! Just wondering if you realise that the only thing that makes a CD play music IS the 1s and 0s on it. :P

        You own the files too. But not the copyright, same as CDs.

        Apple doesn't care what you do with them, only labels do. Apple doesn't own copyright.

        No, you don't own the music (this is why you're not permitted to copy it, or only have a limited licence to do so). What you pay when you "buy" a CD is:
        1 - The physical media (and packaging etc)
        2 - A once-off licence that grants you unlimited playback

        I used to be involved in community radio a while back and used to purchase CDs direct from the distributor for radio play. In that instance we only had to pay for the physical CD, not the licence as we made royalty payments direct to APRA each time we played a track. We didn't need a playback licence (it's about half the cost of the CD).

        To be clear. You own the medium, not the content. The content remains the exclusive property of the copywrite holder

          Where did I say I owned the copyright? I said I owned the CD's, and I can legally give those to my child at a time of my choosing, as long as I don't keep a copy of them for myself.

          Trust me, I work in software dev, I know the copyright law quite well. I'm pointing out the difference between having a physical CD, and buying off iTunes. I can legally give (or sell) those CD's to anyone I want as long as I don't also keep a copy for myself. You can't legally do that with stuff purchased off iTunes.

    Apple's TOS in one line: you own nothing, we own everything.

      Yeah you go Leo, fight the power, man! The only way we can win summarising legal agreements!

      I think the argument you guys are having illustrates the silliness of copyright contracts and the law.

      one has to ask the question re physical
      media and unlimited play liences is what sort of practical rights does the licensor have over the
      liences i.e can they cancel the rights (with due compensation) and although they state the licence cannot be transferred it happens constantly whether be handed down or at 2nd markets?

    Good one church

    Just goes to show, don't have anything to do with Apple cause they are going to screw you

      Oh please, you really think this is unique to Apple? The same goes for anything purchased from Sony, Microsoft or Google Play for that matter.

      Oh man, lucky you never will then - thank god you're safe pepee63.

      Record companies buddy, not Apple. They just pass on the ULA to the buyer, from the copyright holder, namely, the record company. Read your windows ULA and you'll find you don't own that either. So lets have nothing to do with microsoft then?

    There's not a child alive who wants to inherit their parents music collection.

      You may have been stuck with your parents ABBA collection, but some of us got some real classics. . . Stones, Floyd, Hendrix, etc etc. . .

      Hmmm. . . maybe I should modernise that comment with 80's/90's 'old classics'.

    Apple don't own your iTunes library either. The record companies do. Even the music CD's you buy aren't yours. Same with Windows OS. Honestly, read the terms of use, you're only licensed to use it as a single user. You never actually own it. Reading ULA's will have you in the foetal position. I just choose to live my life not worrying about these things Bruce. Why waste money suing for THIS? You think Apple give a shit about your library Bruce? No, nobody does. Nobody but your lawyer buddy. Time to get a life I think.

      "Even the music CD's you buy aren't yours". If I bought them, I own them.

        The physical CD's are yours, but the music on them is not. I think that's the point he was making. You buy a license to listen to the music. The music itself remains property of the artist and/or record label.

    Maybe he should have left them some better names...

      Haha! :D

    Why is he suing apple for the rights to the music? Apple doesn't own that...

    Try Hard.

    I thought Bruce was a tosser untill I read this.

    From what I understand he is free to make a physical/digital copy of his music to transfer however he wants.

    I wonder if Bruce's blues albums are available on itunes?


    Rule 1: Never believe anything printed in the UK Sun "newspaper"
    Rule 2: Properly research stories so you don't look like a bunch of idiots when it's revealed to be fake.

Join the discussion!