Slashdot Mirror

Without the cartel, the prices of CDs would likely vary depending on supply / demand of the individual records. Prices are artificially held at a certain price, not because of the monopoly on a single recording, but because of (illegal) price fixing.

Of probable noteworthy addition is.. those prices in 1983, and 1996, led to an anti-trust pricefixing lawsuit brought by 43 states.

http://musiccdsettlement.com/english/default.htm

Maybe they do where you live, but most parts of the world, they have these laws that prevent price fixing, and companies actually compete for the customer's business.

Where the hell do you live where you have a plethora of broadband providers to choose from?
A typical American has a choice of either one or two providers, that's it. We have competition for milk, eggs and beer, not broadband.

Of course, if you have any evidence of price fixing, maybe you shouldn't be talking to me, maybe you should be talking to a lawyer, cause you could have some sweet class action lawsuit payout coming.

Yeah right. "Sweet payout" Maybe you'll get back the money that was swindled from you illegally, but probably you'll just get a discount coupon. Take a look here to get an idea of what a typical settlement with a megacorp looks like.

Similarly, if you're so sure that ISPs are price fixing, in clear violation of the law, then why bother supporting a new law? Won't they just break that one too?

This is bullshit logic. Just because one law is ineffective it does not mean that:
A) Any other law would also be ineffictive
B) We should give up and let crimnals do whatever they want

That might have been true 10 years ago, maybe even 5 years ago.

But now ANYONE can record, duplicate, and distribute their music very easily. With broadband almost everywhere, it only takes a few seconds to d/l a single, and a few minutes to download an album. With recording equipment being very prolific and MySpace's popularity the labels are losing (I would say have already lost) their death grip on distribution to the public.

I work in the Industry, and I agree the labels are very cut-throat and slimy, perhaps even illegal at times. But I think the convictions you are talking about are more about price-fixing and the co-op advertsing deals.

Check out:
http://www.musiccdsettlement.com/english/default.h tm

"Tell me again why a DVD is less than a CD?"

Okay, once again: supply and demand.

I'm remembering when the major labels were accused of price fixing on CD's when they were new to the market. Basically, they decided to artificially charge more for essentially the same content, even though the manufacturing costs were less than with other media like tape.

Is there going to be a similar issue with new "HD" content being more expensive, even though the technology to produce MAY be similar in cost (no, I don't know the cost of manufacturing a BluRay DVD vs a standard DVD).

In other words, does this cost more because it's more expensive, or cost more because the studios want to extract the most money possible?

There's a website with more details on the DC case and settlement.

A bigger issue is the ownership of downloaded songs. We're moving toward a scheme in the music industry that will match what has been done in the software industry for a long time now: you do not own the music/software, you merely have been granted a license to use it.

Such a license could also be created so as to be non-transferrable, in that if you sell someone the original media, they don't get the license. In addition, the license may expire after some arbitrary amount of time. This is what the music industry is ultimately attempting to do with DRM (forget the whole piracy argument, it's mainly a front for getting the DRM in place).

Now, if the price of music were hugely reduced by the new licensing scheme, since renting is cheaper than owning (and by hugely I mean less than 1% of current costs), that might be acceptable, but the ultimate goal is to implement the licensing without reducing the price of music.

For this scheme to work, all of the major labels would have to be in collusion or else market forces would tend to reduce the price (although not as much as in other markets, since artists are restricted to a single label, and people tend to buy music based on the artist, not on which artist is cheaper). We all know the music industry doesn't engage in price fixing

People need to wake up about this, although I don't see that happening until after everyone's music starts to expire after 5 plays or 30 days, whichever comes first

ok, /rant

I mostly agree with this --

Awhile ago, my brother-in-law and I once discussed the idea of a 'sweet spot' in pricing. I suggested that there is a price that I would consider fair for a CD or DVD (etc.) that I'd be willing to pay, even if I could download the contents for free. Also, I listen to a lot of indie/small/local bands (such as Diamond Fist Werny), and I try to support them by buying their music. So, ultimately, I'm not opposed to paying for these things.

I think part of the download-for-free movement was spurred by the inflated prices of CDs in the last decade, when music companies "conspired to illegally raise the prices" of certain products. So, if the music companies aren't going to play fair, why should we?

Another way to encourage people to buy CDs and DVDs, I think, is to include little bonuses in the packaging, like the inserts you get with CDs that include band information, lyrics, etc. I notice that movie DVDs have been pretty sparse on the inserts lately (except for special editions and so forth) and some are pretty lacking in "extras". As a result, I can see why people download them instead: there's little (if any) value gained by buying the real thing.

btw, bottled water is a big industry I think because there's a lot of places in the world where drinking the tap water will make you ill. There's probably a parallel with the music/movie industry there somewhere... :-)

Just more of the reasons why p2p is a friend to the indie and just a few of the many reasons why the big record companies are going the way of the dinosaurs.

CD Price fixing class action [antitrust] lawsuit against the big music labels settled:
http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/bl-cd-settle ment.htm
http://www.musiccdsettlement.com/english/default.h tm

The full suit can be downloaded here(quite interesting I may add)
http://www.oag.state.ny.us/press/2000/aug/aug08a_0 0_attach.pdf

And just in case you weren't sure how the music industry works (and why we are inundated with lackluster crap advertised on the knob.....errrr, i mean 'played' on the radio by big manufactured label artists)!!

We've all known for a long time that contemporary pop music stinks. We hear "hits" on the radio and wonder, "How can this be?" Now we know. And memos from both Sony's Columbia and Epic Records senior vice presidents of promotions circa 2002-2003 -- whose names are redacted in the reports but are well known in the industry -- spell out who to pay and what to pay them in order to get the company's records on the air.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,163537,00.html

Recording industry titan Sony BMG Music Entertainment agreed Monday to pay $10 million and stop bribing radio stations to feature its artists in what a state official called a more sophisticated generation of the payola scandals of decades ago.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/artic le/2005/07/25/AR2005072501025.html?sub=AR

I was talking to some folks at work who were crabbing about how they had replaced all their old tapes and records for CD's over the years, and how much all that cost. One lady's kid has more than her, yet she paid (of course for all of it). I informed them that they had the opportunity to get in on some cash back since the RIAA sucks donkey balls; of course I didn't say it like that.

Point is... they didn't know about the settlement. I said that's what happens when you don't get involved in your government. Laws that allow companies to do illegal business get passed. Worse, the government itself puts laws in place that are horribly detrimental to the very people it seeks to protect. Same thing happened in Germany between 1919 - 1933; those damned commies, can't trust 'em. For some reason, rationale people didn't make rationale decisions and somehow that crazy fuck Hitler got into office.

We all gotta do our part. Get involved. Watch your government, or better, be your government!

By all means necessary... What I call violence, I can't do , but your kind of violence is stopping me.

Some of their conclusions:
1) The industry experienced a huge boom during the early to mid 90s as CD players became inexpensive to buy.
2) A good portion of those buying CDs were not buying new albums but CD versions of existing music in their collections.

So the music industry was experiencing golden years due to a new emerging technology and the fact that people were replacing vinyl and cassettes with CDs to augment this new emerging technology. But that behavior only lasts so long. Eventually people would have replaced their collections. They would be buying new music but not at the rates as before.

Also, although the manufacturing costs of a CD have dropped dramatically, their prices were still higher than cassettes which cost more to make. This was done for years due to collusion by the music industry and retailers to keep the prices artificially high. This collusion has been documented as part of settlements of lawsuits.

What's more important is that the industry has expected the profits to be the same as that during the boom times even though times were changing. In most industies, the newest products and prototypes are always the most expensive. When economies of scale kick in and manufacturing becomes more efficient, prices start to drop. Take for example, CD and DVD players.

At the same time, the focus of the industry was changing. By now, most music companies had been bought by large conglomerates like Sony and Vivendi. They expected quick profits and the profits to remain high. The industry began to shift its focus from acts to albums. Before it was about the artists and maintaining them. Now it was about getting the CD out. Getting the music video out. It didn't matter if the music suffered as long as the sales were made. It became about the single, the first minute.

At the same time, the radio industry was experiencing the same kind of consolidation as the music industry. Fewer and fewer independents existed. Most were controlled by a few corporations like Clear Channel.

With the music industries controlled by a select few companies, and the predominant means of distribution tightly controlled (radio and retail), the industry had now a near monopoly on music distribution.

Enter P2P. P2P threatens the industry in two ways. Although there have been music sales lost due to piracy, P2P is more threatening in that artists now have an alternative method of distribution that bypasses their control. Unfortunately, P2P gives them a scapegoat for their sales. It doesn't matter that sales should have suffered years ago due lowering prices (manufacturing cost decreases) and lowering sales (people stop replacing older formats). I suggest you watch the Frontline episode online.

I think the parent is saying let the market determine the price instead of having artificially inflated prices that are set by the music industry. Isn't price fixing illegal? Weren't they found guilty of charging too much for recorded media? You are allowed to set the price, but if you get together in a group and decide as a whole to sell a product at a particular inflated price then you're reducing competition.

If the market is free, meaning it is actually controlled by supply and demand, then perhaps Brittany Spears CD's would sell for $0.32, since nobody in their right mind would want them (joke, joke).

*Perhaps* this is because *that's the deal* that *your band* *agreed to* when *you* *signed* the *contract*. It's *the price* for a *chance* at *major label* fame and *fortune*!

Or perhaps it's the tithe you have to pay to a bunch of goons who have monopolized US music distribution?

Somebody would be an idiot for signing a contract like that IN A FREE MARKET, but we have no such thing. Hell, an independent band even has to pay an RIAA tax on the the blank media they use to record.

The problem isn't this guy, it's that a criminal organization has managed to buy off politicians to the point where they even make money off blank tapes they neither manufactured nor distributed. You have to pay them for NOTHING, how fucked up is that?

What if you are guilty? That's why there are trials and juries and all that.

To see such optimism really warms my old heart... can I quote that above to these guys?

If you don't like the way the law and courts work, I would agree. It doesn't mean that what the RIAA is doing is wrong.

Don't you think that being sued in a civil court and running up thousands of dollars in legal fees is a threat? One that the RIAA/MPAA uses all the time. And even if you are innocent, stand your ground and defend yourself, the penalties that could be applied if you are wrongly convicted (see above) will ruin your life.

Copyright law needs to exist to protect the rights of the artists that produce the content , not the industry that doesn't compensate them and screws consumers, then blatantly thumbs their nose at the court ordered fix.

When the RIAA starts doing the right thing, then I'll start supporting their actions against those that infringe. Until then, this looks too much like a big criminal shaking down a smaller one.

I would be very surprised if there were pricing information in the contract because that would make some very nice evidence for price fixing. More likely the license that RIAA collects from Real is fixed and Real is welcome to charge whatever they want.

Especially considering that many RIAA members just settled last year a class-action lawsuit alleging price fixing via "Minimum Advertised Price" policies.

The Defendants are five music distributors and three music retailers.

The lawsuit in question involved suing a number of specific labels, as well as a few retailers. Scroll down for a list of defendants If you want to get riled up about this, do so by all means, but target the correct group. You don't like it when the RIAA accuses all file-swappers of being criminals, so make yourselves look better than them by not doing the same thing.

Despite the /. groupthink, not everything you don't like in the recording industry comes from the RIAA.

All those music corporations are guilty of price fixing. They kept charging $15 dollars a CD even though the cost of the media kept falling. They could not have all done this on their own, they must have illegally acted in concert to keep prices high. Someone should start a class action lawsuit.

Umm, you do know that this already happened, right?

There was a class action lawsuit. I got a whole $13.86 in the settlement.

1. Listen to RIAA music and pay
2. Listen to RIAA music and not pay
3. Don't listen to RIAA music

1. Listen to RIAA music and pay
2. Listen to RIAA music and not pay
3. Don't listen to RIAA music

(Yes, I'm an EFF contributor, but they shouldn't be worrying about how much a music track should cost...)

Yes they should. In this case the RIAA is behaving as a cartel in order to fix prices. They've done this before with CDs.

This is illegal and bad for everyone but the RIAA. This is definately something the EFF should be keeping their eye on. Besides the right to freedom of speech online, We also have the right to a "free" market online.

Actually, while this is probably unknown around Slashdot, a group can damn well fix prices if they want, it's completely legal.

Oh I'm you are right.

If you have a change of address after you submitted a claim, you need to provide your new mailing address to the Administrator at the address below. Additionally, it is recommended that you update your mailing address with the U.S. Postal Service.

Compact Disc MAP Litigation Administrator
PO Box 1650
Faribault, MN 55021-1650

better hurry!

The settlement dictates that if you bought one CD, cassete, or album from a member of the RIAA between January 1, 1995, through December 22, 2000, you are entitled to 20 bucks. Max.

If you bought 300 CDs, you would get 20 bucks. Max.

If you bought a CD every day for those five years - 20 dollars. Max.

Please note, the RIAA admits to no wrongdoing. If the total to each claimant is less than 5 dollars, it all goes to charity. (And becomes a tax write off?)

You're right! I don't want 'double standards'. If I do something wrong, like infringe copyright - I want to settle for a fraction of the money a make each year, and admit no wrongdoing.

Just like the 'Big Biz'.

Why do you think it's so hard to justify? With the number of entities trying to screw me over on a daily basis, then 'admitting no wrongdoing' (catchphrase of the 21 century), I have a hard time caring about anything that 'hurts' big business.

BTW, has anyone recieved their settlement check?

We all know which backwater these litigation crazed reptiles (aka music industry executives) were bred in. Kill them now, before they get a chance to breed.

You have to understand: it's not that music industry executives always reproduce at that rate. It's just that Australia doesn't have any natural predators to counter-act the growth of the entertainment industry. Here in America, for example, our high population of lawyers and politicians ensures that there will always be _someone_ who wants to eat a music executive.

Didn't we already try this?

Ah hah.

Update - August 13, 2003
To receive any reimbursement under these settlements, you must have mailed or filed a claim on-line with the Settlement Administrator. The Court approved deadline for submitting a claim for reimbursement under the settlements has now passed.
The Final Settlement Hearing was held on May 22, 2003, and the Settlement was approved on June 13, 2003. You can view the Judge's order by clicking here. An Order Regarding Claims was issued on July 2, 2003. To view the Order Regarding Claims, click here. The Final Judgment and Order was issued on July 9, 2003. To view the Final Judgment and Order, click here. Notices of appeal have been filed by persons whose objections to the Settlement were denied by the District Court. Counsel for the State Plaintiffs and Plaintiff Settlement Class are contesting those appeals. Until the appeals are resolved or denied, payments for valid claims and distribution of CDs under the Cy Pres Distribution Plan cannot go forward Please check this web site periodically for updates.

Taken from http://www.musiccdsettlement.com/english/default.h tm

That explains it.

How 'bout we give you amnesty if you, collectively and individually, admit to illegal price fixing, and actually give us our money back?

Did anyone sign up for that? And actually get any money?


This is no better than a mugging.
"Gimme all your stuff, and I won't kill you (financially). Oh, and we'll be watching you. Forever."

Get caught stealing 1/2 billion dollars, and no one went to jail? And the fine is 1/3 of the take? And they want to screw us?
WTF is that about?

Ok, so Universal is lowering the SRP to $12.99 -- call it $13.00, since that 99-cent marketing crap annoys me. That basically admits that the they're selling was extremely overpriced before the cuts. And unless they've made some fundamental changes and improvements to their infrastructure, that would facilitate the level of cost savings that could justify such a mammoth price cut, I don't think anything's changed. Their manufacturing prices are still microscopic, the artists still receive a pittance for the music they produce, and Universal still spends way more than it should be on middlemen and marketing (aka pop artist development).

No, I still think CDs are still a rip-off, even at $13 a pop. At $13, CDs are the same price as they would be if every CDs was covered by the terms of the pending CD settlement. Besides, CDs are still being churned out with DRM that (unreasonably, I feel) restricts how I use the goods I have legally purchased. And there's been no headway made in addressing what rights, if any, the RIAA believes users have when they purchase music. Right now, it seems as though each CD is a "license" to use the music in a very restricted fashion, at a very unattractive price. So why should I have any more reason to buy music now than when I did before?

I recently sold back my entire CD collection to Wherehouse Music for ~$150 store credit, picked up a bunch of DVDs instead. For the money, I get a lot more enjoyment out of movies than I do mainstream-label music, and without the hassle that comes along with it. And most of the good stuff I've heard as of late anyway is off of indie labels, when I'm hanging out with my friends. Anything else I want, I can get from KaZaA; I mean, if I'm going to be treated like a criminal for the way I use my purchased music, why not behave like a criminal regardless?

I have little to say to this decision than "too little, to late". I am reminded of the recent lawsuit of Kazaa vs. major record companies (Time-Warner, Virgin Records, etc). of Kazaa vs. major record companies (Time-Warner, Virgin Records, etc), alleging that these record labels conspired to increase the price of CDs. Results: "This settlement will put cash in teh hands of millions of consumers and music CDs in libraries and schools throught the country, and will ensure that the challenged distributor/retailer practices will not resume."
Full results of the article can be found here.

Well finally, lowering prices. That's a relief. But to 12.99? Who are they kidding? They're still hitting profit margins like popcorn at a movie theatre, and CDs are clearly above what any sensible consumer would consider a "fair" price. But they are clearly not lowering prices enough to "bring consumers back into stores."
Instead, they sic the RIAA on everyone, start spitting out scare tactics, threats, seizing bank accounts, etc, then there's the MPAA whining about Warez, then text messeging. Countless US citizens, many whom honestly pay for and purchase music legally and download some music (who clearly pump money into the music/entertainment industry as a whole), are getting tangled up and crippled just so others will be scared to do the same.

And what does it all boil down to?
The music entertainment is simply charging too much for second-rate products/servies (anyone see Gigli recently? I didn't think so). They are doing so because it has historically worked befor p2p alternatives (such as freenet) started showing up. Now, faced with fair prices, they panic and sue by the thousands, which isn't helping them long-term. Millions of people worldwide are getting soured by US entertainment industries, and the entire United States looks like one giant ass as far as other countries may see us (whatever happened to that free country thing we had going a couple hundred years ago?).

The Bottom Line
I absolutely, blatantly refuse to support music/entertainment industries while this chaos is going on. These lawsuits spitting back and forth do not represent the ideals that our country was founded upon. I for one, spit in the music industry. I blatantly refuse to support any industry that practices such childplay.

As for the artists I suppose there's little to do other than say tough beans, cause I'm not paying for any of your crap while it's mixed up with RIAA. Or is there? There are plenty of ways to make lots of money that stray far from CDs in retail stores. Put your mp3s up for free download, the fans will come. New services like iTunes are a great alternative to Records, or even better, record your own!!. I am in full support of music artists, and I always will be, and I will never stop pouring dollars into concerts, special events, etc.

If you are an artist or an end consumer, don't be pushed around by bully tactics. There is still plenty you can do to download your favorite music, support the artists, and still keep the RIAA out of your face. They may look tough now, but don't back down; they're only eating themselves.

I have little to say to this decision than "too little, to late". I am reminded of the recent lawsuit of Kazaa vs. major record companies (Time-Warner, Virgin Records, etc). of Kazaa vs. major record companies (Time-Warner, Virgin Records, etc), alleging that these record labels conspired to increase the price of CDs. Results: "This settlement will put cash in teh hands of millions of consumers and music CDs in libraries and schools throught the country, and will ensure that the challenged distributor/retailer practices will not resume."
Full results of the article can be found here.

Well finally, lowering prices. That's a relief. But to 12.99? Who are they kidding? They're still hitting profit margins like popcorn at a movie theatre, and CDs are clearly above what any sensible consumer would consider a "fair" price. But they are clearly not lowering prices enough to "bring consumers back into stores."
Instead, they sic the RIAA on everyone, start spitting out scare tactics, threats, seizing bank accounts, etc, then there's the MPAA whining about Warez, then text messeging. Countless US citizens, many whom honestly pay for and purchase music legally and download some music (who clearly pump money into the music/entertainment industry as a whole), are getting tangled up and crippled just so others will be scared to do the same.

And what does it all boil down to?
The music entertainment is simply charging too much for second-rate products/servies (anyone see Gigli recently? I didn't think so). They are doing so because it has historically worked befor p2p alternatives (such as freenet) started showing up. Now, faced with fair prices, they panic and sue by the thousands, which isn't helping them long-term. Millions of people worldwide are getting soured by US entertainment industries, and the entire United States looks like one giant ass as far as other countries may see us (whatever happened to that free country thing we had going a couple hundred years ago?).

The Bottom Line
I absolutely, blatantly refuse to support music/entertainment industries while this chaos is going on. These lawsuits spitting back and forth do not represent the ideals that our country was founded upon. I for one, spit in the music industry. I blatantly refuse to support any industry that practices such childplay.

As for the artists I suppose there's little to do other than say tough beans, cause I'm not paying for any of your crap while it's mixed up with RIAA. Or is there? There are plenty of ways to make lots of money that stray far from CDs in retail stores. Put your mp3s up for free download, the fans will come. New services like iTunes are a great alternative to Records, or even better, record your own!!. I am in full support of music artists, and I always will be, and I will never stop pouring dollars into concerts, special events, etc.

If you are an artist or an end consumer, don't be pushed around by bully tactics. There is still plenty you can do to download your favorite music, support the artists, and still keep the RIAA out of your face. They may look tough now, but don't back down; they're only eating themselves.

I was thinking the same exact thing when I read this story. According to this, we can expect to receive our checks in "late-summer or early-fall 2003."

Here's the latest info. All the legal nonsense has gone through. They're tallying the forms now. They say cheques will be shipped out late-summer or early-fall this year.

Well, let's take account of your statements.

1.P2P is legit.

I agree. P2P itself is legit.

2. Theft follows naturally when greed, possession and laziness are part of our way of life.

I'm afraid that I have to agree that this is often so. People become so blinded by what they can GET, that they forget the basic rules of civilization and ethics, and will deprive others of their rights for immediate gain. Although these attitudes may be precursors to theft, they are still not to blame. What is to blame is disrespect for the rights of others, which is inherently evil. Greed, laziness, and possession themselves are not inherently evil, despite what St. Thomas Aquinas, et al may say. Greed, laziness and possession push progress forward. Without laziness, no one would ever have invented the wheel. Without greed and possession, no civilization would ever have explored the world around them, no railroads would be built, no superhighways paved.

3. The RIAA has been stealing millions a year.

The music industry has been found to fix prices in violation of the law. To me, price fixing is not theft, but it is just as bad. It is unethical in that by doing so, they LIE to the consumer. It is a form of fraud, not theft. I would like to see an example cited where the music industry has actually STOLEN money from anyone. Charging high prices for their own goods is a right of theirs, as long as they don't fix prices, no matter how little it actually costs to make the cd's, or how little they give to the artists.

4. Capitalism is in a sad shape in this country, and Microsoft should not be hailed as a success story.

I agree that capitalism is under fire and in danger, but my reasons for thinking this are probably entirely different from yours, and my reasons are too involved to get into here. I would be interested in knowing, in what way you believe that Microsoft has acted that is against the true spirit of Capitalism?

5. Screw You

How mature.

If you find my ideas interesting, you might also like to read this

Crap. According to this (which is supposed to be in this frameset) the deadline is past for excluding myself.

I never included myself, so I don't get a settlement, and I don't care about that because I didn't want those settlement terms, anyway.

But since I didn't explicitly exclude myself, does that mean I've lost all legal options to pursue a claim that they conspired to price gouge me?

Crap. According to this (which is supposed to be in this frameset) the deadline is past for excluding myself.

I never included myself, so I don't get a settlement, and I don't care about that because I didn't want those settlement terms, anyway.

But since I didn't explicitly exclude myself, does that mean I've lost all legal options to pursue a claim that they conspired to price gouge me?

Read the settlement....here's the pertinent quote

The Defendants have denied and continue to deny each and all of the claims and contentions alleged by the Plaintiffs and any violation of law. The Court has not made any determination as to the merits of any of the claims or defenses of the parties to this Litigation.

So they were not "Found Guilty" of anything. Yes, the judge may have had nasty things to say about them, but legally, they werent found guilty.

Include your full name, business name if you are filing on behalf of a business, your complete address, your telephone number with area code, your date of birth, including the year, and the last four digits of your Social Security Number.

That's ok, keep your money and I'll settle my claim via kazaa.

For the RIAA to be in violation of antitrust law, it'd have to (for instance) make secret agreements between major labels about what new acts get signed, or set industry-wide prohibitions on how they distribute music over the internet.

How about price fixing? Because the RIAA has settled a federal lawsuit over price fixing (The CD Minimum Advertized Price antitrust case), which certainly sounds like the behavior of an illegal trust to me. Of course, given recent behavior on the part of the Justice Department there's no actual risk of anything other than civil lawsuits over that kind of thing. The US government seems uninterested in enforcing anti-trust laws.

what i don't understand is why so many people are using their considerable talents and intellect to create arguments FOR, and technology TO rip off some of the most harmless people in this country- musicians. Way to go, guys, hurt a group of people who do no harm to the environment or society, and have done nothing but enhance your lives.

I can't believe the demonization of the musicians in general, so everyone can not only feel not guilty about music piracy, but you can convince yourself that you're doing a valuable public service as well.

so let me ask you, MP3 traders, you who are so socially conscious, do you know who is really ripping you off for their own diabolical ends? Why aren't you going after who's really in control of money and powerin our country? What are you doing to thwart them?

it's been proven that when the music industry rips people off intelligent, comitted people can make them pay for it. That's how you do it, that's how you make a real change.

when you're done with the record industry what are you going to do steal from the 'real' man? oh that's right- nothing...that would take effort and commitment, and let's face it, making a REAL change in this world just isn't as fun as watching your downloads complete.

Warez by any other name...

What can we do?

It sounds like there's a ton of people who agree with this lawsuit but don't believe it'll succeed.

I'm sure there are people out there who do read the EULAs and can site many specific examples that could possibly help in this case.

What about a way to help with attorney fees?

Perhaps an even better question to encourage people to help is:

How do we get in on this class-action lawsuit? :)

Is there a website where we can sign up like many already have for the CD price-fixing settlement?

What you *will* do is reveal a lot of personal info.

Check it out if you wanna: Music CD Settlement

And, of course, we can't forget price fixing and the uncalculatable affect of independent music now being freely available on the internet to compete with mainstream music.

hmmm, "banding together" sounds familiar...

Wouldn't all this "banding together" get them into more (small) trouble?

We are in the customer relationship business

What buisness is not?

If you bought a CD in the last few years, get your $20.00 from the Compact Disc Minimum Advertised Price Antitrust Litigation Settlement. Click the red text on the lefthttp://www.musiccdsettlement.com/english/defau lt.htm

Why do I have the feeling that this decade is going to be known as the "Mine! Mine!" decade.

The genie is out of the bottle, and no law, technology, or ad campaign is ever going to put it back in. Copyrights have been violated since the first artist in history signed their name (or stamped their mark) on their work.

(and as a descendent of one of the artists in Altamira, I would like my cut of the souvenir profits)

Why the recording industry (and others) now feel threatened enough to start raising a fuss, is because it's just become much easier. Although, overall, I don't see how it can really hurt their bottom line. They are making many times the profit on their product than they did in the 70's, 80's, and 90's (am I the only one who's noticed how $1 and $2 paperbacks are now selling for $9 - $12. Was there a sudden paper shortage that I never heard about?). Don't even get me started on CD's, do you really expect me to believe that the bottom line cost of a CD is twice as much as a cassette tape (considering the markup).

If the industry would get smart and offer their products at a decent price, it would help to insure that the run-of-the mill consumer is not tempted to use other means to acquire the product. But if they expect that a few words in a lawbook is going to stop what has already started, they are dreaming.

Dr. Wu

PS: If the music industry is so perfect themselves, then why are they settling the lawsuits against them for illegal price fixing.

Music CD Settlement

You mean like this?

Granted, it wasn't the cartel-busting move that many hoped for, and indeed the actual $ amount is trivial, but still it's nice to see them lose.

The first question on their Questions and Answers page is hilarious:

1. Am I being sued?
No, you are not being sued. Certain companies are being sued.

Are there really people out there who ended up at this site and somehow got the impression that *they* were being sued? The lack of common sense some people suffer from never ceases to amaze me... ;)

DennyK