Slashdot Mirror
Best Buy Backs CD Copy Impairment
borkus writes: "Chief Operating Officer Allen Lenzmeier of Best Buy, Co, owner of Best Buy Stores and Musicland said that his company would support industry efforts at copyright protection, though he didn't specify any particular technology. Although Best Buy stores sell MP3 players, CD-Burners and tape decks, they aquired Musicland in 2001. According to the article, the 10% decrease in music sales in 2001 was caused mostly by Internet file swapping. As a major retailer of both electronics AND music, Best Buy could have a huge impact on the future format of music player hardware as well as software."
And if people can't use CDR's for writing CD's then they are going to notice a far greater drop in profits than those caused by file-swapping systems.
Okay.. I'm going to say something snarly here. Have they actually given serious thought to the possibility that the reason sales are down is because the fanatical followers of bubblegum pop have started to grow up?
Probably not.
This is a supply/demand issue. It's quite possible that the listening audience demand has dropped because the supply is drek.
BestBuy was just eliminating a competitor when they bought Musicland. They were already one of the largest sellers of cd's in 2001. The real issue behind this is that BestBuy owns a record label (can't remember the name, Red Line Records?) and as such they are indirectly member of the RIAA.
Geez... Instead of assuming that the loses are because of us evil consumers, they should look at the feeble economy. People who are scared they might not have jobs (or actually don't have jobs) usually don't run right out and get the latest treasures from N'Sync and Britney. Survival is more of a concern.
Don't anthropomorphize computers, they don't like it.
I'll get my stuff off the net from people who don't assume that I'm a criminal.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
Just like Circuit City had a huge impact on the way we watch DVDs.
I've had enough abrasive sigs. Kittens are cute and fuzzy.
This reminds me of a hilarious study I read about in college... Several pigeons were put into identical boxes that would spit out a food pellet once every minute. Within a few minutes one pigeon was hopping up and down constantly, the second was continually spinning, and another wouldn't stop bobbing his head... It turns out that they were assuming that whatever action they were doing when the food first was dispensed was causing the food to be released, so they would continue to do it indefinitely to keep the food coming! If A is happening, then it MUST be a result of B....
so... yeah... um.. it must be the file trading!
No surpise, really, considering that Best Buy and the RIAA are both on the retail side of things. What I find interesting is that both sectors care little for the artist or the listener... boiling down their influence on music to making it shiny and flashy.
Sooner or later, musicians and audiophiles will have enough technology to bypass all this ridulousness. Let's just hope it doesn't end up being illegal for me to buy listening rights to a song directly from whoever wrote and recorded it!
There is no need to use a SlashDot sig for SEO...
Excuse me? 10% drop in music sales over the past year? Lets be a little level headed here and realise that the economy hasn't been that stellar for the past bit and I can see a 10% drop in the purchasing of Compact Discs that cost $15-$25 a piece.
Lets also put this into context. How many people are on GNUtella or Kazza? Well, on GNUtella it is hard to tell due to how the system works, but I wouldn't be suprised if it was in the 50,000 - 100,000 range. KaZaA is probably at a similar level. How many people out there listen to CDs they buy legitimately? I am sure there are more people with legit CDs than those who have burned MP3s or OGG Vorbis files on to CD-ROMS.
Utter bullshit.
Was caused by internet piracy then because people were discovering all sorts of new music they had never heard and were rushing out to purchase CD's of the good stuff...
Right?
Right?
oh no no no, that was brilliant marketing on the part of RIAA and besides it would've been... uh...28% growth, yeah, 30% even if it hadn't been for those EVIL CHEATING INTERNET PIRACY SCUM who are STEALING money away from these poor starving artsts they represent!
Courtney Love: I want the money you owe me!
RIAA: Shut up! Oh Mr. Clintttooonnnnn... would you mind signing this bill into law that says musicians are really contractors to us and don't really deserve any money for their creations except for an hourly wage, but extend copyright law so we can sell the same disc at 1500% mark-up for 100 years? Thaaanksss... Oh, here's some money for your wife's campaign...
I was going to buy some CDs today. I usually shop at Best Buy. Now I wouldn't be going to Best Buy even if they have the best price. I want value for my purchasing dollar. Limiting my future choices is not value. I didn't buy an iPod to have Best Buy dictate how I use it in the future.
Don't let companies pull this garbage. Don't buy from them. Best Buy just screwed themselves permanently with me. It will be very hard for them to dictate to customers if they don't have any.
Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government.
Analysts expect downloading of Internet music files to lead to another year of declining sales after U.S. music shipments slumped 10.3 percent in 2001.
Which was in no way affected by the recession we're still seeing in many states. The reason why they only dropped 10% is because of internet advertizement.
Does these copy protect CDs specify on the package what hardware they play on or what hardware they DO NOT work on? Product description laws? What about fair use laws? Does these products infringe these laws? I dont know about laws in the US, but in Europe, WE HAVE GOOD LAWS for protecting consumers.
----- Whats wrong with this picture? http://www.revoh.org:1234/whatswrong
I remember back when Napster being shut down was a hot button issue rather than history, sales were up 6% across the board.
Regardless of that, I think the main issue is you can only recycle things so many times before it deteriorates into nothing. Go buy an original VHS tape, copy it, then copy that copy, and then copy it one or two more times for good measure. It'll be so warped by then it's a waste of a tape.
Same thing with this music. Notice that sales for Britney Spears' new album are much lower than her previous efforts. Why? Not because 14 year old girls are pirating it, but because if you've got 1, you've got them all, fundamentally.
Perhaps people are just sick and tired of 20 year old musicians singing about love and relationships(pop), who has the most expensive car and who's the biggest "playa" (rap), being angry for the sake of being angry (nu-metal), and claiming to be unique when everyone dresses the same with let's say, a red baseball hat on backwards (rock).
Perhaps sales are diminished not because of new technologies, but because of lack of creativity. The entertainment industry is in such a horrible state and has been stagnating as such. It's just bad timing for technology that as movies and music gets worse, technology progresses at the same fashion, leaving a perfect scapegoat to use as an excuse to wonder why the public is buying the excrement they dish out.
Perhaps a polite notice that what they're doing is very, very wrong would be appropriate. The EFF has already asked its member to mail a thank you note to Gateway. Best Buy has an address to send "general comments" to. I believe I'll be sending them a piece of my mind on this issue quite soon.
My Blog: http://nic.dreamhost.com/
Wow, your smart. Mediaplay is owned my musicland, and guess what, Best buy owns them too, along with Sam Goody and Suncoast. So go ahead and take your buisness to mediaplay.
Cheap-cds.com and alldirect.com is where it's at.
The past two CDs I've wanted were not available in any stores I looked at. I went to over 10 Goddamn stores looking for them, but it was nothing but effort in vein. I asked FYE about the CD and they special ordered it for me. How much when all was said and done? $23.99. Fuck you. I then ordered it online for $13.
Let's see. I can either buy a CD cheaper and have it guaranteed to be there or waste my time going store to store to hope someone has it to rip me off. Decisions, decisions.
tar zxvf bag.tar.gz ; cd bag ; mv $feline
Everything worth getting is already available in MP3 format..And nothing thats currently being put out by the recording industry is worth listening to. It would be a far easier endeavor for the industry to understand and deal with the past two sentences than it would be to write endless piles of additional legislation and licensing agreements.
Cheers,
Bowie J. Poag
Don't just boycott the bastards.... take 2 minutes and go to their website and give them a note telling them you're no longer a customer.... AND WHY.
It'll make much more of an impact.
...that the 10% decrease in sales could be because consumers have finally realized what SHITTY PIECES OF CRAP THE MUSIC INDUSTRY SELLS?
+1 Insightful, -1 Troll. What can I say, I'm an Insightful Troll.
I'm a techie. When I want music I find the mp3 and add it to my collection. I own hundreds of CDs... from a few years ago. I haven't bought a CD in ages. There is no technical need to do so. My father is a computer newbie. When he wants music even he finds the mp3 version. Same goes for my sisters. The only person in my family that still buys CDs is my brother. He likes music stores and like having "real" CDs.
.iso?
There is no doubt in my mind that mp3's are destroying potential CD sales.
There is also no doubt in my mind that the RIAA is fighting the mp3 threat in the wrong way. They are hurting people that buy CDs! They are tartgeting their own customers! Rather than fighting the format, or better yet, positioning themselves to control the format they actually think that CD sales will improve with more restrictive CDs.
Its hilarious.
The VPs and Money-mongers are so wildly out of touch with their customers that they are willing to cripple their own product to control the situation.
How about monthly mp3 download subscriptions? I'd pay $10 a month to get a mp3 version of new releases as they happen.
How about cheaper CDs. $9 with more content. Better yet, include the mp3's on the CD itself. Or treat the CD as a license to download the mp3 version... no ripping/searching required.
How about a website where I can create my own CD complitation and have it mailed to me... or download the
How about some friggin creativity...
The RIAA and the music industry is sitting on a vast pile of money-potential and THEY DON'T EVEN SEE IT. They are so stuck "in the box" that they can't imagine that there is any other way of capitalizing on their investments.
I hope that someone in the "industry" wakes up and smells the cash. I'm willing to fork over a ton of $$ to get music, I simply don't want $15 CDs anymore. They're bulky, prone to scratches and a poor "investment" for my entertainment dollar. Give me access to clean, high-bitrate mp3's (no crippleware, special players, ads, and other BS) and I'll for over serious cash.
They blame a 10% sales slump on piracy, when you can't swing a dead cat without hearing that we've been in a moderately serious recession? Who are they kidding?
People shape laws. Not the other way around.
"[Best Buy] said it is looking to team up with record labels and technology groups to devise ways to prevent wholesale copying of CDs without antagonizing customers. "
We've already been antagonized, and in us they have an adversary for the rest of their grasping, niggardly lives.
Thank you very much, jackasses, for not referring to us as "consumers."
Those who can, do. Those who can't, write technology blogs.
Here's the thing. We'd all like to be able to buy music on-line. The RIAA probably even wants to sell us music on-line (There are at least hypothetical situations in which the RIAA would embrace online sales of music. Their current hypotheticals may be technologically, legally, and/or economically unsound, but they exist). But how is that ever going to help Best-Buy? Their entire business, as far as music sales go, is based on getting physical copies of CDs from a manufacturer to you.
Online downloads, legal and pirated alike, ruin that business model, so Best Buy naturally feels that it's in their best interests to oppose anything that lets you acquire music on a non-physical medium.
It seems unlikely that there's room for a middleman like Best Buy in online distribution of music. If you were able to purchase and download music direcly from an artist's or label's website, why would you want to pay Best Buy extra money on top of that? Best Buy probably feels they have a lot more to lose than the record companies do.
According to the article, the 10% decrease in music sales in 2001 was caused mostly by Internet file swapping.
Interesting...just yesterday, my friend George Scriban posted a piece on his (for lack of a better phrase) obsessively Big Content focused blog that, among other things, charts CD unit sales against average per-unit price. His data indicates that CD sales slow during periods when per-unit price increases...periods such as the year 2001, when the average price of a CD increased by about 62 cents.
He doesn't indicate the specific source for his data (I don't think he does, anyway), and I haven't gotten around to asking him yet. If he sees his server load getting out of hand, he may check to see what's going on, find this reference, and post some more information on the topic... =)
For your daily dose of irony, note also that George correlates the most dramatic increase in volume of CD sales to "cut-throat price competition" involving discount retailers such as Best Buy.
* * *
It is a dada story -- it has no moral.
"the 10% decrease in music sales in 2001 was caused mostly by crappy bands playing the same shit you heard in 2000. No innovation or new styles were introduced which was believed to have led to the decline. The Celine Dion cd was also alleged to be a major contributor"
I live in a town where there are half a dozen good alternatives to Best Buy. If they think I'm a pirate, they don't deserve my money.
Boycott.
The RIAA, BestBuy and others continue to make two, essential false assumptions about the music industry.
- The decline in sales has nothing to do with the content being produced by the music industry.
Sorry, try again. Many, many people who download songs end up buying the albums, however there is a severe lack of anything new or remotely innovative in popular music, right now. Record companies are STILL placing all their bets on Teen Pop, Metal, Rap and a stunning number of bands who have decided to get Eddie Vedder impersonators as their vocalists. Sure, there are a few exceptions, but really, the catagories I mentioned are the sum total of 99.9% of the music industry right now.
If people don't buy CDs, the record company mentality goes, it must be because of something wrong with the customer. They are unwilling to admit that they have alltogether tightened the reigns on the industry to the point where it is being choked. Radio playlists across the country are exactly the same, paid for by corprate moolah (indirectly, of course) and some DJs are not even permitted to play ANY songs of their own choosinig.
MTV has descended to the point where you get one, single video show per day and that's it. (if you are lucky)
TRL is a pressure cooker for sales. Videos are premiered on the show and since that is for many the only exposure to videos they have, they simply vote for the video they have been spoonfed. The result is a never-changing block of videos that are fed to the masses in a trickle so the minimum amount of variety can be used to gain the maximum amount of exposure for an "artist". This extremly tightly focused enviornment is used to force an artist on as many impressionable people as once, and give them few other musical options.
Now, for the second false assumption:
- That BestBuy, and any company that supports such measures will ever receive my business again.
I've spent thousands upon thousands at particular stores or products by particualr companies over many years. However, their business practices mean that my disposible income will cease to flow into their cash registers.
And I'm not alone.
The music industry has shown their utter contempt for me and I see no reason to give them a dime of my money any longer. I would like to support the artists I like, but even buying a CD now means risking buying crippled media. It doesn't matter WHY I would want to use a non-copy prevented CD, I'm sure it would surprise them that I would be doing nothing remotely illegal, just keeping one CD in the car and a couple of MP3s in my playlist.
But they don't care, and therefore, neither do I.
There are countless others like me now, and there are more all the time. I really hope the record industry likes what they've done.
You reap what you sow, and believe me, the record company better count it's blessings that a 10% drop in sales is all they have to deal with right now.
It's going to get much worse, and their strong-arm tactics are the only reason why.
As an avid music fan who lives effectively between the US and Europe, let me put my two cents in.
I think there are numerous factors going into this. Does illegal copying affect sales? Sure! I have friends who think that it's perfectly ok to go hunt after music online because they can't find in a store here in Finland. Or better yet, one person will have the original and the rest will copy it. I rant and rave about IP laws, and get stared at.
On the other hand, I've noticed that a LOT of people upon reaching their 20's just couldn't care less about downloading the music. Most of the people I see downloading now are those teen pop trash fans. So that is probably hurting sales to some degree.
However, I'm the kind of person who is perfectly willing to buy good music. I'll buy good releases, but I won't rush to get them the instant they come out. The problem for me is being aware of what's good out there. There's too much hype about the latest teen sensations and no enough real coverage of good music.
Conscientiously, I've decided to not necessarily rush out and buy big-label records. I'll often get them used. I will buy small-label records at retail, as they're less likely to abuse artists.
Lastly, hey, the future ain't looking as bright as in the middle of the dot-com bubble. I incurred plenty of debt then and so did a lot of other people. With the joys of interest and shaky jobs, I reckon that quite a few others are working hard to pay of debts quickly and save some money for the anticipated 'rainy day'.
Suggestion for recording industry? Put something worthwhile in the CDs for the kiddies who download all the time so they might buy that bubble-gum pop crap, and find some quality artists that you don't abuse and let them get some press coverage.
The power of accurate observation is commonly called cynicism by those who have not got it. - G.B. Shaw
The 10% drop has something to do with the sharp
decline in music quality over the past few years?
Come on, I'm getting tired of all these
one-hit boy bands and 16 year-old pop stars.
Give me something worth buying, and I will.
As opposed to middle school kids with jobs?
It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
So, was the decline in auto sales last year due to piracy? How about decline in real estate sales? Piracy? Durable goods? Airline travel? Must have been piracy!
Good glub, do any of these idiots understand we were in a recession, and the *entire* economy was in the pits? That CDs are a highly discretionary item, far down the list from things such as food and rent?
A 10% dip sounds like their business did really well, in comparison to other areas of the economy -- I'm sure companies such as Cisco and JDS Uniphase would be deliriously happy had their sales for last year only dropped 10%.
This is offensive in so many ways, it seems like a shame to let facts enter into the equation, but...
1. Much of the copying the RIAA complains about is completely legal under the Home Recording Act. As such, it isn't piracy at all.
2. It is amazing that the record industry seems to think it has a right to be immune to the economy. 2001 was a year of massive layoffs and dot.com implosion. IT workers, people who ordinarily have the kind of discretionary income to support large CD collections were especially hard-hit.
3. Napster, the largest and most visible source for swapped files spent much of 2001 under an injunction that severely hobbled it. If anything, 2001 should have brought less so-called piracy than 2000.
4. C'mon now. Weren't boy bands and teeny-girls starting to grow a little stale in 2001? To generate sales, you gotta deliver product worth buying.
But, the biggest kicker of all:
2. The RIAA very politely posts sales figures for the last ten years on its web site. Some interesting nuggets:
Total CD volume in 2000 (a year with Napster in full force, by the way) were the highest level in history and nearly 3 times the level of 1991.
However, from 1991-2000, sales of cassettes dropped off about 80%,
Sales of vinyl LPs continued their slide into oblivion, at about 45% of the 1991 levels.
Sales of CDs increased every single year except for 1997, covering all of the years in which Napster was unencumbered by injunctions. Sales rebounded to record high levels in 1998, by the way, hitting new records in 1999 and 2000.
One more thing: 2001 mid-year volume, in a recession, was 397.9 units. That may be 22.7 units lower than the same period in 2000, but it is 1.1 units higher than in 1999. In fact, those recession-year statistics represent the SECOND HIGHEST volume from 1991 to the present.
I'll bet a lot of businesses would have been thrilled to book their second-best year in history during 2001.
When all is said and done, music is still a luxury product. Even if Best Buy changed its policy, the fact would still remain the large labels are still shoving copy protection down our throats.
Know what? Screw them. Go support other artists. There is plenty of great music out there not published by the big labels (indie music, for example- and you can feel better knowing you are funding musicians when you buy their cds, and that you are not funding the purchase of DMCA-type laws.) Yeah, even if all the
slashdot!=valid HTML
And what then would be the reason for a consumer to buy a very expensive boat anchor?
Regular people buy PCs because they want to listen to music, watch movies, browse Net and have email. Take away first two, and most consumers will settle on a kitchen appliance for $100, and PC industry will suffer serious losses.
I've never once pirated music. However, I play most of my music CDs on a computer. If they continue to implement "play prevention" schemes into CDs, I will be forced to pirate any music I want to be able to play it on my computer.
-- Will program for bandwidth
Don't shop there. Better yet, buy your copy protected CD's there, and when they sound like crap in your computer, dvd-rom based dvd player, or anything else that will choke on it, take it back and demand your money back. By being the RIAA's face to the customers, they get to directly feel what happens from moving in lockstep with them.
The truth about Scientology, Xenu, and you: Operation Clambake
..if stores like Wal-Mart & MediaPlay don't back these "damaged" goods, Best Buy could go quietly the way of the Dodo. I see one hell of an ad-campaign for thier competitors.
Jaysyn
There is a war going on for your mind.
Nah, the people that would care about getting the album on mp3 would realize that 1) they aren't going to give you the album on mp3. period. wma if you're *lucky*. a completely proprietary format if you're not. 2) any added benefits they give you will still be outweighed by the loss of fair use rights. 3)
Synergy is your friend
If I can't do as much with a CD, and if they're using it to thwart copying, they're reducing 'unauthorized copying' of their music. This means they can't possibly b losing as much money due to piracy, right? So make these CD's cheaper! Give me INCENTIVE to buy these instead of giving me incentive to BOYCOTT.
"Derp de derp."
>>>1. Much of the copying the RIAA complains about is completely legal under the Home Recording Act. As such, it isn't piracy at all.
No, the RIAA is complaining about file swapping and album swapping on the internet. This is simply not legal.
>>>2. It is amazing that the record industry seems to think it has a right to be immune to the economy. 2001 was a year of massive layoffs and dot.com implosion. IT workers, people who ordinarily have the kind of discretionary income to support large CD collections were especially hard-hit.
True. The economy did suck, it affected everyone. 10% is still a huge decrease though, so they need to justify it SOMEHOW.
>>>3. Napster, the largest and most visible source for swapped files spent much of 2001 under an injunction that severely hobbled it. If anything, 2001 should have brought less so-called piracy than 2000.
Good point, but there are even more choices for people now in post-napster world.
>>>4. C'mon now. Weren't boy bands and teeny-girls starting to grow a little stale in 2001? To generate sales, you gotta deliver product worth buying.
Yeah, pop music is wretched now. But there are a lot of smaller bands that are getting hurt by the MP3 internet thing. If a good band does not get good sales, they are not going to get signed again. This has to have happened...
File-sharing is the RIAA's scapegoat for bad record sales. Can you blame them though?
Also, this article was a bit of fluff. Who honestly does not support copyright protection? We are all fans of the GPL or BSD liscence here. The Best Buy guy did not say that he supported any current methods, but said that he believes they can work together with the RIAA to come up with a good solution. Hey, more power to them. As long as I can listen to music on my iPod, I'm happy. I support bands, I buy music. I am confident that I will still be able to listen to the music I legally own on a device of my choosing, and I believe stores and artists recognize this fact.
I went into best buy the other day,
A big poster in the Computer Department that says:
"I bought my computer at best buy, now I can download music from the internet and put it on a cd to listen in my car" (Or something like that).
Great.
This page left intentionally blank.
Yes, at least indirectly internet file swapping could be one of the causes, though I don't think for the reasons they mean.
Take me for example. Before MP3's were starting to get big I consistently bought 2-4 cd's a year. I had for years. Now comes MP3's and I could both listen to an album for a few days/weeks before I bought and could listen to unknowns for me. I found out I like some bands with names that had really turned me off before. I started buying 10-15 CD's a year. During this time the sales of cd's was consistently rising so I would be willing to bet I was not the only one.
Next the RIAA/MPAA began an insane journey to not only stop me from getting MP3's (which is thier right to do) but they did it in a way that was going to destroy much of the things that I should/am allowed to do (DMCA and it's ilk). Well, I pretty much said screw them and quit buying.
While of course I am only one person most of my friends have done this and they have "spread the word". I would be willing to bet this is not that uncommon. I still occasionaly buy a cd (back to the 1-2 a year deal) because a few cd's I want something more than an MP3 for quality. Also since much of this has now moved outside of the geek sector (it now no longer takes knowlege of technology to see the effects, my parents fuss about not being able to fast-forward through the FBI warnings) they should start seeing effects like this more often.
Unfortunatly I think this will cause them to get even wilder and give them more evidence to use for congressional battles. It will take an act of congress or the judicial branch (much like the VCR crap they tried way back when) to force them to embrace a new profit strategy. No matter what congress passes it will always be ineffective and some day they'll realize that.
------- Sorry about the spelling, I suffer from two problems. Dyslexia makes it difficult to spell well, lazy makes it
3. Napster, the largest and most visible source for swapped files spent much of 2001 under an injunction that severely hobbled it. If anything, 2001 should have brought less so-called piracy than 2000.
Unless the pirates simply switched to Morpheus or Kazaa or Gnutella or were content to listen to their 80 gig collection of ripped music or even legal services such as Internet radio.
Sales of CDs increased every single year except for 1997, covering all of the years in which Napster was unencumbered by injunctions. Sales rebounded to record high levels in 1998, by the way, hitting new records in 1999 and 2000.
One more thing: 2001 mid-year volume, in a recession, was 397.9 units. That may be 22.7 units lower than the same period in 2000, but it is 1.1 units higher than in 1999. In fact, those recession-year statistics represent the SECOND HIGHEST volume from 1991 to the present.
As we all know, statistics can usually be manipulated to say whatever you want. When analyzing statistics, people often neglect to account for the possible effect of lag. Ridiculous claims, such as the assertion that the correlation between the advent of Napster and the increase in sales is in fact a causation, simply defy common sense. What the RIAA realizes is that CD sales are going to drop again this year, and next year. Maybe instead of looking at the first derivative of sales, you should look at the second derivative instead.
-a
How to rationalize theft.
Now that the RIAA treats me like a criminal, and I discovered that they treat their musicians like indentured servants who barely get a penny from CD sales (google search for Courtney Love and RIAA), I no longer care to contribute to their business.
If you want to support the musicians, download their music and send the money for CDs you would have bought directly to them.
Hope this helps!
"The lesson to be learned is not to take the comments on slashdot too literally." --Vinnie Falco, BearShare
But this "Best Buy" entity, instead of being a good store, decided to meddle with politics. Now it dictates what the customers should buy! This is one efficient way to go out of business. Who do they think they are, The State? God? Where is demand, there is supply, and people will -easily- find the supply, especially when Internet makes it so easy.
This is, I presume, just another step in the life cycle of a company. Companies start young and aggressive, then become middle-aged and conservative, then become old and senile. Then they die. No reward for guessing correctly which step of its life Best Buy is at.
Which is my point. The RIAA looks at a one year drop (by the way -- no more severe than 1997) and tries to turn that into rampant piracy killing the music business. There is no basis for that conclusion in their own figures, especially considering factos such as the economy and ordinary fluctuations in taste and compelling product.
To put it in technical terms, using whichever derivative you prefer, the RIAA is passing gas and asking that we not comment on the smell.
When i saw this article, I immediately wrote a note to BB letting them know that they had just lost my business (along with anybody else I could convince) until they decided to stop treating their customers like criminals. Here's the reply I got:
"Thank you for contacting Best Buy about copy protected CDs. I'm Val with
Customer Care.
We apologize for any disappointment caused by copy protection. Copy
protection is a decision made by the label to protect them and their artists
from copyright violation. We encourage you to contact the label directly if
you would like to offer opinions about this practice.
Thank you for sharing your comments with Best Buy. Please don't hesitate to
contact us with any questions or concerns.
Best wishes from Best Buy,
Val and the Customer Care Team
TRACKING NUMBER: A00000970333-00003433404
"
BLAH BLAH BLAH. Decision 'by the labels' huh? It's very different if the labels are trying to push it vs. the labels pushing it AND you helping them. Sorry BB, you've sunk even lower....
According to the article, the 10% decrease in music sales in 2001 was caused mostly by Internet file swapping
Gee, I guess there's not a chance in hell that the decrease in music sales in 2001 was caused mostly by THE ECONOMY GOING INTO A RECESSION, now, could it?
General Relativity: Space-time tells matter where to go; Matter tells space-time what shape to be.
>No, the RIAA is complaining about file swapping and album swapping on the internet. This is simply not legal.
That's what they say and you are entitled to take them at their word. The laws they back, however, strike at all copying, including that which is perfectly legal. That includes the DMCA, which is law, and the CBDTPA, which, for now, is not.
>True. The economy did suck, it affected everyone. 10% is still a huge decrease though, so they need to justify it SOMEHOW.
Actually, the decline in CD sales was only 5.3%, which is actually smaller than the 7.2% decline from 1996-1997.
Other formats, such as cassettes have been declining for years. Cassettes, hardly a prime source for internet piracy due to their rather low-quality anolog recordings, declined 42.9% between 2000 and 2001 midyear marks. Could it be that the legal recording enabled by the Home Recording Act, coupled with auto CD players, portable CD players, etc. is having a bigger on total shipments than "piracy"?
>Yeah, pop music is wretched now.
Fun statistic with regard to quality of product and consumer reaction: Latin CD sales were up 7% in the same period that the overall CD sales went down 5.3%. Might be a lesson in there.
>But there are a lot of smaller bands that are getting hurt by the MP3 internet thing.
I don't doubt it, I just don't how big the impact is. I do not support internet file-swapping and am quite happy that Napster was shut down.
An important note on this topic. Did you notice that Judge Patel (judge in the Napster case) has been far less sympathetic to the music industry of late? She has expressed the belief that the music industry is doing all it can to lock up its own monopoly in digitally downloaded music.
Wonder what that'll do to small bands?
As a major retailer of both electronics AND music, Best Buy could have a huge impact on the future format of music player hardware as well as software."
Yeah, they said that about proprietary DVD formats, too. How many people remember was DIVX used to be, and who financed its development?
>They know that, left unregulated, music piracy is going to hurt the industry,
Almost correct. You start from the assumption that piracy is unregulated today, but that isn't true. Copyright law regulates it now. You do recall that Napster has been shut down, don't you? Whether current laws are enough or are too much is the subject for reasonable debate.
OTOH, the RIAAs breathless rants (incorporated quite happily into the "findings" of the Hollings bill, BTW) are being used to support blunderbuss solutions that go far beyond protecting the rights of music publishers and into the realm of trampling the rights of consumers.
Why did you allow the search? IIRC you are under no legal obligation to submit to a search in that situation.
STOP MISUSING APOSTROPHES, YOU MORONS!!!
Guess that means don't shop at Best Buy. Which won't be too hard. Good hardware can be found cheaper, and I'd much rather go to a local record store then some big corporate chain.
Big chain stores love to make arangements with record companies. Remember a few years back when they would cut out the dirty words on CDs sent to some big chains and not tell anyone about it?
Music is art. Big business has no place in that world. (P.S., your local record store has a better chance of having that obscure but good CD then Best Buy... they just might be a little short on the latest J-Lo release)
The Internet is generally stupid
I look at music copy protection this way:
True: Most new music is targeted at the teeniebopper age group, and is therefore (mostly) unlistenable to other people.
True: There's no point in copy protecting a band no one's heard about. Celine Dion? Sure. Mike Errico? Jude Christodal? Accoustic Junction? Uhhhh...Who?
Therefore: any copy protected disc that hits the market is going to be from a HUGE artist, a HUGE label and be unlistenable.
I know the arguments - it's a stepping stone to universal copy protection, it's a violation of our rights, etc. I agree with all of that. BUT. For now it has less of a (musical) effect, so I prefer to see it as less dire. When they protect (insert favorite indie artist here) I'll throw a fit. But Backstreet? Sell it in a steel case that can't be opened without a blowtorch. I'd prefer ithat kind of protection anyway.
Triv
I'm not 100% sure, but I've heard Microsoft has a large interest in Best Buy, or a controlling interest. Does anyone have accurate data on this?
I did not fail to notice the MSN posters hanging from the roof the last time I was there.
Life's a bitch but somebody's gotta do it.
Perhaps it's because we're in the middle of a gigantic recession, the people who used to buy lots of albums (geeks, who were flush with cash) are now unemployed or working for burger king, and because there hasn't been any really good music release since the nineties?
Of course, the RIAA knows exactly why sales are dropping, but they can lie and make up anything they want. Remember, lies, damn lies, and statistics.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
... that I just signed up for emusic.com. You won't find Britney Spears or the like there, but then again, that may be a good thing depending on your point of view. I've found all sorts of good stuff on there from independent artists, things the RIAA doesn't seem inclined to try and sell. $15 a month is a little steep, but then again, that's cheaper than a single CD with the latest shovel-songs courtesy of the RIAA... And there's a free trial, too. :)
</plug>
Mozilla's a nice operating system, but it needs a better browser.
Re Patel v. Music Industry arrogance,
t ml
Try this wired article:
http://www.wired.com/news/mp3/0,1285,50625,00.h
I would buy their music if I could get it online via the internet. These are also required:
Then I would be willing to:
I'm sure one of the reasons the CD sales have dipped (aside from the obvious which the music industry wants to play down regarding the economy, which has particularly hit hardest those most knowledgeable about how to share music over the internet), is simply the fact that the music industry has avoided selling music online so far. Of course people pirate music by swapping it online. But if the music industry starts selling it online, that is not going to cause the swapping piracy to increase. No sir, it will go down. Maybe a lot, maybe just a little. But tell me who can't swap music now that will be able to when the option to buy comes along? Instead, many honest people will be willing to buy online and won't have to pirate anymore.
Of course, piracy will never disappear. It's foolish to think it can be eliminated, and futile (and costly) to even try. But once you have genuine availability of all music to all people online, then we'll at least have an honest and accurate figure of what the true level of piracy really is (and not the forced piracy caused by the unavailability of a legitimate means to get music online).
now we need to go OSS in diesel cars
Back when there were just a handful of channels, it was easy to trace the history of television through the major trends. People had nothing else to watch, so it was easy for something to dominate. Then, with cable and eventually satellite, people had dozens, even hundreds of choices. Suddenly, the major channels could no longer define television culture with major trend starting programs.
The major television stations are still running just fine, but they no longer control the world of television.
Similarly, the filesharing culture now allows people to easily find obscure music. With more things to choose from, less people listen to the biggest thing.
The music industry isn't waiting around for the next big thing. It never has. It used to *make* the next big thing. Right now, it's trying very hard to make another big thing, and failing miserably.
mlylecarlin
Try stealing a book on grammar.
Java is the blue pill
Choose the red pill
Wouldn't it be ironic if the RIAA was *charging* artists for the increased cost to press a copy impaired disk? After all, why should the RIAA have foot the bill for looking after the artists' interests? Oh boy, wouldn't *that* just be a hoot?
"Your superior intellect is no match for our puny weapons!"
"They have it, they know you want it, and they know that the law is on their side. "
That's supply and demand. If demand goes down when the CD is restricted, then they MUST lower prices.
We should be trying to get a law passed that makes sure they are marked as 'COPY RESTRICTED'. Who'll pay for them then?
"Derp de derp."
The RIAA should put up a site that has a list of every song they own rights to. Then, they should attach a fair price to each of those songs. (say, $.50 or $1 if it's a good song) Then they should have a discount price if I buy a license to the album. Then, what I should be able to do, is compile a list of every song that I have an Mp3 of, add up the price, and I can use PayPal or something like that to pay for it.
We both keep a record of the license, it never expires, and it also covers remixes of each song. This license says I can have that song on any media I choose. I'm an honest guy, treat me like an honest guy and I'll behave like one.
If they charged more for these licenses, then offer me an incentive to share the song with my friends and get them to pay for it. Give me a referall reward. If somebody buys a song and puts me down as a referral, give me a free song license as a reward!
The RIAA could potentially rake in a TON of cash if they do this.
"Derp de derp."
I don't know about other factors, but the Internet might have contributed to the decline of CD sales ... by making it so freakin' easy to buy used CDs. I can go to Half.com and find a zillion used CDs and knock 30% or more off the price if I'm willing to wait 6-8 months. The selection is so huge, I'm practically guaranteed to find any mainstream CD I want. I think 3/4 of the CDs I purchase now are used.
The economic problems in 2001. CDs, movies and so on are luxury items while we like to get new stuff, they certianly aren't essential. This like this are usually some of the first thigns to go in a budget when money gets tight. I know if I lost my job the first thing I'd do is stop buying CDs, movies and software. Sure I like having new music and games but I'm content with what I have, and if money is getting thin it's an easy thing to conserve.
Most people are far more concerned with making house payments and keeping food on the table than having the latest nSync album. Hence, when times get tough people who sell things like this are going to feel the hit worse than those that sell more essential services.
I will never, ever buy anything again from Best Buy. This is were a boycott can work. The RIAA won't notice us, but I'm pretty sure Best Buy will notice that we've gone elsewhere for our games and stuff. I've been getting close to giving up on them anyway, all they seem to be now is a front end for M$ to dump their shit. What's important is to let them know, from the store manager to the COO. I'll be writing letters tonight.
--- Think of it as evolution in action ---
KCRW, while halfway decent, is nowhere near as good as KXLU. 88.9 FM, out of Loyola Marymount University.
At least you didn't mention KROQ, the new "oldies" station in town. They're still playing the whiny Brit band crap they did 20 years ago. Modern Rock? Naah.
And yeah, Clear Channel should be the first against the wall when the Revolution comes. Plastic music for plastic people.
Knowledge is power. Knowledge shared is power multiplied.
I really like the thinking you are doing, and I have tremendous respect for you and what you are saying. It's possible you are 100% right. But there are some things that really worry me. Let me play the devil's advocate for a minute. This may sound a little personal, but I hope you will not take it as anything but a cautious response mixed with some thinking out loud.
No, the RIAA is complaining about file swapping and album swapping on the internet. This is simply not legal.
The facts don't seem to support this distinction. Measures such as the one this article is about will do a lot more to stop Home Recording Act style swapping than internet swapping. Once somebody gets the binary and starts sharing it, the binary is oblivious to what kind of protection is on the CDs people are using at home.
> True. The economy did suck, it affected everyone. 10% is still a huge decrease though, so they need to justify it SOMEHOW.
And what better way to justify it than, once again, blame your customers. The RIAA is guilty of misrepresenting correlation for causation. People are being cautious. Consumer spending is way down. Music prices are higher. What do they expect to happen?
Good point, but there are even more choices for people now in post-napster world.
More choices, but not very ones. They don't perform anywhere near the speed and ease of Napster.
Yeah, pop music is wretched now. But there are a lot of smaller bands that are getting hurt by the MP3 internet thing.
To me, it seems like the Britney Spears and MTV-created performers benefit most from a restrictive system. People don't hear much of the smaller bands, and that is even more true when you:
1) Don't hear them on the local radio stations (which play about 10 songs in a continuous loop) and
2) Can't get recordings of them somewhere without shelling out $16 for a CD.
If I discover that I like a band, I will buy the CD. In that sequence.
File-sharing is the RIAA's scapegoat for bad record sales. Can you blame them though?
Their jobs are on the line, and they are constantly fighting congress for more favors. When there are not solid facts to back them up, they have to be to be creative.
Who honestly does not support copyright protection? We are all fans of the GPL or BSD liscence here.
A) Some people honestly don't support copyright protection (granted, GPL and BSD backers are not among these).
B) Many people who do support copyright protection don't support the abuse of copyright powers.
C) As people like the makers of Lindows are finding, the GPL isn't always a rose garden. If you write on top of GPLed code, you have to accept that your code will be shared with anyone who uses your product. But yes, copy protection can often be for the public good.
D) Even if we grant the RIAA every bit of copyright protection they have and more, they could well acting as a trust to abuse the rights of consumers by limiting their access to music. And, by the way, this definitely hurts small artists.
As long as I can listen to music on my iPod, I'm happy.
So if the said protection prevents this (which from what I have read, it sure seems to), wouldn't you oppose it (and Best Buy's sopport thereof)?
I support bands, I buy music. I am confident that I will still be able to listen to the music I legally own on a device of my choosing, and I believe stores and artists recognize this fact.
I really respect your sentiments, but I don't share your optimism about being able to choose the device. If my facts are right, your iPod only connects to a Mac. Copy protected CDs will not work on a computer. Some have special software to allow you to hear the music on a PC, but not a mac, and certainly not to copy it.
Thanks for being patient and reading this. Again, I mean you all respect, and I appreciate your unselfish view of the whole issue--something we consumers and the industry seem to need more of.
Donate background CPU time to fight cancer.
Top Three Guaranteed ways to earn unwarranted karma:
~#3~
"MTV (TRL) / VH1(Top20) contribute to the downward spiral the industry is in..."
The last time I checked, Viacom didn't own any record labels. For being such an integral part of the devolution of music, they aren't that attached to it.
~#2~
"... the music industry only offers pre-selected artists... making a mockery of the whole system..."
The record labels can use their marketing muscle to promote the hell out of an artist, but if music listeners (consumers) deem the music to be bad, no amount of marketing can keep said artist in the limelight for too long. Artists may artificially be placed at the top, but without sales & popularity, they don't stick around.
~#1~
"...the music out there today sucks... no wonder music sales aren't stellar anymore..."
Easy to say when you think myopically. Yet, Slashdotters like to mod this kind of trite comment up. Why? I have yet to figure this out. This sort of comment is simply a stab at the mainstream, spoken from someone high upon a perch of musical elitism.
Typical American cheering for the underdog... until the underdog gets too popular. (insert eye-roll here)
A few interesting things to note, here...
Best Buy *does* own its own label, Redline Entertainment. One of their more notable artists is Prince, whose latest CD, Rainbow Children, has gotten incredible billing in Best Buy store signage and in-store TV ads. Why does this matter? If I recall correctly, Prince was something of a proponent of services like Napster while also something of a detractor of the RIAA. His pick of Redline for the new album seems to indicate an opinion that that particular label is more decent than the rest.
Now its parent company is joining up with the fair use rights abusers.
A second thing to note here is that Best Buy is a fairly powerful presence. Their CD and software sales represent something significant both to consumers and professionals. Their recent decision axing Mac software and peripherals gives many developers pause in producing Mac ports for games, simply noting how few consumers will have access to store shelves containing their product without Best Buy support.
The point here being, a giant like Best Buy is setting a standard for fellow retailers. Musicland, Sam Goody, and Suncoast all are part of the Best Buy enterprise and represent a considerable slice of the pie for any consumers. Sure, you can buy your music elsewhere, but with BBY, SG, and ML comprising the easiest sources, where else can we go?
Let's also not forget just how expansionist Best Buy is. They acquire chains and build new stores the way the rest of us shave and eat breakfast each morning. I imagine the latest portion of their retail arm, Canada's Future Shop, will also be supporting "anti-piracy" measures.
Big news, here, folks.
people didn't but the crap then, they won't now.
Listen up you RIAA greedy bastards, my 401k and stocks lost almost 20% this year and it had nothing to do with the internet or file swapping. I buy my music legally; but i'm going to buy less this year because I lost money in the RECESSION!
Music industry CEOs listen up: the internet scapegoat will save your jobs temporarily, but stockholders will eventually figure out that the losses have nothing to do with the internet, and have everything to do with your terrible products and even worse business model.
-ted
Best Buy is merely spouting the accepted wisdom in the investor community ("CD copying reduces sales") and announcing support for anti-copying technologies in order to assure the investors that the management team is on top of things and deserves their confidence.
It's called CYA. The execs are trying to save their own jobs.
If we walk on by our local Best Buy store, or better still, walk in and complain, then walk out with our wallets firmly in our pockets, they'll get the message soon enough.
I was so pissed off with music industry after napster was closed down / DMCA was introduced, I boycotted all CD purchases from stores. I only buy CDs from bands with websites selling CDs directly. If the profits from CD sales are going to be used to try and destroy our freedoms, then it's immoral to give them money.
Now, I think the crappy music or economic downturn is a more likely cause of declining record sales, but and many people's interest in music slumped after Napster, but I would like to think enough napster users were similarly pissed off to have made a difference. Napster shutdown probably contributed to CD sales decline.
http://rareformnewmedia.com/
We're going to keep seeing this kinda crap until the record labels are put in their grave once and for all. It's not a matter of them adapting to new consumer demand and letting us buy music online or whatever. No matter which way you cut it, they are still middlemen--sucking economic gain from both the consumer and musician. Albums cost way too much and artists aren't being fairly paid. Technlogy has obsoleted the information middle-man altogether. Perhaps what we need are companies devoted to assisting professional independent artists.
"On a side note, isn't that traditional defintion of a monopoly? "
It makes you wonder why there isn't more than one organization, doesn't it. I have no idea what's stopping somebody from saying "Well I'm going to sign on some artists and do a web play."
"Derp de derp."