Slashdot Mirror
Music Industry Pays $67M Fine For Price Fixing
Krelnik writes "Reuters is reporting that the music industry is paying a $67.4 Million settlement to end a lawsuit where they were accused of artificially inflating CD prices at retail. Yeah, P2P is causing their problems. Sure, sure it is. Here's the story at Reuters UK."
Ok, so it costs like $15 for a CD, even though there is so many different artists out there. Give me a break RIAA, I buy your CDs, least you could do is offer me some sort of a deal.
they've been fixing prices for how long? and it took till now for a suit like this to win.. let's hope it's not the last.
MABASPLOOM!
I've been hearing about this issue for years, literally! One wonders, however, about the timing of this decision. The music industry is not seen in the best of light right now, and I wonder if they belive this will improve sales. Or maybe I am just paranoid.
I know that seems like an awful lot of money, but does it even approach the amount the industry gained through its unfair practices?
Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
-- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.
It means free-software/music movement isn't allowed to fix their price at 0 local-currency-units.
Do I get any part of that amount?
I would buy more cd's if it didn't cost so much for such low quality in most cd's.
I'm sure the RIAA will be quite upset at losing that less than 1% of their annual income. Poor sods. But I think if judgements continue like this, and that moronic bill for "P2P warfare" is dropped, a real dent might be made in the RIAA's empire of art commodification.
s200.org - visit it (me), love it (me).
Is it just me, or does this seem like a reallllly low amount of money for a settlement in a judgement this serious? Not to complain about the victory, but shouldn't this have much greater consequences than what ultimately boils down to a weekly paycheck for these CEO's?
"Quoting famous computer scientists out of context is the root of all evil (or at least most of it) in programming." - K
Let's write a law to make it legal to hack* RIAA lawyers when we suspect them of "pirating" our money.
* hack meaning to chop into little pieces
Isn't this the amount they spend on promoting N*suck during the superbowl? They will just regain the cost of the fine when I pay the $21.99 for the new Brittany cd anyways!
Open Source is a term that deals with software, and has nothing to do with the arts. Yes, you can run a similar principal to an extent, but it's really not the same thing.
SIG: HUP
That seems like peanuts compared to how much they're ripping off the artists and us, the consumers who buy their crap.
They are just paying their way and donating CDs to certain organizations just to say drop the suit... that's it.
I wonder when the RIAA and music industry as a whole will realize that P2P isn't hurting their sales at all... I personally bought a CD recently BECAUSE of file sharing. It was hard to decide on doing, but music enjoyment won out. I am just glad that it they are finally on the otherside of the case.
Erutangis ym si siht.
The five largest music companies and three of the USA's largest music retailers agreed Monday to pay $67.4 million and distribute $75.7 million in CDs to public and non-profit groups to settle...
75 million in CDs? So what's that buy nowadays, 20, 30 CDs?
Finally, someone figured out that:
1) Cost to profuce cd's is probably less than $1/CD including case and linear notes, excluding production costs.
2)The cost of CD's, with everyone making substantial profit could be $3.50
3)The only way for the prices to be so artificially high was for price fixing.
I know I would buy more music if it came at a reasonable price.
Maybe someone in the software industry will realize that: more people will buy this if we only charge $20 for it!
Help I'm a rock.
I suspect that, for these bastards, anything below a cool billion is a nominal nuisance fee. If I were a record industry executive, which isn't likely ever to happen, I would read this message from the court as "keep it up -- you're doing a great job -- and try not to get caught in the future, 'cause we don't like having to do this".
I would expect their next move would be to work a bit faster with MS, and get DRM pushed out there. While looking through Windows Update, I noticed Windows MediaPlayer v7.1 has DRM - and you can't uncheck the box for it. If you want Media Player 7.1+, you have no choice but to install the DRM portion along with it, or not install the player at all. Perhaps MP v7.1 is non-reversable - once you install it, you can't downgrade. I dont know if that is the case, but I'm not particularly in the mood to be a guinea pig, at the moment.
Someone you trust is one of us.
When the RIAA asks for anything else from the goverment to protect it's IP, the goverment will say "uh yeah, go away please..."
One can always wish...
I live in a giant bucket.
"This is a landmark settlement to address years of illegal price-fixing," Spitzer said in a statement. "Our agreement will provide consumers with substantial refunds
No it won't! The suit was filed two years ago. $67.4M divided over all the CDs distributed by the labels ends up being fewer than pennies per consumer. At best, I'd expect little more than a $5 coupon off my next overpriced music purchase. The settlement also doesn't do anything to address future infringement.
and result in the distribution of a wide variety of recordings for use in our schools and communities."
Not under today's Fair Use laws...
"Mod, mod, mod...and another troll bites the dust."
I sincerely hope this has the ramifications it deserves. The general public (read: stupid masses) truly needs to know about things like this, so we all continue to pressure RIAA and it's member companies where it hurts - our wallets. The sooner they understand they are in business to satisfy the desires of the CONSUMER, not the desires of a few extreme fat cats, we all win. Make the consumer happy and the fat cats (and us lowly consumers) all come out better.
How much will CDs cost now?
Let's see, consumers were overcharged $480M and the fine was $67M?
Well now we know what step two is:
Step one, rip off consumers.
Step two, settle out of court.
Step three, $413M profit!
so where do I pick up my compensation check for getting screwed over for all these years?
GoatPigSheep, the 3 most important food groups
I understand that it costs much less that $15 to manufacture a CD, so $67,000,000 can't be that much to them. Some say P2P is what should be used as a form of protest against the industry. Suing them may not do much.
the TERRORISTS have already won!
Paying for any commercial music is paying too much. It's like a $15 smorgasbord of unsalted peanuts.
*DrugCheese rants*
They are distributing the payoff (whoops, I meant settlement) to the local libraries here in Oklahoma
Not a bad use in my opinion but maybe they should make the libraries buy 2nd hand cd's and allow people to check them out. That might get the RIAA's attention. Payback can be such a bitch.
So is this $75.7 million worth of CD donations based on the price before or after the gouging?
In seriousness, it says in the article "consumers had been overcharged by $480 million since 1997." I don't know what the other details are, but it seems that the penalty is just a slap on the wrist since it barely adds to $200 million. Isn't that half of what they gouged? They still made off with a ton of cash. Where's the hurt?
(\(\
(^.^)
(")")
*beware the cute-bunny virus
Imagine a beowulf clusters of fines on the Music Industry!!!
*smacking sound of a large trout up against my head* +2 funny
Yeah right. When hell... hey wait a minute - massive climatic change? Maybe there is hope...
I'm pretty sure an investigation would reveal that most every product's price has been artificially inflated. Sellers do this because they wish to make a profit. If the price goes too high, then sales decrease. This is kind of a self-regulating process that doesn't require a referee or lawyers or judges.
NO this seems like an awefully small amount of money. Does 67M approach the amount they profitted off of the price fixing? It should be at least that amount, plus a punative amount.
$67M is a Joke. A single company could foot that.
They do that at my local lib. Except that it is not second hand CD's (yup, brand spanking new) and you get them for two weeks with unlimited refunds. I know a guy who went to the library, checked out the max (15 @ a time, I think) took them home, ripped them, then burned to mp3 cd. So what should they do now, sue the libraries?
.noitacidem deen uoy siht daer nac uoy fI
Former FTC chairman Robert Pitofsky said at the time that consumers had been overcharged by $480 million since 1997 and that CD prices would soon drop by as much as $5 a CD as a result.
Now, then it won't be worth the time finding all the tracks to the CD on P2P.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
where does it say Reuters UK ? someone needs to RTFA i think
anyway karma fans here's the story
___________________________________
NEW YORK (Reuters) - The five largest music companies and the three largest music retailers will pay $67.4 million in cash to settle a CD price fixing case launched by New York and Florida two years ago, State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer said on Monday.
In August 2000, 43 U.S. states and commonwealths said an industry practice called "minimum advertised pricing" (MAP), under which the labels subsidized advertising for retailers that agreed not to sell CD's below a minimum price determined by the labels, artificially inflated the price of CDs between 1995 and 2000, violating federal and state anti-trust laws.
The five record labels -- Vivendi Universal's Universal Music Group, Sony Music, Bertelsmann AG's BMG Music Group, AOL Time Warner Inc.'s Warner Music Group and EMI Group PLC -- and the three retailers, Musicland Stores Corp., Trans World Entertainment Corp. and Tower Records, agreed to stop using MAP policies as part of the settlement.
Brad Maione, Spitzer's spokesman, said the companies would not admit any wrongdoing.
The cash settlement will be paid to the 43 states. The companies also agreed to distribute $75.7 million worth of CDs to public entities and nonprofit organizations in all 50 states.
"This is a landmark settlement to address years of illegal price-fixing," Spitzer said in a statement. "Our agreement will provide consumers with substantial refunds and result in the distribution of a wide variety of recordings for use in our schools and communities."
...where?
The music industry has been ripping us off (no news there) to the tune of $5 per CD.
The have to pay up $67 mil + $75 mil to non-profit, etc.
Who the hell gets that $67 mil? I want my cut!
~50 CD's over the last few years....where is my $250?
Errr... sorry, I meant with unlimited renewals
Sorry!
*runs off, hides in corner, and hopes that all this karma whoring doesn't go to waste*
.noitacidem deen uoy siht daer nac uoy fI
The five record labels -- Vivendi Universal's Universal Music Group, Sony Music, Bertelsmann AG's BMG Music Group, AOL Time Warner Inc.'s Warner Music Group and EMI Group PLC -- and the three retailers, Musicland Stores Corp., Trans World Entertainment Corp. and Tower Records, agreed to stop using MAP policies as part of the settlement.
bull.
Brad Maione, Spitzer's spokesman, said the companies would not admit any wrongdoing.
bullshit^2 and abdication/autoabsolution in the same sentence. There is no way this "settlement" can be viewed as anything less than an utter failure. Mariah Carey's contract was purchased for more than one third of this settlement IN CASH, not in the distribution of recordings for our schools and communities, just to get her to stop singing. Give me more bull.
This is a landmark settlement to address years of illegal price-fixing, New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer said in a statement.
This is not a landmark. It ain't even a bookmark. Read the article and boggle at the audacity.
On another note (from the article) I would settle for $67 million with $480 in actual damages 7 days a week. Even if you count the $75 million worth of CD's they said they'll distribute to public and non-profit gourps, that's still $.29 on the dollar. What a fleece.
If you blog it...
This lawsuit looks like it was brought before P2P and before Napster was big. If CDs were priced fairly to begin with I wonder whether file sharing would be AS big. No doubt file sharing would be big but its growth might have been slower and easier to contain. IMHO the RIAA dug (and is digging) its own grave.
sig
You could only check it out for 1 day and 1 time per year. That way you'd be forced to either buy a copy or rip it. That would royally screw the record companies, which in my opinion isn't that bad anyway.
In a world where children go hungry, addicts are jailed instead of helped, grandparents cannot get perscription drugs because I needed a tax cut, the RIAA gets no sympathy from me (but I'm just a "liberal democrat" so what would I know).
So now the local indy shops that can't match the $8 a CD that the big chains can sell for will go under. They're already more expensive, but it just got pointless for them to even try.
It'll be like bookstores all over again.
1) fix prices of retail CDs
2) Acutally profit!
3) Get sued for it
4) Lose profit
5) ???
6) PROFIT AGAIN!
This is so cool, I am literally jumping for joy! The music industry... Those lying sons of jackals. Those shmucks. Greedy, gray-haired BORING old geezers with no life, looking for ways to USE the general public, to ROB good people of their hard earned money, to make a killing on work they never did. And when their free profits, money that's practically falling out of the sky, start to shrink because consumers can't afford to spend TWENTY DOLLARS on a measly CD containing some measly GARBAGE, they grumble and moan and complain, and point the finger in every direction except at their flawed, greedy, unethical marketing ploy.
I very, VERY strongly hope that this tiny, insignificant, puny little fine, consisting of meager pocket pennies for those evil pieces of TRASH, is only the beginning of the beginning of fines and losses and total, utter, complete failure of their marketing system, leading to the entire recording industry taking a dump, and placing those horrible people back where they belong. I hope this signals the introduction to the COMPLETE AND UTTER CRUMBLING of this evil music industry, which deserves to go out of business for good.
And don't you think for a moment that this will hurt the artists. Those poor artists will find ways to record their music and deliver it to consumers who wish to listen to it, and they will make SIGNIFICANTLY more money when there isn't some enormous bureaucratic music industry ROBBING them of their hard earned money and placing them in the streets. Then, without the caring and nurturing of the EVIL music industry, which has all this time FLAT OUT ROBBED the artists while preaching the gospel, these poor artists won't be so poor anymore. Because they'll find innovative ways to deliver music to consumers at a really low price, without the need to be EVIL like those bad people at the top of the music industry, the artists will prosper and there will be a LOT more money left in consumers' pockets to spend on all sorts of stuff. This will make our economy strong, by circulating the money to people who need it, not to EVIL people in the music industry.
So to the EVIL multinational corporations that make up the EVIL music industry... NANNY NANNY BOO BOO!
Former FTC chairman Robert Pitofsky said at the time that consumers had been overcharged by $480 million since 1997 and that CD prices would soon drop by as much as $5 a CD as a result.
Yeah right! That has yet to happen. Actually, I believe the reverse has happened -- CD prices have increased by $5 since then.
This would at first blush seem perfectly reasonable, until one notices that one United States dollar buys about $1.58 Canadian. That's right--CD's are typically about 50% more costly as soon as you go from Windsor to Detroit.
Granted, I've noted a similar pricing trend with some other goods--groceries come to mind. But for non-perishables, the price disjoint is quite stunning.
Is it price fixing? Or plain old-fashioned gouging? All I know is that for a ten-cent piece of plastic, that's quite a markup. Charge what the market will bear, and hope nobody notices that the neighbours are getting a 30+% discount. Does anybody know if there are any retailers taking advantage of this price difference? Buy Canadian, sell American, pocket the difference. (Whatever you do, don't write a post containing the phrase "3. Profit!!!")
~Idarubicin
FWIW, Ars has a news post with links to PDFs of the original complaint and the resolution.
This should prove quite interesting.
This article does not mention piracy or file-sharing.
Reuters should be commended for not confusing the issues.
________________
All my sig are fjdklafjkldafjkldafdaklf
No the local indy shops will continue to do what they do best sell GOOD and hard to find music, focus on what the customer wants, and build lasting relationships for steady sales. Wal-mart might rake in more at 8 bucks but they'll get no loyalty from their customers. And no love from the real music fans.
"Do not be swept up in the momentum of mediocrity." - anon
from reuters UK:
:)
The companies also agreed to distribute $75.7 million worth of CDs to public entities and nonprofit organizations in all 50 states.
Is that $75.7 million worth of CDs at the fixed price or at production cost?
"Previously, the companies said that MAP was needed to protect independent music retailers from rising competition from discount chains such as Wal-Mart, Circuit City and Best Buy."
Oh that's right, all they were doing was looking out for the little guy. I can hardly believe that. And only $67.4M when "consumers had been overcharged by $480 million"? That's just a slap on the wrist.
Settling out of court is just the easy way out. The States gave up. The record labels admit no wrong-doing, and they will continue their practices one way or another because they were not found to have done anything wrong.
It's situations like this when I wish settling out-of-court were illegal.
-IOVAR Web Dev Platform
The article said that they stopped doing it in 2000.
It also said that they would refrain from doing it for 7 years.
If it is illegal saying that you won't do it for X amount of time still won't make it legal (although sometimes you wonder if it will still be illegal in the future...).
I hope I am not the only one that sees this as a problem.
The music industry is shooting itself right now. This isn't at all helping. P2p wouldn't hurt it at all if the industry would get busy and start producing better quality music. The RIAA is notorious for exaggerating their figures that they show to the general public. While the sales of records are up, they will show you the sales are down.
Plus, what's the point of paying $16 for 10 songs that of which only 2 are good.
Are you telling me that you don't see the connection between government and laughing at people? - Interviewer
This is common, the lawyers sue and settle for way less than they should because they are payed a percentage. I think tort reform should include only paying lawyers only out of punitive damages unless the class votes for the settlement.
This should have been a 2 billion dollar cash settlement. 480M*3(cartel)+500M(punitive). Though I'm more partial to the corparate death penalty, we need some serious tort reform to increase settlements if we want to keep the current system working.
This is like those car safety lawsuits where you get a coupon for buying another crappy car from the same company. Yeah Right!
"player 4 hit player 1 with 0 stroms"
so, next January, we'll be treated to a news release from the RIAA, proclaiming that P2P and file-sharing services have cost them, *gasp*, $67 million in 2002!
mmm... yeah... You see, we're putting the cover sheets on all TPS reports now before they go out...
Come on people, realize that these states' attorneys are just padding their resumes in prep for entering the private sector. They always settle - there's never an admission of guilt. That's the game. Meanwhile, prepare to get your proctology exam from the RIAA. Their vigilante powers to enact the corporate police state are in the works. That is, unless we can all get a little more proactive in the activism department, support the EFF with letters and, yes, money. Lots of money, to the EFF and the legislators who oppose the RIAA's latest legislation. We should have a lobby as powerful as the NRA. I mean, c'mon, if a bunch of gun-totin' rednecks can control the legislative process, geeks should be able to as well. We are an order of magnitude more literate. I say, put a lot of money into it now, it could pay off in the long term. Remember, a pound of prevention.....
The article says that the music companies and retailers will "distribute $75.7 million in CDs to public and non-profit groups...".
:-)
That $75.7 million figure had BETTER be wholesale. Somehow or another, though, I can't imagine these companies giving away 250 million CDs. Unless they're all Vanilla Ice CDs.
In settling the lawsuit, Universal BMG and Warner said they simply wanted to avoid court costs and defended the practice.
"We believe our policies were pro-competitive and geared toward keeping more retailers, large and small, in business," Universal said in a statement.
They should have had to drop all P2P lawsuits.
This is a perfect example of the pot calling the kettle black! The only difference is that the pot has paid off a few Congressmen, so they get whatever they want, be it illegal or not.
Just watch...Congress will pass a law legalizing this MAP pricing.
They DO carry hard-to-find books. People love them and they get lots of customer loyalty.
Atlantic Monthly covered this very well a while back:
Yes, it's a blog. Sorry if that offends you.
If I commmit a crime and it nets me billions of dollars, and I get caught and sentenced to pay a fine that amounts to a tiny percentage of what I've made as a result of my illegal endeavors, how exactly does that serve as a deterrent to future crime?
You see? You see? Your stupid minds! Stupid! Stupid!
Did they mention that that's based on a Minimum Advertised Price of $250 per CD?
Wah!
The lawsuit that the recording companies settled is only not the whole story. The Attorneys General of a bunch of states sued them in civil court because they violated anti-trust law (allegedly). The Attorneys General, or the Federal Government could also have filed criminal charges against the record companies but they chose to file a civil lawsuit, presumably because it is much easier to win. In criminal proceedings, the defendant has to be proven guilty 'beyond a reasonable doubt.' To prevail in civil court, the standard is 'more likely than not.' It is the difference between being 51% sure they are guilty and being 99% sure.
While the record companies refused to admit fault with words, they did it with dollars. You don't settle a lawsuit for that much money unless you are pretty sure that you will be found liable at trial. If they were really settling for the 'nuisance value' of the lawsuits, the amount would have been much lower. Think of this settlement as plea bargaining for guilty corporations--"We won't fight the the punishment as long as we don't have to say 'we're guilty' out loud."
The other shoe, or boot, that is waiting to fall is private class action litigation. If someone robs you, the government can prosecute or sue them. But as a victim, you also have a right to sue. (Alas, you don't have a right to start a criminal prosecution--under US law--but you can, like the family of O.J.'s wife, sue in civil court.)
There was at least one private class action lawsuit filed against these record companies for price fixing in 1996. The last I saw (1997), it was still kicking around the courts. In dollar terms, private class action suits can easily exceed the damages they'll pay to settle the government's case.
The other damage the industry faces is that this settlement, while not technically an admission of guilt, is tantamount to it in the court of public opinion. The industry has been shown to be bigger pirates than Napster--they've been ripping off ALL of their customers.
I know many people who make and sell their own CDs independantly. Some are able to make a substantial amount of cashflow by doing this. Thus, if the RIAA gives up the war and stops inflating CD prices, my friends would not be able to make any money by selling their own music independantly.
Just something to think about..
Rather than continue to purchase the engineered junk that the RIAA labels are releasing, start supporting indie labels (many of whom have been royally screwed by the major labels). Try United Musicians or QDivision home of Jen TryninJen Trynin
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
I can find some odd stuff at the local stores - and those are just the employees ;) good people.
But I think what helps them is the used CD's. They may pay me $2-4 for a CD and resell it for $8. Hopefully that'll help support them for also promoting local and non mainstream stuff.
One might argue this rips off the musician - sorry they won't get their $0.50, but hell...most of the stuff I'm shopping for you can't find on the shelves anymore anyway.
There are a few obscure, non-mainstream bands I like - and I try to buy the CD's right from their website if possible, hoping it'll generate max revenue.
Same as above with used books, except it's hard to buy the book straight from the author.
The companies also agreed to distribute $75.7 million worth of CDs to public entities and nonprofit organizations in all 50 states.
I'm willing to bet the next time I'm at the local library there's going to be a LOT of copies of Nsync and Brittany.
Deuteronomy 13:06-9
They will deserve their fate, which they have earned by continuing to treat their customers and talent with contempt.
A few degrees skew of the current topic, but M$ and Adobe, for two that I know of, also prohibit dealers from advertising their wares below certain prices. Is this practice only prohibited if you can prove that they're conspiring to fix prices?
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
Per the story on yahoo.
n ci d=762&e=1&u=/nm/20020930/en_nm/media_music_settlem ent_dc
http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&cid=638&
A whole $67M? Geeze, the industry really got screwed there. Man, how will they, as a lowly $2B/year industry, be able to make up that loss? Man, I better go out and buy 10 or 20 price-fixed CD's to help keep the industry going. I hear this P2P War on Terrorism might hurt their bottom line as well.
Karma: Non-existant. Due mostly to the fact that you smell funny and nobody likes you.
This doesn't make much of fine, when you can consider the real incremental cost of the media.
-Dave
I can see it now!
The music industry, in the attempt to cover their profound sence of loss, is forced to shut down sales of cd in favor or returning to casset and 8-track tapes
1. Massively Overcharge
2. Get fined 14% of the amount you overcharged
3. ???
4. PROFIT!!!!
You are to blame. A fool and his money are soon parted. Boycott or deal with it.
The real money will come in when some consumers get to together a class-action lawsuit. First the government sues you to get the ball rolling but then record stores, or consumer groups sue them again for the same issue and they go the big bucks. It would suprise me to see this coming up soon.
... who is this... music industry?
....
Is it artists? Producers? Engineers? Advertising Agencies?
I dislike seeing such vague lables put on things.
"Information Technology Industry fined for price fixing"
"This is a landmark settlement to address years of illegal price-fixing," Spitzer said in a statement. "Our agreement will provide consumers with substantial refunds and result in the distribution of a wide variety of recordings for use in our schools and communities." okay, five years of price fixing is only a measly $75 mil? i find it hard to believe. then again, the big five live in the land of make believe. and i'm going to continue to only buy CD's when i visit (never). this is a good time to support local artists like monkeyvillage.com and buy homegrown music.
"You never want a serious crisis to go to waste." - Rahm Emanuel
Seems like the record company profit is based on the wholesale price they charge the stores. Shouldn't higher retail prices result in LESS record company profits, as fewer units are sold at a higher price? Or was the price fixing really an attempt to squeeze out the independents by not allowing them to compete with the RIAA by selling their music for less? How does retail price fixing maximize RIAA profit?
"Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney
When CDs first became widespread, I remember that they were priced at around $12. Maybe $14 for the most popular artists. I wouldn't hesitate to buy a CD for an artist I had only heard of.
However, now that CD prices have risen drastically (over $19 USD in some cases), I have found that it can be a serious financial investment to explore new artists. This method of making more money made me less likely to try new artists. At least until P2P became widespread.
P2P was very good for me. It enabled me to hear artists that I might be interested in and then listen to a few of their songs to see if I like them. I have found that I have started purchasing many more CDs now that I can hear the artists before I buy.
For example, in the last month, I have purchased CDs from Funker Vogt, Peter Murphy, PIG, Kidneythieves, and 16 Volt. All of these artists I first heard from downloading a song or two off of KazaA or DC++. I know for a fact that if I hadn't heard the songs, I wouldn't have purchased the CDs.
The price issues have limited my options relating to hearing new artists. I am more wary to spend $18 USD on somone I have never heard of.
neurostarThe next question we should ask ourselves is if this can be used as a defense against any music *Sharing* service. The law says he who seeks equity must do equity, which in english means a crook cannot sue his victim. When the RIAA seeks an injunction against folks like Napster (RIP) they are seeking an equitable remedy with unclean hands, are they not?
Most new music these days is crap!
The labels are estimating the value of the sevent million CDs at retail -- $75.5 million -- not at their true cost, more like $10 million. Further, they're counting these as free goods. Free goods usually are CDs given away to journalists for review and such. This means that artists won't see one cent in royalties from the seven million CDs.
In a slightly related note, we've seen here in Australia the 5 disc LOTR boxed set listed for $X amount of US dollars online (can't remember the US amount). This translated to roughly $AUD90.
The exact same boxed collection, with the exact same feature set, sells online from Australian retailers at over $AUD160.
Yes, DVD regioning is only used to protect privacy and not to fix prices. In the same way, creationism is an exact and accurate account of how the world came to be.
Janie took my gun...
Pass a replacement copyright law where the artist can establish a set of payment procedures for how much a certain action will cost and let anybody produce the artist's CDs. For example you could have something like this in a more machine readable copyright data sheet.
o ugh</track>3 Rate>i rPlayRate>i on>T rackCurrency>USD</TrackCurrency> ;
<album>
<band>Gravity Kills</band>
<name>Manipulated</name>
<track>En
<CDRate>20</CDRate>
<MP3Rate>40</MP
<SDMIRate>25</SDMIRate>
<AirPlayRate>0</A
<FreeDistribution>NONE</FreeDistribut
<MinimumTrackCost>1.00</MinimumTrackCost>
<
</album>
Too bad 70 million is a fart in the wind for these people.
An average CD at lets say... Cinram... stamped, sealed and delivered is about $0.28 when purchased in bulk by the major lables... so where is all the money going if the artists are complaining, the stores are complaining, and the distributers are complaining... need I say more about a $1 million price tag for Love inc.'s Here comes the sun music video... or other outragious costs in some other videos... how much can you spend on Payola? Do they really need to spend that much on a video just to convince us that we want to be as cool at the dude... or dudette... on MTV? Well I guess with all the editing out of product placement in videos, which I guess could cut costs, we have to pay at the stores...
flinging poop since 1969
Office of the Attorney General Paul G. Summers
NEWS RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Sept. 30, 2002 Sharon Curtis-Flair #13 (615) 741-5860
TENNESSEE ATTORNEY GENERAL WINS ANTITRUST SETTLEMENT IN LAWSUIT ALLEGING PRICING CONSPIRACY ON MUSIC CDS
Tennessee Attorney General Paul G. Summers announced today that five of the largest U.S. distributors of pre-recorded music CDs and three large retailers agreed to pay millions of dollars in cash and free CDs as part of an agreement on price-fixing allegations.
The companies will pay $67,375,000 in cash, provide $75,500,000 worth of music CDs, and not engage in sales practices that allegedly led to artificially high retail prices for music CDs and reduced retail competition as part of the agreement. Tennessee's share is an estimated $993,948 in cash and $1,507,852 in CDs.
'The lawsuit and settlement demonstrate our commitment to halting corporate misconduct,' Attorney General Summers said. 'Such illegal activity causes our citizens to pay higher prices and distorts our free market economy.'
Tennessee, along with 41 other states and three territories filed an antitrust lawsuit in federal court in August, 2000. The lawsuit alleged the five music distributors (including their affiliated labels) and three large music retailers entered into illegal conspiracies to raise the price of pre-recorded music to consumers. The defendants in the lawsuit are music distributors Bertelsmann Music Group, Inc., EMI Music Distribution, Warner-Elektra-Atlantic Corporation, Sony Music Entertainment, Inc., Universal Music Group and national retail chains Transworld Entertainment Corporation, Tower Records, and Musicland Stores Corporation. The defendants deny these allegations.
Today's agreement calls for the defendants to change sales practices to ensure strong price competition among retailers. The companies will pay $67,375,000 in consumer compensation, charitable purposes, or some combination of both. Notice of how to file a claim will be provided to the public at a later date. Finally, the defendants will provide approximately 7,000,000 music CDs (valued at $75,500,000) for distribution by the state attorneys general to not-for-profit corporations, charitable groups and governmental entities such as schools and libraries for the benefit of all consumers in each state.
I think that monetary penalties for large companies should parallel those of the average citizen; hurt them as much as a speeding ticket hurts the regular Joe. If you or I got busted hauling ass at 60 in a 35, we get wreckless driving. A wreckless driving ticket of this magnitude bags about $300 bucks and a few points againt the license. Most middle class citizens (in VA) net about $1100 every two weeks. $300 hits hards: you might be late on a few bills, and it will certaingly inconvenience you for the next 3 pay checks. This said, I believe that the record labels should face 67 million dollars each. But hey, what can ya do?
You listen to the kind of mass-market shit they sell at CostCo? I mean a few CDs here and there are OK, but I can't imagine considering CostCo my local record store.
If that's the only kind of music you buy, the RIAA should give you a membership card.
--
They use different words for things in America.
For instance they say elevator and we say lift. They say drapes and we say curtains. They say president and we say brain damaged git.
-- Alexie Sayle
I have no special gift, I am only passionately curious. --Albert Einstein
When they say they're going to distribute 75.7 million dollars *worth* of CDs, are they talking about the number of CDs they could stamp out for that amount of money, or the number of CD's that they'd sell for that amount of money?
The former would probably be about 400 million (at ~20 cents per CD), while the latter is closer to 5 million (at $15 per CD). Mind you, i'm not sure how much packaging costs, but I do know that the actual cost of stamping CDs approaches 10 cents apiece after you'd paid for all your equipment.
What do you call 1000 lawyers that are chained together and thrown into the Pacific?
...a start.
Columbia house will offer you a dead :)
All kidding aside though, it really isn't a suprise at all. Have you ever seen a CD cheaper than the same thing on a tape? It costs them under a penny to produce a CD in under a second while it costs bundles to mass produce tapes. If tapes and cds were the same price, i wouldn't say anything. If tapes were 50 cents more than a cd, i wouldn't say anything, but when you charge more for something that costs less to produce just because of its superior quality some will say its 'whatever the market will bear', while others call it price fixing.
P2P is awesome, nothing will be done to stop it. What is File and Print Sharring or running an FTP server if not P2P? P2P will hopefully take enough money away from the record industry that we will be able to go from
a: choosing an $18 CD from the 200 or so artists that have been played on the radio/mtv in the past year
to
b: choosing a $5 CD from 5,000 artists who make equally good music but don't lip sync too well N'Suck or have a face good enough to paste on top of porn star bodies and post all over the internet Britney or can play awesome live shows but don't have hollywood making million dollar videos for their lame music Lincoln Park.
Hopefully we will get more variety and less MTV / Hollywood bullshit in our music.
I'm just waiting for a similar lawsuit to follow for Hollywood charging ridiculous prices for DVDs just because they contain footage that wasn't good enough to make it in the actual film....Tell ya what, how about I pay $20 for the DVD without any extra crap, and if i feel the urge to hear it in Pakastani or want to watch some deleted scenes, i'll come back and buy the other half for another 10 bux.
I'm just rambling, its late...But as far as the music industry goes,its right up there in the list of things that have power which shouldn't...Microsft/MTV/AOL/Bush goodnight bedtime
After all, those with legal copies of CDs released over the last 10 years or so, should be entitled to a cut of that money, correct? After all, they WERE the ones who were ripped off to begin with... So how does one with about 50+ CDs get their cut? I could reallllllly use the money...
Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
Yeah, P2P is causing their problems. Sure, sure it is.
Must I continually point out that it DOESN'T MATTER if P2P loses revenue for the record companies - P2P file sharing is still (in most instances) WRONG.
I'm so sick of hearing people whine and moan about how P2P should be considered legal because the record companies don't lose money because of it (typically followed by an argument that illustrates that the industry has sold more music since filesharing that before).
I'll say it again: IT DOES NOT MATTER.
Philosophically, this is called an "appeal to a complex argument," and it's considered a logical fallacy.
Let me give a more blatent example:
Suppose you own a really nice bicycle, but you only ride it from 5-6pm. Now suppose someone from down the street comes and "borrows" your bicycle from 7:30-8:00pm, and returns it in pristine condition...you can't tell it's been used. Their borrowing of the bicycle without your permission is still WRONG. The bicycle is your property, and they used it without your permission. You could even take it a step further and say that it would still have been wrong if they left a $5 bill on the seat, because they still used it without your permission.
We, a crowd of people of whom many make their living generating intellectual property, should understand that.
Music is simply property. If you use it without the owner's permission, it's wrong.
Are they cutting off their own noses by disallowing P2P sharing? I think they are in alot of cases. But it's their noses to be cut off.
Minimum Advertised Price (MAP) has been around for a while, and not only in the music industry. When I first read this story I remember reading about this somewhere else, and it happens to be in the PC Hardware in a Nutshell book I'm reading from O'Reilly (Thompson & Thompson, 2002). It mentions that a good amount of PC hardware prices are held high due to this same MAP scheme. Fortunately we have pricewatch to help keep computer hardware prices down.
MAP just sounds like another scheme to keep prices up in what would otherwise be a competitive marketplace. Unfortunately, nobody seems to care enough to stop it.
A computer is a valuable tool, so use it and stop whining.
Considering that buying CDs is (usually) entertainment and not a necessary part of life, why is price fixing on them illegal? If people don't want the CDs, they can just go without, or look at local music.
slashdot!=valid HTML
Can anyone spot the similarity between M$ proposing their crapware as part of a settlement and this mob offering $75 million worth of CD's?
Would such CD's count as sales for the next Brainless Spears or N'Stink they are trying to push to the top?
Tax implications? Like being able to write the entire fine off as a legitimate business expense?
I don't know how the IRS is going to treat this expense, but the WSJ had an article in the past month or so on how businesses essentially can ignore fines for bad behavior, because it can be treated as a cost of doing business, and as such, it can be FULLY DEDUCTED on their tax returns.
Talk about corporate welfare! We fine em, then forgive em!
If they reduce prices, it's likely that sales will increase. (still ~$18 at a record store & ~$12 at the electronic/appliance chains (Best Buy, Circuit City, ...)).
Now if they wait until the the p2p-bills are pushed through, they're open to say the anti-p2p bills increased sales.
they will find a way to bill artists for this settlement, as they have time and time again for whatever costs come along. I swear sometimes the music biz is shadier than a Texas insurance company...
For those of you curious enough to listen to the best radio station in the world, you can hear it over the web; go to JJJ and follow the links. No Ads!! Great Variety of Music!! Free Steak Knives...
According to this, there is also $75M in CDs to be given away to non-profits.
Oh yea, Iomega did this as well
So many people seem to doubt that P2P piracy is actually causing record companies to lose money. Well, consider for a minute how much this whole campaign of fighting it costs them. There's no money to be made in suing Napster and other such companies that don't have any money to begin with. So why do you think they are doing it, unless for the reason they say it is - to stop P2P piracy because it's causing them to lose shitloads of money?
I know 99% of all mp3's I'm ever in contact with are illegal and I know that maybe 90% of my friends (which include plenty non-geeks) have stopped buying CD's completely due to mp3's. With faster Internet connections, better P2P software, better mp3 hardware (think iPod), surely the situation isn't going to get any better than it is now.
Perhaps, just perhaps, the record companies actually ARE losing money? I mean, perhaps they deserve to, but I can't see how anyone can seriously argue that record companies aren't losing a lot of income due to P2P piracy!
So when they're committing "evil" acts against the consumer, we treat them as a single evil entity, and hate them as such. When they start doing "good", we break it down so as to dilute the issue?
Way to make clear the obvious bias within the Slashdot community. Face it, classifying the RIAA as a single entity comes with the intent of promoting them less as a fair oligopoly than some nefarious modular monopoly. We're so quick to drop the title when it's less convenient to a given perspective.
As for the matter of overcharging (not in regard to the parent post, so much as those above), define "overcharge". No made-up (ie assumed) statistics or assumed libertarian audience. We've already heard it time and time again. If you're going to quote the FCC, quote with context.
The defining "overcharging" is as cut-and-dry as defining "poverty". Are they overcharging when they charge an unreasonable sum relative to production costs? When they soak the artists to maximize their own profit? But isn't overcharging best demonstrated by consumer trends? I doubt people're buying fewer albums due to high costs than as a result of industry music simply sucking.... and that's a bit non-sequituous in the greater overcharging issue.
Sorry to reply to my own post, but I have made a serious error in my calculations - I forgot to include the artists' royalties that they'll have to pay. So, instead of $1,114,000.00 cost to the record industry, make that $1,114,003.65. My apologies for the oversight.
Sigs are bad for your health.
Let's see, average price $15, average cost 50 cents. Those CDs will set the companies back a whopping $3 million, which is probably less than their lawyers' cocaine bill.
Like hell it didn't help wholesale prices. If retail prices were to drop significantly, does anybody think wholesale prices would stay the same? Hel-lo???
I mean what is this BS again with justice anyway? Did they bought their way out or what? Did they agree to stop it?
Isn't RIAA non-profit?
You may think they are overcharging for cds, but compared to the rest of the world cds in north america are relatively cheap. In Asia they are around 40 US for a album and 10 for a single.
We have the same problem in the Netherlands. We are the largest CD consumers in the world (in percentages!). I don't even remember the last time I saw a LP. Prices here have been high for quite a while. There once was an investigation to look into the fixed price myth (Witch we all know here is true). But I guess the RIAA in our country (different name here) simply got a nice 'bonus', smiled and stepped aside. Recently I read an article in a newspaper here that some small record labels agreed with us hackers that illegal MP3 swapping was not causing the CD sales to drop, it's the huge price. They dropped their prices... everybody is waiting to see what happend next...
get real, man... 67 million dollars? EACH board member probabbly makes about that much in a year. and even if they did inquire: a dozen VPs and senior VPs and maybe even layed-off VPs will start to fight for credit: "Hey we lost 67mil but by doing it we gained almost half a BILLION"...
if you fine them a billion dollars or so; then maybe something will take effect... but heh... knowing this government (the type that fines the tabacco companies, and then uses the money to subsidize tobacco growers (no kidding)), it probabbly won't even be that effective.
My life in the land of the rising sun.
At the bottom of the Reuters article posted above:
d =C AFJ5135ALXEKCRBAE0CFEY?type=entertainmentnews&Stor yID=1516818
http://reuters.com/news_article.jhtml;jsessioni
States settle CD price-fixing case
By David Lieberman, -- the name precedes itself..
Or have we all forgot the past so soon?
Let's extend that. Is your expression, 'music is simply property' property? I'm not sure I ever heard anyone say exactly that before. Should you get a title to that saying, should you get to charge anyone else for the rights to say it?
If you write off the public domain like that, it leads to absurdity pretty quickly. I think the counter-view, 'music is nobody's property', would be less damaging in the long term...
Um, can someone teach the US government.....
T O D O FUCKING MATH!!?!
ps: god this fucking lameness filter is fuckin bullshit sometimes. what the hell is wrong with caps!? May several 22LB ice blocks fall from the sky and bash the fucking skull of the person who created the lameness filter!
The article mentioned that the RIAA made this settlement out of court and that they were not forced as part of the settlement to admit any wrongdoing. Is it just me or is a settlement without an admission of guilt just a way to buy yourself out of trouble. It strikes me that the RIAA might be very happy to have avoided being found guilty of a crime by paying such a small price. Of course, without a judgement or an admission of guilt there is nothing to prevent the RIAA to start up price fixing again at a later date. To me it stinks of what could almost be called bribery.
You can't win Darth. If you mod me down, I shall become more powerful than you could possibly imagine
That kinda makes $67 million a fortune or what? Why didn't they fine them at least $500 million? If the fine is lower than the overcharging, seriously, why should they care?
Not Buzzword 2.0 compliant. Please speak english.
In the last few years the competition developed. It is called napster, kazaa, morpheus et. al. Maybe they will think about their prices and service survive.
"I just read this article telling that if someone steals $480 millions he'll have to pay only $67 million back.
Now I'm sure that you, Mom and the teachers at school were all wrong: crime pays. Maybe in other countries too."
Didn't anybody realize that kids actually learn from these examples?
P2P may be illegal, but is it wrong? Your argument by an analogy with physical property is pretty weak. In the case of a bicycle, there is always the risk that the bicycle could be damaged, or you could want to use it when it's being borrowed.
These considerations don't apply to MP3s. The idea that P2P is inherently wrong IF it's not damaging the music industry is pretty odd, and you haven't justified it.
The argument that "X does no (or little) harm, so it should be made legal" seems reasonable to me.
It's not the music industry's "noses to be cut off". "Intellectual property" is granted by the state for the common good. The idea that music is property at all would have seemed bizarre 200 years ago, and maybe it will be seen that way in future.
I'm not saying copyright should be abolished, just that both IP law and the music industry's business model should be subject to revision to meet the needs of the day.
Sure it is wrong but the correct analogy would be:
Suppose you own a really nice bicycle, but you only ride it from 5-6pm. Now suppose someone from down the street comes with his nano copier and "copies" your bicycle and returns it in pristine condition...you can't tell it's been copied. Their copying of the bicycle without your permission is still WRONG.
May it is, but since copying bycycle only costs, say 20 bucks, why would bicyclemakers still demand $800 for them?
Sorry, CD's are still way too exspensive. Use emusic or something. The only CD's I have bought for the past 4 years are 3 from a independent band called Devics. (Try them). So much for the Spears and Timberlakes of the music world!
J.
So technically speaking, the voluntarily settled for a sum of 67 mil. Which means it's not a fine because the settlement is not enforced, but a voluntary deal.
The reason they most likely did this is that the damage of being convicted for violating anti-trust laws would be much greater to them. Seen in this light the sums seems low indeed.
So I wouldn't call the settlement a "victory", the industry escaped from being held responsible for their actions once again. Too bad. Having a court rule that they are indeed guilty of price-fixing, now that would be some truly good news.
Idempotent operation: Like MS software, wether you run it once or often, that doesn't make it any better.
The article says that
"Attorneys general in the two states, who were joined in the lawsuit by 39 other states, said that the industry kept consumer CD prices artificially high between 1995 and 2000 with a practice known as "minimum-advertised pricing" (MAP)."
So, what has been keeping the prices artificially high since 2000? The CD prices continue to go nowhere but up. Shouldn't they have to lower the prices? Wouldn't that be a more beneficial judgement?
And furthermore, 67 MILLION??? Please! They will probably spend twice that on the party they throw to celebrate their "loss".
-- -- Warning. Do not stare directly at the sun.
When they say that "The companies also agreed to distribute $75.7 million worth of CDs to public entities and nonprofit organizations in all 50 states.
Is that 75.5 Million at the "artificially inflated" price or the price they should have been. Also, who gets to decide which CD's they send? They should have been made to $75.7 million worth of BLANK cd's..
-- -- Warning. Do not stare directly at the sun.
...we also paid for them to shut down Napster.
In the UK the retail price of CDs is circa a flat pound equivalent of the dollar price i.e. $15.99 = £15.99. With the exchange rate at circa $1.60 to the pound is there anything going on? Oh no; there have been any number of investigations in to price fixing in the UK and apparently it is the costs of doing business in Europe that causes problems!
I am a dedicated music buyer mainly because I am a fussy b*stard and think that the audio quality of my PC ain't the same as my hi-fi. To tell you how nuts things are over here though: it was sunstantially cheaper, until about a year ago, to buy CDs in the States (at your 'fixed' prices) and get them shipped over here, even if I was caught for VAT (never was), than buy CDs here.
Sheesh...
That's just the way the system works. Better get used to it.
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
> Previously, the companies said that MAP was needed to protect independent music retailers from rising competition from discount chains such as Wal-Mart, Circuit City and Best Buy. They had slashed CD prices, below cost in some cases, in the hope that once consumers were in their stores they would buy other, more expensive products.
CDs below cost? I have yet to see Best Buy selling music CDs for less than $0.74.
well, what do WE, the buyers of the too expensive cd's, get from the 60+M?
the usual i think.
Privacy is terrorism.
Of COURSE Jobs isn't going to play along, it's in his best interest not to. Hopefully Apple will help lobby against any DRM legislation.
Sticking feathers up your butt does not make you a chicken - Tyler Durden
It's statements like that that make me grateful that my father showed me classical music at a young age. That's not to say that I don't like other music; I do like rock, some blues, and some other types of music, but...now compare all that to the pseudo-urban stuff Britney sings. Today I listened to Franz Liszt on the way to work. Could I EVER listen to something like Britney? The word "garbage" is woefully inadequate to describe my description of the stuff the RIAA is pushing. It's like intentionally soiling one's ears--I would have to lose all self-respect before I would do such a thing.
My advice: if you have young children, or are planning to have them, teach them at an early age of the full history of music. There is music that has been around for centuries, and will be the only ones standing centuries from now. They'll learn on their own to appreciate what's good and what's garbage.
There seems to be a startling similarity in the business models of tabloids and the RIAA. Both break the law to make money and hope that the resulting fine is less than what htey made by breaking it. Tabloids lie and create fake stories about actors, musicians and the like, and then get hit with libel suits. Quite often the payouts they make on these cases is much less then what they made by running the false story. The RIAA breaks the law by price fixing, make $240MM and are fined $67MM. Sound similar?
OK, so the RIAA owes me. They can subtract all the music I have "pirated" from the bill. I bet they still owe me money.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
CDs sold at walmart should be at least $2 cheaper than any other store since most of the bad* words are censored out. Those censored lables should be big and bright pink for all to see. bad* = words that I paid for.
So are they disseminating the gains of the lawsuit among those of us who've bought CDs?
Music wants to be free.
Says the money's going to "public and non-profit groups". This is the problem with Class-action lawsuits. The people affected ("victims") never actually see a penny. I mean WHO's been paying these exhorbitant prices for CDs? You and I. And will we see a single red cent from this lawsuit? No. While I'm not exactly a fan of the (RI|MP)AA, and I'm glad to wallow in my schaedenfreud at their expense, mostly this kind of story just makes me sad :-(.
I am alone, yet I also surf the universal backwash of undifferentiated Being, which is LOVE.
"We believe our policies were pro-competitive ..."
obviuosly they are reffering to a new meaning of the word competitive....of which I am not aware of one with the total opposite meaning....ummm now I see why they though Napster was bad when it was actually GOOD , right gang?
Shin: a device for finding furniture in the dark.
So they say pricefixing went on from 95 - '00, and is now over.
But average CD prices in 2001 were higher than they were in 2000 (from $14.02 per CD to $14.63, according to the RIAA's *own numbers*). Surely if the pricefixing was that extensive, and ended in 2000, then the average CD price in 2001 would have fallen?
Anyone? Anyone?
Bueller?
There should be a grossly exaggerated word for what the industry is doing to match the industry's use of "Piracy" for unauthorized copying.
For complete parity, it needn't match the nature of the act very closely, so long as it smears them with and emotion packed label.
"Loan sharking"?
"Drug trafficking"?
"Extortion"?
"Prostitution"?
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
Who gets the money? Surely not the people who dished out money for the CD's and were scammed by the RIAA..?? The government is the real criminal.
They conspired to raise the prices, and now the consumer is used to those prices so they can keep them there. Incremental increases afther that will be normal and they'll keep making a profit off of their price fixing for years to come.
This judgement is a tiny slap on the wrist, and they will most likely still be making a profit after you subtract the judgement from the money they made and will make with their price fixing.
We need criminal penalties against CEOs when their companies do something illegal. Right now they only have to worry that their stock options will slip a penny or two, but they'll stop doing this when faced with jail time.
...but I kinda agree with the record industry on this one.
I do believe it was intended as a way to keep large discount chains with multiple product lines from pricing the music-only shops out of business.
The music industry is very new-release driven, and if the large chains can afford to price those titles below cost and get the majority of the business, there's now way for the smaller retailers to keep afloat.
Besides, retailers were free to sell below MAP, they just couldn't advertise it.
Joe
I'm sure they mean the cost that Wal-Mart pays.
Has anyone in the RIAA taken ECON 101? This is one of the reasons that businesses have sales.
We know that's not $75M/RIAA cost for CDs to equal about 80 million CDs. That's going to be $75M/$14 for 5.3 million CDs.
There is about 1 hour of work completed each day. Although private industry is not much better.
If you pathetic republicans want the government out of your pocket then I guess we should eliminate:
1) National Security
2) Social Security / Medicare / Medicaid
3) The highway system / road projects
4) OSHA / EPA / and all other regulatory boards
5) Get rid of the Treasury hell who needs a common currency, just let the states do it. Oh wait that might cost something, guess it's back to bartering.
This list could go on forever. Things you take for granted now as necessities were all federally funded projects. And in case you were not aware any project done by the government for the advancement of the people, is a social program and something that wouldn't exist without callous individuals that really provide no benefit to the masses. I'm interested to see if you think you receive no benefits from social programs.
Sad really, guess your parents forgot to teach you compassion and caring for others. You're probably just a religious hypocrite that "gives" to the church for the BIGGEST CROSS IN TOWN. Pathetic platform, pathetic people.
Now they will just claim that they have to raise costs of CD's to recoup the fine they had to pay.
I still say P2P is an easy way to get your money back on all the media and burner levies, especially if you burn lots of CDs for backup and system imaging. You paid for it, so you might as well get the product.
The Supreme Court has already ruled that you can't dictate price once you've sold an original copy. This was a case of a book reseller selling a book at a lower price than the original publisher wanted.
But then there's the Metallica method where they put right on the cover something like "Don't pay more than $x for this album or you're getting ripped off!" (which one was that?)
Einstuerzende Neubauten provide true value to the customer above and beyond what P2P can give, and all prices are reasonable.
I'll swear it's retail price, which is damn near nothing in actual expenses. Even in jewel case and all it's damn cheap.
Kjella
Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
Take a look at AOL-TW deal, and how many tens of Billions they had to write off due to the loss of the goodwill in the merger.
It sounds like a lot of money to us mere mortals, but in the board room, you are talking Billions each quarter, so that gets lost in the noise (cough, cost of doing business).
Major label CEO(in early 2000): Ok, if we want settle this case in two years for say, $80M, how much do we need to raise prices now?
Accountant: About $0.25 per album, taking into account interest. That will cover $80M fine plus court and lawyer fees.
CEO: Good, good! Ok, if we jack up the prices $1.00, can I buy the new mansion?
Accountant: Yes, the mansion and the new 300ft yacht.
CEO to VP: Raise the wholesale prices $1, let the other CEO's know we're going to settle in two years.
-- If god wanted me to have a sig, he'd have given me a sense of humor.
I've got receipts going back 8+ years....
We were overcharged $480 Million since 1997?
let's see...700 CD's @ $17 each...
looks like they owe me $3,960!
uh, where can i pick it up?
Eventually, if everyone pitches in, you can "check out" whatever music you want to explore. If you like it, then buy it at the store and support the Artist. If you don't, rip it (in case you change your mind and decide you like it ;)
EMI/Virgin records has announced it will earn a US$67million tax credit this year by donating 5.5 million unsold Mariah Carey CDs to charity groups. The CDs will be delivered in CD players glued shut, with no pause/stop buttons and extra long life batteries to ensure they can play continuously for the next 6 months.
An unidentified spokesman for one of the affected charities was quoted as saying "Oh, God! the humanity! Why us? What did we ever do to deserve this?"
There was no comment from the EPA about rumors of an investigation into hazardous waste dumping by EMI/Virgin.
the AC
Hemos is like...sci-fi fans;he thinks technology is cool, but he hasn't bothered to understand the science it's based on
- Ben Folds
But salaries are generally less even taking the exchange rate into account.
Still, at least chocolate is readily available :-) [i doubt that hershey's would be allowed to be marked as chocolate in the EU!]
The point: Microsoft donating software to schools is an admirable thing, because it frees up the dollars that the school would otherwise have spent to buy the software. (Or, more likely, there would be no software)
I know, I know: They could have gotten free software of one stripe or another. I am surprised that this doesn't happen more, really.
I know, I know: These "gifts" poison the minds of students and make them zombie Microsoft slaves. I wish more vendors would attempt to "subvert" students by giving them software!
The idea that music is property at all would have seemed bizarre 200 years ago, and maybe it will be seen that way in future.
The idea that music could be recorded onto a physical medium and sold for money in the free market would have been bizarre and absurd 200 years ago. That doesn't make the fact that music can be recorded and sold any less true now; nor does it make the fact that music is (or should be) considered property any less true or false now.
Times change, so must our assertions about the world we live in.
Step 1: Buy Canadian
Step 2: Sell American
Step 3: NOOP
Step 4: PROFIT!!!
"All I do is eat and poop!" -- Bean
So the recording industry is found guilty of price fixing, and they get a litte smack on the wrist? (which is what a $67M fine is to them, really) I would have thought this would involve the Sherman anti-trust act at least..
Me, I wonder how many times your mom had to drop you on your head to make you as abysmally stupid as you are today.
The companies also agreed to distribute $75.7 million worth of CDs to public entities and nonprofit organizations in all 50 states.
.3million change too.
Unfortunately, right before this distribution they're going to raise CD prices to 1 million dollars per CD, so 76 CDs will be given out to public entities... they'll be expecting their
"Probably the toughest time in anyone's life is when you have to murder a loved one because they're the devil." -Philips
NEW YORK (Reuters) - The world's five largest music companies and the three largest music retailers will pay $143.1 million to settle a CD price-fixing case launched by New York and Florida two years ago, New York State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer said on Monday.
In August 2000, most U.S. states joined in a lawsuit alleging that an industry practice called "minimum advertised pricing" (MAP) artificially inflated the price of CDs between 1995 and 2000, violating federal and state antitrust laws.
Under MAP, the labels subsidized advertising for retailers that agreed not to sell CDs below a certain price.
The five record labels -- Vivendi Universal's Universal Music Group, Sony Corp ( news - web sites).'s Sony Music, Bertelsmann AG ( news - web sites)'s BMG Music Group, Warner Music Group, a division of AOL Time Warner Inc. and EMI Group Plc ( news - web sites) -- and the three retailers, Musicland Stores Corp., Trans World Entertainment Corp. and Tower Records, agreed to stop using MAP policies as part of the settlement.
The companies, which did not admit any wrongdoing, will pay $67.4 million in cash to compensate consumers who overpaid for CDs between 1995 and 2000. The companies also agreed to distribute $75.7 million worth of CDs to public entities and nonprofit organizations throughout the country.
"This is a landmark settlement to address years of illegal price fixing," Spitzer said in a statement. "Our agreement will provide consumers with substantial refunds and result in the distribution of a wide variety of recordings for use in our schools and communities."
No national security. Lol, you want none. I guess the boy scouts can protect us (as long as none of those evil doer gays join).
If you don't want to help on a national level, why would you want to help on a local level? The difference is it makes the standard of living higher in areas that are less likely of being self sustaining (for example my poor ass state of Oklahoma, we get 3-4 times what we pay in but at a population of only 3.5 million it is a very small amount on the national level).
Nothing NEEDS do to be done on the national level (your contention is true). However, only 6 states contribute over 75% to the GDP. Every other state would be like Mexico. Do you really want that? Good luck driving through Kansas and having your car break down.
You think the EPA would work on a local level? Considering you would make each state like an independent country there would be no way Texas could do anything to stop an Oklahoma waste treatment plant from dumping all their sewage into rivers flowing downstream to Texas (not that is entirely a bad idea). Good luck with that on a local level. The only remedy would be State suing State (again on a National level).
Fed's out of banking. Lol, I guess you want your local load shark to be able to charge you credit card rates for your mortgage. Ever hear of Fannie Mae? How about Sallie Mae? No federal student loans?
If you truly believe everything could be better on the local level you've just got your head in the sand. The only reason the USA out performs most other countries in the world is 99% of issues are standardized at the national level so everyone conforms to the same law. This prevents every state from signing treaties with one another and having to pass various laws that are essentially the same.
Could you imagine trying to have a business that sells in every state where each law is different? I guess you don't have the ability to foresee the negatives.
When you say the government doesn't care, remember you elected (if you can call it that) George W. who would rather kill peoples kids for war than look for a diplomatic solution first. So in that regard you are correct. However, the government is only made up of American people, and these are the ones you want governing on a local level? If they don't care on a national level why the hell would it be different locally? Have you ever been to a local council meeting? It's worse than the senate & house of reps.
If coercion is the worst way to do things then everyone in the Military should be able to vote for themselves if they want to be on the frontline in Iraq.
People are selfish and you're a perfect example. You talk about how you would prefer it to be at the local level, yet I doubt you'd give a dime. Actions speak louder than words. I regularly donate time and money to local causes. In reality I should love GWBush since I'll probably save an extra 10-15 thousand this year. Realistically I would have rather paid those taxes and seen them go to stopping the financial bleeding from our local economy (all govt spending at the university, state and local levels has dropped 7 to 12% depending on your area). When the children are "left behind" because no one wants to teach them because 15k/year isn't enough to live on, you tell me how cutting taxes helped?
Unbelievable how sad it is living in a country where people are more concerned with having the fucking 10 commandments on the chalk board instead of worrying about the fact that their kids cant read, and doesn't understand math, science or simple social studies.
Trickle down doesn't work because when I save 15k in taxes it simply sits in my money market until the market recovers somewhat. I make enough money to be a republican I just have a heart, a degree in finance and a minor in economics.
The head of the department that pays gets angry, goes to the head of the department that cuased the problewm. The they movy 70million into the head of the dept. that paid. Probably give the guy some large bonmus so he has no incentive to say something when it happens again.
It's good business sense. spend 67 million to get 400million dollars.
If I said to you, I'll give you 400 dollars of the course of 5 years, but you have to give me 67 dollars at the end of 5 years, wouldn't you do it?
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
It is a stinkin' shame that those who have actually been ripped off (you know, US the consumer) will probably never see any of the money in the form of lower CD costs in the future, etc. I hope the politicians who benefit from their "finding the truth" spend that money on something other than spamming us with stupid snail-mail, or on mudslinging adds about how their opponents bought less cd's and were therefore un-american.
It just does get better than this!
those rich bastards can go to hell!!!
i think mel brooks would blame it on the jews...
funny, in reality many of those executives are in fact jewish...just an observation.
From the article, they are paying $67.4 mil cash, and $75.7 mil in CDs (actual cash value? $174.96 :}) as punishment for overcharging $480 million!
Nothing was said about returning the overcharge - at least not in the article I read. That seems to mean they get to keep almost $337 million - quick, somebody punish me like that!
Acts of massive stupidity are almost never covered by warranty. --me.
Hey Gang, Check out this Reuters (New York) article on 43 US states and Commonwealths suing the US recording industry. Basically there's a 67.4 million dollar penalty and then they'll be required to donate 75.7 million dollars worth of CDs to public entities and non-profit organizations. While I think it's great that they're in trouble, paying a penalty of 143.1 million dollars is a drop in the bucket for the companies involved (AOL/Time Warner, Sony, Universal, BMG, EMI, Tower records, Musicland, and TransWorld Entertainment). Is it just me or could these guys afford a couple billion in penalties for decades of price fixing? Furthermore they only have to pay 67.4 million dollars in cash, the rest is going to be 75.7 million dollars worth of CDs. Now who thinks that they'll give the latest and greatest, best-selling CDs to these organizations? Anyone willing to believe that they'll just be disposing of CDs that they overproduced and couldn't sell in the retail market? (like those Spice Girls CDs that came with a case of Pepsi in Europe). Now I wonder will this be 75.7 million dollars worth of CDs at their price fixed MSRP 15-18 dollars for a new CD or will this be 75.7 million dollars worth of CDs at cost? Hmmm... that's a tuffy. Let's do some more math shall we? 143.1 million/43 states = 3.33 million dollars per state. In the past +/-20 years (CDs were patented in 1983) does anyone believe that the citizens of any state in the union were taken for more than 3 million dollars by this powerhouse list of companies? Seeing how the average state has 5+ million people in it I'm willing to believe that every last citizen was overcharged by more than a dollar over the last 20 years related to CD purchases. Who thinks they were overcharged by 10 dollars, 50, 200? So in summary the music industry suffered a minor minor bug-bite and won't be in need of hospitalization any time soon. -Christian Blackburn
cases like this are a waste of time.. they pay $67million to "the states". what the hell does that mean? a state is a geographical boundry, how does it recieve money? what about the consumers who were the ones screwed in the price fixing to begin with? what do we get out of it? ooh.. they donated CD's to charity also... neat.. still doesn't effect the people that bought the overpriced cd's to being with..
First off in financial planning they teach you to legally avoid all possible taxes. Otherwise you're just throwing your money away. You're damn right I use every loophole available. If you'd like to hear my solution to taxation here it goes:
First instead of progressive or flat taxation I would propose a consumption based system only. This would be in the form of a sales tax. The way it would be beneficial to all is first, it gives those who want to save a greater incentive to do so because the less they consume, the less they pay in taxes. Second, you don't tax necessities to a certain point. For example you still tax gasoline in full because if you are concerned with savings you buy a fuel efficient car (like a Neon, instead of an Expedition), however you exempt up to a minimum amount (based on region due to weather fluctuations) on needed things like electricity, gas/propane, etc. Third, you collect all taxes at the national level only and distribute them locally and evenly based on population. This helps break up the segregation of our society (oh yeah, republicans were against desegregation so I guess this doesn't matter to you) and it would fund areas that don't have an economic incentive to improve their areas. And everything would be a taxable exchange, services, goods, etc.
Quit simple actually but like you said, I'd rather be "liberal with everyone else's paycheck". lol, btw I got a finance degree so I would have an idea what to do with money when I got it. As a software engineer I make a shitload of money, and I have 3 jobs. I work my ass off, and yet still don't have the hate in my heart that comes from the doctorine of "Fuck'em if they can't find a job" attitute. My guess is your a white male in your 20's to 30's who has little education and is pissed off at anything that is "different" from life as you know it.
The problem is there is no empathy in our society. In all likelihood you have no idea what differing sects of society go through to succeed. Regardless of what Rush Limbaugh says if you're not white you've got a significantly more difficult time ahead of you (btw I am white but have a diverse collection of friends who dispite sometimes differing views, we have intelligent conversations on our beliefs).
No one wants to pay for social programs until they are in need, then like every other person when their time finally comes they want to know "where's my check from the govt?". My guess is you leach somehow off the govt (by your posting). You either work for the govt, get some benefit from it (and are not still there), or are simply a liberal hater. In the end your sad pissed off life will net you exactly what you want, 3% more on your paycheck and 10 times that amount lost in derived benefit from public goods (you may want to research public economics, it changed my opinion greatly).
I feel sorry for you.
Music CDs have defied the laws of economics for too long. No matter the quality or popularity of an album, or how "hot" it is, it always sells for $14-20, with the exception of a few titles that end up in bargain bins for $9 because they've been taking up space for too long.
If CD prices had not been artifically propped up like they have been for so many years, a new album by a very popular artist would cost more than an albums by an artist of less demand (except for niches where the few afiniciados are willing to pay extra), and the price should drop over time.
Even movies follow that pattern even though they generally all start off at the same $8-$10 price. After a few months, they become available on cable or satellite pay-per-view for $4 and discount theaters for $1-$2. Then some time after that they become free (OK, ad-supported) on TV. But with music it's the same price no matter how hot or how cold, how new or how old.
The states should have gone for the full $480 million. Settling for a sum which is less than the amount of violations just encourages them to do it more in the future, because it sends the message that the penalty for future violations is less than the cost of conducting business in a legitimate manner.
---------
There is inferior bacteria on the interior of your posterior.
I'm happy you fought a war for oil. Be proud, too bad you didn't finish the job because shocking development here we are again.
I guess you're just pissed off you are poor and the great Republican lie isn't working out for you. Maybe instead of killing Iraqi's you could have tried for an education.
I have worked on base here (AWACs) and have TS clearance. The only military people with a brain make a lot more money than I do and when they retire actually make money. You were obviously not one of these people. When you finally make SSgt at age 45 I wouldn't consider that a success. Are you sure you don't hate gays? I mean come on I thought that was beat into your head in the military.
If you want to live only by the constitution go form your own country because in case you didn't notice your president seems to ignore it altogether.
Moron.
Seven. It was seven times. Very hard and from a height of about 3 feet. That's what your mom was doing wrong. Her whole "as many times as it takes till he blacks out" approach from 5 feet was the problem in your case.
Now you know, and knowing is half that battle!
Appended to the end of comments you post. 120 chars.
There is almost no business in Oklahoma and the ones that are here are quickly moving to Texas for lax laws (GW strikes again) on environmental issues and a tax system that is great for business (but shitty for the average person).
The reason I don't leave Oklahoma is it affords me a very high standard of living without having to make a lot of money. Apparently you don't have any clue what income level can trigger a change in taxes by 10~15K/year. It is certainly not in the millions. If I had millions I would be on a beach in the south of france, not posting on slashdot. I work about 90~100 hours a week on average and have busted my ass since high school.
I chose to sacrifice in the short run (by getting an education) for a bigger payout in the long run. I have no guilt over being wealthy since I worked for it. Coming from an extremely poor background (my family qualified for free school lunches, and I was one of the few kids happy to actually get clothes for Xmas since that was one of two times a year I got clothes) I know what it means to need help from the government and society. I respect and value every dollar I earn. However, if my money goes toward helping your grandma get her prescriptions she cannot afford (and accordingly you chip in your part too via taxes) then so be it.
It's easy to say "Get a job" when you have one. Try that some time when there is nothing available. That is how it was in the late 80's early 90's when George H Bush was president. Another shocking development here we are again, stupid president, shitty economy, war, recession, debt, fear, uncertainty, all the goodies that go with having a republican for president.
Thanks, you brighten my day. I hope you never need any government assistance.
I'm happy you fought a war for oil. Be proud, too bad you didn't finish the job because shocking development here we are again.
I was only a sergeant. Sergeants don't decide where wars are fought and when they end. There is no politics on the front line in the military. Only war and survival. Go argue the whys and wherefors of the conflict with the Ivy League policy numbskulls at the DoD and the State Department. I was just a grunt.
I guess you're just pissed off you are poor and the great Republican lie isn't working out for you.
Great Republican lie? Try the Great Mainstream Political Lie. Neither party can claim the moral high ground here, in my opinion.
Maybe instead of killing Iraqi's you could have tried for an education.
You come off as the kind of dickhead who, 30 years ago, would have spit on returning drafted VietNam vets and called them "babykiller". I didn't choose to go to war, I simply honored my commitment when we went. I had nothing against the Iraqi soldiers and they had nothing against me, I'm sure. War isn't a philosophical debate at the level I saw it. It was just war: kill or be killed. Boring, terrifying, tedious war. I wouldn't wish it upon anyone, even sneering neo-hippies who think soldiers like going into combat. (p.s. We don't)
I have worked on base here (AWACs) and have TS clearance.
This is supposed to impress me? I was a 98C(01LF8) Signal Intelligence Analyst (Tactical/Linguist) and I had a TS clearence. 80% of the people who are in or work with the military have TS clearance. All it means is that you passed a background check. BFD. You were allowed on board an Air Force E-3 Sentry and I was a low-level operative in Military Intelligence. I guarantee that neither of us saw any secrets of any consequence.
The only military people with a brain make a lot more money than I do and when they retire actually make money. You were obviously not one of these people. When you finally make SSgt at age 45 I wouldn't consider that a success.
Nope, I'm not one of those people. I did my 4 years and decided not to re-up because I didn't agree with the political positions of our leadership. I'm currently underemployed because my Army job has no civilian counterpart and I'm slowly working on educating myself for something else. Difficult to find time/money with a wife and kid, but not impossible. I'm not unhappy either. Happiness isn't about money. You know, with all your talk about money , you're the one who sounds like a Republican.
Are you sure you don't hate gays? I mean come on I thought that was beat into your head in the military.
There you go again, mistaking the positions of political bozos in the DoD for the positions of those in the ranks. All that crap about gays in the military? It was just a pissing match between a grandstanding liberal clown of a president and a bunch of "chairborne" general officers in the DoD who were throwbacks from the 50's. There are, and always have been, gays in the military. Everyone in the military knows it. I served with several of them and no, I never once worried that one of them might be "lookin' at me". Why? Because the military is built on self discipline. Harassment of any sort, be it hetero- or homosexual, is viewed as unprofessional and undisciplined behavior and is therefore quite rare. One's sexuality is essentially a non-issue among the ranks. The only people who care about it are political grandstanders and social activists. Contrary to what you may think, the military is not entirely filled with hee-hawing backwoods georgia cracker boys flying the confederate flag and beating up queers for laughs. Most service members are polite, reserved and remarkably non-judgemental. I'm not saying there aren't a few jerks, but I reckon there's a lot less than you'd find in a similar sampling of the civilian population.
If you want to live only by the constitution go form your own country because in case you didn't notice your president seems to ignore it altogether.
You seem to be stuck in a strange black-and-white, either-or universe where, if someone is not a liberal Democrat like you, they must be a Conservative Republican. I'm neither. He's not "my" president. When he chooses to ignore the constitution it only serves to illustrate how the current implementation of our constitutional system is corrupt and needs fixing. I don't need to form my own country.
So I guess that's your rebuttal to my arguments? Call me "babykiller" and sneer at me for failing to pick a Military Occupational Specialty with a lucrative civilian application when I enlisted at 18? Nothing to say about your mutual fund? Nothing to counter my arguments in support of the premise that smaller government works better? Just ad hominem attacks? Impressive.
If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
You're right the gay thing doesn't matter, however that's all I encountered on base, gay hating angry people who are jealous of anyone who works for the success they attain.
I guess my experience with the military was significantly different than yours. And you are right most the military people are okay, it's the ex-military civilians that are difficult.
In short you want local govt only, I want national. I guess it's good we live in a democracy so we can argue forever about which system is better. I just favor social programs and as a military person you should still be receiving benefits (for life was my understanding). If you don't like "social programs" why not just refuse?
In the end both of our positions don't matter because with the corrupt politicians (all sides) and big corporate money that influences them, there will never be true representation. Be it local, state or national. Hell they are giving to judges who run now. Sad times.
Seems like the record companies' Karma score has just gone negative!
All the article states is that the award will go to the states. But who REALLY gets the dough and what will it be used for?
My guess is this is another fat paycheck for some lawyers and rich politicans in the name of the consumer.
----- All Hail the Monkey Lich...now fetch me some undead bananas!
You apparently have no prior experience with this poster. Check out his posting history. Seven three-foot drops simply can't account for the level of sheer idiocy he displays. We're talking "60 MPH out the car window into a brick wall" stupidity. Might account for you, though.
> I'm an idiot.. At least this [bug] took about 5 minutes to find..
We need to find some new terms to describe the rest of us mere mortals
then.
-- Craig Schlenter in response to Linus Torvalds's
- this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...