Slashdot Mirror
Ebay vs. Musician
evenprime writes "Ebay's Verified Rights Owner Program was designed to make sure the auction site doesn't let people
sell things that violate copyright laws. Unfortunately, over-zealous ebay employees have been causing problems for independent musicians. George Ziemann has a detailed
account of the difficulties he's faced when trying to sell copies of his CD on the auction site. Apparently ebay kept pulling his ads simply because he was selling a product recorded to CD-R!
Ebay employees assume that all audio recordings on CD-R are the result of piracy, despite the fact that many indie bands burn their own music to CD-R to sell it. Wired has a nice summary of this story."
Its called Cover You Ass.
EBAY knows doing such a thing will just bring it some bad reviews... OTOH, not doing this can bring in the RIAA hounds... what would you choose?
My Aurora : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o91ZsGwJYyg
FB : https://www.facebook.com/TanveersPhotography
Once it's written to (and finalized), it's a CD, rather than a CD-R.
So just sell it as a CD.
3. Profit?
I don't think that the best idea is to anger a group of people who are known to have an audience. I mean, these guys have fans.
but they must bow to the wicked witch of the west.
time for the traditional raspberry to the RIAA
{bpphbzphbpbzhbphz!!!}
"It is a greater offense to steal men's labor, than their clothes"
Don't we have laws in place to protect these types of things from being executed by individuals (ebay as opposed to law enforcement agencies)?
You're probably trolling, but just for the benefit of anyone else reading this - the reason to sell through Ebay is because it's a no hassle, trusted organization. It reaches out to people who might feel unsafe giving their cc# out to some random indie "label", while still selling on the band's terms.
The truly ridiculous thing is that this system doesn't work anyway. The most common thing I've seen from people selling bootlegs or other illicit music is for the auction description to say "You are bidding on a pencil (or other random object). The winner will also receive..." The sad thing is that this usually happens with bands that don't mind their music being traded (Pearl Jam, Phish, etc.), but newbies get scammed into buying copies of stuff they could get basically free for trade. EBay has done very little to prevent abuses like this, yet they'll prevent a musician from selling his own work?!
Given that eBay is an auction site, that indies are by nature not likely to have the kind of demand that would make auctioning their music worthwhile, and that CD-Rs of their music being pressed by them isn't something that is likely to be in a strictly limited supply, what's the advantage of selling your own music on eBay over setting up your own website or using one designed to push independent music that already exists?
Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
-- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.
More and more modern law is allowing (and sometimes encouraging) any corporation to be come a vigilante. In this case, it's obvious that Ebay has the right to deny service to any customer they please. What's disturbing is that the government is encouraging companies to adopt policies that turn that right of denial of service into the noose used to hang the guilty (as well as the 'likely guilty'). We can blame the RIAA all we want, but ultimately, the government (through action or inaction) is allowing these types of things to happen every day now.
How is that IRONIC? Did Alanis Morresette teach you the English language or something?
IRONY: Incongruity between what might be expected and what actually occurs: "Hyde noted the irony of Ireland's copying the nation she most hated" (Richard Kain).
Sorry to jump down your throat, but this is one of my personal pet peeves. Irony would be if Ebay had a problem with selling CD-Rs, when they themselves were the largest supplier of blank CD-R media. Or if they wouldn't sell CD-Rs, but linked to Napster and Kazaa.
What you describe is merely a case of double standards.
Let's hope these "you're guilty, period" employees never "serve" on a jury.
Slashdot: Failed Car Analogies. Amateur Lawyering. Anecdote Battles.
I hate to say this, but you get what you pay for. Sure EBay's a cheap way to sell items, but the sheer volume of auctions (and complaints) means EBay's only going to pay for a large room of trained monkeys following a step-by-step script for customer service.(That's assuming management wants to spend the extra money to train the monkeys)
1. Does the auction sell organs or living tissue? [press here]
2. Is the auction selling any material deemed offensible by the French government? [press here]
3. Does the auction include any CD-R media[press here] (which fires off an automated email, de-lists the auction, etc.)
Its a quantity over quality approach. If you want better customer service, expect to have to pay more to sell your product.
Shameless plug for my photos on Flickr
What you describe is merely a case of double standards.
I would argue it's not even a double standard. Porno is legal. CD-Rs of your own music is legal, too... The problem is the lunkheads who search for bootlegs aren't paying enough attention, and end up NOT finding the real bootleggers, instead screwing the honest musicians (because the bootleggers probably don't use the term "cd-r", but the honest musicians do).
>That is, music doesn't/can't get made without samples
Not true. I`m not sure about percentages of this vs that sound creation method, but there are all manner of ways of creating sounds - analogue synths, simulated analog synths, fm, additive, combinations of simple waveforms modified by algo's etc. Also, many samples are just simple drum/percussion samples you can get on a sample disk (or sample yourself) or whatever. This doesn't detract from your basic point, however.
I've vontacted them many times about people selling pirated MST3K videos ("Keep Circulating the Tapes" doesn't mean you can charge for them), even of episodes that Rhino and BBI has for sale.
Their answer is always "The copyright owner must contact us. Please alert them and have them get in touch with us."
I guess the same thing doesn't apply to music for some reason.
Frankly, this guy is just an Internet street singer... No offense. Some street singers are pretty good and even some had sometimes a chance to go into the "official" music arena.
But as with street singers, he's got trouble with the police patrols (in this case the uber-careful eBay). So they kick him, spread his meager cents all over the street and hint him to "get outta here". They don't wanna know if he's good or bad. They don't care for his music. They just wanna see the street looking antiseptic, wax shinny and without a single stain on it. For who? I don't know. Maybe they are worried about its nostalgic clients who dream to see the colors of the III Reich again?
In my experience, it's cheaper for an employer to higher an moron, and tell him EXACTLY what to do in clear black and white words (like no cd-r music) than to hire someone with a little more potential and tell them to use their best judgement. Employees have minimum quotas, and employers want minimum liability. You can see where I'm going with this so there's no need to continue...
and then there's that stupid PLAYING OF INSTRUMENTS that all of us luddites engage in... perish the thought that a computer doesn't make an appearance in part of our life
If the CDR comes with a printed label in a jewel case with a J card and with liner notes, would you really notice that it was burned on a CDR.
Also, having "real" CDs burned is only economical for orders that number in the thousands or above when compared with CDR.
Someone points out that they have a fraud problem and they go whole hog after something completely different. Often their investigations are totally off base and only interfere with those honestly trying to do some legitmate business.
You're not allowed to sell your own music on CD-R just because it being on CD-R makes it automatically too likely to be inviolation of a copyright somewhere? This from the well-known auction site known for sellers who never really ship anything but cash your check or accept your cc payment anyway? The site where you can easily by "native american" artifacts or jewelry made in locations like mexico or china? The site where you can buy used dvds, videos or tapes at almost any time? Where you can buy stolen goods almost as easily as you can at the local flea market? Ebay needs to buy a life.
Mmmmmm machine guns....
This is a story not about ebay trying to shut down independent musicians but rather what happens when you let a computer decide by keyword which auctions are and aren't acceptable.
His frustrations really are because the ebay "auction filter" apparently automatically stops any auction containing the words "cdr" or "cd-r".
So, this guy writes and complains as he has a right to, and yet continues to whine even when they apologize and admit that yes, they made an error. ebay tells him he can relist but he decides to be a brat and lists a couple of auctions selling "nothing" which incidentally received more bids than his band's cds did.
finally he reposts the ads which eventually get flagged by the same brainless auction filter. yes, this is frustrating and ebay should now have a human review flagged items before cancelling them but his response is totally off the wall. he complains, a person responds and apologizes but he wants to file a suit against ebay and states that:
"Ideally, I would like to file an injunction to force eBay to stop the sales of all CD media pending the resolution of this issue. I am going to pursue this through every possible avenue."
he no longer really is interested in getting the problem resolved. he then decides that the best thing to do is to mail bomb their system.
"I was going to send the message incessantly until someone called me or they shut down the comment section to force me to stop"
he did this for four hours and apparently sent 1800 e-mails.
According to the intro to his site, he spammed a bunch of people he didn't know in order to publicize himself and this issue. Well done Mr. Ziemann, your unknown band whose cds apparently received zero bids has now obtained a million dollars of free publicity.
don't support this publicity hound.
CD-Rs are not normal CDs. Labelling them as such is bad.
But ebay's autosearch bot is probably looking for precisely CD-R. So describe it as "writable CD" or "CD created with a CD writer" or something that won't trigger the autobot. Meanwhile hopefully the bad press will get ebay to make their system more flexible, and perhaps even consider making their system especially friendly to independent musicians.
Ooh, a sarcasm detector. Oh, that's a real useful invention.
the point is that it has nothing at all to do with morals. eBay is a corporation interested in making money and keeping the money it's made, which means they don't want to be sued by large rich conglomerates like the RIAA. If that means they get sued by Joe Shmoe, the random musician, so be it. He'll be much easier to deal with than the RIAA.
and many artists dont research it first befoer they put out their first CD's..
you can get 100 of your cd pressed in a jewel case with 4 color printing on the cd and the insert and the case spine PLUS cello wrapped for less than $3.00 a cd. that $300.00 for a first run of your CD so they look professional.. hell most musicians blow that much on booze in 2 nights of practice (ok Joking there... by my buddies and I certianly do)
there is no excuse as a musician if you have an album to sell, for you to have them pressed and looking 100% identical to that which you buy from the sellouts(Read that as RIAA members)
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
E-bay is not being consistent by allowing some CD-R's to remain while not allowing others. They are also not allowing the person they've essentially accused of copyright infringement to defend himself or clear the matter up.
They may not be under any obligation but it's not exactly good business practice.
This is exactly the kind of thing the RIAA wants to stop. Here's a guy trying to sell his own album without going through the RIAA and he's prevented from doing so because of pressure from content producers over copyright infringement. Don't think for a second that this guy just got caught in the crossfire. He and musicians like him are the main target.
People's desire to believe they are right is much stronger than their desire to be right.
You know, I'm pretty sure modifying DVD players to multiregion is legal. Totally. It's hardware, there's no EULA, and what you are doing is not copyright infringment in any way.
DVD regions are not law, not by a long shot.
No excuse? so now you are dictating what a musician has to deliver?
Why should they be penalized for offering a CDR?
Maybe they don't have $300 kicking around to spare. Maybe they have to do them one at a time, on demand.
I was thinking he could just make a small graphic that had the word CD-R in it... No way to 'search' on that.
And if you had contacted them and said "I am the copyright owner; these people are selling unauthorized copies of my work".. they would have yanked the auction, and probalby done nothing to verify that you are the copyright holder.
That's the point.
Pardon my ignorance for that type of music, but aren't you just copying other people's music, mixing the ends and beginning of the songs together and selling it as yours? It seems to me that I could record the audio off of VH1's video shows where they fade one song into the next and sell that with the same infringement.
Incidently, I am *not* making a statement that being a good DJ is not a skill. Being a really good DJ, keeping the beat together, and keeping people on the floor or circulating - basically maintaining "mood" - is difficult, and certainly to be praised.
But a mix tape is a mix tape, right? So what are you selling if it isn't a mix tape (however well it's put together and however well the songs are joined)?
--
Evan
"$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
My point is to avoid being one of these children that will oh-so-selectively take events such as this as the sole reason(s) for stopping what is in reality their quest for free crap. Everyone likes free, everyone. However, theft is theft and if you cannot reason and must then resort to selective justification you are only proving that you are a childish idiot with an overpowerful ID.
This is sorta like the wanna-be Linux advocates that were in reality either boorish anti-MS children or were simply general stock losers out to make themselves sound big. Do everyone a favor and don't help. You are nothing but the idiot that stands up in a meeting and shouts some nonsensical crap that makes us and our cause look bad. Please listen, watch and LEARN.
Right, the RIAA. The same way the MPAA sent a take-down order for a fourth-grader's book report about Harry Potter. They don't care if the claim has any merit. All they care about is that no one distributes music except through their channels.
Nope, no sig
Exactly. Combine that with the mention of well-known artists such as Led Zeppelin, Neil Young and Ozzy Foulmouth in the same add (as he does) and it probably sets off the stage 5 RIAA emergency alarm bells at E-Bay.
The problem here seems to be one that we see frequently - bad laws and bad lawyers and bad groups like the *AA's make everyone afraid to do anything over which they might, in some context, get sued. So my guess is that the E-Bays of the world would rather err on the side of potentially denying Joe Nobody access (after all, what's it worth to them, 20 bucks or so?) and come up with simplistic techniques to try to catch potential infringements. Then they provide little avenue for recourse, because, in the name of saving money, everything possible is handled by a machine.
Personally, and I HATE to say this, I think that the bad guys (*AA's) are winning.
Indeed -- this has become a significant focus for me lately, as I've had significant difficulties getting even my own family members to stop by and look at the Open Music Registry -- my sister, for example, claimed she and her husband weren't interested because they don't pay attention to "new" artists (meaning, those lacking the corporate seal of approval). It's one thing for a typical Slashdot user to understand this; however, getting Joe/Jane Average to "get it" is something else.
Last night I posted a short Ogg audio file promoting free entertainment, which I hope people will either pick up for use directly or will take the idea and make their own, to include in Internet radio broadcasts, Free music compilations, etc. It's a long uphill battle, though.
No Laughing Allowed!
Just call the thing a CD. Lots of bands sell CD's at live shows and when you get them home they turn out to be CD-R. They work fine in almost all players. If someone complains, give them a refund including shipping costs. But really, hardly anyone cares. The first time I bought an artist's CD and it turned out to be a CD-R, I didn't think "I've been gypped!". I thought "wow, cool, I'm really 3733t for liking this obscure band!".
If you really want to mention in the auction that the disc is on recordable media, then do that. Just say "this disc was personally duplicated on recordable media by the artist and copyright holder and is a fully legitimate copy". As long as you don't use the magic letters CD-R, EBay is extremely unlikely to flag the auction.
Sheesh. There are plenty of battles that need to be fought. This isn't one. Just change the wording in your damn auction, sell your damn CD's, and then get out in the streets and protest about something that matters.
Yup. I'm guessing taht he didn't read the text of the Dependent Musician Control Act. You're only allowed to distribute bits if you're a big huge corporation. Otherwise you have to get their permission to distribute your own bits. On a serious note, that IS the wave of the future. The days of being able to distribute your own stuff will come to an end simply because if the media companies don't control that, then people will be able to compete with the big media companies. This is their great fear. Not piracy, but competition that they can only control through suppression of speech. Remember that and stop giving the copyright industry any money forever.
Best. Comment. Ever. Enjoy!
Good grief. Read the article. Idiot.
Look man, there's no way he could have possibly read the article only 6 minutes after the article was posted. Give me a break, cut they guy some slack. He was only trying to post quickly to get easy karam from trigger happy moderators, is that illegal now?! Sheesh.
For the humor impaired, please note my oozing sarcasm.
Let's see...the guy listed an auction, which was mistakenly canceled. So, instead of writing them back and saying, "Hey, you made a mistake.", he lists it again. Surprise! It's canceled again! (What did he expect?) Finally, he clues in and sends them a mail saying, "Hey, what's up?", to which they respond with, "Oops, we screwed up, please relist." This should have been the end of it.
However, this guy (who apparently has had his honor besmirched or something) starts complaining about ebay using form letters. Give them a break! They list thousands of auctions per day! What kind of response do you expect for your 30 cents? CEO's prostrating themselves at your doorstep? Ebay made a mistake, and they fixed it. What's the problem?
He goes on to talk about how he then deliberately violated their listing policies, dropped a mailbomb on their customer service, etc. etc. Is it any wonder he had further problems with them? If somebody mailbombed me, I'd tell them to FOAD...in my opinion, the folks at Ebay showed considerable restraint in this case.
Ebay has its problems (including their refusal to allow auctions of legitimately purchased Microsoft products), but from what I've read, this isn't one of them.
"It sure was strange to see something on Usenet about me that didn't involve Klingon gang rape." -- Wil Wheaton
... they simply use an search engine to scowr the ads and ban those that appear to sell something they shouldn't be selling.
The problem here is, of course, that they have no respect for the customer (yes, because he is a customer, and as the saying goes, the customer is always right. And he is not such a little customer as that). Canceling ads is a serious action, especially if you're canceling something without any proof, based solely on the say of the search engine (which is just a program).
They have the obligation to check those ads selected for termination *before* being terminated. And if they say "we don't have the manpower for that", well, then they shouldn't be in this business, now should they?
shana