Slashdot Mirror


RIAA Settlement: Possible Consumer Payback

KoopaTroopa writes "Over on Ars Technica they are running a story about the RIAA handing out consumer payments as a settlement to a price-fixing class action. If you bought a recording at retail between Jan. 1, 1995, and Dec. 22, 2000, claim your money." As usual, the lawyers win a lot more than you will, but the process is pretty painless if you'd like to collect part of the settlement money; you may recall this earlier story about the settlement.

428 comments

  1. No thanks RIAA by typical+geek · · Score: 5, Funny

    I'd rather rationalize my mp3 theft by saying CD prices are too high.

    1. Re:No thanks RIAA by blibbleblobble · · Score: 1

      "I'd rather rationalize my mp3 theft by saying CD prices are too high."

      Pretty good answer. RIAA will probably be rationalizing their price-fixing by saying the settlement will cost them squat, so hey! Free round [4 years] of free music to all involved, courtesy of RIAA and the lack of public guilt in defrauding them.

    2. Re:No thanks RIAA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      what is the burden of proof? I bough a bunch of CD's up to 99, but I have noi idea how much I spent over that time. Seems like a settlement that will be easy for them totake. I mena, how woudl they know if I am lying or not? They probably want receipts.

    3. Re:No thanks RIAA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Here's a novel idea. How about clicking the link and visiting the site. All you have to do is fill out the form on the site and you will receive somewhere between $5 and $20 depending on how many people respond and how much the settlement is. If it is under $5 per person then all of the money goes to a charity. They are not asking for any proof. They do ask for you age and I think that is how the will tell if your claim is reasonable. If you were born in 1993, chances are you didn't buy anything in those years. Your parents would have to make the claim.

    4. Re:No thanks RIAA by quintessent · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What does getting a check for a few cents in the mail have to do with resolving the CD pricing issue? The RIAA was fixing prices then, and they have only pushed them higher since.

      Part of their guilt came from their prohibition against any store advertising CDs below a certain price. Strangely, I haven't seen much of a change.

      In any case, CDs are priced WAY too high. Now whether it's ok to copy based on that is another story.

      Also, don't you find it strange that each time you back up your data to a CD, you have just paid a tax to the RIAA?

    5. Re:No thanks RIAA by Patrick13 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yeah -- hurry and get your name in before the claims site is slashdotted!!

      --
      ::.. check out some Cell Phone Reviews
    6. Re:No thanks RIAA by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      "I'd rather rationalize my mp3 theft by saying CD prices are too high."

      Theft is when you sell a consumer something they can't preview or return. "Open your mouth and close your eyes!"

    7. Re:No thanks RIAA by geekee · · Score: 2

      "Theft is when you sell a consumer something they can't preview or return. "Open your mouth and close your eyes!"

      In slashdot-speak, that is.

      --
      Vote for Pedro
    8. Re:No thanks RIAA by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 2

      "In slashdot-speak, that is."

      Sorry, didn't understand that. Please explain?

    9. Re:No thanks RIAA by aardvarkjoe · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      Translation, in short words that even you can understand:

      "You are a moron."

      --

      How can we continue to believe in a just universe and freedom to eat crackers if we have no ale?
    10. Re:No thanks RIAA by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 2

      "Translation, in short words that even you can understand:

      "You are a moron."


      So are you going to say anything thing to back up that statement? I mean, if you're going to call me a moron without an explanation of what you think is wrong with my statement, then what's the point? Perhaps you're incapable of articulating a copmlete thought?

    11. Re:No thanks RIAA by NanoGator · · Score: 2

      "You are a moron."

      Welcome to Crossfire!

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    12. Re:No thanks RIAA by Sinistar2k · · Score: 2

      Technically, you would receive a check for at least $5 *if* and only if there weren't so many claimants that dividing the settlement among them doesn't make individual pay-outs less than $5. If that happens, none of the claimants get anything.

      So, for those of you who have put your names in... The fewer people that know about this, the bigger your share of the pie (up to $20).

    13. Re:No thanks RIAA by kernelistic · · Score: 1

      It made slashdot. I think that the word is out. ;)

    14. Re:No thanks RIAA by Platinum+Dragon · · Score: 1

      Part of their guilt came from their prohibition against any store advertising CDs below a certain price. Strangely, I haven't seen much of a change.

      Hmmmm... remember when Metallica released "The $5.98 EP: Garage Days Re-Revisited"? Supposedly, the rationale was that so music store owners couldn't raise the price, since the price was in the title.

      I wonder if they could pull that off now? Not that they would want to, but was it their relative niche fanbase at the time that allowed them to get away with such a stunt? Or were vinyl and cassette prices close to US$5.98 anyway? I also wonder if music stores got any profit from that record at the time; the band may have inadvertently screwed smaller store owners in favour of their label, since I can't imagine the label (Elektra at the time, IIRC) giving up their own cut.

      Musings, musings...

      --

      Someday, you're going to die. Get over it.
    15. Re:No thanks RIAA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have 400 CDs in my collection. The RIAA will pay me $20 (tops) and as little as $5 if enough people claim theirs. Not to mention if the average drops undnre $5, it's given to charity.

      If I get $5, we're talking about 1 penny for every CD I've ever purchased from the RIAA. They are obviously charging more than a penny more than is "reasonable" or "legal (loosely used)" per CD so I'm still getting ripped off. Why should some dork who has bought two CDs in his life get the same payback as someone like myself who has spent $10,000 in music CDs.

      I would say the price gouging comes out to more like $5 per CD in which case I feel the RIAA OWES ME approximately $2500. Maybe more ($5/cd seems low, even).

      And how exactly does $137million teach the RIAA a lesson? This isn't even a slap on the wrist. I'd rather not receive ANY money and just see them properly punished for the price gouging. Let them be required to donate $10billion in cash to various charities. If Phillip Morris can be found guilty for a single woman smoking for 30 years and told to pay $28billion in damage, then a company responsible for ripping off every person who has ever bought a CD in their life by a significant amount should certainly have to may more than that.

    16. Re:No thanks RIAA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In this case you should remove yourself from the Settlement Group at the musiccdsettlement web site to keep your claims for a possible future settlement with better conditions. Otherwise you will be part of the Settlement Group but receive no money.

  2. No thanks. by TheSHAD0W · · Score: 3, Insightful

    In order to get my few dollars, I have to give out all my personal info, social security number, mother's maiden name, etc, etc? No thanks. I don't care how official that web site looks; that's enough information to steal everything I own and trash my credit rating for the next thousand years.

    1. Re:No thanks. by k3v0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      i thought the same thing but then i realized you can get all that stuff pretty easily already. you may as well get 5 bucks

    2. Re:No thanks. by SirSlud · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Why the hell is the US working on a missle defence system? Wouldnt it be more logical to make a country-sized tinfoil dome?

      (On a more serious note, I can trash your credit rating by sitting at a restaurant you pay credit with. Your waitress can trash your credit rating. Anybody with access to your garbage can trash your credit rating. What on earth are you people so terrified of?)

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
    3. Re:No thanks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For a paranoic (or someone who wants to come across as one), you would realize that your SSN and mother's maiden name are matters of public record. You would also realize that your mother's maiden name is not required by financial institutions, it is just used as a convenience. You can use any password you want.

    4. Re:No thanks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What if I don't eat out and I shred my documents before taking the garbage out to my DIY incinerator?

    5. Re:No thanks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It adds spice to their otherwise boring lives. For most slashbots, making stuff up about your uberl33t s3r3t spyz0r action based on some vaguely remembered scenes from The Net and some adolescent fantasies about hax0ring for bab3s and bl1ng bl1ng are as close as they get to real life.

    6. Re:No thanks. by SScorpio · · Score: 1
      And if McDonald's started handing out a free Big Mac for a sample of your DNA. People would line up around the block.

      Even if they have to work a little to get that information, are you readily giving it out? I'll give you $5 for it.

      I can more than make up for the $5 with all the expensive electronics I buy on your new credit cards.

      Some things are just not worth it.

    7. Re:No thanks. by Buck2 · · Score: 1

      Then you're weird.

      --

      As my father lik@(munch munch)... ....
    8. Re:No thanks. by hansroy · · Score: 3, Funny

      That's why I shred all my receipts. And eat the paper.

    9. Re:No thanks. by Mitchell+Mebane · · Score: 3, Informative

      whois for musiccdsettlement.com

      The domain is registered to Rust Consulting, Inc. They specialize in technology class-action lawsuits. And their address matches that in the whois records.

      Looks legit to me.

      --

      The roots of education are bitter, but the fruit is sweet.
      --Aristotle
    10. Re:No thanks. by SirSlud · · Score: 2

      Then you reinforce the impression that some people would rather spend more time on making sure nobody can fuck with their life than having one worth fucking to begin with. :)

      --
      "Old man yells at systemd"
    11. Re:No thanks. by NotesSauceBoss · · Score: 1
      Reference for the domain...

      Rust Consulting, Inc. (YKMILXKTDD) 501 MARQUETTE AVE STE 700 MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402-1208 US

      http://www.networksolutions.com/cgi-bin/whois/whoi s?STRING=musiccdsettlement.com&SearchType=do

    12. Re:No thanks. by edbarrett · · Score: 3, Interesting
      you may as well get 5 bucks

      Read the terms, though: they have $67,375,000 to give out to anyone who's purchased a CD, cassette or record from the beginning of '95 to December 22 of double-naught. It doesn't take into account how may albums you bought; the money is split evenly for the class. If the numbers end up being less than $5 a head, "the cash portion of the Settlement shall be distributed to not-for-profit, charitable, governmental or public entities to be used for music-related purposes or programs for the benefit of consumers who purchased Music Products." So, if 13,475,000 people claim their chunk of the settlement, you get your $5 check. When Mr. 13,475,001 rolls along, the record companies /conspiracy theory/ will set up a not-for-profit shelter so they can hand the money right back to themselves /conspiracy theory/

    13. Re:No thanks. by rowanxmas · · Score: 1

      Now you just have to watch out for the plumber....

    14. Re:No thanks. by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

      Exactly what can you do with the last 4 digits on a SS number?

      Jaysyn

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    15. Re:No thanks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wrong. No SSN (just the last 4 digits). No MMN. An address so they can send you a check (unless too manyy people file a claim).

    16. Re:No thanks. by EatHam · · Score: 1

      I'm not paranoid, I'm mononoid. There's only one person out to get me - I just don't know who it is.

    17. Re:No thanks. by Diamon · · Score: 2

      Look again, it's only last 4 of social, no maiden name, phone number not required. But thanks I'll take a bigger piece of the pie if you don't want your money.

    18. Re:No thanks. by pi+radians · · Score: 2

      Because your DNA is a "private" thing right?

      DNA is the one thing you can't help but leave behind everywhere you go. Your DNA is probably the most public thing about you.

      --

      sin(6cos(r)+5A)
    19. Re:No thanks. by The_K4 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Thats why for any on-line purchases (or places where the card is going to leave my sight) I use a card with a 1K limit, and I check the callances on-line at least 2x a week (it takes like 5 min to log in and check it). If someone want to mess with that card go for it. As for my garbage i've got a file of every reciept going back 3 years, at the end of that it gets shredded on it's way out (takes like 20 min to shred a whole year). Problem solved. All it really takes to protect your self is to keep an eye out. I had that CC stolen one (on-line). I noticed the charges right away, called the bank, they re-issued the card and removed the 2 bad charges. End of problem. As for my SSN, hell more sites use it for logings then i care to think about (most financial sites ask for it) and wone of my friend's banks uses it as her account number, so it's on every check she writes (the whole 9 digits!). Your info is out there. Just check it yourself to make sure that nothing looks fishy. Hell if you don't order a Credit Report once a year and review it, your asking for trouble.

    20. Re:No thanks. by zx-6e · · Score: 1
      It wouldn't surprise me if they sell this personal information to all the direct-marketers.

      Additional snail mail and spam is not worth $5 to me...

    21. Re:No thanks. by 1nsane0ne · · Score: 1

      You have to love the ignorance on /. All they ask for is a name, address, and last four digits of your social security number. That's a helluva lot less then any online retailer and 50% of retailers have to be shadier then these guys. It always amazes me how people get mod'd +5 insightful for never even click the damn links.

    22. Re:No thanks. by anarchima · · Score: 1

      But will they? The answer is most likely, No. Why do we have to subject ourselves to one more danger? It's like saying, "Well driving a car is extremely dangerous and you can get killed any minute. So you might as well go bungee jumping off a cliff or see an airshow." The logic...

    23. Re:No thanks. by jayhawk88 · · Score: 2

      Please. If the RIAA wants your personal information, they'll simply purchase it from the thousands of companies that already have it.

      You are not a beautiful and unique snowflake.

    24. Re:No thanks. by SomeGuyFromCA · · Score: 1
      So, if 13,475,000 people claim their chunk of the settlement, you get your $5 check. When Mr. 13,475,001 rolls along, the record companies /conspiracy theory/ will set up a not-for-profit shelter so they can hand the money right back to themselves /conspiracy theory/


      And then it got submitted to /., so it's almost sure to go over 13,475,000 people. The conspiracy theory continues.

      (this should have been from the-tragedy-of-the-commons-strikes-again department)
      --
      if the answer isn't violence, neither is your silence / freedom of expression doesn't make it alright
    25. Re:No thanks. by AKnightCowboy · · Score: 1
      In order to get my few dollars, I have to give out all my personal info, social security number, mother's maiden name, etc, etc? No thanks. I don't care how official that web site looks; that's enough information to steal everything I own and trash my credit rating for the next thousand years.

      Well, you can do what I did to help punish the RIAA and take the alternative settlement of downloading 20 tracks off of a P2P network of your choice.

    26. Re:No thanks. by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 2

      "And if McDonald's started handing out a free Big Mac for a sample of your DNA. People would line up around the block.

      Even if they have to work a little to get that information, are you readily giving it out? I'll give you $5 for it."


      Question: If you're that worried about your DNA, does that mean you're going to avoid their bathrooms like the plague?

    27. Re:No thanks. by mshultz · · Score: 0

      This is a really neat game theory/fallacy of composition problem, if I'm understanding this right... So many comments on this article have been in the "I don't want to give away all this information for $5" vein.... but what if all these people are just saying that to get everybody else to pass on this opportunity? (and they're really going to be sneaking in to get their cut of the money...) Maybe we're all part of some huge behavioral experiment... little slashdot lab rats tempted with cash...

    28. Re:No thanks. by sfe_software · · Score: 2

      In order to get my few dollars, I have to give out all my personal info, social security number, mother's maiden name, etc, etc?

      I know exageration is rampant on Slashdot... but allow me to point out that it only asks for your name, address, email, and the last four digits of your SSN. Nowhere do I see any mention of Mother's maiden name.

      The information is very basic, and the last four digits of the SSN is a good way to verify identity should it be necessary (eg, you fill the form out 100 times with different info).

      --
      NGWave - Fast Sound Editor for Windows
    29. Re:No thanks. by jx100 · · Score: 1

      No, I avoid them because of whatever plague I can catch from them...

    30. Re:No thanks. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm.. Mononoid... mono...noid

      The obvious answer would be that you are being hunted by the Noid from the old Dominoes ads

    31. Re:No thanks. by Martin+Blank · · Score: 2

      I'm curious which bank this is... so I can make sure I stay the hell out of its branches.

      --
      You can never go home again... but I guess you can shop there.
    32. Re:No thanks. by The_K4 · · Score: 1

      Actually, I know of 4 large (read: Have branches all over the US) that do this. The only catch, they usually add 1 digit (at the begining or the end) to padd it to a 10 digit number, and MOST people won't know what to look for. Advice, always ask questions BEFORE opening accounts......this was a standard for a long time.

  3. been around for a while by arson1 · · Score: 5, Funny

    That site has been up for months. But wait, if everyone trieds to collect, and the payment is less that $5/ person, then it goes to a charity (I'm guessing the the EFF), not the people. We can't let that happen! ;)

    --


    --
    Don't sweat the petty things, and don't pet the sweaty things.
    1. Re:been around for a while by athakur999 · · Score: 2

      If it ends up going to charity, it goes to fund music related things (music programs in schools, for example).

      --
      "People that quote themselves in their signatures bother me" - athakur999
    2. Re:been around for a while by Rubbersoul · · Score: 1

      Yeah we are going to slashdot our self out of $5 this sucks ...

      --
      man .sig
      No manual entry for .sig.
    3. Re:been around for a while by stratjakt · · Score: 1

      Not even that, it goes to charity in the form of CDs, IIRC..

      So the school doesnt get $20,000 (number i made up), they get 1,000 CDs which the industry values at $20 apiece.

      I may be wrong. Who cares.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    4. Re:been around for a while by edbarrett · · Score: 1

      You don't recall correctly. But as you said, who cares. There's an additional ~$75M in CDs they're giving to charity. But that's like MS donating $1B (in software value!) to charity.

    5. Re:been around for a while by MisterFancypants · · Score: 3, Informative
      then it goes to a charity (I'm guessing the the EFF),

      Why would you guess the EFF? What has the EFF got to do with price fixing?

      The EFF won't see a dime of this money, and rightly so. I'm not anti-EFF, but ... again, they have nothing to do with this.

    6. Re:been around for a while by arson1 · · Score: 2

      typo on my part, I meant to say not the EFF. And I mentioned them because they are a charitable organization that accepts donations, and if the numbers get too high, the money goes towards charitable organizations, and my guess would be they wouldn't be on the list.

      --


      --
      Don't sweat the petty things, and don't pet the sweaty things.
    7. Re:been around for a while by JWhitlock · · Score: 2
      That site has been up for months. But wait, if everyone trieds to collect, and the payment is less that $5/ person, then it goes to a charity (I'm guessing the the EFF), not the people. We can't let that happen!

      The music industry giving a payment to an organization that lobbies for consumer rights? Sure....

      Instead, this will probably take the form of education grants, so that schools and libraries get "discounts" on the retail prices for certain media. Maybe they'll even use it as R&D money, to distribute DRM hardware and media to schools.

      But I'm sure the prosecuters of this case will take some of their portion of the settlement and give it to the EFF...

  4. Sorry by cporter · · Score: 5, Funny
    They want a lot of information. Date of birth? Part of my SSN? Sorry. Keeping that private is worth more than $20.

    I'll just download a few CDs from a P2P and call it even.

    1. Re:Sorry by arson1 · · Score: 5, Funny

      you think that information is private? Everyone knows my birthday, you get more presents that way.

      --


      --
      Don't sweat the petty things, and don't pet the sweaty things.
    2. Re:Sorry by mgs1000 · · Score: 2

      Arson is right.
      Haven't you played Animal Crossing?

    3. Re:Sorry by MyHair · · Score: 2

      Everyone knows my birthday, you get more presents that way.

      Remember to ask for the receipts when they give you CDs!

    4. Re:Sorry by unicron · · Score: 2

      Mildly off-topic:

      The local radiostation does this friggin hilarious gag that I hear at least once a week. They'll announce "Be the 10th caller to win 2 CD's". So these people call up, the DJ goes "Would you like two CD's?" and they respond "yes, which ones?" he replies "Would you like too see DEEEZ nuts bouncing off your chin."..Laugh my ass off everytime, and people still fall for it all the time.

      --
      Finally, math books without any of that base 6 crap in them.
    5. Re:Sorry by Binarybrain · · Score: 1

      Dude, SSN is practically public domain. I have been to 3 colleges and all 3 required SSN as a student number.

    6. Re:Sorry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's just being an asshole. With a childish joke to top it off. Plus gramatically incorrect: 'be the 10th caller to win to see these nuts bouncing...' what language is that? Assholian?

      Pull my finger. haha funny.

      NOT!

      ...

    7. Re:Sorry by RatBastard · · Score: 2

      That's okay. They got your IP address when you looked at the page. Now they'll be flinging port scans and evil malware at your system in an attempt to knockdown the P2P program you've got running.

      --
      Boobies never hurt anyone. - Sherry Glaser.
    8. Re:Sorry by unicron · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      NOT!? My god man, if you EVER say anything and then follow it by NOT!, you deserved to be dragged into the street and shot. In all seriousness, the NOT thing was tired the second week after it came out back when I was in Jr. High. Your stupid-ass reply made my post more funny by comparison. Thank you.

      --
      Finally, math books without any of that base 6 crap in them.
    9. Re:Sorry by 198348726583297634 · · Score: 1

      Hey, I know part of your SSN, too! It's got a five in it somewhere, doesn't it?

    10. Re:Sorry by styxlord · · Score: 1
      The website certainly has the feel of ... "this is a big scam to collect the key information required to initiate identity theft". Looks like someone checked it out here and you don't need to use your real last 4 digits unless you have a really common name and multiple people apply with the same name/birthdate. Here's the juicy comment.

      The settlement website is registered to:

      Rust Consulting, Inc.
      501 MARQUETTE AVE STE 700
      MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402-1208
      US
      612-359-2000
      cmichelsen-at-rustco nsulting.com

      I called their central office, which referred me to their office in Fairbough (507-333-4300), and asked them about the SSN query. They were quite helpful, and after a bit of asking around her office the receptionist told me that because the number of class members is so large, they ask for the last 4 SSN numbers to insure that if two or more people with the same name apply, they will in fact make two or more payments.

      Dunno if that's the most sensible way to do that, but that's what they told me. At any rate: it's a legitimate site.

      Or a very, very clever plot to steal identities, staffed by cunning actors with Minnesota accents.
    11. Re:Sorry by evilviper · · Score: 2

      Oh yeah! And it's even better if you have more than just one a year...

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
    12. Re:Sorry by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It'll be even funnier when they get sued over the misrepresentation...

  5. the best part! by Scaebor · · Score: 1

    and the best part is, no receipts are required, making the process of claiming your money very easy (and exploitable by some)...

    --
    "Hey brother Christian with your high and mighty errand / your actions speak so loud I can't hear a word you're saying"
  6. Not guarenteed. by gmiller123456 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Note that you're not guarenteed to get anything. They've apparently already settled on how much they'll pay, and it'll be divided amongst everyone who signs up. It it gets down the less than $5/person, all of it goes to charity.

    1. Re:Not guarenteed. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah but the settlement was $66,000,000 right? If every man, woman and child in the USA staked a claim, it'd work out to $4.36. Since it's not likely that every man, woman and child in the USA is going to stake a claim, there's a good chance that you'll get something.

    2. Re:Not guarenteed. by ryanvm · · Score: 2

      Yeah, but the charity is for record company executives that are starving because of Gnutella.

    3. Re:Not guarenteed. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you under the impression that there are only ~15,000,000 people in the USA?

    4. Re:Not guarenteed. by funaho · · Score: 1

      Heh I think the original poster reversed the numbers when they divided. 66,000,000 x 4.36 is about 288 million which is roughly the US population.

  7. I was going to but... by fgb · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I was a bit uncomfortable with the idea of giving them my date of birth and the last four digits of my Social Security Number.

    1. Re:I was going to but... by Control-Z · · Score: 2
      I was a bit uncomfortable with the idea of giving them my date of birth and the last four digits of my Social Security Number.

      But they need to be able to distinguish you from the other 9,998 people whose name is Homer Jay Simpson at 742 Evergreen Terrace! Yeah, it's probably just an attempt to keep people honest, but still it makes you wonder...

  8. Already Claimed Mine by AltImage · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I saw this story on Wired a couple days ago. I already filled out the form online to join the settlement group. It was a suprisingly simple process...name, address, email address and click accept on a few things. You don't even need a recipt. Here's the link for those interested.

    For some reason when I submitted this EXACT same story a few days ago it was rejected in under 10 minutes. Oh well, can't win 'em all.

    1. Re:Already Claimed Mine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try submitting it again, chances of getting it accepted are much better if its already on the front page.

  9. Ah it's about time something is done! by Kethinov · · Score: 1

    CDs are way too overpriced.. 15$ for a CD that costs 2$ to make.. and artists are poor?! Gee I wonder who gets all that extra money.. well I guess I'm just stating the obvious about how the record companies rape artists and customers both.

    I applaud people who stand up against this crap.

    --
    You're right, I wouldn't steal a car. But if it were possible, I sure as hell would download one!
    1. Re:Ah it's about time something is done! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It costs much more than 2 dollars to "make" a CD. Sure, to press or burn one it costs much less. But packaging, marketing, not to mention recording costs, mix down, mastering...paying artists etc etc. They all take a little bit of the money from the 15 bucks. Now..the problem lies in that some take a bigger share than others.

    2. Re:Ah it's about time something is done! by Kenja · · Score: 1

      It only costs you 2$ to master and produce a CD? Wow, you should start your own recording group.

      --

      "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    3. Re:Ah it's about time something is done! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Every notice how most of /. keeps hounding this issue? If it costs too much, don't pay it. Artists will and are suffering. Give it time, and the industry will be righted. It is built into this economy system... duh!

    4. Re:Ah it's about time something is done! by Creepy · · Score: 4, Informative

      yeah, but distrobution and retail markups make up a good chunk, as well. As you said, artists usually end up with squat (songwriters get paid better than artists, but artists/songwriters still get paid squat). The good, low risk money was in becoming a songwriter and NOT a musician/performer - they make 10 cents a song rather than 1 cent (you may need to adjust that number for 8 years of inflation). This rate is set by some organization, I think ASCAP in America, but it's been a while since I dealt with it.

      Remember that retail stores typically double the prices, so your $15 CD is bought by them for $7.50, ~$3-4 is taken by the distributor, unless the record company is also the distributor (Time Warner, for instance), and the remaining $4.00 is split between the artist and the record company, usually 98% recording company, 2% artist. The record company then claims most of their money was spent on promotional and distrobution costs (which may also get taken out of the artist's paycheck).

      Record companies claim to take the risk, which they do, to a degree, by fronting money for recording, but I seriously doubt many of them don't break even, as they still expect the artist to pay back expenses out of their 2%, and if they don't break even they "lost" money. Major artists can get 20-50% of the cash rather than 2%, but I don't know any of them (I know a lot of bankrupt bands, tho).

    5. Re:Ah it's about time something is done! by Blue+Stone · · Score: 2

      I was, by chance, listening to BBC World Service the other night and heard an advert for a series of programmes they're running on the Music Industry. It mentioned something about the nasty contracts they make up for artists.

      The programmes start on the 18th of January, dunno what time, I think it depends on your locale. Here's the schedule page:
      http://www.bbc.co.uk/cgi-bin/worldservice/psims/ ScheduleSDT.cgi

      --
      Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
  10. Only applies to the US by Cruciform · · Score: 2

    So only Americans pay too much for CDs? Damn :(

    So how many of you that qualify actually have receipts to prove your purchases during the period. Like most people I save my receipts from big ticket items for warranty and insurance purposes, but CD receipts usually get tossed. The RIAA will probably laugh it's way to the bank on this.

    1. Re:Only applies to the US by Sylver+Dragon · · Score: 2

      So only Americans pay too much for CDs? Damn :(

      Nope, we just the only ones that have gotten a civil suit to the point of getting a payout. That's kinda the way it works, this was done by the US states, so its their citizens that benefit.

      So how many of you that qualify actually have receipts to prove your purchases during the period.

      Doesn't matter, they get some info from you, to keep people from filing multipul claims, and then review your claim. No receipts necessary.

      --
      Necessity is the mother of invention.
      Laziness is the father.
    2. Re:Only applies to the US by zx-6e · · Score: 1
      Since I purchased many CDs online, I had receipts emailed to me. And I keep every email I get (even that wonderful SPAM -- in case I ever need to find the latest porn site or source of herbal viagra) I have a good number of receipts for the CDs I purchased.

      To bad it isn't on a per-CD basis. I would get a bunch of money as I had purchased over 300 CDs during that time period....

  11. EFF by cheeseSource · · Score: 1

    You can get up to $20 depending on the settlement. If it's -$5 then it's donated to charity. Seems like it would be a good idea to donate the $20 to charity anyway. E.g. the EFF to continue fighting the **AAs and all the DMCA rubbish.

    --
    (Sponsored by cheeseSource for President 2012)
  12. on slashdot = no one gets the payout by ruiner13 · · Score: 2

    Great, now that it has been posted here, I'll never get my $5. amount per person = total settlement / number of claims If too many people sign up for the refund, making the amount given per person less than $5, no one will get the money, it will all go to charity. Rat farts. I wanted a refund from those money grubbing bastards.

    --

    today is spelling optional day.

    1. Re:on slashdot = no one gets the payout by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But since people like you are whining about it, other people will think the same way you do, so that will decrease the number of claims made.

  13. Dear Hillary, by grub · · Score: 5, Funny


    Please keep the few dollars you've earned from me as I've downloaded much, much more than that and my conscience is getting to me.

    Thank you.

    --
    Trolling is a art,
  14. Big whoop ... by nucal · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Cash Distribution

    The cash paid by the Defendants, after the payment of attorneys' fees, litigation and Settlement administration costs, shall be distributed to consumers who purchased Music Products. The number of claims filed will determine the actual amount of the individual refund but will not exceed $20.00 per claimant. If the number of claims filed would result in refunds of less than $5.00 per claimant, there will be no cash distribution to individual consumers. Rather, the cash portion of the Settlement shall be distributed to not-for-profit, charitable, governmental or public entities to be used for music-related purposes or programs for the benefit of consumers who purchased Music Products.

    This kind of settlement won't benefit consumers directly. Even if you could locate six year old receipts, the odds are pretty good you won't get a direct settlement out of this.

    1. Re:Big whoop ... by iMMo · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Agreed - big whoop. I've bought *hundreds* of CDs over the last several years, and $20.00 doesn't seem like enough if the prices were in fact 'fixed'. This entire activity seems like an easy way for the recording companies to 'make good' on their past, present and future monopolizing.

      Between the several large conglomerates, I've got to believe that it wasn't hard to come up with $67 million to pay out this settlement. Will this really change anything?

    2. Re:Big whoop ... by techsoldaten · · Score: 1

      In the event there is a payout, I think the expectation is that consumers will receive a check for something a little less than $20, think to themselves 'what shoudl I do with that money? Hey, I know! This is enough to buy that new [INSERT YOUR FAVORITE ARTIST] CD.'

      Perhaps the payout checks will be distributed at a Tower Records store.

      M

    3. Re:Big whoop ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where do you see any indication that receipts are required? I think they're making it very easy to file a claim in hopes that they can save on mail costs. That is, easy to file -> many claims -> average award is sub $5 -> money goes to a few charities.

      And you're also allowed to opt out and take them to court on your own. If you can find your receipts it should be a breeze to get more than most everyone else given that they've already admitted to price fixing. In my case I could probably get a few hundred if I were succesful doing this.

    4. Re:Big whoop ... by elmegil · · Score: 1

      Nowhere on the site does it ask for receipts. Get a clue.

      --
      7 November 2006: The day Americans realized corruption and incompetence weren't addressing 11 September 2001
    5. Re:Big whoop ... by CanSpice · · Score: 1

      Keep reading the site. You don't need a receipt to make a claim.

    6. Re:Big whoop ... by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

      When (if) I get my check it's going to the EFF.

      Jaysyn

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    7. Re:Big whoop ... by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

      I kinda wish the reciepts mattered and increased the amount you would be rebated. If it did, I could get a list of all my purchases from my bank & credit card co. (I don't use cash much) & send them proof of purchase for all my CDs.

      Jaysyn

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
  15. Alternative payout methods by jj_johny · · Score: 1

    It would really be nice if they just let you put this into paypal or other online payment systems. They spend a huge amount of money just going the hand processing and for postage ($.37/$5 = 7.4%).

    1. Re:Alternative payout methods by DarkKnightRadick · · Score: 1

      That would be nice, too.

      If they do, I have a PayPal account already. :-)

      --
      "There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death." Proverbs 16:25 (NKJV)
    2. Re:Alternative payout methods by nogoodmonkey · · Score: 2

      They would send the letters in bulk form, which is MUCH less than $.37 per letter.

  16. Buy a CD by night_flyer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    get 5.00 back in the laswsuit

    buy 100 CDs get 5.00 back in the lawsuit...

    that means I got overcharged 2 cents for each of my CDs...

    how about they lower the prices instead?

    --


    Thanks to file sharing, I purchase more CDs
    Thanks to the RIAA, I buy them used...
    1. Re:Buy a CD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They already did. That's why CD's are $17.98 instead of $18.00.

    2. Re:Buy a CD by Kaz+Riprock · · Score: 2

      5$ back for 100 CDs is 5 cents per CD...

      Besides, you *could* get 20$ back from the lawsuit. Then 100 CDs would be overcharged by 20 cents each! 4x more than your pessimistic view! What a country!

      --
      Mordor...a magical, mythical land where women are more rare than dragons--but where every man would rather find a dragon
    3. Re:Buy a CD by jfengel · · Score: 2
      how about they lower the prices instead?

      Presumably, they already have. If the prices are now un-fixed, the price is supposed to fall.

      "Fall" is a bit complicated to measure here. If they delay a $1 price increase by a year, then the prices have fallen, by a dollar. That is, for every CD you buy, you're paying a dollar less than you would have if this settlement hadn't happened.

      Or rather, if the lawsuit hadn't been filed, and won, the collusion would have gone on, and prices would have gone up at some faster rate than they are.

      You'd never see the prices fall. Prices never do, not on items like this. It's easier to continue to charge the same price and wait for inflation to catch up to you. The only time prices fall is when competition allows a drastic reduction in prices, such that the overhead of slightly lowering prices is less than the extra "pull" you get from the lowered price. Knocking a buck off the price of the CD won't get you into a particular record store.

      I'm not saying you should be thrilled. CDs are already pretty expensive, much more so than they need to be, through the RIAA's fault, not that of the retailers. It's impossible to distribute this money fairly (since it's impossible to keep track of the sales), and the lawyers get most of it anyway.

      Since there's so little money divided among so many people, the fairest thing may well to be to give it to a nonprofit. I didn't say "fair", I said "fairest". It's still not fair. "Fair" would be refunding every cent I spent, with interest. But it can't be done. They can't refund it only to people with receipts, because that wouldn't be fair either. And taking people's word for it wouldn't be fair, because people lie when they're handing out free money.

      But you can take some microscopic comfort in the fact that the prices are slightly lower than they would have been. Don't spend your $5-$20 all in one place.

    4. Re:Buy a CD by DASHSL0T · · Score: 1

      I think you should buy a calculator with your refund.

      --
      Freedom Is Universal
      Linux-Universe
  17. Amen by PotatoMan · · Score: 4, Interesting
    That was exactly my feeling when I got to the sign-up page. I didn't mind some of the questions, but when I realized they had enough info to build my SSN from, and that the info was not secure, I started wondering if this site is real or not.


    I guess we'll know when the 'identity theft' ring goes into action.


    Preach it, Lamont!

    1. Re:Amen by onepoint · · Score: 2, Informative

      well to wonder or not, this is what I did,

      I called my credit card sompany and told the guy I want to have my card checked for signature with a passport or Drivers liscense, then I want the phone calls I make to them to confirm a few things, I ask for a list of things they coudl ask
      1) date of birth
      2) if a po box then the real address
      3) telephone Number matching
      4) LAST 4 digit's of your SS number
      5) e-mail address if you have one for your CC

      and the list went on.

      Something is not right when someone ask you for the last 4 digit's of your SS#. I hope it's not a con.

      Mike

      --
      if you see me, smile and say hello.
    2. Re:Amen by mgs1000 · · Score: 2

      So what's stopping you from putting a fake number? I signed up and entered '0000'.

    3. Re:Amen by onepoint · · Score: 3, Interesting

      that's not the point, the data of a corrilating name, with address, with/or po box, to IP addresss and age is perfect for marketers.

      the data is worth $20+ or more. because they will be able to say IP# 24.123.256.21 is cable modem in new england, human person with the age of XY, then if they can then cookie you, you'll be tagged for life.

      --
      if you see me, smile and say hello.
    4. Re:Amen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why bother then? Obviously you are going to be rejected when they review you for eligibility. You might as well not respond at all.

    5. Re:Amen by armaghetto · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Um, I work for a credit card company and all that person did was make a note on your account that says "this guy wants us to check a bunch of stuff"

      You know what happens at the point-of-sale?

      *swipe* Thank you for supporting an international megacorporation. Have a nice day, consumer/citizen.

      You can tell your CC company to test for DNA, but there's no way they can communicate this to EVERY retailer in the country. Unless you report your card lost, there is nothing that comes up that says "check id". As a matter of fact, it's part of the contract between MC/Visa and the merchant that they *can't* ask for identification. You could legitimately say no. Of course, they will have to call in to the credit card company and THEN ask for the info you specified, but how often do you see a cashier compare the signature on the back of your card with the signature on the receipt?

      Anywho, to stay on topic, I freaked about the last 4 digits of the social. Sure, it's easy enough to get elsewhere, but if you want to fraudulate (made up word) my ass, you're gonna have to do some leg work.

      Also, if signing up for this petition causes the money to go below 5 bucks, big deal. Hopefully the EFF gets some of this money. It would be using the recording industries ammo against them.

    6. Re:Amen by bobthemuse · · Score: 1

      How will they generate your SSN? It's based on where you were born, the year you were born, and then some extra digits to identify you personally. Without knowing the location you were born, they can't come up with your full SSN.

    7. Re:Amen by molarmass192 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Well ... lets see if this smells of a con job. First, who owns the musiccdsettlement.com domain:

      Rust Consulting, Inc.
      cmichelsen AT rustconsulting.com
      Rust Consulting, Inc.
      501 MARQUETTE AVE STE 700
      MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402-1208
      US
      612-359-2000

      Ok, so Rust Consulting, and just who are these guys?

      Michelsen, Claus
      postmaster AT RUSTCONSULTING.COM
      Rust Consulting
      501 Marquette Avenue #700
      Mpls , MN 55402
      612-359-2000

      Record expires on 07-Mar-2003.
      Record created on 06-Mar-1996.

      So far so good, same group of folks and it has been registered since 1996 so this didn't spring up overnight. Second, we can go to www.rustconsulting.com for a look at who we're dealing with:

      Founded as the Rust Consulting Group, Inc., the Group was from the start a leader in applying computer technology to the practice of law. Using the most advanced computers and technology available, the Group computerized millions of documents in more than 500 cases such as MCI v. AT&T, Westmoreland v. CBS, and the Chem-Dyne environmental case.

      Took a quick look at the site and found out that Rust Consulting is owned by SourceCorp which is publicly traded (symb: SRCP), not a typical thing for a con ring.

      The only doubt that's left unresolved is why this thing is not SSL enabled. As for the SSN fear, your SSN can't be rebuilt without knowing what state your resided in when you were issued your SSN. The middle digits are of a random group that can't be related to any other info. They won't get far with just 4 digits. More info ...

      It's always wise to be weary of "free money" offers since that's the fingerprint of pretty much all con jobs, but a quick bit of research shows this is most likely legit. However, if it isn't, they left all the necessary info to track them down.

      --

      Good people do not need laws to tell them to act responsibly, while bad people will find a way around the laws-Plato
    8. Re:Amen by afidel · · Score: 2

      That's ok I plan to give a fake SSN, live in an apartment that I will move out of in less than 8 months, have a dynamic IP, and don't accept third party cookies =) I also tell every telemarketer to add me to their do not call list before they even start their script and will join the national do not call list in a heartbeat once it is established. You CAN eat your cake (or free $20 from the RIAA) and have it too (your privacy that is).

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    9. Re:Amen by Patrick13 · · Score: 2
      They won't get far with just 4 digits.

      This is from the social security administration site under the heading "It May Be Easy To Steal Your Number"


      You may not realize how easy it is for someone to get access to information about you. Identity thieves get your personal information by: ...stealing personal information you provide to an unsecured site on the Internet....

      --
      ::.. check out some Cell Phone Reviews
    10. Re:Amen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You, sir, are a fool. Did you even read the post you replied to?

    11. Re:Amen by KalvinB · · Score: 2

      I signed up. All that info I would assume would be used to make sure no one tries to get multiple pieces of the pie. I'd rather give the last 4 digits than the whole thing.

      And frankly, if someone wants to steal the identity of a college student with dept I'd be more than happy to have them tracked down, press charges and collect damages.

      Maybe they're purposly just trying to freak people out to keep the payout higher.

      On second thought, I bet they're evil. Don't SIGN UP! It's A HORRIBLE HORRIBLE TRAP!

      Ben

    12. Re:Amen by VertigoAce · · Score: 1

      It's even better if you weren't born in the US. The first three digits are based on where you received the card, so in my case someone would have to try to trace every place I've lived (along with any nearby place with a different prefix).

    13. Re:Amen by hesiod · · Score: 1

      > > They won't get far with just 4 digits.
      > ...stealing personal information you provide to an unsecured site on the Internet....


      Umm, I think they meant they could get the WHOLE number from unsecured sites. If you put in 4 digits and the site ended up being unsecure, they can only get those 4. The other 5 digits don't just magicaly apear on the site...

  18. I just love the bias-free journalism by falloutboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "As usual, the lawyers win a lot more than you will, but the ..."

    This may come as a huge surprise, but the lawyers actually earned that money. All you had to do was fill out a form on the web.

    1. Re:I just love the bias-free journalism by pr0t0plasm · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I bought over 180 CDs between the years in guestion. I'm pretty sure nefarious price fixing cost me more than $20. All I had to do was overpay for every music purchase I've made to date due to an oligopoly's illegal collusion.

      --
      - - - Patent applied for and deliver us from evil
    2. Re:I just love the bias-free journalism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's an interesting definition of the word "earned" you've got there.

    3. Re:I just love the bias-free journalism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's an interesting definition of the word "earned" you've got there.

      At least I'm safe knowing my job as an attorney won't be shipped to India. Hope you like (1) being unemployed or (2) curried goat and earning $4.51 a day.

      Love,
      Johnny Cockring

    4. Re:I just love the bias-free journalism by autopr0n · · Score: 2

      All you had to do was fill out a form on the web.

      And get rapped by price-fixers for 5 years...

      --
      autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
    5. Re:I just love the bias-free journalism by quintessent · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This may come as a huge surprise, but the claimants have been cheated out of a lot of money, and are only getting a tiny fraction of it back. Whether the lawyers earned it, I can't say. Often, they don't.

      For example, I read that the lawyers involved in the tobacco settlement ended up with about $60000 USD per hour of work. Something tells me they were overpaid, even if I fully supported suing big tobacco. Nobody works hard enough to deserve $60000 per hour.

    6. Re:I just love the bias-free journalism by elmegil · · Score: 2
      All you had to do was fill out a form on the web.

      And be bilked out of a few hundred times that $20 by the recording industry. Might be nice to recover some of THAT money. (for the record I currently own >1500 CDs, the majority of which were purchased during the time frame in question, and that doesn't count the hundreds that I've bought and then resold because I ended up deciding I didn't care enough about them any more).

      --
      7 November 2006: The day Americans realized corruption and incompetence weren't addressing 11 September 2001
    7. Re:I just love the bias-free journalism by terrymr · · Score: 2

      Not to mention that if you don't like the settlement you are entitled to opt out of the class and bring a separate lawsuit.

    8. Re:I just love the bias-free journalism by m1a1 · · Score: 2

      This may come as a huge surprise, but the lawyers actually earned that money. All you had to do was fill out a form on the web.

      Are you fucking stupid? If you are getting money from it that is because you were ripped off. And you'll probably get much less than you were ripped off for.

    9. Re:I just love the bias-free journalism by UVABlows · · Score: 1

      For example, I read that the lawyers involved in the tobacco settlement ended up with about $60000 USD per hour of work

      That was calculated from the jury's award of damages, not the judge's. If I recall correctly from this case, the judge reduced the amount of damages by 1000, so the lawyers got $60/hr.

      --

      <high-level position here>
      <name of stupid small company here>

    10. Re:I just love the bias-free journalism by MacAndrew · · Score: 2

      For example, I read that the lawyers involved in the tobacco settlement ended up with about $60000 USD per hour of work. Something tells me they were overpaid, even if I fully supported suing big tobacco. Nobody works hard enough to deserve $60000 per hour.

      What you read is nonsense. The settlement "requires the tobacco companies to [reimburse] state and local governments for all reasonable costs (costs and expenses for which the industry would reimburse their own counsel and agents) and expenses and in-house attorney fees associated with the tobacco industry litigation. Reimbursement will be at the market rate for hourly fees in each state." Moreover, most of the lawyers worked for the states as AAG's. Regardless of what the state took in, they took home their salaries. The remainder of the settlement -- the lion's share -- went to the states themselves, not as windfall but reimbursement. It did not go to the lawyers, though certainly it was thanks to them.

    11. Re:I just love the bias-free journalism by odin53 · · Score: 1

      First of all, who's to say they didn't earn it? How do you know how much they deserved? Are you the final arbiter of what everyone should be earning? You probably think there should be caps to salary for everyone, from a janitor to an astronaut, based on someone's (or some committee's) idea of "what's fair."

      Second, the lawyers from the outset took a contingency fee -- a percentage of the outcome IF THEY WON. The fact that the jury ended up deciding an outrageously high damages award obviously had no bearing on the initial setting of a percentage of the damages, if any. Haven't you ever seen Erin Brockovich?

    12. Re:I just love the bias-free journalism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lawyer fees shouldn't be part of the settlement, it should be separate.

    13. Re:I just love the bias-free journalism by falloutboy · · Score: 2

      "Are you fucking stupid? If you are getting money from it that is because you were ripped off. And you'll probably get much less than you were ripped off for."

      No, actually I'm not fucking stupid. But that clever rejoinder does give me an idea about what we can expect out of you.

      "Ripped off" is a pretty subjective phrase. If a particular CD was worth a certain amount of money to me, then I was not ripped off. The unfair thing that this lawsuit addressed was price fixing. But that kind of violation does not automatically mean that anyone who was affected by it was ripped off.

    14. Re:I just love the bias-free journalism by quintessent · · Score: 2

      First of all, who's to say they didn't earn it? How do you know how much they deserved? Are you the final arbiter of what everyone should be earning? You probably think there should be caps to salary for everyone, from a janitor to an astronaut, based on someone's (or some committee's) idea of "what's fair."

      I'll say it again: Nobody works hard enough to earn $60000 per hour.

      Second, the lawyers from the outset took a contingency fee -- a percentage of the outcome IF THEY WON. The fact that the jury ended up deciding an outrageously high damages award obviously had no bearing on the initial setting of a percentage of the damages, if any. Haven't you ever seen Erin Brockovich?

      I haven't seen Erin Brockovich, but somehow, I still know what contingency means. My above statement stands.

    15. Re:I just love the bias-free journalism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      This may come as a huge surprise, but the lawyers actually earned that money. All you had to do was fill out a form on the web.

      Yea, but as usual, lawyers get more than you will. Even if you're the only person making a claim against a company the lawyers will almost always get a bigger chunk out of a huge settlement than you will. Take some guy that sues the cigarette industry for $1 billion and wins. The lawyers usually take $999 million for services rendered and the guy gets $1 million. Lawyers are fucking SLIMEBALLS.

    16. Re:I just love the bias-free journalism by odin53 · · Score: 1

      I haven't seen Erin Brockovich, but somehow, I still know what contingency means. My above statement stands.

      Do you really understand? I don't actually disagree with you and the sentiment that no one works hard enough to earn $60000 per hour. But I don't see how a predetermined percentage of a damages award -- determined, obviously, before knowing what the award was going to be -- is bad. I don't care how much money their fee turned out to be -- the fact is that it was determined beforehand that they'd get whatever percentage if they won, and nothing if they lost. I'm not saying they *deserved* $60000 per hour; I'm saying that that's the gamble they took when they decided to represent the plaintiffs. A very rough analogy: you start a software company that sells a Linux-based OS that truly is a MSFT-killer -- it's the best desktop OS by far, so everyone switches to it, taking the place of MSFT. You went public early on, but in the past 3 years your founder shares have skyrocketed, and suddenly you're worth $60 billion (like I said, your company replaced MSFT) more than the initial value of the shares. Assuming you worked 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, you've earned $2283105 per hour. Is that fair? Should there have been a cap for you? Did you or did you not deserve the capital gain?

      My point, of course, is that it doesn't matter at all that you're worth an obscene amount of money. You put in the initial investment, you worked hard to make the company succeeed, but in the end, your worth is *entirely dependent* on the whims of the market. Same with the tobacco lawyers (notwithstanding the fact that the judge reduced substantially the jury award, and the fact that most of the lawyers were Attorneys-General of several states): they agreed with the plaintiffs that they would get X amount of the damages, which were completely at the whim of the jury/judge. Just because it was a windfall doesn't mean it wasn't fair -- that was the gamble, and it paid off.

      Another, much less appropriate analogy: you put in $10 on Monday to win the weekly lottery, which was worth, say, $1 million. On Saturday, it turns out that for some reason a lot more than the usual number of participants play that week, so the lottery is for $100 million. Then you win. Should you be forced to give back $99 million, because it "wasn't fair" -- you didn't expect to win that much? That would be ridiculous.

  19. Payments Could Be Nullfied by aSiTiC · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It is being spread that you will get $20 for a claim. In fact you will get $20 if less than 3.375 million people make claims because they are only paying a total of $67.5 million.

    In fact, if more than 13.5 million people make claims which causes each claim to be less than $5 than everybody gets NOTHING. I wouldn't be surprised if more than 13.5 million people do make claims with all the press this story will get. The RIAA will probably try to get more press so that payments are nullified.

    I'm curious to know where all the money goes if the average payment is less than $5... Do the lawyers get a week in Bermuda?

    1. Re:Payments Could Be Nullfied by DarkKnightRadick · · Score: 1

      I don't care. My entire cd collection except for about 3 or 4 cd's were bought in that period of time.

      --
      "There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death." Proverbs 16:25 (NKJV)
    2. Re:Payments Could Be Nullfied by Spamlent+Green · · Score: 1

      The payments to _you_ could be nullified, but that doesn't mean the guilty parties in question will get off the hook. They'll still pay out the same $$ -- it will just get distributied to charities, non-profits and educational programs.

    3. Re:Payments Could Be Nullfied by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I read a story about this maybe a week ago.. as it was then, only 30,000 people signed up. We got a long way to go.

    4. Re:Payments Could Be Nullfied by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You forget the Law firm will take anywhere from 33-50% of the settlement themselves, so no where near thirteen million need to sign up, it is more like seven or eight million

    5. Re:Payments Could Be Nullfied by LePrince · · Score: 1, Funny

      Well, I'll help you guys. I will not sign up. All it'll cost you guys is 1 cent each. Meaning that if it is successfull, and only 12 millions people subscribed, you'll all owe me 1 cent, which makes... 120 000$. Good deal, isn't it ? :-) Aw, don't thank me, I'm kind by nature :-)

  20. I think I would rather excude myself from this by Kasmiur · · Score: 2

    I purchased multipule CD's through that time period. It was about the time I got my first CD player. The amount of CD's I bought was 40-50. If they did price fix 1-2$ per CD then I figure I am entitled to a lot more. I would actually rather they be forced to sell CD's for 1 year at a fixed price of 12$ Susgested retail price. Also I imagine you give up certain rights if you agree to the pay off. I would rather excude myself and get some friends also perhaps to let the judge see the judgement is unfair and is only good for the RIAA and the lawyers.

    --
    -THIS SPACE FOR RENT!
    1. Re:I think I would rather excude myself from this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, I hear Multipule is pretty good. They're doing the West Coast tour circuit right now, aren't they?

    2. Re:I think I would rather excude myself from this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Okay, important point here:

      If you sign up for this settlement, it is an acknowledgement that you consider the matter settled.

      In other words, you just might be entitled to more money in a bigger lawsuit, but joining the class-action implied that you have already settled.

      I wish more of you people would stop and think about that.

    3. Re:I think I would rather excude myself from this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      40-50? I easily bought 200-300 CDs in that time period. For that amount of money, I should get alot more than $20. I'd like to personally horse whip RIAA, if that is possible.

    4. Re:I think I would rather excude myself from this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey, nobody put a gun to your head and said 'Hey, buy these price-fixed cds!'

  21. Re:Dell: For the love of Christ, ditch the interns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Do they call you the customizer?

  22. No thanks RIAA,already gave at <insrt-store> by trentfoley · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Considering I pay the RIAA with every cdr I use, and that less than 1% of my cdr usage is for music, I feel that I am giving the RIAA enough already. That's all the justification I need.

  23. How can this be a Class Action suit? by Newer+Guy · · Score: 4, Funny

    How can this be a Class Action Suit when the RIAA has no class? Crass action would be more accurate...

  24. To bad I can't cash for all the MP3s I downloaded by autopr0n · · Score: 2

    Over those years. At $20 per recording, that works out to, hrm, oh, only about a quarter million dollars :P

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
  25. Inflation adjusted value of settlement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Assuming you qualify for the max $20, and further assuming you bought it all in one year (simply apply the fraction to these numbers to calculate your adjusted value in those cases), here's the inflation adjusted values assuming a 4.25 percent inflation rate:

    2003 20
    2002 19.15
    2001 18.33
    2000 17.55
    1999 16.81
    1998 16.09
    1997 15.41
    1996 14.75
    1995 14.12

    1. Re:Inflation adjusted value of settlement by Ikoma+Andy · · Score: 1

      4.5%???? Sign me the f@#$ up!!! That's beats my 401k over the last five years with a STICK! Thanks, music industry!

  26. A link to the actual article would be nice... by WebMasterJoe · · Score: 2

    It would be nice to have a link to the actual article instead of the frontpage of the site. Granted, the article is currently on the frontpage but won't be for long. Here is a permalink to the actual article.

    --
    I really hate signatures, but go to my website.
  27. Settlement by graphicartist82 · · Score: 1

    Do you have to pay taxes on a settlement? That would suck if you got your $20 just to spite the RIAA, then the government, in return, hits you for its portion..

    Given, that it's only $20, but it's still the principle of the thing...

    1. Re:Settlement by HBI · · Score: 1

      Jury awards are not taxable in the US. They aren't income.

      I doubt whether it is legal for the lawyers to arbitrarily donate the funds to charity however. If it's a class action they are bound to distribute the proceeds, minus the contingency. This seems strange unless there was some existing contractual agreement when you signed up for the class action.

      --
      HBI's Law: Frequency of calling others Nazis is directly correlated with the likelihood of the accuser being Communist.
  28. RIAA payment by von+Prufer · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo now my uber $20 payment will go down to $5 because you'll slashdot the payment site

  29. quite whining and read the form by endoboy · · Score: 5, Informative

    they don't ask for your social security #, they ask for the last 4 digits. They also don't ask for mother's maiden name

    If you're unwilling to give them your name and address, how precisely do you wish for them to send you the $$$?

    1. Re:quite whining and read the form by k3v0 · · Score: 4, Informative

      social security numbers are decided based on your birth state and other info. this article is pretty interesting http://www.howstuffworks.com/social-security-numbe r.htm

    2. Re:quite whining and read the form by ChaosDiscord · · Score: 3, Insightful
      they don't ask for your social security #, they ask for the last 4 digits. They also don't ask for mother's maiden name

      Unfortunately many financial institutions use the last four digits of your social security number as a password of sorts. It's sometimes used directly as a PIN, and sometimes as the initial password when you set up online banking for the first time. Armed with a name, address, date of birth, and last four digits of your social security number, you could get access to many bank accounts.

      Now, a financial institution shouldn't use your SSN as a password of any sort, but there is still no reason for these people to requirement.

    3. Re:quite whining and read the form by jdreed1024 · · Score: 2
      they don't ask for your social security #, they ask for the last 4 digits. They also don't ask for mother's maiden name

      Ever had a bank account? Or a credit card? The last 4 digits of your social security number is often what the bank uses (in conjunction with mother's maiden name) to verify who you are on the phone.

      That's because the last 4 digits of your SSN are guaranteed to be unique. The first 5 digits can easily be determined based on where and when you were born. Given the last 4, you're well on your way to stealing someones identity.

      True, it doesn't ask for mother's maiden name - I think that was humor/sarcasm. I don't think anyone would have a problem if it just asked for postal address - that's public information for about 90% of the population. But $20 is not enough to convince me I should give some folks I don't know the last four digits of my social security number.

      Of course, if places would stop using your SSN like a citizen ID number, we wouldn't have as much of a problem, but that's a different issue...

      --
      There is no sig, there is only Zuul.
    4. Re:quite whining and read the form by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    5. Re:quite whining and read the form by endoboy · · Score: 1

      break out the tin-foil hat...

      4 digits isn't enough to open a new account... if they want to rip off an existing account, they have to know of its existence...

      Essentially--anybody that's willing (and capable) to work hard enough to work backwards from your address and a partial SSN into an identity theft is probably capable of doing it without the 4 digits.....

    6. Re:quite whining and read the form by afidel · · Score: 2

      That's funny because my two brothers and I who are a total of 9 years apart with birthday's in 3 different months apart have adjacent SSN's. SSN's were at least initially doled out on a first come first serve basis based on chunks per SS office. It is also not mandatory to register a child at birth, but you cannot claim them as a dependant until they have a SSN, which is bs as the SSN was origionally guarenteed to be used for no other purpose than to administer social security benifits.

      --
      There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
    7. Re:quite whining and read the form by cheese_wallet · · Score: 0, Redundant

      That's because the last 4 digits of your SSN are guaranteed to be unique.

      You do understand that there are only 9999 possiblities for the last four digits? I'd hardly call that unique.

    8. Re:quite whining and read the form by kevcol · · Score: 2

      Wrong!

      You can get 10,000 combinations. Don't forget 0000 :-)

    9. Re:quite whining and read the form by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I never understood why mother's maiden name was considered "secure". All you have to go is look up that person's uncle, or hell, ask them if they have any family reunion's coming up. Or if you still can't find, it old wedding announcements will do the trick too.

    10. Re:quite whining and read the form by ncc74656 · · Score: 2
      social security numbers are decided based on your birth state and other info.

      Not always...in fact, I suspect that's not too common. It is based on the ZIP code given when you put in for your mark-of-the-beast, and that usually doesn't happen at birth. I was born in Florida and my sister was born in Colorado. We were overseas at the time the cards were issued...I think it was Germany. Our mailing address ended with "APO New York 09012," so we both ended up with marks-of-the-beast beginning with 055.

      --
      20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
  30. What happens to the $$? by webscathe · · Score: 2, Interesting
    As quoted from the web site

    The cash paid by the Defendants, after the payment of attorneys' fees, litigation and Settlement administration costs, shall be distributed to consumers who purchased Music Products. The number of claims filed will determine the actual amount of the individual refund but will not exceed $20.00 per claimant. If the number of claims filed would result in refunds of less than $5.00 per claimant, there will be no cash distribution to individual consumers. Rather, the cash portion of the Settlement shall be distributed to not-for-profit, charitable, governmental or public entities to be used for music-related purposes or programs for the benefit of consumers who purchased Music Products.

    So now that this is on /. we all know the # of claims filed will result in a refund of less than $5. So now what happens? The money gets donated to pro-RIAA groups, yipee!

    1. Re:What happens to the $$? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Isn't the RIAA a non-profit organization?

      NR

  31. Breakdown... by goingincirclez · · Score: 5, Funny

    Purchases of overpriced CD albums from 1995-2000 (that turned out to little more than one-hit-wonder crap): > $200

    Settlement from class-action lawsuit (regarding the purchases of overpriced one-hit wonder crap):
    The cost of filling out a marketing infomation form (to get your refund from one-hit wonder crap): Dead trees and spam

    Trying out mp3's before wasting any more money on hard copy: Priceless

    There are some things that are a ripoff. For everything else, there's P2P.

    --
    ~~~
    "The slave thinks he is released from bondage, only to find a stronger set of chains" - NIN
  32. But Don't You All Sign Up! by GeekLife.com · · Score: 2

    If enough people sign up that settlement/people is smaller than $5/person then no individuals get any money (and it all goes to charitable groups and the government). From what I can tell, the magic # is 8.8 million.

    I was actually hoping Slashdot wouldn't get wind of this, so I'd have a better chance at getting $20. Oh well. (If I were one of those charities I sure would be working hard to sign people up for the settlement.)

  33. AUGHHH! NOOOOOO! by Maeryk · · Score: 5, Funny

    Dont get in on the suit. Next thing you know Lars Ulrich will be personally writing on you to demand 1 penny from the settlement because the price fixing made Moneygru^H^H^H^H^etallica lose
    money and the money coming from the settlement will make them earn less from the distributor for their next album and soon James will be kicking in your door demanding money and spontaneously combusting all over your shiznit!

    Maeryk

    --
    Feminine Protection? What is that? A chartreuse flame thrower?
    1. Re:AUGHHH! NOOOOOO! by almeida · · Score: 2

      Do you know why Metallica got pissed? They have one of the best record deals in the industry because way back around 1990, Elektra realized how important Metallica was. I forget the exact numbers, but they get nearly all of the money from album sales, unlike most other bands who only get a few pennies. Also, they lost more money paying lawyers than they did to lost album sales. They readily admit this. It wasn't about the money, it was a matter of principle. Very few people stand up for their beliefs these days.

    2. Re:AUGHHH! NOOOOOO! by idontgno · · Score: 1
      It wasn't about the money, it was a matter of principle.

      The old saw goes "When someone says it wasn't about the money, but a matter of principle, it was really about the money."

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    3. Re:AUGHHH! NOOOOOO! by evilviper · · Score: 2


      Sounds great! Wonder what he will be thinking when he sees the Napster sticker on my shotgun?
      </sarcasm>

      Muwahahaha

      --
      Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
  34. That's cool.. More money for us... by Viewsonic · · Score: 2
    Since everyone on the planet already HAS that info about you to begin with.

    PS. Beware of those rogue Birthday Carolers!!

    1. Re:That's cool.. More money for us... by onepoint · · Score: 1

      no that's not true, I make it a habit of checking to see how much of my identitity is on the internet via search engines and the payable search companies.
      With search engines :

      average you can only get my name and po box. no SS# yet, no physical address yet, and not tel#

      with paid services :
      name, po box, sometimes address if it's correct.

      me

      --
      if you see me, smile and say hello.
    2. Re:That's cool.. More money for us... by MisterFancypants · · Score: 2
      with paid services : name, po box, sometimes address if it's correct.

      Well you must have paid for those services with a credit card.. Guess what, now they know EVERYTHING about you for when someone ELSE does a lookup! Good job, asshat!

    3. Re:That's cool.. More money for us... by Safety+Cap · · Score: 2
      Along those same lines...

      Since picking a lock is trivial, why do you bother locking your house and vehicle?

      --
      Yeah, right.
    4. Re:That's cool.. More money for us... by onepoint · · Score: 1

      your thinking incorrectly,
      since it is already know that my P.O. Box is avalible without the paid services, it's safe to use your credit card that goes to the same P.O. box.

      the thing I am looking for is the home address. the less of that is out thier the less of a chance I will be fully known.

      --
      if you see me, smile and say hello.
  35. No money for me... by jpsst34 · · Score: 1

    ...If only I'd actually have bought some CD's over the past three years, rather than dowloading every album from a P2P network.

    Neudge!

    --
    How are you going to keep them down on the farm once they've seen Karl Hungus?
  36. "Charitable" Donations by barryfandango · · Score: 1

    "...Defendants will provide $75,700,000 worth of prerecorded music compact discs. The compact discs will be distributed to not-for-profit, charitable, governmental or public entities to be used for music-related purposes or programs.

    Finally, my community centre will get that Britney Spears Box Set we've been saving up for...

    --
    In all matters of opinion, our adversaries are insane. -Oscar Wilde
  37. I concur, RIAA still gets bled by mekkab · · Score: 2

    Even if you only see $5, it adds up to a large penalty against RIAA.

    This goes right in line with those Sprint Spectrum settlements- where the settlement "deal" was worse than what you could get in Radio Shack! (yep, I got that one in the mail, got excited, checked the prices, and decided not to opt in)

    It isn't so much to really re-imburse the consumers, but to hurt the corporations first and foremost.

    --
    In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
    1. Re:I concur, RIAA still gets bled by Golias · · Score: 5, Informative
      Even if you only see $5, it adds up to a large penalty against RIAA

      Holy shit, the ignorance flying around here is blinding today. Sorry to single you out, but you are one of many who seems to completely misunderstand what you are signing up for here.

      1. The RIAA loses nothing. This is a lawsuit against a group of record labels. Yes, the RIAA lobbies on their behalf, but if anything this will result in the labels investing more money into the RIAA, to help insure that they don't get stung like this again over something.

      2. Your signing up does not mean more money gets added to the penalty. The penalty was already settled by the ambulance-chasing lawyers who set up this class action... and it ain't much. You signing up just means the tiny fraction of the settlement that actuallly goes to those who were "damaged" by high CD prices gets divided up more thinly.

      3. The settlement didn't do jack shit about high CD prices. Go to your local record store, and notice that albums that used to cost $13 about two years ago are now going for $17. Like almost all corporate class-action lawsuits, the lawyers get rich convincing you that you got "free money" coming, but the reality is that the costs of litigation and penalties are typically passed on to you, the consumer, while the handful of lawyers who suckered you into helping them make the suit look legitimate are making off like bandits... which is what they are.

      If you want to fight the RIAA, give money (more than $5 would be nice) to the Electronic Frontier Foundation, or 2600's legal defense fund, or Senator Hatch's campaign fund. Signing up for this settlement just makes you a participant in the over-litigious culture we are rapidly becoming, while doing nothing about the problem other than make you feel like you are doing something about it.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    2. Re:I concur, RIAA still gets bled by mekkab · · Score: 2

      tit for tat...
      I think I have a far better grasp of the big picture here. However I don't think I clearly explicated myself.

      1. The RIAA loses nothing. This is a lawsuit against a group of record labels.


      same difference- record companies lose money.

      But those companies are not privately held corporations. NO!!! They are Shareholder driven. And when shareholders lose money, they get pissed. And management gets fired.
      Look at how the SEC does it's regulation of 'wayward' securities- they want to hurt the company in a tangible way, but not at a total expense of the shareholders. So its a balance.

      2. Your signing up does not mean more money gets added to the penalty.

      RIGHT! similar to the Sprint PCS settlement. But it doesn't matter if you sign up or not- they still got a slap on the wrists.

      3. The settlement didn't do jack shit about high CD prices

      Ah yes, the "no fault" settlement ;) Is there ANY other kind?! But see my first response- while it may not be the case immediately, that is the desired outcome. You penalize a company and the people at the top who are being penalized let the crap roll downhill.

      Signing up for this settlement just makes you a participant in the over-litigious culture we are rapidly becoming, while doing nothing about the problem other than make you feel like you are doing something about it.


      actually, this settlement is a way of getting around the over-litigious nature of society- they bilked people for money, they got called on it, and they are paying money out.

      Signing up for the settlement doesn't do dick- its the fact that this settlement even exists and that the companies are paying a penalty, THATS what is important.

      And if you want to do something about it don't buy records. Buy a guitar and make your own music.

      --
      In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
    3. Re:I concur, RIAA still gets bled by Golias · · Score: 2
      same difference- record companies lose money. But those companies are not privately held corporations. NO!!! They are Shareholder driven. And when shareholders lose money, they get pissed. And management gets fired.

      Not really. Record companies simply raise their prices slightly to cover the cost. Oh, look at that, they already have. Nothing in the settlement prevents this from happening.

      Those who buy their albums will be the ones to bear the cost. What? Did you think they would chose to screw their shareholders over the consumer?

      And if you want to do something about it don't buy records. Buy a guitar and make your own music.

      Already have. I highly reccomend it.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    4. Re:I concur, RIAA still gets bled by mekkab · · Score: 2

      Not really. Record companies simply raise their prices slightly to cover the cost. Oh, look at that, they already have. Nothing in the settlement prevents this from happening.

      Those who buy their albums will be the ones to bear the cost. What? Did you think they would chose to screw their shareholders over the consumer?


      Okay- you've got me over a barrel on this.
      Really the only thing one can hope for is the PLAN B which you are enacting:

      it goes like this: corporations get fined, sharehodlers get concerned, management raises prices, consumers catch wind of the settlement and the price raising, complain, stop buying products.

      BUT THAT takes a strong grass roots movement. Without people organizing and saying "we know what you're doing and we won't take it anymore. We have the numbers to back up this boycott."- this "slap on the wrist" is the best thing we can expect from the powers above us.

      Already have. I highly reccomend it
      If you live in the D.C. metro area, we should get together and jam!

      --
      In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
    5. Re:I concur, RIAA still gets bled by Golias · · Score: 1
      If you live in the D.C. metro area, we should get together and jam!

      Alas, I live in the frozen tundra of the Twin Cities. However, if you are ever up in the land of blonde hair and blue ears, I also play a descent bass guitar, and my studio also sports an upright piano & drum kit.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    6. Re:I concur, RIAA still gets bled by mekkab · · Score: 2

      Once we get my bro-inlaw to move to the twins (from Grand Forks) I'll take you up on it.
      I bash (drums), thump(bass), screech (sing), and squeal (guitar).

      --
      In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
  38. They're still doing it by rossz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I would assume they settled out of course instead of paying this as part of a judgement. If they had gone the whole distance in court they would have had to pay refunds AND stop price fixing. I haven't seen any drop in CD prices, so it's obvious they haven't changed their practices one bit.

    No doubt the RIAA attornies realized they would lose the case and be forced to sell music at reasonable prices. They can't have that! So settle for a few measly millions, instead.

    --
    -- Will program for bandwidth
    1. Re:They're still doing it by quintessent · · Score: 2

      The court will have hearings in Maine in March where YOU can go to contest the settlement. You or your lawyer can appear before the court.

    2. Re:They're still doing it by DirtyCowboy · · Score: 1

      Actually, that is not true. As with many settlements, the settlement agreement in this case requires the defendant to give up more than money. To quote the Notice of Proposed Settlement:
      "The Settlement Agreements with the Distributor Defendants and the Retailer Defendants each provide for injunctive relief. The Plaintiffs and Distributor Defendants have agreed to the entry of a permanent injunction, which would prohibit the Distributor Defendants for a period ending August 30, 2007 from adopting, maintaining, enforcing or threatening to enforce any policy, practice or plan which makes receipt of any cooperative advertising or other promotional funds contingent on the price or price level at which any product is advertised or promoted. Distributor Defendants would also be prohibited from agreeing with any dealers to control or maintain the resale price at which the Dealer may offer for sale or sell such Distributor Defendant's Product. Additionally, Distributor Defendants could not for a period ending August 30, 2005, announce resale or minimum advertised prices of product and unilaterally terminate those who fail to comply because of such failure. Distributor Defendants may however, announce suggested retail prices for their Product."

      It's not perfect, but they're not walking by simply writing a check.

      BTW, IAAL. And I DO wish they had handed out a pitchfork and goatee with my JD.

      --
      D'oh -- the stuff that buys me beer! Ray -- the guy who sells me beer!
  39. Apply Anyway by core+plexus · · Score: 2
    I know people have posted this: "The number of claims filed will determine the actual amount of the individual refund but will not exceed $20.00 per claimant. If the number of claims filed would result in refunds of less than $5.00 per claimant, there will be no cash distribution to individual consumers." and say "Why Bother"?

    I'll tell you why: Because at the very least we can get some money out of the thieves that today are trying to screw us in other ways. Its too bad we can't use the money to fight the RIAA and their co-conspiritors. I'd waive my refund for such a cause. I'd love to see them punished, and brought to task for their misdeeds.

    Personal Strap-On Aircraft for Auction on eBay

  40. Re:No thanks RIAA,already gave at by aridhol · · Score: 5, Informative

    I don't know how much you pay, but here are the numbers for Canada. The CCFDA (Canadian Coalition for Fair Digital Access) is trying to fight it.

    --
    I can't say that I don't give a fuck. I've just run out of fuck to give.
  41. Money from RIAA to EFF by Stephenmg · · Score: 1

    that has to be worst posable insult to RIAA. I think i'll go sign up.

  42. any chance to bash America, huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, assgiblet. Not just Americans pay too much for CDs. That's not what this means at all. But I guess that you won't care to hear that, since you seem to have such a blinding hatred for America.

    Sure. Whatever. All Americans fuck babies and have Hitler moustaches. Whatever you want to believe, it doesn't matter.

    1. Re:any chance to bash America, huh? by Cruciform · · Score: 2

      Wow, look who woke up on the retarded side of the bed. It's dislike for the RIAA being expressed. And no, I don't hate all Americans, just you :)

    2. Re:any chance to bash America, huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My my, you certainly have a lot of sand in your vagina. Does it itch?

  43. Re:Dell: For the love of Christ, ditch the interns by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No.

  44. Exclude yourself from the Settlement Group by cmoney · · Score: 2

    and then keep on pirating!

    1. Re:Exclude yourself from the Settlement Group by Blue+Stone · · Score: 2

      "Exclude yourself from the Settlement Group and then keep on pirating!"

      They get royalties on blank media, to make up for non-authorised copied music, therefore they're being paid royalties for bootlegged MP3s [especially when you consider that a lot of blank media is used for software, pictures, legally owned music and other data that the RIAA has no claim for a royalty on.]

      And still they bitch and moan and whine and scream.

      They get re-imbursed for bootlegging. So, feel free. No?

      --
      Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
  45. Do you applaud the people who bend over? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    $15 for a CD that should have been in the neighborhood of $8 X the number of CDs you've bought = $5 to $20?

    Yeah, something was done alright, somebody caved.

  46. Huh? by autopr0n · · Score: 5, Informative

    Do you live in canada? If not, why are you using "music" CD-Rs rather then "data" ones for your music? (the only diffrence between the two is that music disks will work in special music drives, have serial copy protection (no copies of copies) and are taxed by the RIAA. Data CDs work in music players, have no SCP, and cost only a few cents, in general)

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
    1. Re:Huh? by fendel · · Score: 3, Interesting

      My local Best Buy has a hand-written sign up near the music CD-Rs claiming that they sound better and are more(!) flexible.

      I haven't figured out yet whether they're deliberately lying or just ignorant. (These are the same guys who had no idea what I meant when I told them they shouldn't leave their monitors in the PC section at the default 60hz.)

    2. Re:Huh? by quintessent · · Score: 3, Informative

      Data CDs in the U.S. are still RIAA taxed, but at a lower rate. Live and learn

    3. Re:Huh? by CanSpice · · Score: 1

      Canadian consumers taxed by an American organisation? Tell me sir, how does that work?

      You mean to say that there's a levy on blank audio recording media collected by the Canadian Private Copying Collective. From the CPCC's website:

      "In Canada, private copying is legal and does not infringe copyright. It is because, in exchange, copyright holders in recorded music have a right to receive compensation in the form of royalties for private copying."

    4. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      In the United States, a distinction is made between "consumer digital audio" media and data media. You have to pay extra for consumer audio CD-R blanks and DAT tapes, and the music recording industry gets a piece on the assumption that the media will be used to hold commercially recorded material.

      Canada has gone a step farther, by placing a levy upon *all* media capable of storing audio. Even the "data" CD-R blanks, which don't work in consumer audio CD-recordable decks, are subject to the levy. Starting Jan 1 2001, the levy was raised from CDN$0.052 to CDN$0.21 (a 4x increase) for CD-R and CD-RW discs.

    5. Re:Huh? by quintessent · · Score: 2

      Let me clarify:

      Data CDs in the U.S. are still RIAA taxed, but at a lower rate than music CDs.

    6. Re:Huh? by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 2

      " If not, why are you using "music" CD-Rs rather then "data" ones for your music? (the only diffrence between the two is that music disks will work in special music drives, have serial copy protection (no copies of copies) and are taxed by the RIAA."

      That might be acceptable to if putting music on these CD's (as opposed to data CDs) legalized my copy of the music. That would mean I could download all the music I like, and then burn it to a 'Music' CD that the RIAA specifically gets money from. It sure beats taxing the 50% of CD's that aren't used for music.

    7. Re:Huh? by shepd · · Score: 3, Informative

      >I haven't figured out yet whether they're deliberately lying or just ignorant.

      They're actually neither.

      The audio CDs are more flexible. They can be recorded in any equipment, whereas the "regular" CDs require either a data drive, a professional audio CD recorder, or a newer consumer CD audio recorder that has a built in DAC/ADC stage.

      They also sound better. Unlike regular data CDs, which when recorded in the newer consumer CD audio recorders are recorded after a pass through the DAC/ADC, the audio CDs are a bit-for-bit copy.

      It might be sly, it might even be misleading, but it isn't lying, or ignorance.

      --
      If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
    8. Re:Huh? by plague3106 · · Score: 1

      Data CDs in the U.S. are still RIAA taxed, but at a lower rate than music CDs.

      Proof? I've seen articles to the contrary.

    9. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because when I walk into a store, there are no "data" CD-Rs. Everything's "music".

      Sure, I could probably mail order from somewhere, but I'm often absent minded, and when I'm shopping for discs, I need them *then*.

    10. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, you must be thinking of Canada. Data CD-Rs in the US have no music industry "royalty" tax. Audio CD-Rs do. (Of course, almost all CD-Rs are subject to patent royalties, which are a totally different matter.)

      US Code, Title 17, Chapter 10, Subchapter C, Sec. 1004:

      "(b) Digital Audio Recording Media. -

      The royalty payment due under section 1003 for each digital audio recording medium imported into and distributed in the United States, or manufactured and distributed in the United States, shall be 3 percent of the transfer price. Only the first person to manufacture and distribute or import and distribute such medium shall be required to pay the royalty with respect to such medium."

    11. Re:Huh? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Canadian consumers taxed by an American organisation? Tell me sir, how does that work?

      Perhaps you missed the bit where ee said: "If not," i.e., if you do not live in Canada.

    12. Re:Huh? by Bigfishbowl · · Score: 2, Informative
      Come one, by definition a pass through, DAC/ADC doesn't really exist. Either it converts it to analog or it doesn't. Passing through implies no change. The only difference between "Audio" and regular CD's is a bit on the CD's that the manufactures set at production.

      It might be sly, it might even be misleading, but it isn't lying, or ignorance.
      No, its defiantly ignorance. Digital is digital. Its not some magic form of communication; its merely the approximation of the analog word we live in. Nothing more and most certainly nothing less.

    13. Re:Huh? by itsyourunclebill · · Score: 1

      Roxio has a nice explanation of music vs data CDs at http://www.roxio.com/en/interest/music/audiomedia. jhtml

    14. Re:Huh? by shepd · · Score: 1
      >Come one, by definition a pass through, DAC/ADC doesn't really exist.

      I'm sorry you feel that way, but me and pretty much everyone else who has dealt with audio know about this "feature" in home audio CD recorders.

      Anyways, this requirement, to have this passthrough "feature" is the law for home CD audio recorders, unless they can only make one copy, in which case they must also only take audio CDs.

      This recorder won't even use the non-Audio CDs, although there's no reason it shouldn't, considering it does EXACTLY what you think it can't:

      Due to the SCMS (Serial Copy Management System) circuitry that is a requirement on consumer-based CD-Recorders, a duplicate cannot be made of a copy that is digital. The CDR 2 will automatically switch to an analog deck-to-deck dub when it detects that the source is a digital copy. However, if you can make only one copy at a time, and you need multiple copies from a particular CD, there seems no logical reason why you shouldn't make all copies from the original.

      Here's another review of another home audio CD recorder, and another quote about something you say doesn't exist (why don't you tell NAD that they should stop lying to their customers?):

      If that doesn't make it sound like an ideal machine for those who like to keep their copying options open, it will even simplify the copying of material encoded with the Serial Copyright Management System -- for example first-generation CD/R-CD/RW copies. Load one of these and copying system just switches from its default digital operation to copying in the analogue domain, running the output from the playback deck through the DAC and then back through the ADC in the CD-R/RW section.

      Would you like me to find you more reviews, or are you satisfied that I'm correct?
      >The only difference between "Audio" and regular CD's is a bit on the CD's that the manufactures set at production.

      Agreed. But that doesn't stop equipment from reacting differently to this bit. And some does, because if it didn't, the producers of such equipment, if it is sold in certain countries (like the US), will go to jail.

      >Digital is digital.

      Not when it goes through an DAC/ADC stage. Then it's analog to digital to analog, which means a very minute loss of quality.

      By doing this the producers of said equipment no longer have to follow the restrictions (as listed in the above link), as they are no longer recording the signal from a digital source.

      I still say that they might be sly and misleading, but they aren't liars or ignorant. Unless you want to buy a home audio CD recorder that is illegal, I'm right.
      --
      If you could be told what you can see or read, then it follows that you could be told what to say or think - BoC
  47. Oh please by autopr0n · · Score: 2

    The only way no one gets anything is if more then 13 million people claim. Slashdot does not have 13 million visitors.

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
    1. Re:Oh please by ruiner13 · · Score: 1
      The only way no one gets anything is if more then 13 million people claim. Slashdot does not have 13 million visitors.

      no, but it has been posted elsewhere in the past, including on fark.

      --

      today is spelling optional day.

  48. Uhh, we didn't have to earn the money by cmoney · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It was ours to begin with. Record companies were found to be overcharging customers and the courts took action to give it back to consumers. So the lawyers did some work so they should be compensated for their work, I agree, but implying that I should have to earn my money back is rediculous!

    1. Re:Uhh, we didn't have to earn the money by isorox · · Score: 1

      Agreed. You earnt money when you worked writing software or whatever that lawyers then use. The record companies then used illegal buisness practices to, in effect, steal hard earned money from you. That hard earned money will now come back to you, however lawyers had to work to do that, and take their (no doubt generous) cut.

      You earnt the money, RIAA companies stole the money, lawyers told the riaa to give it back.

      In the start
      1) You lose some hard earned money ($100)
      2) RIAA gains hard earned money ($100)

      RIAA = +$100 You = -$100 Lawyers = $0

      In the end
      1) You get some hard earned money back ($20)
      2) RIAA loses some of the money they stole ($80)
      3) Lawers take their earned money ($60)

      In the end:
      RIAA = +$20
      You = -$80
      Lawyer = +$60

    2. Re:Uhh, we didn't have to earn the money by elmegil · · Score: 2

      Having purchased easily 1000 CDs in the time period in question, I don't think "me == -$100" is an accurate reflection of reality. It is at least "me == -$1000". So how much am I out again?

      --
      7 November 2006: The day Americans realized corruption and incompetence weren't addressing 11 September 2001
    3. Re:Uhh, we didn't have to earn the money by linzeal · · Score: 1
      Hard earned money? Bullshit, I know old friends that work 2-3 hours still to be able to afford a single Cd after taxes. If you can show me that the lawyers had enough man hours working for their salaries to equate per the $/t average of the average joe that was buying these and I would concede.

      If not it is the thieves stealing from themselves, and they are both against us.

    4. Re:Uhh, we didn't have to earn the money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      how many hours did your friends have to work to buy a technical manual or a computer game? Sounds at that rate like about 12 hours, which doesn't make a CD sound like such a bad deal!

    5. Re:Uhh, we didn't have to earn the money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Ridiculous" is spelled with an 'i,' like "ridicule."

    6. Re:Uhh, we didn't have to earn the money by Planesdragon · · Score: 1

      It was ours to begin with

      And then you bought CDs with it. You could just have easily given it to charity, kept it to save, or spent it on illegal drugs.

      It stopped being "your money" when you gave it to someone else. The _only_ times the argument that a transactional exchange of money doesn't divorce you from ownership of that is banking and paying taxes.

      Sheesh. If I buy a cheesburger and don't like it, do I have a right to "my money" back or does the restautant have an opportunity to purchase my goodwill by giving me the price of the cheeseburger?

    7. Re:Uhh, we didn't have to earn the money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dude, you should have used napster if you're that upset about paying money for music.

    8. Re:Uhh, we didn't have to earn the money by geekee · · Score: 2

      "Record companies were found to be overcharging customers and the courts took action to give it back to consumers."

      This is what's wrong with the US. A court system is deciding that consumers were overcharged in what is supposed to be a free market system. No one put a gun to your head and made you buy a cd. This is just stupid. The settlement is just a way for lawyers to make money. They don't even make you prove you pruchased a cd, much less try to distribute the settlement money based on the amount you were supposedly overcharged. The American legal system is a joke.

      --
      Vote for Pedro
    9. Re:Uhh, we didn't have to earn the money by Mr+Guy · · Score: 2

      Use this helpful diagram to see where you stand relative to the RIAA: Helpful Diagram

    10. Re:Uhh, we didn't have to earn the money by isorox · · Score: 1

      Law takes a lot of work (4 year degree in the UK, normal degree is 3) and late nights (80 hour weeks+ etc. You are expected to live in your office for two years) before you are trained.

      Of course once you are trained you dont have to do anything :)

      *urghh, cant believe I'm defending lawyers*

    11. Re:Uhh, we didn't have to earn the money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Many states have minimum manditory warrenties, so your claim isn't exactly true. I'd love to think my taxes are still mine, but I'm pretty sure they are long gone.

    12. Re:Uhh, we didn't have to earn the money by elmegil · · Score: 2
      An anonymous fool wrote:

      Dude, you should have used napster if you're that upset about paying money for music.

      Ever try to find the latest song by Bleep & Booster on Napster? Didn't think so.

      Beyond that, I don't object to paying for music, I personally prefer a real CD to MP3. I object to being stiffed when I'm doing the Right Thing [tm]

      --
      7 November 2006: The day Americans realized corruption and incompetence weren't addressing 11 September 2001
    13. Re:Uhh, we didn't have to earn the money by elmegil · · Score: 1

      Exactly my point. The person claiming $20 is a reasonable deal is full of it. Not that it's the lawyers' fault that it's so low, but even so....

      --
      7 November 2006: The day Americans realized corruption and incompetence weren't addressing 11 September 2001
    14. Re:Uhh, we didn't have to earn the money by xenocide2 · · Score: 2

      Sometimes you have to strike a balance between free market and avoiding monopoly. If there's one thing suppliers hate, its competition. And yet exactly that is needed to sustain a healthy market. So what exactly are we supposed to do when undue collaboration between companies results in inflated prices to consumers? Shrug it off because its not an essential good of life?

      --
      I Browse at +4 Flamebait

      Open Source Sysadmin

    15. Re:Uhh, we didn't have to earn the money by an_mo · · Score: 2

      You are missing the point, the court ruled that it was NOT a free market because distributors engaged in monopolistic collusive behavior. A free market needs the enforcement of a truly competitive environment in order to achieve economic efficiency

  49. WB fights back by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unlike the RIAA who is paying out, the MPAA specifically Warner Bros has started going after the average home users with threating letters to ISP's A friend of mine recently received an email from his ISP due to his excessive usage of kazaa.
    posted a copy of the email here
    http://www.xstreamlan.com/f0rumz/viewtopic.p hp?t=4

  50. Helping OGG? by SuperKendall · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Given that probably the number of people signing on will bring the distribution below $5, and that then the money goes to not-for-profits that benefit "the music listening public" - can OGG get some of that money to help with development costs? I'm sure even just a lowly million would help things along.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  51. Biased AND wrong by MacAndrew · · Score: 2

    Thanks for the support. :)

    As for the facts: The Notice of Proposed Settlement specifies, "The attorneys' fees and expenses sought by Plaintiff States and Counsel for the Plaintiff Settlement Class will not exceed 21.5% of the Settlement Fund and 10.1% of the total Settlement." Either way, that's a lot less than "win a lot more of the settlement than you will"; and it's reimbursement, not windfall.

    If you live in New York or Florida, note that your State Attorney General was a principal co-counsel, meaning if they did not recover fees, the cost would come out of your pocket as a taxpayer. Perhaps there were side agreements with other states to share the expenses, given that the settlement affects all states.

    Remember also that the counsel took the case with fees contingent on winning. The wins have to pay for the losses, and inadequate awards only make it harder for attorneys -- including AG's -- to take on meritorious but difficult cases.

    I will make a comment about politicians -- Eliot Spitzer is quite the crusader, isn't he?

  52. Not even a secure URL!!! by Emperor+Shaddam+IV · · Score: 1

    And they want my birthday and last 4 digits of my social!! For only 5-20 dollars? No way. I'll just buy used CD's at a fraction of the price.

    1. Re:Not even a secure URL!!! by titonutz · · Score: 1

      And they want my birthday and last 4 digits of my social!! For only 5-20 dollars? No way. I'll just buy used CD's at a fraction of the price

      You know how frames work, right? The main frame of the form is actually secure:

      https://webform.musiccdsettlement.com/english/form s/questions.aspx

  53. PLEASE File Your Claims!! by vivekb · · Score: 1

    Sure, the dollar amount will be low to negligable, but filing a claim will let the RIAA know that you felt cheated by their practices, and want retribution. If nobody files, then it'll pretty much be business as usual because the industry will see that consumers don't really care that much. If they get millions of claims, they will at least get the message that people are watching them. And future suits could be picked up more easily if lawyers see that there is a large, active class to sue on behalf of.

    This is like voting. Everybody, please cast your vote against the RIAA!

    1. Re:PLEASE File Your Claims!! by MImeKillEr · · Score: 2

      In a perfect world, the RIAA would care. Hell, in a perfect world the RIAA wouldn't exist.

      Either way, the RIAA isn't going to give a damn about what the consumer wants.

      --
      Cruising the internet on my TI-99/4A @ a whopping 300 baud!
  54. Re:No thanks RIAA,already gave at by plague3106 · · Score: 1

    If you're in the US, you pay nothing to the RIAA for blank cdrs, unless they are blank Audio cdrs.

  55. Re:No thanks RIAA,already gave at by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Considering all the CD-R's I've bought recently were free after rebates, the RIAA is fucked.

  56. Oh happiness by DarkHand · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If I DO get a check from the settlement, I'm framing it and putting it on my wall. For once the record companies are paying ME! :) (Nevermind the various p2p networks... They're for sharing non-copyrighted material of course.)

  57. The lack of financial knowledge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...on Slashdot is amazing. Steady prices over a period of time mean that the actual cost is going down. Ever heard on inflation? One dollar now will buy less of a given basket of goods than one dollar in 1995 would have. Yet, CD prices are the same, which means in real (inflation adjusted) cost, they are cheaper.

    1. Re:The lack of financial knowledge by MisterFancypants · · Score: 2

      While the lack of financial knowledge on Slashdot IS amazing, the price of CDs has been trending up with inflation, not staying constant. You'd be hard pressed to find a new CD for less than $17 now at retail, compared to $13 or so a few years ago.

    2. Re:The lack of financial knowledge by len_harms · · Score: 1

      And that would mean inflation was at 30%. When in reality it was about 10%.

  58. What gives? by binner1 · · Score: 1

    Ok, so they're found guilty of price fixing. That's good. This seems like the legal system working properly.

    The problem?

    While these people were able to gouge customers on music purchases for years, said customers may claim only $20 as part of this class action. Seems to me that if I was hosed on X purchases, I should be able to file X separate claims...obvoiusly not at $20/claim, but up to and including X * Y (where Y is the retribution amount)!!

    This is a step, but not enough of one...

    -Ben

    1. Re:What gives? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They weren't found guilty. They settled. And if you take the $20, it means you are settling with them.

    2. Re:What gives? by Spamlent+Green · · Score: 1

      I think that's part of the weakness of a class action. (IANAL, and really know nothing about class actions..)

      Anyway, as I was telling my sister-in-law, (who is a lawyer), it seems like distinctly communistic resolution to what's possibly the most unrepentently capitalistic crime. No doubt conceived of by some big corporate lobbyist...

  59. All goes to charity by richlb · · Score: 3, Funny

    Somehow I feel that the number of respondants will push the per person settlement BELOW $5, so all of it will go to charity anyway.

    I'd be amazed if any consumer saw a dime.

    On another related note, though, I DO remember getting like $2 sent to me back in the way early 90's because I sent in the UPC symbol from my Milli Vanilli cassette when their record company got hit with a class action suit. So maybe.....

    (note: I apologize for mentioning Milli Vanilli on /.)

  60. Gueralla marketing? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Given the info you have to provide to *maybe* get some money, what this actually ends up looking like is:

    Evil Plan #14 for getting consumers to give us enough info to direct-market them to death.

  61. I have a question... by airrage · · Score: 2

    I saw this advertisement in the paper, I could get 13 cds for only a penny; of course, you have to buy 3 more at the "regular" membership prices. Should I average the cost or only include the ones I paid full price for, when submitting my claim?

    --
    "This isn't a study in computer science, its a study in human behavior"
  62. retards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hey morons, if you filled out the form, you'd find that it's painless, doesn't require all kinds of personal info (in fact, it requires a lot less than most online transactions involving money), and any of that info is already freely available due to the fact that I even exist as a citizen of the US. So get over yourselves and at least make someone other than those recording companies rich. I'd like to get $5.00-$20.00 in the mail for free.

    IT REALLY WORKS!!!!

    ROFL!

    1. Re:retards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do realize that, for most people, the last four digits of their SSN along with a birthdate and city/state will give someone 100 guesses to getting a full SSN.

      Considering you think that this kind of information is "a lot less than most online transactions involving money" then you're an idiot for putting it up on a non-secured page run by an industry not known to be all that trustworthy.

  63. eerie by Spamlent+Green · · Score: 2, Funny

    my sister-in-law emailed me not 1 hour ago about this exact thing.

    I suggested she post it to slashdot, and she was like -- "Are you kidding? I want my $20 -- I don't want to share it with those geeks!"

  64. Why I will not participate in this travesty by kmweber · · Score: 0

    There is no valid reason to sue any company, regardless of what it produces or how big it is, simply for trying to make money. By suing several private companies for deciding the terms under which they will distribute what they produce, society is being drawn closer and closer to the moral void of socialism.

    --
    "Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
    1. Re:Why I will not participate in this travesty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Likewise there is no valid reason to sue someone who mugs you, since he is merely exercising his god-given right to make money. Sure it's at your expense, but don't whine about it or you'll turn into a socialist.

    2. Re:Why I will not participate in this travesty by kmweber · · Score: 0

      The difference is that a mugger is causing direct physical harm to you.

      And there is no god; therefore, there is no such thing as a "god-given right". Rights exist because man has free will.

      --
      "Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?"
  65. The Jerk by sbillard · · Score: 0
    I wonder if some guy named "Navin" is sitting in his RIAA office in his bathrobe, writing out check after check after check? ... and this chair, and this paddle ball game, and this ash tray, and thats all I need!.... oh wait I need this.....

    Seriously though.. It is about time they got nailed for price fixing. For years and years and years they charged us twice as much for a CD as they did a cassette tape. A CD is a round piece of plastic with a hole in the middle. A cassette tape is linear media with moving parts. You tell me which format is easier to mass-produce. We've been getting screwed so bad for so long now, I've kinda gotten used to the rough ass love I've been getting. Goatse style.

  66. Signing also says you agree. by nurb432 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    If you sign this you also agree in whole to the agreement, with what apears to be no future recourse.

    I say *noone* sign and we fight for whats really far.

    A free cd ? bah thats not fair settlement.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
    1. Re:Signing also says you agree. by poot_rootbeer · · Score: 5, Interesting


      In fact, everyone should go beyond just passively not claiming their share of this settlement, and actually submit the appropriate paperwork to exclude yourselves, in essence rejecting the settlement. We all know this isn't a fair compensation, and the more people who speak out and say so the better the chances that a more equitable settlement will be reached.

    2. Re:Signing also says you agree. by agrounds · · Score: 5, Informative
      In fact, everyone should go beyond just passively not claiming their share of this settlement, and actually submit the appropriate paperwork to exclude yourselves, in essence rejecting the settlement. We all know this isn't a fair compensation, and the more people who speak out and say so the better the chances that a more equitable settlement will be reached.


      I couldn't agree more! I'll even take the liberty of helping this along:

      Just so you don't have to find the means of doing this:
      From the settlement:


      If you do not wish to be bound by the terms of the proposed Settlement described in this Notice, you may request to be excluded from the Settlement. To do so, you MUST send a written request for the exclusion to:

      Compact Disc MAP Antitrust Litigation Administrator
      Post Office Box 1643
      Faribault, Minnesota 55021-1643

      Your request for exclusion must be postmarked by or before March 3, 2003, must clearly state that you want to be excluded from the Settlement, and must provide your full, legal name(s), address, telephone number, and the name and number of this Litigation (In re: Compact Disc Minimum Advertised Price Antitrust Litigation, MDL Docket No. 1361). NO REQUEST FOR EXCLUSION WILL BE CONSIDERED VALID UNLESS ALL OF THE INFORMATION DESCRIBED ABOVE IS INCLUDED IN ANY SUCH REQUEST.

    3. Re:Signing also says you agree. by addaon · · Score: 2

      Personally, I feel it's a fair settlement. In the time frame indicated, I purchased one cd. Even if my share goes to $3, and that's redirected to charity, I feel it's quite realistically on the scale of the pricefixing I experienced; after all, do notice that the market does support CD's, to some extent, at current prices. And, of course, this settlement only covers bad behavior through the year 2000, so if things don't get better, we get to take another x million dollars from them, next time with a precedent.

      Of course, if you bought more than about ten cd's, you'd be crazy to not disqualify yourself and take separate action.

      --

      I've had this sig for three days.
  67. WRONG Re:Big whoop ... by LookSharp · · Score: 2, Informative

    You didn't even pay attention to the site you were cutting and pasting from. No receipts or other documents are required, and it is limit one claim per consumer. And I personally can guarantee that I have purchased at least one major-label CD during the perios in question.

    Speak for yourself; unless more than two million people file a claim, everybody who bothers spending 60 seconds to fill out the simple form gets a check for $20. I'll take that.

    1. Re:WRONG Re:Big whoop ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I think the odds that even a $5 check goes out is about zero. No way is a $20 check being sent. I'm sure my Mom has signed up already and she'll e-mail everyone she can and they will too.

      Just think of this as signing up for a marketing database of suckers.

  68. we're still prisoners to the RIAA by acroyear · · Score: 3, Interesting

    as in they've given us a variation on the prisoner's dilemna -- if nobody asks for it, nobody gets it. if one person asks for it and the other refuses, then one person gets the money and the other gets screwed. if both people ask for it, nobody gets it. just goes to show the RIAA still doesn't respect us and wants us in our place -- as prisoners to their control over our entertainment.

    --
    "But remember, most lynch mobs aren't this nice." (H.Simpson)
    -- Joe
    1. Re:we're still prisoners to the RIAA by Occam's+Hammer · · Score: 1

      I don't think that the decision to donate to charity is a disrespectful decision of the RIAA intended to put us in our place. I am sure that once the settlement reaches $5 per individual the cost of distributing the settlement funds becomes prohibitive. The RIAA still has to pay the settlement. It is just distributed to one entity rather than a million individual $0.35 checks.

      --
      (sig on loan to Smithsonian)
  69. Injunctive relief by MacAndrew · · Score: 3, Informative
    The lawyers did pause to wonder whether the lawsuit would alter the defendants' behavior. The Notice of Proposed Settlement provides:
    Injunctive Relief

    The Settlement Agreements with the Distributor Defendants and the Retailer Defendants each provide for injunctive relief. The Plaintiffs and Distributor Defendants have agreed to the entry of a permanent injunction, which would prohibit the Distributor Defendants for a period ending August 30, 2007 from adopting, maintaining, enforcing or threatening to enforce any policy, practice or plan which makes receipt of any cooperative advertising or other promotional funds contingent on the price or price level at which any product is advertised or promoted. Distributor Defendants would also be prohibited from agreeing with any dealers to control or maintain the resale price at which the Dealer may offer for sale or sell such Distributor Defendant's Product. Additionally, Distributor Defendants could not for a period ending August 30, 2005, announce resale or minimum advertised prices of product and unilaterally terminate those who fail to comply because of such failure. Distributor Defendants may however, announce suggested retail prices for their Product.

    The Settlement Agreements entered into by Plaintiffs and each of the Retailer Defendants, also contain injunctive provisions. These injunctions would prohibit the Retailer Defendants for a period of five years from soliciting, demanding, requesting, advocating or encouraging any distributor or wholesaler of music product to adopt or implement any policy, practice or plan which makes receipt of any cooperative advertising or other promotional funds contingent upon the price or price level at which any music product is advertised, promoted, offered or sold.

    No, I don't know where they got these magic termination dates....
  70. They ought to give it all to the EFF instead... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...All $67.5M of it.

  71. Here is the solution by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Get 13,499,999 people to sign on. No more and no less. Then the RIAA will have to pay a guy to write out 13,499,999 checks for 5 dollars, the way Steve Martin had to write out 900,000 checks for $1.09 by hand in The Jerk.

  72. I love the paranoia of some /.-ers! by Dman33 · · Score: 1

    Okay, let's take the simple approach...

    WHOIS
    Registrant:
    Rust Consulting, Inc. (YKMILXKTDD)
    501 MARQUETTE AVE STE 700
    MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402-1208
    US
    Domain Name: MUSICCDSETTLEMENT.COM
    Administrative Contact:
    Rust Consulting, Inc. (KZPXFPWQJO)cmichelsen@rustconsulting.com
    Rust Consulting, Inc.
    501 MARQUETTE AVE STE 700
    MINNEAPOLIS, MN 55402-1208
    US
    612-359-2000


    And so we go to www.rustconsulting.com and we find out that they are just class-action whores! The only scam they might do is sell your e-mail addy and claim administrative costs to the court for a chunk of the settlement.

  73. Consider the consequences! by Raetsel · · Score: 5, Interesting

    JWZ had a very good point -- this was discussed on BoingBoing, and here's what he had to say:
    • "Doesn't taking their $20 payoff constitute an agreement that they have paid their debt? If they have in fact engaged in price fixing, they owe us a hell of a lot more than $20 each. I suspect that taking the $20 in hush-money will preclude one from participating in any future, similar legal action against them."
    Damn skippy.

    Too bad I don't have Microsoft-level resources for lawyers, or I might end up owning the RIAA. (Yeah, right.) On second thought, I'd better be careful -- MS might get ideas...

    The question of SSNs also came up, and was addressed -- it looks like they have a legitimate reason for asking.

    --

    "...America's great minds of today, teaching America's great minds of tomorrow. Poor bastards." -- A Beautiful Min
  74. incentive by honold · · Score: 2

    if i go out to eat, i'm giving them money for the food. the server is getting paid with that money.

    if i go to a (for all intents and purposes) anonymous web site that's HANDING OUT MONEY, i think there's reason to be much more skeptical about disclosing details.

    web sites are known for harvesting contact information for the purpose of reselling it. resteraunts and dumpster divers aren't.

    i think you're confusing the fear of spam with the fear of identity theft.

  75. Sorry, really should be "Helping Xiph"... by SuperKendall · · Score: 2

    From a little searching it turns out that Xiph is the non-profit corperation that perhaps could seek funds from this settlement. Anyone know if they are on it?

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  76. Just called Rust Consulting by NotesSauceBoss · · Score: 4, Informative
    Talked to a fellow there named Matt Potter to get a little more personal connection to this stuff.

    The Notice of Proposed Settlement is available at: http://www.musiccdsettlement.com/english/notice.ht m and includes both the individual state's AGs on the case, as well as actually listing the URL for the website itself.

    Mr. Potter stated that the detail of information is to ensure that fradulent claims aren't filed -- primarily by attempting to prevent the same person from filing multiple times.

    I suggested they put in a privacy notice. We'll see.

    I also warned him of the impending Slashdotting. He didn't know what I meant. hehe

  77. Funny quote from this article by PseudoThink · · Score: 1

    "Recycling numbers might become an issue someday, but not any time soon -- statisticians say that the nine-digit SSN allows for approximately one billion possible combinations. "

  78. Who's Paying What by egoff · · Score: 0, Redundant

    THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTS The proposed Settlement reached by the parties to the Litigation settles and resolves the Litigation against the Defendants in its entirety and was granted preliminary approval by the Court on October 21, 2002. Cash and Non-Cash Consideration Under the terms of the Settlement Agreement with Distributor Defendants, they will pay Plaintiffs a combination of Cash and Non-Cash Consideration. The Cash payments total $64,300,000 and the Non-Cash Consideration totals $75,700,000. The Cash payments will be deposited into the Settlement Fund. The Non-Cash Consideration, consisting of approximately 5.5 million music CDs of a broad selection of genres, will be the subject of a cy pres Distribution discussed below. The Settlement Agreement provides that the Distributor Defendants individually pay the following amounts: (1) EMD shall pay $6,500,000 in Cash and $8,500,000 in Non-Cash Consideration; (2) WEA shall pay $13,650,000 in Cash and $15,750,000 in Non-Cash Consideration; (3) Universal shall pay $18,850,000 in Cash and $21,750,000 in Non-Cash Consideration; (4) Sony shall pay $12,523,500 in Cash and $14,701,500 in Non-Cash Consideration; and (5) BMG shall pay $12,776,500 in Cash and $14,998,500 in Non-Cash Consideration. As provided in the Settlement Agreements entered into with the Retailer Defendants, each has agreed to pay Plaintiffs the following in Cash Consideration to be deposited into the Settlement Fund: (1) Trans World shall pay $800,000. (2) Musicland shall pay $2,000,000. (3) Tower shall pay $275,000 in twelve consecutive monthly installments unless Tower should merge with, consolidate with, or be acquired by another corporation or individual, or if Tower should sell or transfer a Controlling Percentage of its capital stock to another corporation or individual, or if Tower should sell at least 70% of the fair market value of its United States assets to another corporation or individual, in which case Tower shall pay $325,000, less any cash installment payments previously made to Plaintiffs. The Non-Cash Consideration will consist of prerecorded music CDs. For purposes of determining the amount of Non-Cash Consideration, such Consideration shall be valued at twenty percent (20%) less than manufacturers' suggested retail price as of the date such Non-Cash Consideration was selected by Lead Counsel for the Plaintiffs for inclusion among the selections available for distribution.

  79. Fuck the lawyers. by sulli · · Score: 2
    Yes, fuck the lawyers who get millions while we get either jack shit or twenty fucking bucks.

    Fuck the judge that allowed a settlement in which consumers get a tiny fraction of the price-fixing harm, while the attorneys (let me remind you!) get millions.

    Earned it? The only work they did was get RIAA member companies to pay them a small amount relative to the total harm to get them off the hook. It sounds much more like collusion than anything else.

    (Of course, I took my $20, because it's better than nothing. But I'll send it all to either EFF or SomaFM.)

    --

    sulli
    RTFJ.
    1. Re:Fuck the lawyers. by falloutboy · · Score: 2

      "Yes, fuck the lawyers who get millions while we get either jack shit or twenty fucking bucks.
      Fuck the judge that allowed a settlement in which consumers get a tiny fraction of the price-fixing harm, while the attorneys (let me remind you!) get millions.

      Earned it? The only work they did was get RIAA member companies to pay them a small amount relative to the total harm to get them off the hook. It sounds much more like collusion than anything else."

      Here comes another huge surprise: the lawyers who worked on this aren't taking home a percentage of the settlement. This suit was brought by the Attorneys General of Florida and New York and a whole bunch of other states. The individual lawyers probably got paid thier usual salaries.

      So, feel free to fucking complain all you want, but (let me remind you) all you've done is complain. If you feel this strongly, why not do something other than bitch about the people who tried to help you?

      To answer the inevitable: no, I am not a lawyer. My folks are, and I get tired of hearing how evil they are. Sheesh, you'd think they handed out pitchforks and goatees with Juris Doctorates.

  80. Bullshit. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    but they get nearly all of the money from album sales

    $0.75 is more like it.

    It wasn't about the money, it was a matter of principle.

    Definite bullshit. Some handler probrably told them "Napster is taking your money!" The Lars, like, goes on MTV and, like, whines.

    No one over 40 years old and talks like he's perpetually 14 has any principles.

    1. Re:Bullshit. by almeida · · Score: 2

      No, they get nearly all of the money from their album sales. Their management company Q Prime discussed this in an interview that appeared in a recent issue of "So What?" magazine. They have one of the best contracts in the business because they renegotiated it sometime around 1990, give or take a year or two.

      Now go away.

  81. What can THEY do by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    Exactly what can you do with the last 4 digits on a SS number?

    Well, that's sort of the point, isn't it? If the answer is "nothing" then there is absolutely no reason for them to ask (if you say to keep the same person from filing multiple claims, what keeps you from making the number up?).

    If the answer is that they can look you up somehow to prove it's you, well, then that's exactly what most people would prefer them NOT doing...

  82. ObSovRus by TrevorB · · Score: 2

    In Soviet Russia, YOU payback RIAA!

    Um, Wait a sec...

    Damn lameness filter, won't let me post allcaps.

    in soviet russia, allcaps post prevents lameness filter from working!

  83. Yawn by Gothmolly · · Score: 2

    Another piece of Old News.

    Lookee here:
    2003-01-08 01:37:29 Buy a CD, get $20 back (articles,music) (rejected)

    --
    I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
  84. You may also recall... by gosand · · Score: 2
    you may recall this earlier story about the settlement.

    You may also recall that I submitted this story on Dec 17th, and it was rejected. Hey, I understand you reject a lot of submissions, but to have something like this happen burns me just a little.

    I know, I am not supposed to bitch about having a submission rejected, but I am just curious how the process works. I thought I knew, but I guess I don't.

    --

    My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.

  85. Hm. by Arcaeris · · Score: 1

    Maybe someone already said this, but I didn't care to read through all the posts. Anyway.

    There was an ad on the radio recently about this. Apparently there's a website (forgot the URL. Like musiccdpayback.com or something) where you can file a claim for a piece of the settlement.

    The sucky parts:
    1) No one person will get more than $20.
    2) If each person's repayment, after dividing by number of claims, is less than $5, the money will go to a non-profit charity instead.

    So really, the consumers aren't individually winning anything from this, despite dealing with elevated prices for all those years. Some victory.

  86. A Paltry Sum of Total Awards by mgbastard · · Score: 2, Informative
    This is a paltry sum of total damages awarded. File a request to be excluded from the class. I will. ---from the notice---
    (1) EMD shall pay $6,500,000 in Cash and $8,500,000 in Non-Cash Consideration; (2) WEA shall pay $13,650,000 in Cash and $15,750,000 in Non-Cash Consideration; (3) Universal shall pay $18,850,000 in Cash and $21,750,000 in Non-Cash Consideration; (4) Sony shall pay $12,523,500 in Cash and $14,701,500 in Non-Cash Consideration; and (5) BMG shall pay $12,776,500 in Cash and $14,998,500 in Non-Cash Consideration.
    If you do not request exclusion from the proposed Settlement and you serve the Court and Counsel with timely notice, as provided on page 11 below, you have the right to appear at the Fairness Hearing and comment on whether the proposed Settlement and other matters being considered should be finally approved by the Court.
    --snip several pages to page 11 as referenced---
    If you do not wish to be bound by the terms of the proposed Settlement described in this Notice, you may request to be excluded from the Settlement. To do so, you MUST send a written request for the exclusion to: Compact Disc MAP Antitrust Litigation Administrator Post Office Box 1643 Faribault, Minnesota 55021-1643 Your request for exclusion must be postmarked by or before March 3, 2003, must clearly state that you want to be excluded from the Settlement, and must provide your full, legal name(s), address, telephone number, and the name and number of this Litigation (In re: Compact Disc Minimum Advertised Price Antitrust Litigation, MDL Docket No. 1361). NO REQUEST FOR EXCLUSION WILL BE CONSIDERED VALID UNLESS ALL OF THE INFORMATION DESCRIBED ABOVE IS INCLUDED IN ANY SUCH REQUEST. If you do not request exclusion, you will be bound by the terms of the Settlement, even if you do not file a Proof of Claim. If you validly request exclusion from the Settlement, (1) you will be excluded from the Settlement, (2) you will not share in the proceeds of the proposed settlement which are available for distribution as described above, (3) you will not be bound by any judgment or release entered in this Action, and (4) you will retain the option to pursue your claims, if timely, on an individual basis at your own expense against the Defendants.
    --
    Anyone seen my low uid? last seen 10 years ago while panning the #@$# out of Taco's 'web based discussion system'
  87. Mod parent up by quintessent · · Score: 2

    Parent is correct:

    Whether you claim your money or not, you are a part of the law suit class, and as such, you will lose your right to any recourse once the settlement is finished.

    Unless... you specifically write to exclude yourself from the settlement. The deadline is in March.

  88. Wow, they are going to... by jetmarc · · Score: 1

    Wow, they are going to distribute "$75,700,000 worth of prerecorded music compact discs" to "not-for-profit, charitable, governmental or public entities". That's really worth signing up on their web page..... Remindes me of Microsofts offer to donatie software "equivalent" to umpteen-million-dollars to buy them free from court. I wish MY company could pay its expenses (and tax) in goods rather than real money.

  89. I wonder if anyone noticed by tonyzeb · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I wonder if any one noticed that the settlement was for 67 MILLION dollars? That means 13 MILLION people have to sign up for it before it goes below 5 bucks a person. I like Slashdot, but I dont' think there are that many readers. If less than three million people sign up, which seems reasonable to say, everyone gets Twenty bucks. Cool. Besides, anyone who is a REAL freak about their personal information would have a PO BOX, and wouldn't care. Amateurs.

    1. Re:I wonder if anyone noticed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      I would expect at least 50% of that settlement to go directly to the lawyers...and they get their money first :(

    2. Re:I wonder if anyone noticed by /dev/trash · · Score: 2

      You'd think, but I saw this on 4 other web sites BEFORE Slashdot got a holdof it. Plus if it's like any other class action suit, it will be posted in magazines and other places as well.

      As I said before, mysteriously that division will make it to like $4.90 and none of the people who signed up get anything. Well except for some spam or something.

    3. Re:I wonder if anyone noticed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FWIW, the first I heard of this was on CNN this morning. I wouldn't be surprised if it's been on the evening news already, or will be in the near future.

  90. offtopic, but I really have this question... by H0NGK0NGPH00EY · · Score: 1

    Please can someone tell me what in the heck is with the "^H^H^H" stuff that shows up sometimes in stories or comments? I have seen it on other sites, and I can't seem to find any information on what causes it.

    anyone?

    --
    Do not read this sig.
    1. Re:offtopic, but I really have this question... by Kredal · · Score: 1

      it's a joke based on older unix clients and telnet systems. The backspace key, if improperly configured, would print ^H and not delete the previous letter. So if someone wants to make it look like they deleted something, but still wants you to see the original, they just have to hit ^H a few times...

      to wit:

      Bill Gates is a borg^H^H^H^H nice guy.

      I wanted to call him a nice guy, but my true feelings are that he's a borg. Make sense?

      --
      Whoever stated that signature sizes should be limited to one hundred and twenty characters can just go ahead and kiss my
    2. Re:offtopic, but I really have this question... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ^H is a backspace.

      so a sentence like:

      The RIAA are a bunch of lying basta^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H honest people.

      and you converted the ^H to backspaces, the sentence would be:

      The RIAA are a bunch of honest people.

      When what I really meant was:

      The RIAA are a bunch of lying bastards.

  91. This is not a guaranteed pay out... by bubba_ry · · Score: 2, Informative

    Fairness Hearing: The Court will hold a Fairness Hearing to determine if the proposed Settlement is fair, reasonable and adequate on May 22, 2003, at 10:00 a.m. in Courtroom 2, United States Courthouse, 156 Federal Street, Portland, Maine 04101.

    You're not guaranteed this money. If, in the hearing, it is determined that the settlement is not fair, reasonable, and/or adequate, you might not see a dime.

  92. Cash Distribution -- 20 Bucks Max by pnatural · · Score: 3, Insightful
    From the page http://www.musiccdsettlement.com/english/default.h tm:
    Cash Distribution

    The cash paid by the Defendants, after the payment of attorneys' fees, litigation and Settlement administration costs, shall be distributed to consumers who purchased Music Products. The number of claims filed will determine the actual amount of the individual refund but will not exceed $20.00 per claimant. If the number of claims filed would result in refunds of less than $5.00 per claimant, there will be no cash distribution to individual consumers. Rather, the cash portion of the Settlement shall be distributed to not-for-profit, charitable, governmental or public entities to be used for music-related purposes or programs for the benefit of consumers who purchased Music Products.
    IMPORTANT - If you are a member of the Settlement Group, you can only file one claim per person no matter how many Music Products you purchased.
    So, let's see. Between '95 and '00 I've purchased at least 100 CDs (that's only 20 a year, but I'm being conservative in my estimate). 100 discs, 20 bucks for the settlement. That's a whopping 20 cents per disc.

    Thank you, laywers! I can retire now.
  93. Re: paranoia by PotatoMan · · Score: 2
    I've never claimed to be free of paranoia.


    For instance, even if the intended receiver is honest and trustworthy, my personal information is being transmitted in the clear.


    As lawyers, they are supposed to be aware that requiring my SSN is a violation of law.


    This is clearly paranoia on my part, but I'm OK with that.

  94. Oh no! by vmfedor · · Score: 1

    It's a good thing that site isn't slashdotted. We wouldn't want that money going to charity. :P

    --

    I like my women how I like my sugar.. granulated.

  95. $5.00! by ackthpt · · Score: 1
    That site has been up for months. But wait, if everyone trieds to collect, and the payment is less that $5/ person, then it goes to a charity (I'm guessing the the EFF), not the people. We can't let that happen! ;)

    Note, there's a cap, per claimant of $20.00, depending upon the number of claims. If the number of claims dilutes the award, per person below $5.00 each then it goes to charities. Most likely the politically popular "inner-city deprived youth music program."

    $20 is pretty sad, considering the number of CDs I've bought between 1995 and 2001, approx. 100 I have since curtailed sponsoring the evil empire.

    --

    A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
  96. Transfer the refunds by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Everybody should transfer their right for collecting the refund to Kazaalite so that they can provide us bigger and better updates. :)

  97. Ironic story... by EZmagz · · Score: 1
    So how many of you that qualify actually have receipts to prove your purchases during the period.

    Funny sidenote, when I started buying CDs in 7th grade, I saved EVERY receipt, period. I was terrified of having my CDs stolen due to our house getting burglarized a few years earlier, and I too kept receipts on all "big ticket items" (hey, when you're 13, a CD *IS* a big ticket item). A few years later in the middle of high school, I checked my drawer and had hundreds of receipts from all the CDs I had bought over the years. Some CDs I loved, some I loathed, but I had proof that everything I listened to was mine (this was way before the advent of burnable CDs). If the day ever came when my shit got stolen, I could laugh my way to the insurance company and show them exactly what to buy.

    The funny thing is, the summer after I graduated from college, I had all of my CDs (and a TON of receipts, out of habbit) in my parent's house for the summer. Just moved back home, nowhere else to put them, blah blah blah...

    So I come home from a weekend camping in Wisconsin, and my house is burned down. All my gear, all my stuff, ALL MY CDS AND THEIR RECEIPTS WERE GONE. Burnt. Toast. In the end, it wasn't a crook that was responsible for my missing music...it was a misfunctional dehumidifer (beware: never buy whirlpool dehumidifiers. They tend to "spark" when unattended).

    --

    "Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned for SEGA. ..."

    1. Re:Ironic story... by Cruciform · · Score: 2

      Wow, I feel your pain. I bought a fire-safe and took it to work to keep insurance documents and stuff in, just in case something started a fire at home.
      Do you have a backup plan in effect now?

  98. #include std.bitch by mdouglas · · Score: 2

    2003-01-07 17:12:21 update on Minimum Advertised Price Antitrust settlement (articles,music) (rejected)

    i see numerous other people submitted this as well, i can't believe it's taken this long to get this story posted here. this is the 'stick it to the man' the readers here have been waiting for. all the negative riaa articles, and the one that allows people to take hard action nearly gets lost.

  99. Wrong rant by MacAndrew · · Score: 1

    True the RIAA is just a proxy.

    Yet most of your rant is misdirected. The attorney reimbursement is 20% or less and the settlement does address future prices.

    1. Re:Wrong rant by Golias · · Score: 1
      Right. And Microsoft's settlement over DR DOS corrected their behavior back in the late 80's. Whew! Glad we got that squared away!

      And for the record, 20% is still a shitload of money for filing a suit and then taking damn near the first settlement offered.

      --

      Information wants to be anthropomorphized.

    2. Re:Wrong rant by MacAndrew · · Score: 1

      20% is the cap. They only recover reasonable expenses. I linked to this before but it didn't take. Also, these were government lawyers -- they only get their regular salaries regardless of the settlement.

  100. But no real remedy... by Paul+Neubauer · · Score: 1

    Refund or not, CD prices seem to still be high.

    Looks like nothing was really accomplished after all.

    --
    I don't subscribe to RMS's GNUtopian vision.
  101. The RIAA could fit that description. by Demon-Xanth · · Score: 2

    "not-for-profit, charitable, governmental or public entities to be used for music-related purposes" ...so they pay lawyers and give themselves what's left over?

    --
    If you think education is expensive, you should try ignorance -- Derek Bok, president of Harvard
  102. Second the Mod Up call by MxTxL · · Score: 2

    Definately correct.

  103. The most you'd get is $20, so what's the point? by fudgefactor7 · · Score: 2

    $20 is only one CD. fF you bought say 50 CDs since 1995, you're getting screwed. If you bought 10 CDs since 1995, and get that $20, you're still getting screwed.... Add to that you have to fork out all sorts of personal info, it's really not worth it.

  104. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1, Redundant

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  105. hmmm....perl script + mass mail list? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    So if someone unethical with access to mass mailing databases and some perl hacking skills were to put the two together and send thousands upon thousands of claim requests for moderately legitimate households to this site?

  106. This is a joke, right? by geekee · · Score: 1, Interesting

    If people would take some personal responsibility for their actions and stop blaming everyone else for their problems, this settlement wouldn't exist. If you don't think a price is fair, you do have the option to not buy the product. That's how free market economies work. This case ranks up there with suing McDonalds because they didn't tell you the coffee was hot or because you got fat eating their food.

    --
    Vote for Pedro
    1. Re:This is a joke, right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      thank you, ayn rand. or should I say troll.

      "free market" means no price-fixing, no collusion, etc...

      Maybe the parties in question should accept some corporate responsibility, and stop blaming mp3s for all their problems?

    2. Re:This is a joke, right? by dentar · · Score: 1

      Someone mod geekee down.. Price fixing is illegal, period.

      --
      -- I am. Therefore, I think!
    3. Re:This is a joke, right? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      If people would take some personal responsibility for their actions and stop blaming everyone else for their problems, this settlement wouldn't exist. If you don't think a price is fair, you do have the option to not buy the product. That's how free market economies work.
      This is true, unless there is nowhere else to buy the product . This case isn't about a bunch of cheapskates getting together and whining that CD prices are too high. This is about a cartel, erm, I mean group of companies conspiring amongst themselves to artificially inflate prices.

      Basically, companies A, B, and C all sell product X. Consumers, being the dirty thieving "piratical" bastards that they are, tend to shop around and buy product X where it's cheapest. So companies A, B, and C get involved in a price war trying to attract sales, missing out on "potential revenue." Finally, company A goes to companies B and C (through a conveniently organized union of their companies, let's call it the "RIAA") and says, "you know what, guys, we're the only three suppliers of product X. If we could just agree to all sell X for the same price, we wouldn't have to compete, and none of us would have to lower prices anymore. No matter where people shopped, product X would always cost the same amount." Companies B and C agree to the scheme, prices get set at an artificial level that does not reflect supply vs. demand, or the free market economy, or whatever you want to call it.

      Further, it's alleged that companies A, B, and C (and their other cohorts) went even further in this case, telling retailers that they were forbidden from ever selling product X below specific prices. "If you ever offer product X for sale in your store for less than $8.00, we will stop supplying you with product X and you will go out of business." Sounds a bit like the game Microsoft liked to play with OEMs, where "either all of your computers ship with Windows or none of them do."

      In any case, what's been done (and by all indications is still being done) is illegal.
    4. Re:This is a joke, right? by geekee · · Score: 2

      Copyright law gives a producer exclusive right to sell a cd. So if I own the copyright, I set the price. No one else can compete. RIAA members cannot price fix because the don't sell the same products. Only 1 member sells britney spears, another sells metallica, etc.

      --
      Vote for Pedro
    5. Re:This is a joke, right? by geekee · · Score: 2

      If I'm selling a Britney Spears cd, no one else can sell one at any price. Copyright legislation gives me this right. Therefore, how can there be price fixing when no 2 RIAA members even sell the same products. Therefore, the case is ridiculous.

      --
      Vote for Pedro
    6. Re:This is a joke, right? by geekee · · Score: 2

      No, free market means free to do whatever you want, including price fixing. This isn't a problem since another competitor will enter a market and undercut the cartel's prices if there is price fixing. Price fixing is not even happening in this case since the RIAA members don't even sell the same products. Each has it's own monopoly on a particular artist guaranteed by law.

      --
      Vote for Pedro
  107. NO ONE is gonna get anything now by Archfeld · · Score: 2

    If you read the fine print, if the division goes below $5 per person then they make a charitable donation and we all just lump it...Thanks for screwing everyone else slashdot.

    --
    errr....umm...*whooosh* *whoosh* Is this thing on ?
  108. $20 isn't enough by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think we should get $20 of CDRs, really even out the karma ;-)

  109. No oneis going to see any money. by /dev/trash · · Score: 2

    Why?
    Read the rules. If enough people file a claim and the money being paid is less than $5 per person, then the RIAA pays all the money to a charity. I'll lay 100 bucks that this is what happens.

  110. I love when lawyers turn against each other. by RumGunner · · Score: 2

    Ahhhh..... satisfaction.

    .

  111. Re:No thanks RIAA,already gave at by Genjurosan · · Score: 1

    Do you have any further information on this? This piece of information is the largest racket I have ever heard! So If I write my own song, and I record it to CD, then I have to pay the RIAA to do so!?!?!?! That's like microsoft attempting to charge HDD mans a levy because they can store linux on the HDD, and that would go against what microsoft wants. This is an outrage.

  112. Lawyers make $5 more per hour than your friends... by mekkab · · Score: 2

    So, your friends make $18,720 $/year after taxes. (using the $17 per cd, 2 hours of work, so that's approx $9 after taxes. so $9 $/hr * 40 hr/week * 52 week/year)

    assuming 30% in taxes (and thats a STRETCH, at this rate, your looking more like 20-25% in taxes), thats ~ $26,742 $/year.

    Now you want me to equate the "average joe" salary of 26k with that of the average lawyer?

    okay- from: http://www.career.cornell.edu/students/grad/law/la w.career.html

    Employment statistics for the class of 1999 law graduates, which totaled 39,054, reveal the following*:

    The average starting salary was $59,125; the median salary was $50,000.

    Approximately 36% of salaries were below $40,000.

    Salaries of more than $70,000 accounted for fewer than one-third of the salaries reported.

    The salary of $40,000 was reported most frequently.

    Approximately 55% of the class chose private practice in law firms.

    About 27% took positions in public service, including judicial clerkships, government agencies, and public interest organizations.

    Graduates entering business accounted for slightly over 13%.

    Just under 11% of graduates were employed in non-legal positions.

    While a corporate lawyer may earn $90,000 the first year in a private firm, he/she may also work twelve hours a day, six or seven days a week.



    So lets break that down- the high of $90,000 is for 12 hours a day, 6-7 days a week!
    thats 90,000 for 72-84 hours a week, as opposed to the 40 estimated for your friends.

    so lets take out 30% in taxes- $63,000 a year.
    Divide that by 84 hours a week (12 hours *7 days) *52 weeks a year=
    63,000 $ per year / 4368 hours per year = $14.4 per hour.

    So for extra education and no social life, they make $5 more an hour than your friends.

    Lets take into account the higher level of education necessary to become a lawyer. Thats at LEAST 3 years to get your JD (which is requred by most BAR associations). Not to mention the loans you take on- thats approx $100k in loans (it goes higher). Also note, those loans accure interest before you even graduate and can get a job.

    Is that $5 gonna pay off that 100k+ loan? If our lawyer is working 4368 hours, that's only 21k.
    And those loans are still accruing interest.

    --
    In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
  113. They're not going to pay out a dime by Demonikus · · Score: 1
    And here's why:

    Please note, however, that if the number of claims filed result in awards of less than $5, the Settlement Fund will revert to Cy Pres distribution. Cy Pres distribution means all Settlement Funds would be distributed to not-for-profit corporations and/or charitable organizations and/or governmental or public entities within your state, to be used for music-related purposes or programs.

    So, if the number of claimants is too high, the money will be distributed to a not-for-profit corporation OR charitable organizations OR Governmental or public entities blah blah blah.

    Isn't the RIAA a not-for-profit corporation?

    IANAL, but couldn't they reason that fighting piracy is better then giving it away, and keep it for themselves? er, I meant distribute it to theirselves, of course.

    And, if they do give some to charity, wouldn't they still get the tax benefits of donations?

  114. Another Possibility by Tuxinatorium · · Score: 2

    The RIAA could keep all this personal info and use it to track down pirates! After all, people who sign up for this claims thing online are about 100 times more likely than the general population to have pirated music.

  115. For the security concious... by X86Daddy · · Score: 2

    First off, they do not ask for mother's maiden name, or full SSN. They do want your Date of Birth, and the last 4 digits of your social.

    Also, their site is unencrypted, except for that data-entry frame. That frame is over https, and is using 128-bit RC4, so that shouldn't be an issue.

    What is rather unfortunate is the lack of disclosure on the firm's privacy policy... For the lawyers reading, is this protected due to existing client-lawyer legislation?

  116. MOD PARENT DOWN!!! POOR ATTEMPT AT HUMOR!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sincerely,
    Hillary

  117. MOD PARENT DOWN!!! -1, STALE MASTER CARD REFERENCE by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  118. Re:No thanks RIAA,already gave at by NanoGator · · Score: 3, Informative

    "I don't know how much you pay, but here are the numbers for Canada [ccfda.ca]. The CCFDA (Canadian Coalition for Fair Digital Access) is trying to fight it. "

    I read recently that they've collected over 28 million, but none of it has yet to reach musicians like they claimed it would.

    I didn't exactly have a stunned expression on my face when I read that. I'm sorry, but I don't remember where I read it unless it was on Wired.com within the last week.

    --
    "Derp de derp."
  119. Price fixing has stopped? by zx-6e · · Score: 1
    If price fixing has stopped, why is it that I can go and purchase a DVD of a movie for $9.99 yet the stupid soundtrack for that movie is $15-$18?

    Does this mean that the days of cheap DVDs are fleeting?

    1. Re:Price fixing has stopped? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, most movies have made their money back well before they're released to DVD. DVD revenue is gravy. Not the same with CDs.

      Of course, they are still obscenely expensive. And I'd bet that if a label starts selling CDs at 6 or 7 bucks, they'll make more money than at $17. Make it a lot easier for an album to go gold or platinum, too.

  120. ahhhhh... by H0NGK0NGPH00EY · · Score: 1

    thank you. that makes a lot more sense now. I have actually used such systems before, but I never made the connection. It is all clear to me now, though. Thank you much.

    --
    Do not read this sig.
  121. Re:To bad I can't cash for all the MP3s I download by yourmom16 · · Score: 0

    Its $20 not $20 per recording. You get $20 if you bought 1 cd or 125,000 cds.

    --
    "We have got to make Stan understand the importance of voting, because he'll definitely vote for our guy." - South Park
  122. How much are the Lawyers getting?? by mcdade · · Score: 2

    I'm willing to guess they are taking a 50% cut of the settlement, so it's more like if 1.3 million people sign up then they will start cutting down the rebate from $20 till it gets to $5. Also you have to take into consideration that they will have postage and checking fees, plus printing and processing of all these checks.. that's not coming out of their pocket, it's coming out of the settlement money.

    Oh and you can bet the Laywers aren't takin their cut in 'free music', cash only! For a small to medium firm this can be a huge cash cow. Put a bunch of laywers on the case for a year or so, and make about $30 million... sweet!

    -b

  123. The important parts by Guppy06 · · Score: 2
    For having my wallet gouged throughout a seven year period, I get to have a shiney $20.00 bill (if that much)? I'll pass.

    And to add insult to injury, check out the damages:
    (1) EMD shall pay $6,500,000 in Cash and $8,500,000 in Non-Cash Consideration;
    (2) WEA shall pay $13,650,000 in Cash and $15,750,000 in Non-Cash Consideration;
    (3) Universal shall pay $18,850,000 in Cash and $21,750,000 in Non-Cash Consideration;
    (4) Sony shall pay $12,523,500 in Cash and $14,701,500 in Non-Cash Consideration; and
    (5) BMG shall pay $12,776,500 in Cash and $14,998,500 in Non-Cash Consideration.
    (1) Trans World shall pay $800,000.
    (2) Musicland shall pay $2,000,000.
    (3) Tower shall pay $275,000
    And this is supposed to be a penalty? To a multi-billion dollar industry? No thanks, I'll wait until something with teeth comes along.
    If you do not wish to be bound by the terms of the proposed Settlement described in this Notice, you may request to be excluded from the Settlement. To do so, you MUST send a written request for the exclusion to:
    Compact Disc MAP Antitrust Litigation Administrator
    Post Office Box 1643
    Faribault, Minnesota 55021-1643
    Make it $200, and maybe I'll start listening.

  124. Re:No thanks RIAA,already gave at by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hmm, I've never even paid for a CDR and I've bought hundreds of them. Check out devsdeals.com because they always list CDR deals for free or better. That way, if the RIAA is getting any money, it sure as hell isn't coming from you.

  125. Hrmm.. interesting... by matth · · Score: 2

    Please note that this is a secure website. Any information you exchange through this site cannot be viewed by anyone else on the Internet. For more details on the security of this website, please see the Verisign Secure Site logo at the bottom right corner of this page.

    The verisign logo doesn't mean anything when you're URL looks like this:

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

    Where's the https?!?!?!

  126. Sore Loser Post by ewhac · · Score: 1

    Submitted three days ago, and bounced:

    2003-01-07 11:02:08 The RIAA Owes You Money (articles,money) (rejected)

    My write-up was better, and also called attention to the SSN requirement, and how question 12 in their FAQ addresses concerns over this.

    Schwab

  127. Exclusion & other questions by multimed · · Score: 2
    So people are saying that if you don't specifically exclude yourself from the settlement, then you're assumed to have agreed with it and can have no further claims against them on this matter. I can understand that you forfeit further claims if you settle & accept the money, but how can they possibly hold you to something you don't agree to in the event you don't exclused yourself or don't hear about the settlement for that matter? If that's the case, then it benefits the company to keep the settlement as quiet as possible because anyone who doesn't hear about it not only misses out on the settlement benefit, but is considered in agreement with the terms. I have to suspect that's not the case.

    Second, it seems entirely unreasonable to make the amount each victim gets based on how many victims there are. If they broke the law and I am an injured party with a valid claim on the settlement, how does it matter in the least whether one or a billion others were also injured? Essentially this means that a company can break the law and illegally over charge millions of customers and it costs them the same as if they did it to a handful. I love the tone that sends--I might as well screw over as many people as possible, if I'm caught, I pay the same price either way.

    Finally this statement got my attention:

    "The cash paid by the Defendants, after the payment of attorneys' fees, litigation and Settlement administration costs, shall be distributed to consumers who purchased Music Products."
    In other words, the $67 million is actually $67 million minus their attorney's fees, administrative fees and whatever they can tack on. Tell me this, how the harry hell can you take your attorney fees out of the settlement you're supposed to pay to your victims? So in the end, it might be more like $40 million or something for overcharging consumers by $480 million AND no admission of guilt or consent decree so they can continue the practice as if nothing happened. Wow, now there's a business model the VC's should be drooling over!
    --
    Vote Quimby.
  128. The Slashdot Effect Strikes Again by Kylow · · Score: 1

    What do you want to bet that the payout per person has now been slashdotted?

  129. What makes you think this is real? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ok, so someone puts up a site claiming to be about a legal settlement and claims you *may* get money for giving them your full address, name, email, and phone number ostensibly because you're entitled to the money just by virtue of your word...

    And then they get it mentioned on slashdot, sit back and start making their mailing lists. Uh huh - sure. I'll believe it when you get your money, cuz I'm not adding my name.

    1. Re:What makes you think this is real? by thumbtack · · Score: 1

      The Privacy Questions raised about the CD Price Fixing Settlement have been addressed by the lead counsel.

      Steven M. Steingard
      Kohn Swift & Graf, P.C.
      One South Broad Street
      Suite 2100 Philadelphia, PA 19107
      ssteingard@kohnswift.com

      My firm is lead counsel for the private plaintiffs in the Compact Disc Minimum Advertised Price Antitrust Litigation which is currently pending in the United States District Court for the District of Maine. We have prosecuted this litigation along with Attorneys General from more than 40 states. As a result of the proposed settlement of the litigation, a web site www.musiccdsettlement.com has been established to provide detailed information about the settlement and allow purchasers of CD's during the period January 1, 1995 through December 22, 2000 to file claims to receive proceeds from the Settlement Fund. Under the terms of the proposed settlement, should the settlement be approved, persons filing timely and valid claims will receive a payment of between $5.00 and $20.00, provided that the number of persons filing claims does not result in the payment amount falling below $5.00. I have been made aware of your recent posting and would like to correct certain misinformation it contains. Contrary to your assertion, privacy and security issues are addressed on the web site. Question 12 of the Q&A section on the site reads:

      12.Will the information I provide on my claim form be kept confidential? Yes. The information you provide on your claim form will be kept confidential and secure, and will be used only to determine your award under this Settlement. It will not be sold to any business for marketing purposes, or shared with anyone not a party to this litigation.

      Further, there is a Verisign logo on the claim form that if clicked provides detailed security information. The need for the personal information we have requested on the claim form (including the last 4 digits of social security numbers) is quite clear. We have to protect against duplicate and/or fraudulent claims. The suggestion that we would sell the database of this information should the amount of claims result in payments below $5.00 is just plain wrong and, in any case, would never be permitted by the Court overseeing the settlement. Your proposal to file several test claims is precisely the type of conduct that endangers the claims process. I would also like to note that in response to questions about the web site both the media (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A21 176-2003Jan7.html ) and investigatory sites such as Snopes.com ( http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/nothing/cdrefund.asp ) have concluded that the process is legitimate. I hope this answers concerns about the web site.

      Steven M. Steingard
      Kohn Swift & Graf, P.C.
      One South Broad Street
      Suite 2100 Philadelphia, PA19107
      215-238-1700
      215-238-1968 (fax)
      ssteingard@kohnswift.com

  130. Re:No thanks RIAA,already gave at by trentfoley · · Score: 1
    Thanks for the info. I thought all cdr's had some sort of RIAA tax -- not just the ones labeled "Audio". I guess that's what I get for using slashdot as a news source.

    I'm too busy (drinking beer) right now to search google for confirmation -- got a url?

  131. Well, here's what I just might do... by Peterus7 · · Score: 1
    Get the money, and still theive mp3s, while laughing the entire time. Not only do I steal their copyright material, but I take their money for it too!

    Or maybe I'll pass.

  132. Re:No thanks RIAA,already gave at by peg0cjs · · Score: 1

    I'm sure you're glad that you don't live in Canada now, eh? The CPCC has actually proposed a levy on all digital media, including hard drives. This also includes hard drives that are embedded in other devices. The numbers they were proposing added over 120% to the current price of most portable MP3 players.

    --
    Karma: Excellent (Mainly due to Bill & Ted's Karma Adventure)
  133. A few points... by nuxx · · Score: 2

    A few points:

    - First off, this lawsuit is *NOT* about price fixing. It is about record labels enforcing a minimum advertised pricing (MAP). This is when the labels would say that stores can't advertise X cd for less than X price.

    - Second, MAP isn't actually that bad of a thing from the perspective of small retailers. See, since this ruling, large stores like Best Buy will commonly advertise 'New CD X' at $8.99, far below their cost. This is done just to get people in the store. It's called loss leading, and something that only stores with deep pockets can do. Because of the price it's likely that all the discs are sold out, but the people are already there, so they are likely to purchase something. This hurts small retailers by drawing buisness from small retailers to the large stores. Small retailers can compete price wise on CDs when everything is normally priced, but there is no way a $1000/day store can compete with an extremely diversified $25,000/day.

    Oh, and yes, I do work at a small, independant record store. And for point of reference, cost on new major label CDs typically varies between $11 and $15. CDs are typically marked up about 25%. Not very much, eh? Oh, and remember, it's the major labels primaraly, then the RIAA secondaraly that are screwing you. Not the retailer. Support independant labels and stores, lest you lose the ability to find non-mainstream music with much ease.

    1. Re:A few points... by /dev/trash · · Score: 2

      Does loss leading really work? I mean it must, but I never buy something I didn't go in for. If the batteries I wanted are out, I leave. I guess I'm in the minority.

    2. Re:A few points... by will_die · · Score: 2

      My parents use to own a francize donut store where they would theses seasonal items, the 'Buy two dozen donuts get this item for $xxx more.' Our cost on the item was at or slightly below the $xxx more, but you were using this to draw in new people and get people to purchase more and it was actually more profitable because the person could not then use a coupon, and it would work. You could see a marked improvment in sales most of the time with theses items, and then after that promotion was done sales would start slumping off.
      You would also get people who would come in just to item and min required(not what you wanted), but it was profitable for us so we kept doing it.

    3. Re:A few points... by nuxx · · Score: 2

      Yes, actually. Loss leading work VERY well. Or if the product is in stock, people tend to use the "Well, since I'm here and this was so cheap..." mentality. It's very hard for small buisnesses to compete with large stores which can afford to loss lead. When Best Buy (the bigggest example in this area) sells the latest pop-whatever disc for $8.99, the store loses a dollar or two. What typically happens next is someone buys another CD at full price, BB makes $3, for a net total of $1 (which is still better than nothing) and the customer is slightly more inclined to say that BB has the cheapest prices, and the customer will come back.

      Or if nothing else it simply keeps the customers from going to a competitor for that one disc, slipping the knife ever so slightly further in.

    4. Re:A few points... by /dev/trash · · Score: 2

      Well I think a food store can better do loss leading than say a TV store.

  134. EFF? WTF have you been smoking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The money would go towards music programs in states involved in this lawsuit, not the EFF. I don't know what kind of brain damage caused you to guess the EFF, but I'm glad it's you that has it and not me.

  135. Thermal receipts by bsdbigot · · Score: 2

    (warning: conspiracy theory)

    I always knew there was a good reason to switch to thermal receipts on cash registers. The answer? To reduce your liability in a consumer class-action suit! If you've ever gone back and looked at a thermal-printed receipt from even just a few months ago, it's either nearly all black or all white. BASTARDS!

    --
    main(){char I,l,O[]={'-',1-1,0,(1<<5)-1,0+'-',-10-1,-10,11-0,- 1,-100};for(I=l=0;l<10+0;put
  136. mod parent up by valmont · · Score: 2

    someone please mod parent way the fuck up. also someone should post a link to the USA equivalent of those levy charges. it's insane.

  137. 21 cents?!? by freeweed · · Score: 2

    Ok, this is insane:

    Currently the charge raises the price of data CDs by 21 cents

    I can buy cd-r's for about 30 cents in bulk in many stores. I'm paying almost 70% of that price as a tax? Can you say cash cow? This is almost as bad as gasoline and cigarette taxes.

    Oh wait, I live in Canada, home of the 95% tax structure...

    --
    Endless arguments over trivial contradictions in books written by ignorant savages to explain thunder in the dark.
    1. Re:21 cents?!? by ConceptJunkie · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It could be worse. Norway actually had to pass legislation to change the tax law so you wouldn't be liable for more than 100% of your income. Apparently it was happening all too often.

      --
      You are in a maze of twisty little passages, all alike.
    2. Re:21 cents?!? by Junnonen · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well, the situation in Canada is nothing compared to Finland..

      The fee for CDRs is 18,5 eurocents (that's 30,2 Canadian cents), and there is also the VAT (value added tax) of 22% that is added to every product sold in this country.

      But that's just the beginning. About 75-80% of the gasoline price are taxes.. (1 liter costs about 1,15eur = 1,21USD. That's $4,56 per US gallon.)

      New cars are heavily taxed. There's naturally the VAT, but in addition there is also a special tax, which is about 25% of the total price.

      Alcohol is ridiculously highly taxed. One bottle of beer in a supermarket costs about $1 (quantity doesn't matter). Aluminum cans are almost non-existant due to a special "environment tax" for them.

      There's even a special tax for soft-drinks! A small bottle of Coke (0.5L) costs over $1.

      And last but not least, the income taxes are highest in the euro-zone...

    3. Re:21 cents?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, but Finland is a great place to live. It could be worse. You could be stuck in the US.

    4. Re:21 cents?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh wait, I live in Canada, home of the 95% tax structure...

      Oh wait, you live in Canada, where you get free health care and other benefits. If you don't like it, go south; and stop bitching about it to the rest of us, who do like it.

    5. Re:21 cents?!? by Junnonen · · Score: 1

      Finland is not a "great" place to live in. Of course we have universal healthcare and other benefits, but it's almost impossible to get rich in this country. With "rich" I mean something like >$40.000 (=>40.000) a year, which in U.S. standards is only an average income, if not below average.

      Not to mention that Finland is the most expensive country in the euro-zone.

      And it's way too cold and dark in here right now...

    6. Re:21 cents?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In American, I pay about $40 for 100 brand-name (say, memorex) 700MB discs. If I buy lesser known brands (say, Dysan for example) I can get them for about $30/100.

      If there were ever plans to start taxing media here on the basis of subsidizing other industries (music, movies, software companies), I would stock up on a few hundred dollars worth of CDs before hand.

    7. Re:21 cents?!? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In America, the average income is around $28,000 (it may be slightly higher now).

      But that's before taxes.

      I make $90,000/yr without a highschool diploma or a college degree, but after taxes, my take is actually more like $50,000. And that is only after *income taxes*, social security, medicair, disability and all of that crap. It doesn't take into account sales taxes, gas tax, propery taxes, car licensing taxes, phone utility taxes, electricity taxes, taxes on dividends from my securities investments, and miscellaneous taxes that are hidden as "fees" for government services (high cost of going to a park, camping, hunting licenses, business licensenses, etc).

      The government easily walks away with more than 50% of my salary.

    8. Re:21 cents?!? by Junnonen · · Score: 1

      Do you know what it takes to earn a net salary of $50.000/year in Finland?

      Probably under 0.1% of the population earns that much...

  138. Not RIAA, but 8 companies by Chanc_Gorkon · · Score: 3, Informative

    The companies, including Universal Music, Sony Music, Warner Music, Bertelsmann's BMG Music and EMI Group, plus retailers Musicland Stores, Trans World Entertainment and Tower Records....NOT the RIAA. Although that group about covers it. Do a search before posting the story.

    --

    Gorkman

  139. 4.25? by raehl · · Score: 2

    As if. Try 2-2.5%.

  140. Re:Lawyers make $5 more per hour than your friends by puppet10 · · Score: 2

    Of course that's only one law school for another example -

    Columbia Law:

    The median starting salary for all graduates is $94,000

    Stanford

    New graduates from Ivy League schools hired at firms with national practices can earn $70,000 - $85,000 in their first year, but the majority of new hires earn in the $40,000 - $60,000 range. Starting salaries are somewhat lower in the corporate and public sectors. Eighth-year associates can earn between $85,000-$113,500 per year.

    less well known law schools,

    Case Western Reserve

    The average salary for Class of 2001 graduates was over $75,000.

    Of course this is for recent grads 1-2 years as were the statistics you quoted. One of the benefits of a specialized degree is that the upper bounds on individual salary is much higher, and one of the reasons the recent grads are working thier asses off at 90k per year is that if/when they make partner they'll be rolling in the cash (maybe working just as hard, but at a substantial boost in earnings)

    We can also check salary reports for an estimate of what you should be looking for as a more experienced attorney,

    Career Journal

    Associate General Counsel working in US - National now earns an average salary of 310,054. Half of those in this position would earn between 230,122 and 332,812.

    Position Description:
    Conduct criminal and civil lawsuits, draw up legal documents, advise clients as to legal rights, and practice other phases of law. May represent client in court or before quasi-judicial or administrative agencies of government. May specialize in a single area of law, such as patent law, corporate law, or criminal law.

    (although general counsel probably work for the side that lost this case, but hey they still got paid, actually by CD sales ;>)

    Department of Labor statistics for all lawyers

    Area - All United States
    Occupation - Lawyers
    Level - Overall
    DataSource - Published
    Year/Period - 2000/Jul
    Hourly Rate - $38.70

    Of course this data includes public lawyers which are paid significantly less than corporate/private practice lawyers in general, and includes all levels of experience.

    And this survey of law firm compensation:

    Law Department Compensation Benchmarking survey - Total cash compensation

    Attorney - 2001 - $120,252

    --
    -------- This space intentionally left blank --------
  141. PLEASE DON'T File Your Claims!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you file your claim, you are sending a message to the RIAA and that message is: "Sure you overcharged me for the hundred of CDs I've purchased over the years, but if you give me $20 now I'll call it even and you won't have to lower your prices!"

  142. Yes, claim your money. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Surely even the most die-hard anti-RIAA cynic can see that this lawsuit is frivolous. When you purchased those products, you felt the price was fair, else you would not have completed the purchase. The RIAA may be an abusive cartel, but you were free not to support their members and your decision to exchange money for goods was voluntarily made, no matter what your complaints about the price.

    This lawsuit is nothing more than a tactic of abuse. This is not even proper retribution for the RIAA's law-mangling, as the laws will remain mangled in their favor. Even in the case that the suit is won, think about what that means; is $5 really sufficient compensation for the RIAA's past deeds? And, while you may benefit by $5 or $10, do you really think the RIAA will not recoup its losses eventually using similarly repugnant tactics?

    The only real benefactors here, as in most claim settlement suits, are the lawyers that have arranged the suit to begin with. Maybe if everyone contributed their settlement checks to EFF or EPIC, it might be worthwhile, but the dilemma of having provided the RIAA present justification for their past deeds will persist afterwards, likely for ever.

  143. Read Ars Technica instead of /. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've noticed that Arstechnica is a better "news for nerds" site than slashdot. Arstechnica is kind of like Slashdot, but without all the pointless articles that are posted just to get more page hits.

    Consider, for example, the earlier /. story: News Flash! Large capacity hard drives are pretty darn cheap these days. Please, tell me something I don't already know!

    I've also noticed that when Slashdot actually posts a newsworthy story (like this one!), Arstechnica usually already posted it a few days earlier.

  144. It's a good start... by Anonvmous+Coward · · Score: 2

    I think making the RIAA pay is a good start. But I think it'd be more worthwhile to take away their ability to refuse returns on opened CD's.

    The reason why their price fixing is do damaging is that the consumer is left with no way to protest the price. If a CD sucks, they're less likely to return it if the price is okay than they are if the price is ridiculous. It would force them to be careful about what they charge. If you give the customer a way to say "I'm not satisfied", then you give the RIAA very strong incentive to make sure everything's fair.

  145. Poor lawyers by alexo · · Score: 1

    Now let's look at the latest study from 2001-2002.

    A summary is available here and a PDF with more info and charts is here.

    Some interesting points from the summary:

    * Of those graduates whose employment status was known, 90% were employed as of February 15, 2002

    Remember, we are talking about the Class of 2001. 90% got employed fresh out of college. During a recession. Not bad, eh?

    * Of graduates known to be employed, 57.8% obtained their first job in a law firm. Employment in business was 11.3% and Public service jobs accounted for 27.6%

    The lawyers we're talking about are in the first group. Let's see what the article says about them...

    * 62% of employed graduates age 20-25 entered private practice and private sector medians are higher - $90,000 in private practice

    We are talking about kids (age 20-25) fresh out of college, earning $80K on their first job in 2001/2002. I wonder how hat compares to B.Sc. geeks...

    * About 71% of the 29,118 jobs for which timing of offer was reported were obtained before graduation. One in six jobs was obtained after graduation but before bar results; the remaining 12% were obtained after bar results were issued.

    Everybody loves them.

    And now, the punchline:

    Although salaries at large firms generally did not increase beyond the $125,000 level, the increasing frequency of salaries at this level widened the salary differential between private and public sector jobs. (emphasis mine)

    Fresh out of college, during an economic downturn... Poor kids!

    1. Re:Poor lawyers by mekkab · · Score: 2

      Fist off these are NOT all kids who are 20-25.
      These are people graduationg LAW SCHOOL- some don't start till their 30 our later. At the University of Iowa the average INCOMING CLASS age is 26- add three and you have average graduating class age of 29. (check thier website, check all the law school's websites. the median incoming age spans 23-29. Add 3 for graduation.)

      Actually, thing have gotten much worse. Look at your own NALP report- This 28th consecutive report documents the first decrease in the employment rate of new law graduates since 1993, with a figure of 90% of graduates for whom employment status was known. (emphasis mine)
      Salaries were inflated SKY HIGH due to the tech bubble. As such, that $125 is going to be the intro level salary for SPECIALIZED lawyers a looong time.

      In addition there have been a great number of layoffs and not too many golden parachutes.
      For example, Dechert's DC office let go of 9 first years (Right before their christmas party, no less!) this past December. And there has been belt tightening all around.

      But lets not forget that the $125 is for specialized LARGE FIRM lawyers ONLY.
      Also, they work 60-80 hours a week!
      My initial figures are still adequate- they don't clear $20 an hour after taxes!

      Fresh out of college, during an economic downturn... Poor kids!

      To recap- 1- they are graduates who are probably older than you who are NOT KIDS, they are not fresh out of college, they are fresh out of LAW school with another 100k+ debt, who will have to work at least 60 hours a week.
      If they have it so great- why aren't YOU going to law school?!

      --
      In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
    2. Re:Poor lawyers by alexo · · Score: 1

      > Fist off these are NOT all kids who are 20-25.

      I Never claimed that they were all in that age bracket, just that the article said that those that were, got better paying jobs (on the average) than the older ones. 62% of their jobs were in the private sector with a median salary of 90K.

      > Actually, thing have gotten much worse.

      Beg your pardon? Let's look at the full quote:
      "This 28th consecutive report documents the first decrease in the employment rate of new law graduates since 1993, with a figure of 90% of graduates for whom employment status was known. This compares with a figure of 91.5% for the prior year, and is evidence of the effect of the general economic downturn on the employment market for new law school graduates."

      Much worse? Please! Name one other sector that has it better.
      Also, comparing the 2002 report and the 2001 report shows that the median salary of lawyers' first jobs in the private sector rose from 80K to 90K.

      > Salaries were inflated SKY HIGH due to the tech bubble

      The "tech bubble" burst around April 2000. Please compare the pre-burst 2/2000 survey with the post-burst 2/2001 survey and the middle-of-economic-slowdown 2/2002 survey.

      > such, that $125 is going to be the intro level salary for SPECIALIZED lawyers a looong time.

      Please explain how can a lawyer fresh out of law school be SPECIALIZED?
      Please explain why, in your opinion, lawyers' salaries are different from the salaries of other people, which have fallen since 2000.

      > In addition there have been a great number of layoffs and not too many golden parachutes.
      For example, Dechert's DC office let go of 9 first years (Right before their christmas party, no less!) this past December. And there has been belt tightening all around.


      Nine? Wow... Now for some perspective:
      Nortel has announced a total of 52,000 layoffs in the 18 months prior to September 2002. Lucent has turfed 50,910 and Motorola Inc. 42,910.

      The bottom line is: in Feb 2002, 90% of law school graduates of 2001 were employed. 57.8% of them obtained their first job in private practice.

      > But lets not forget that the $125 is for specialized LARGE FIRM lawyers ONLY.

      Recent graduates are not "specialized". Also, the article states:
      "Although salaries at large firms generally did not increase beyond the $125,000 level, the increasing frequency of salaries at this level widened the salary differential between private and public sector jobs." (emphasis mine)

      Even if ignore the $125K figure, the $90K median in private practice is still impressive.

      > Also, they work 60-80 hours a week!

      Source please!

      According to this article: "The typical Philadelphia lawyer works about 51 hours per week".
      Another article (sorry, lost the source) describes lawyers that are expected to generate 2000 billable hours/year as being severely overworked.

      Also, the fact that lawyers bill their clients for X hours, does not mean that they actually worked that amount of time.

      > To recap- 1- they are graduates who are probably older than you who are NOT KIDS

      According to the survey, most of the best paid ones are.

      > they are not fresh out of college, they are fresh out of LAW school

      Not being a native English speaker, I thought that the term "college" could be applied to law school as well. Would the term "fresh out of university" be more acceptable?

      > with another 100k+ debt, who will have to work at least 60 hours a week.

      Source please!

      >If they have it so great- why aren't YOU going to law school?!

      What makes you think that my personal reasons for not going to law school have any bearing on the facts of the case?

  146. check the fine print by jlechem · · Score: 1
    ~The amount you will be paid will be based on the total number of claims filed, up to a maximum of $20 per claimant. Please note, however, that if the number of claims filed result in awards of less than $5, the Settlement Fund will revert to Cy Pres distribution. Cy Pres distribution means all Settlement Funds would be distributed to not-for-profit corporations and/or charitable organizations and/or governmental or public entities within your state, to be used for music-related purposes or programs. For more information on this, please see the Notice of Proposed Settlement.~

    so if there are lots of claimants I can still get no money and the RIAA gets to claim a tax break for donating to charities. I mean what the fucking fuck! This is absurd, they are still screwing over the consumer.

    --
    Hold up, wait a minute, let me put some pimpin in it
  147. Lack of secure link when posting the information by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Anyone notice that the form to fill out is NOT an https (secure) form? I'm not touchin that form with a 10 foot pole!

  148. Dear Mr.Presesident by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dear Mr.President,

    While your out protecting me from your proffit margins. The evil terrorists and that strange group what sounds more like a cold syptom (al kida). While senator dashel, and John Ashkroft are chasing unconfirmed threats of a terrorist nature. Your' probably wondering what's happened to your plans to be reelected

    Before you bend over, and way before you hand out even more bribes please consider the following

    Consumer confidence is in the shitter cause were getting riped off!

    Colledge students and young adults aren't spending because they can't afford to purchase stuff and still expect to make rent, and other esential bills

    Gas is a fucking rip-off, horrible inofeciant and dangerous to use and transport

    I'd like to assist the economy, but I gota assist my own damn house WAY before then.

    Electrical prices are out the roof and so is my god damn phone bill

    You're ape of a fucking advisor told california to kiss his ass when they needed you now what do I get to look forward to?

    More inflation, more taxes, and if i'm REALY lucky higher rent! And you have the nerve to wonder why on earth you'r rating before your' plans to blow something up was effectivily around 15%! What in the COLD HEL ARE YOU ON!!! mandate 75% lower prices and people can spend, on CD's, electronics, cars etc

    -John Doe a pissed off consumer

  149. anti riaa and anti mpaa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I proudly wear my anti-riaa button, check'em out Anti-RIAA and Anti-MPAA buttons!

  150. Re:Lawyers make $5 more per hour than your friends by mekkab · · Score: 2

    so lets break this down- inspite of the superstars who make partner or general counsel, etc.- we're still talking 90-120k not a crazy difference. And given a BILLABLE hour route of 2000 (which is more like 3-4k actual) though they make a lot of money, all they do is work. And lets not forget the cost of their education as well. So if you have to pay off loans, pay for dry cleaning and maid service, someone to bring you food, only to HOPE that you make partner, which odds are you won't.

    Sure, lawyers get paid. But they in turn pay for it.

    --
    In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
  151. Erm... by autopr0n · · Score: 2

    But far, far more people have "data" drives then actual music-only CD recorders. And for the vast majority of people out there they are either going to make a straight ISO copy, which would sound the same, or take the PCM data and make their own mix CD... also sounding the same.

    There might be some degradation if they used MP3 compression for the tons of MP3 supporting players out there, but then, they'll be sticking 250 songs on there, not 20.

    As for flexibility, I thought they were talking about the actual flexibility of the plastic (there is a difference with some CDs in this respect) or something. Being able to work with rare, crippled, expensive equipment isn't really that useful for most people, and sounding better when using even rarer, more expensive equipment is even less-so.

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
  152. What if the RIAA counts itself as a beneficiary? by JHandey · · Score: 1

    Notice the qualifications for receiving the donations... Not-for-profit organization and it's to be used in "music related purposes". Hmmmm, it's not like the Lawyers really care who gets the payoff.. they just want their share.

  153. And what happens at $5/claimant? by tvsjr · · Score: 3, Interesting
    Did you read the description of where the money will go if the settlement drops below $5 per claimant?


    Rather, the cash portion of the Settlement shall be distributed to not-for-profit, charitable, governmental or public entities to be used for music-related purposes or programs for the benefit of consumers who purchased Music Products.


    So, what do you bet the defendants will publicize this heavily and get enough claimants to drop below $5/claimant? Then, they'll get the money funneled into not-for-profit, charaitable, etc. organizations aligned with the distributors and the RIAA. They'll lose money out of the general fund, but it'll get pushed back into other organizations they control.

    Wait and see...
  154. I'm pretty sure you're wrong by autopr0n · · Score: 2

    Do you have any refrences to back up your claim?

    --
    autopr0n is like, down and stuff.
    1. Re:I'm pretty sure you're wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes I do. Do you have the references to backup yours? Show me a price breakdown on what I pay for data CD's which relects how much if anything the RIAA gets?

  155. Putting in my two centers, one thousand times... by gilroy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I'm going to put in a claim, then use that $20 to support the EFF (or maybe a different consumer-rights organization). Let's use the record companies' money against them!

  156. I live in Canada... by thatguywhoiam · · Score: 2
    ... and the whole Music CD-R vs Data CD-R thing is new to me. Like, in the last 2 weeks I found out that CD-Rs in the US are actually sold this way, and it was shocking to me.

    We didn't have 'data' tapes for my C64 dataset, dammit.

    --
    If Jesus wants me it knows where to find me.
  157. Fucking paranoid slashbots. by Wakko+Warner · · Score: 2

    The site is completely legitimate. This is part of an actual legal settlement. Why the hell would the RIAA set up a website to steal your name and address?

    Ignorant and paranoid are a dangerous combination.

    Now, as to whether all that bullshit is worth between $5 and $20: I couldn't even buy dinner with that much money. That is why I won't bother. If it were a couple hundred, I'd consider it...

    - A.P.

    --
    "Remember when the U.S. had a drug problem, and then we declared a War On Drugs, and now you can't buy drugs anymore?"
    1. Re:Fucking paranoid slashbots. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Ignorant and paranoid are a dangerous combination.

      Awesome quote - very sig worthy!

  158. Non-Cash Settlement ... by ProfMoriarty · · Score: 3, Funny

    You know ... it would be just my luck to get part of the "Non-Cash Consideration" in the form of Britteny Spears CD Collection ...

    --
    Karma? Karma? I don't need no stinkin' karma.
  159. This is old. Slashdot rejected previous submission by Linuxathome · · Score: 2

    I submitted this story two days ago, and it was rejected. At first, I thought it was rejected because they (the slashdot higher-ups) didn't want to dilute the payout pool so they could get more money sent out each payee (i.e. themselves). Imagine if musiccdsettlement.com got slashdotted? The payout could foreseeably fall below $5 per person, in which case none of us will see any money, only the lawyers.

  160. Paranoid? Me? [who said that?] by Blue+Stone · · Score: 2

    "That's why I shred all my receipts. And eat the paper."

    I like to be doubly-extra safe. I shred all my receipts. Then I eat the paper. And then shred the poop that results.

    But that's where I draw the line.

    --
    Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility. - Ambrose Bierce
  161. Interesting exercise in Gaming Theory by dfinster · · Score: 1

    So, as I understand the rules of the game...

    I might get as much as $20, unless a lot of people sign up. If my share of the pot drops to less than $5, nobody gets anything. (I understand of course, that "nobody gets anything" isn't exactly true, but for purposes of the game I personally don't get a check for any amount.)

    Part 1 of delimma: If some kind soul had not posted this story here, I might not have seen it at all. So should I sign up and reduce his chance of getting anything?

    Part 2 of delimma: Should I tell my wife about this, so she can claim her legimate damage also? After all, I share in her gain - I live in Texas so it's community property.

    Part 3 of my delimma: Should I tell my brother, who also deserves to get his award? I will not share in his gain, and his participation reduces my award.

    Hmmm. What if my participation in the settlement is what moves the award from $5.00 to $4.99? Of course, I'll tell you later what I actually did.

    ---
    Hey, you know what ya call a one-liner joke with no punch-line?

  162. Re:No thanks RIAA,already gave at by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Gosh, it's amazing - it's like the same story I submitted 3 days ago - been accepted. It's almost like that cocksucker, Michael Sims, wasn't a slashdot editor at all!

    (Quick michael, mod this to -1 right away. Disagreement with you is WRONG!)

  163. Here's the way this works... by wedg · · Score: 3, Funny

    Make sure *nobody* signs up for this. At all. We all know how hard this will be, since everyone and their mother, and their mother's cousin loves "free money". But really, we're just saying, "Hey, it's ok to rip us off some more."

    If no one agrees to the settlement, then perhaps the courts, when they try to see if the settlement is fair, will realize that it is not, and that the price fixing must be stopped.

    And then I sign up for the refund, and being the only person signed up, I walk away with a cool $25 mil. Muaahahahhahahahahahahhahahaha. *cough* Ignore that last part.

    --
    Jake
    Dating: while( 1 ){ call_girl(); get_rejected(); drink_40(); } return 0;
  164. Check out their FAQ by DennyK · · Score: 2

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

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

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

    DennyK

  165. What's the SSN paranoia, please explain? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What is the motivation for such? Can someone use your SSN to impersonate you? How? Please explain.

    Here in this small European country we've got SSNs too but I think people are not that paranoid about those.

    1. Re:What's the SSN paranoia, please explain? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      When I call my bank for information or to make a transaction, name and the last 4 digits of my SSN are used for identification. I think this is also true for credit cards, phone companies, etc.

  166. Uh by Kanasta · · Score: 2

    'The compact discs will be distributed in each State,Territory, and Possession to not-for-profit, charitable, governmental or public entities to be used for music-related purposes '

    Who will then pay royalties for the said music-related event?

  167. So I really *was* ripped off buying Marvelous3 CDs by krinsh · · Score: 1

    and Everclear, and a few others, at Tower when I lived and worked in DC.

    I don't see that this will actually provide me any cash compensation for the outrageous prices they charge compared to the paltry sums the artists actually get in the long run. I hope that legitimate music education programs do end up receiving the part of the pot the lawyers haven't already carved up for themselves.

    I won't be putting my email address on that form; and especially not *verifying* it to provide whomever is distributing the cash or non-cash compensatory awards - very likely yet another marketing agency just working for a different color shark - with the ability to peg me with their particular clients' spam in the future - even if they are requests for legitimate anti-scam activity.

    --
    I think with the interesting people, their lives can't possibly be wrapped up into a nice little package.
  168. anyone else get an error submitting the form? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    An error has occurred trying to process your request. Please click here to return to the home page.

    I've tried it twice now with the same results.

    1. Re:anyone else get an error submitting the form? by CIMLINC_85 · · Score: 1
      I just filled it out and submitted it with no problems. I did have to enable cookies though.

      Just FYI, they want name, address, birthdate and last 4 digits of social security number. Email address is optional.

  169. P2P and MP3 are killing the industry. by t0qer · · Score: 3, Insightful

    At the bottom of my sig, you'll see the mag I donate my webmastering skills too. We're a local zine for the silicon valley music scene.

    Before ppl ask "SV has a music scene?" remember, bands like green day come out of here. Our music scene is totally different than that of L.A.'s a.k.a. Hollywood. I can't describe it, because I see everything as data, but I can tell you what the musicians are fearing.

    So today, i'm riding around delivering the latest issue of Zero with one of our big bosses. Boss delivering zines you ask? It's hard times, everyone is pulling double effort.

    Anyways, this cat is a musician, and .5 owner of the zine. When we went to the different bay area wherehouse music stores today, we found out some alarming news.

    All Wherehouse music stores around our area are shutting down... We have noticed a trend too, less people in other music stores.

    So who's to blame? Napster? The economy? Pirates?

    Well, my partner started asking questions about the technology. He's what I would call a reforming luddite (yeah strong words but he'd agree with me) "Isn't there some way they could make a CD so it's uncopyable?" he asked. I explained to him as long as there was some sort of digital, to a speaker coil coversion, the RIAA will never be able to stamp out piracy.

    "Well who the fuck would want to download a shitty copy of a song then!" he chirped.

    "The same fucks that would bring a camera into AOTC's, compress it to mpeg and share it over kazaa" I replied.

    Stumped, he went back to his first question. After repeating that there had to be some way of doing it 3 times I answered..

    "Yeah, if they could convince everyone to replace their ears with DRM enabled digital implants, then yeah the RIAA has a chance"

    Well, he got the point after that. So he moved onto "How do you stamp out P2P?"

    I put it into another analogy for him. Napster with it's central peer topology is much like a football team with 1 quarterback. You sack the quarterback.. You sack the network.

    "So the RIAA can just sack kazaa right?"

    "No, Kazaa would be the equivelent of every player on the team being both QB and reciever"

    See, our zine stays alive by record lables having the money to buy adspace from us. If the record lables are losing money from P2P it affects us because they've yet to evolve to the net.

    "What should they do?"

    Personally, I think the record lables should ditch CD production altogether now. They should make songs freely downloadable. Fuck it, cut their losses.

    But rather than look at it like a loss, the record industry should take a Las Vegas approach to it. Just use the music as a "comp" to milk money out of people in other ways.

    For instance, that $50 dollar green day ticket, fuck it, if people won't buy the albums anymore, double it. I think people wouldn't care if they had to pay more for live performances. I'm biased because I do get in for free, and don't have any money to pay for tickets anyways. I'm 30 years old in feburary and am perfectly content to staying at home.

    The market is really for 14-25 year olds. Those are the people with expendable cash. They live at home, don't have a mortgage, and can afford $100 bucks to see a live performance. With the rate of inflation over the last 10 years, $100 doesn't really seem like a lot to me to see a big headliner band if I had no financial obligations.

    I'm the oldest of 6, my youngest siblings are more at home in the computer enviroment than I ever was at their age. The RIAA doesn't realize this yet, but their biggest age group has a huge understanding of internet distribution, and they will never be able to beat it. That's just an unfortunate fact about it.

    So to recap the RIAA should...

    Cut back CD production,
    Raise the price of live performances
    Focus on promotion more than CD distribution.

    Well, it's 3:30, and after a night of bouncing 300lb pac islanders from my karaoke bar, I need some sleep. Slash you in the morning and I hope your friday was as fun as mine.

    --Toq

  170. Excluding yourself from the settlement by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What possible reason would I have to exclude myself from the settlement?

    I could understand if this was about defective pharmaceuticals, or asbestos, or environmental pollution, or something else where I might be seriously injured and might want to reserve the right to sue for a lot of money.

    But seriously, are you planning to launch a private lawsuit against the entire recording industry? Unless litigation is your hobby, or you don't mind spending hundreds of thousands of dollars in legal fees on a whim, it doesn't seem like a practical alternative to me.

  171. CrimeStoppers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you're unwilling to give them your name and address, how precisely do you wish for them to send you the $$$?

    Ha, that reminds me of those "anonymous" tip lines that police departments advertise to encourage witnesses to call in information about a crime. Most of them offer a reward.

  172. Is anyone going to object? by thogard · · Score: 2

    If your in the area where the court hosue is, you can go to the court and claim the $20 is way too low and you should be getting closer to $10 per CD. with typical fines for this sort of thing, the fines should be closer to the entire price of the CD but no point aruging that.

    So you can send in your form and get your $20 back unless someone starts a chain mail thing of "click here and get $20" in which case the amount might be lower. If the amount goes below $5 then no one gets anything and the money goes to the RIAA's home for boy band want to bes or some other charity they like.

    If someone is going to the court house to object in person, let me know because I'm willing to risk the loosing my $20 if there is the slightest chance the court will increase the award. Fair is fair and if the company did illegal things that will cause them to ceas to exist, then thats the way it should be.

  173. Re:No thanks RIAA,already gave at by plague3106 · · Score: 1

    Can't find what i want because what i said is not true in canada, but if you read this, i think you'll agree that blank cd-rs can hold far more then audio recordings, thus the logic from the same ruling that settled the question of the rios status can be applied to blank cdrs.

    Since cdrs can hold far more then just music (just like a hard drive can), they arent taxed (with the exception of audio cdrs, which are).

  174. WTF?! by Tuffnut · · Score: 1

    Fuck that shit! I bet you a god damn bag of money that those cocksucking lawyers haven't bought half has many CDs as the real fans have.

    Christ, the things people do to scam money these days, pisses me right off.

  175. Re:Get rich? by Brendan+Byrd · · Score: 2

    Good. You shouldn't be able to get rich. Why try to rip off millions of people of their hard-earned cash, just because you feel greedy? If you're thinking about getting rich, try living in the US and see how it feels to to be poor, while the CEO is making $2 million a year.

    And I find this funny to find this in a thread about the RIAA ripping off millions of people in price-fixing.

  176. quick response- more coming later by mekkab · · Score: 2

    I must apologize. I'm running out of time for research for this but I don't want to leave you hanging.

    In terms of the bubble just bursting this year (your retort was that the tech bubble burst in 2000) I read an article in the ABA student Lawyer magazine in 2002 about the Law bubble bursting. I'll find the source.

    Lawyers fresh out of school can specialize in three ways:
    1) previous legal assitant/clerkship experience
    2) specialized classes in law school (not all the curriculum is mandatory)
    3) Summer Associate positions with lawfirms during law school.

    My wife has specialized via all three. As such, when she graduates in May she will go on to do Investment company management work.

    the source for highly paid corporate lawyer's 80+ hours per week is from my initial Cornell link and a function of their need to acheive 2000 billable hours. Since the time you spend in meetings not with a client, having a coffee break, going to conferences, doing research projects for partners don't count as billable hours, it is much more likely that a lawyer will put in 3000+ the figure the cornell link gave was 12 hours a day 6-7 days a week.

    I would like to further support that with the fact that the burnout rate amongst lawyers is statistically higher- their rates for drugs, alcohol abuse, gambling, divorce, etc. are appreciably above "normal" trends. My wife got this statistic when she started law school; I don't know if it was in their student handbook or some additional supplemental material, but I'll find it.

    So this is the direction I'm going in, I just need some time to collect my sources!

    P.S.- in my understanding of colloquial american english, college and uni are more geared towards undergrad. Anything beyond would be graduate school.

    --
    In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
    1. Re:quick response- more coming later by alexo · · Score: 1

      mekkab,

      We're getting more and more off topic here. I understand your position (even if I may disagree with some of your numbers.)

      Getting back to the source of the argument, I still maintain that when a lawyer or a law firm reaps an 8-figure sum in commissions on a high-profile case, they didn't "work hard to earn that money" in the sense that their work/profit ratio was negligible.

      It is a problem in the American legal system that justice comes with a high price tag.

      Over and out.

    2. Re:quick response- more coming later by mekkab · · Score: 2

      ack! you're correct! Let's get back on track, however I'll have to change my re-search angle! ;)

      In THIS case, where you have class-action lawyers who, for lack of a better image, leap from class action suit to class action suit and only get paid on contingency; though they may get paid quite handsomely from the settlement there are two issues I'd like to bring up:

      1) its feast or famine. That book "A Class Action" (turned into a movie starring John Travolta) is a real life story about one such lawyer losing his shirt.

      2)The consumer who has been slighted has two options: to sue on their own (and pay their own lawyers- there is no double jeopardy in civil suits) or to tag along with these class action suits. For some, this is the only protection/legal remedy they can afford.

      In that sense, it may not be enough justice in your eyes, but it is justice that the consumer doesn't have to directly pay for OR has already paid for (in the case of CD price fixing)- but that money is gone, anyway! Especially in the case of a luxury item like a cd.

      If it was the price of food and basic shelter we were arguing, I'd have to side with you.

      But short of defending yourself "pro se", class actions are the most realistically equitable way to go.

      --
      In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
  177. Re:Vote KDE! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0