Slashdot Mirror
EMI and Sony Lose Lawsuit Over Crippled Music Disks
neves writes "A brazilian consumer has sued EMI and Sony, and won! The reason was a copy protection technology in the best seller album "Tribalistas" that didn't play in his car. You can read about it in Folha de São Paulo (babelfish translation here), brazilian biggest newspaper. They must be very afraid, since EMI vice-president defended the company himself in a lawsuit involving less than US$ 350,00. A more detailed report is in my music site Agenda do Samba & Choro (babelfish here), where we release some of the lawsuit files to make it easier for others to sue them. Since last year, we are calling for a boycott (babelfish) of copy protected albums. The companies appealed, and said that they will take the case to the Supreme Court, because it is a 'question of principles'. The consumer is sueing them again, because all new EMI albums in Brazil are being released with copy protection and won't work in his car."
Yeah, but if selling these defective CDs becomes illegal in Brazil, USians could always import all their music from there if they want to be guaranteed error-free CDs.
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
Thank God someone had the initiative to actually do something about this! My only contribution has been to vote with my wallet, not purchasing any music that comes in a crippled format and encourage others to do the same. As much as I hate the "just sue them" philosophy, it seems to have worked in this case. Perhaps the time has come for us to vote with our lawyers rather than our wallets.
I hope it does go to the supreme court so we can get rid of these CDs that infringe on my rights.
I would be interested in knowing as to what the logical reasoning and the legal framework of the case was.
Was the winning based on something substantial, or could it be just overcome by the CD producer putting up a disclaimer sticker on the CD saying the "this might not work on certain devices." Basically the intention is to understand the depth of the victory.
Could somebody help with some links or any more info??
To see a world in a grain of sand, and then to step back and see the beach where the sand lies
I said it before, and I'll say it again - there's nothing wrong with copy-protected CDs - as long as they're clearly labeled as such. Label them and let the consumers decide, I say. Cases like this should really fall under false-advertising precedents.
c-hack.com |
Well you have to remember
When the consumer sues its Extortion.
When the RIAA sues its protecting your property rights
I went along to a show last week, where the artist was performing songs off his latest, copy-protected CD. After the show, there was a stall selling his CDs at the back, so went back to check it out.
Sure enough, out he came to sign copies of his CD for those who were going to buy a copy. I worked my way to the front with a copy of his CD in hand, and handed it over. I pointed out the copy protection notice, then said "although I really liked your show and your new stuff, I'm not going to buy a copy of your CD since I can't play it on my PC or in my car".
He looked a bit shocked, and asked what I was talking about. I said that the copy protection would prevent me from playing the CD on my PC or in my car, and that since that was where I listen to music 99% of the time, his CD wouldn't be much use to me. I handed him one of my business cards and told him to call me if he wanted to talk about it further - there was a bunch of people behind me waiting for their CDs to be signed...
I got the impression that he either didn't know his CD was released copy protected, that he wasn't sure what copy protection actually meant for a CD, or that he was surprised that someone like me (a 40 year old, normal looking guy, not an obviously raving half-wit) would confront him with something like this after his show.
I also got the impression that he was going to look into it further - he's a 40ish guy also, with a fairly niche appeal and presumably wife/kids/mortgage etc. like the rest of us. He probably didn't like hearing a fan tell him people couldn't play his music in the car or at their PC.
I'll check out his CD in the stores again in another month or so to see if it's had the copy protection removed.
It seems to be the developing countries that "get it" and make legislative and legal decisions which are in the interests of the public at large, as opposed to multinational cartels. What we really need is for many such countries to pull together and speak with one voice when it comes to international trade. Our system will only be fixed when you get a lot of people really pissed off. If the RIAA runs around suing college kids for astronomical sums of money, and enough people get stuck with CDs that won't play, then it will raise the visibility level enough to get this on the front burner.
I am strongly in favour of globalization, but it must be done with the interests of the public, instead of large vested interests. That means doing away with crap such as region coded DVDs and damaging tariffs. I should be able to travel whatever products I choose from anywhere I want, excepting only really offensive stuff like narcotics and weaponry.
My rights don't need management.