Slashdot Mirror
Apple and Pepsi Ad Sports RIAA Targets
eefsee writes "USA Today is running a story about Pepsi's Superbowl ad for their iTunes promotion. The ad will apparently feature teens sued by the RIAA, including one young woman who holds out a Pepsi and says, 'We are still going to download music for free off the Internet.' The RIAA response? 'This ad shows how everything has changed.'"
That's a great lesson to teach. Download music, get caught, get famous in a Super Bowl ad. What a bleak and horrible future we live in.
A programmer is a machine for converting coffee into code.
Corporate forces taking aim at the RIAA shows that the RIAA's business model is failing, and no amount of lawsuits, subpoenas, and para-military crap is going to stop it.
Either the RIAA can join in and make money, or they can sit back and hopelessly try to defend an oppressive business model that has been rendered technologically obsolete.
Gifts for Geeks - Stuff that really matters!
Seriously, I noticed last year that if I hit my 30 second skip right when a play ended, it would usually take me right to the snap for the next play. With the 30 seconds of downtime between plays gone, football was actually kind of interesting!
Mitch Bainwol, RIAA chairman says ",Legal downloading is great because fans are supporting the future of creative work in America."
We need to have a 'present' first.
Join moola.com, play games to earn money.
unfortunately taking a jab at the RIAA like this will do absolutely nothing. It will take more than a commercial make fun of them to make them stop this witch hunt.
As the RIAA responds "this is the way it is supposed to be" they will probably be filling out the next batch of legal filings accusing more senior citizens of stealing songs. The worst part of all this is that here they are making money off legal downloads while they attack people like rabid dogs trying to make more money.
No trees were harmed in the composition of this; however, numerous electrons were inconvenienced.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Ah yes, the good life.. Drinking Pepsi and stealing from those poor record companies. Back in my day we only have Coke and we had to bootleg eight tracks..
Isn't it strange to hear quotes from people at the RIAA that don't sound stupid? They could rant and sue, but instead they calmly compliment the ad. Something has clearly changed in that organization. I won't go so far as to say they're not evil, but they almost seem less evil than before.
You'll probably be able to watch it on Apple's website the following day
My body will have to adjust to getting 4x the amount of caffeine it is used to during the next couple of months.
yeah they were downloading and whatever, but they are not bootleggers out there selling copies. they are just kids. the article said a few of the kids said they will use some of the money they get to pay their $3000 settlement.
...is make me continue to buy new CDs.
Screw that. From now on, I am only buying used.
I am still not going to drink Pepsi.
Some 20 teens sued by the Recording Industry Association of America, which accuses them of unauthorized downloads
The entire article is wrong. They were busted for being uploaders (sharers) of music, not downloaders. In fact, it is perfectly legal to download music off the internet. It is against copyright law to share it, which is what they were doing.
So, I guess Darl McBride opened that PR school after all.
The bigotry of the nonbeliever is for me nearly as funny as the bigotry of the believer. - Albert Einstein
The ad's line "We're still going to download music for free" is in regards to the iTunes give-away. i.e., those who earn the points/prizes from Pepsi's promotion get to grab a limited number of songs off iTunes for free, with Pepsi footing the bill paying the artists/labels.
I can't imagine how the RIAA/MPAA think that they have truly changed a culture. Most people that I have talked to still download music, movies and television shows, but they do it in a more anonymous way than what can be readily tracked by outside agencies. If you give someone a burned DVD of all your MP3's, no one can track you. As far as apple and pepsi, I think that they are fairly immune to what the RIAA and MPAA think. The whole target audience that they are trying to reach are young people with lots of idle time and loose morals. The same people who have been trading music and thumbing their noses at the respectives AA's.
If I could get a firm grip on reality, I'd choke it...
Learn your values from megacorps, they know better than you! They never diverge from the moral high road, and are utterly devoid of corruption. Racketeering, denial of civil rights, litigation, employee shafting, price fixing are all available. Which value do we get to see megacorps teach our children next?
Great. That is somehow not the least bit controversial for CBS, but they refuse to broadcast MoveOn.org Voter Fund's winning Bush in 30 Seconds Ad. While I support the freedom to do what you want with your own music, the double standard at Viacom is sickening. If controversy moves product, show it. If it informs political debate, can it. It makes me sad. Very, very sad.
Back in the day... we only had EIGHT SONGS to listen to. AND WE LIKED IT!
....move along....nothing to see here....
who along with her older sister and younger brother downloaded 950 songs over three years.
That is laughable... An average geek downloads that much stuff in 2-3 months.
...the RIAA is all in favor of the spot. They still get their royalty money for the 100 million "free" downloads.
...during the superbowl, I will be wirelessly offering 300 gigs of Mp3s (that weren't from p2p networks) outside of my house. The wep key passphrase? "We are still going to download music for free off the Internet."
FLR
Mr. O'Connor, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
How are you going to keep them down on the farm once they've seen Karl Hungus?
I think you have this wrong! We still live in the bleak and horrible past where most of the music the world has made is stuffed in vaults. Where most of the money which is used to buy music goes to the management. Sort of like directing cigarette advertising towards kids, and then telling them they can't smoke! Who exactly is wrong here?
Whats the Superbowl???
Getting into a fight on the Internet is like winning 1st place in the Special Olypics, when its all over your still reta
5 years ago, someone giled a lawsuit over the pepsi points/harrier jet ad.
A couple weeks ago, a suit was trown out (because it was filed after the statute of limitations) when a boy died after swallowing a pin used to "shotgun" a soda.
No word yet if anyone has been killed trying to drink pepsi one while sky-diving.
Do you even lift?
These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.
That there will be no more Britney Spears commercials? Noooo!!!
Posted AC to avoid bodily harm...
Fuck them. Once again, it's not theft. It's copyright infringement. Fuck them.
Oh great! I use to love stealing music but if Pepsi likes it then it just ain't cool no more. At least I still have smoking *cough* *cough* You stay the hell away from that Pepsi!
***Holding my lottery ticket up***
Prof. Farnsworth - "Oh a lesson in not changing history from Mr I'm-My-Own-Grandpa!"
scary part is... someone's THIS excited about a TV commertial. C'mon guys, they're just ads. Yeah, it's kinda amusing to get sued kids to pimp the iTunes store, but really, it's a big "see? I learned what I did was wrong and now I BUY my music" message. RIAA are likely overjoyed.
I'll wait till the commercial is on Kazaa, then I'll get it and watch it:)
Regards,
Steve
But of course, that would involve sticking to principles, and that's hard!
"Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
Please Sign this petition to have the commercial aired during the Super Bowl.
Win a signed Stephen Carpenter ESP Guitar from the Deftones: http://def-tag.com/?r=0008781
Interesting that this promotion is precisely the business model that radio has been for all these years...
So, when this ends and downloads slow down, will Fritos, KFC, etc. be the next to give away music downloads? And how long do you think it will take until all music downloads are sponsored by advertising dollars?
Just my $.02
An ounce of perception is worth a pound of obscure
is here now. It's just not evenly distributed."
---anactofgod---
---anactofgod---
"Equal opportunity swindling - *that* is the true test of a sustainable democracy."
The radio stations in my town (Orlando, FL) call pretty much all their promotional CD giveaways "Win it before you can burn it" or a similar reference to downloading music online. One of the rock stations even played a promo for awhile that basically poked fun at "little Billy" for downloading music off the internet and while they didn't say it directly, prison rape was implied with a soap dropping reference. If this promo was run as a Slashdot post, it would have been modded down as troll.
Let's face it, while an ad during the Superbowl seems like a big deal to us geeks, people ALREADY know about teens being busted by the RIAA. While the buzz has definitly gotten around to non-techie people, people just aren't getting worked up over this enough to actually do anything about it.
As much as it's considered taboo to say "downloading music is stealing" on Slashdot, that's what many people who do not download music see it as - teens getting sued by the RIAA for stealing music. It really doesn't tug on your heartstrings when that's what you see it as. You gotta remember, the average person who doesn't use P2P services probably does not understand the chances for the wrong people getting accused by the RIAA. They don't realize the RIAA is basically extorting people for absurd amounts of money to settle or face civil prosecution and all the costs associated with it. They don't realize the RIAA is abusing its monopoly and rips off its artists. All people see are teens stealing music.
I see something much more sinister in the Pepsi commercial. I see the RIAA getting its way for $1 a track. I see once insubordinate teens that have been "shown the light" by becoming corporate whores and bowing to the RIAA's will. It only took Apple 20 years to be associated with a superbowl commercial totally opposite of their 1984 vision. This time, big brother wins.
It's a good thing I drink coke.
---
DRM is like antifreeze, to the MPAA/RIAA it's sweet, to the consumers it's poison.
yeah . . . wave one hand in the air to take attention away from what the other is doing.
.
this ad, while ostensibly taking a shot at the RIAA, is actually helping them. It points out that these kids were sued for one, reminding a lot of people that the threat still exists. It makes i-tunes a very attractive alternative. The more popular i-tunes is, the less popular p2p necessarily becomes.
and does the RIAA make money from songs sold on i-tunes?
Um, you know, i think they do . .
so if you were thinking of screaming 'TAKE THAT RIAA! HELLS YEAH PEPSI!", maybe you should take a moment to consider that pepsi is probably just using your anti-RIAA sympathies to leverage its brand.
*disclaimer - i personally think i-tunes rocks. pay for your music . . . just don't buy RIAA.
** Chigusaaa!!! You're the coolest girl in the WORLD!!! **
but my question is this: Do you think Apple is really charging Pepsi 99 cents per track, or do you think they got a volume discount? I would like to think that Pepsi got a smokin' deal on however many tracks they purchased to giveaway, meaning that the RIAA isn't making as much money off of the Pepsi tracks as it would if they were all independently purchased...
Isn't it interesting how you come to recognize posters based solely on their sigs???
Pepsi? Who cares? I just love the beer commercials.
http://tomgould.com/
Whats the Superbowl???
You obviously have slashdot confused with google.
I was all ready to go and buy pepsi instead of coke, and then i got half way down the article and read "iTunes giveaway" - i thought for a minute they were trying to target young people saying "hey, we got sued, we dont give a fuck and neither should you! screw the RIAA, download music for free, and drink pepsi to the max" which would have been a great ad. Now i realise all they're doing is promoting some iTunes thing, big deal.
You can do _very_ well advertising to the younger end of the spectrum (0-30) with bad-taste advertising, the more complaints you get and advertising standards violations you make the better! I would have put that 12 year old and the 70 year old together and got them to say "fuck you RIAA!" and the next day i might have 5000 complaints and 3 subpoenas from the RIAA, but im telling you - everyone would be buying my product.
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
A simple no would have sufficed...
"This ad shows how everything has changed," says Mitch Bainwol, RIAA chairman. "Legal downloading is great because fans are supporting the future of creative work in America."
"RIAA has filed 914 lawsuits since it began cracking down in September, including 532 this week."
Mitch, if things have changed, why are you still filing lawsuits? The truth is as long as a product's price is artificially inflated, there will be a black market for that product. You guys never learn, you were celebrating after shutting down napster, but what happened? 5 more popped up in it's place. Shutdown Kazaa, what's going to happen? People will move to tools like soulseek and newsgroups.
If you simply provided a high quality product at a fair price over the internet, then piracy would be reduced to 10% of what it is today. Instead you provide low quality audio recordings with what you call Digital Rights Managemet (Consumers should call this what it is, Digital Restrictions Management, because who's rights is it managing?), at the same price you charge for a physical product.
I hope you don't learn your lesson. I hope more and more artists will see the light, and manage there own distribution chanels with the internet. The world would be a better place without the RIAA. Music survived before you, and it will live on after you're gone. Good riddens!
Sorry, for picking you from among the many who are echoing such sentiments, but how is this "less evil than before"? As far as I can tell (not having yet seen the ad and given the article's details), the former defendants will be on the tube, hats in hand, promoting a pay service to obtain files over the Internet. Furthermore, the AAC files Apple sells on the iTMS are DRM'ed. This is everything the RIAA could have hoped for: former P2P'ers nodding to the beat of paying for their downloads.
Also keep in mind that members of the RIAA get a take of money earned by the iTMS if those tracks are copyrighted by RIAA-affiliated labels, and many are.
Don't get me wrong. I think iTMS is great (I'm a Mac head from way back who loves UNIX) and have maybe a couple dozen songs with the "m4p" extension. I also used Napster maybe a dozen times and hated the RIAA's campaign to destroy one of the best databases the world has ever known. But with the exception of profiting from digital music distribution, I don't see how the RIAA has changed at all.
blog
Bainwol had worked closely with then-National Republican Senatorial Committee (NRSC) Chairman Frist during the 2002 campaign cycle while serving as Executive Director of the NRSC.
With an undergraduate degree from Georgetown University and an M.B.A. from Rice University, Bainwol began his career as a budget analyst in President Ronald Reagan's Office of Management and Budget (OMB). He went on to become a U.S. Senate leadership staff director from 1993-97, chief of staff of the Republican National Committee in 1998, and then a top lobbyist for the management consulting firm Clark and Weinstock in 1999.
During his career, he has managed two successful statewide campaigns and advised on numerous others. Before forming The Bainwol Group in 2002, he also served as chief of staff for U.S. Senator Connie Mack (R-FL) for nine years (1989-1997). Mack praised Bainwol's "ability to manage an organization, fully appreciate all the nuances of issues, and grasp in a very short period of time the essence of a debate."
An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
Downloading is not what got any of these people in trouble. Sharing -- making the songs available for download -- got them in trouble. They cannot tell what individuals downloaded. They can tell what individuals made available for download and confirm it by downloading it!
If you want to know why the RIAA is hip to this, just think a moment. It blurs the activity. Illegal downloading is now the problem in the public's mind. By saying they litigated on the demand side rather than the supply side, they make people worry about whether the downloads can be tracked.
I respect that the RIAA needs to enforce the publishing rights of its members. Given how creepy most people think the RIAA is, I don't see why the reinforce the perception by perpetuating a lie.
This ad shows how everything has changed.
That isn't just spin, my friend. That is spaghettification.
who are those slashdot people? they swept over like Mongol-Tartars.
featuring CEO's who have been sued by SCO?
S
50 cent didn't get my 15 dollars, I downloaded his cd free on the internet. Now I'm 50k in debt.
Why shouldn't they compliment the ad? The RIAA wants the money they (and their component labels) get when you buy a CD. Since (as many others have noted) they also get a cut of the cost of a track downloaded through legal music services on the Internet (and have probably set their fee to divide out to the same amount per song), the RIAA has no reason to discourage downloads from which they get their appropriate payment (and the control they assert in what is offered).
RIAA labels still have preferential access to music on radio, they still control their supply chain, and they're getting paid. What's even better is that the while the ad might portray Apple as standing up to the RIAA, Apple (and its customers) are paying them for the music all the same. It's like beer ads that preach mass-market nonconformity as a panacea for conformity - it allows people to feel that they're hurting the RIAA by buying iTunes while giving RIAA precisely what it wants from them (control over music choice, and money).
The RIAA should be cheering - they negate some of their opposition and get paid if they just sit back and shut up. They haven't changed - they still want control over aspects of music they have already shown they can't be trusted with. They're just smarter about it.
For a while now, I've not bought any RIAA CDs (actually almost 4 now). However, my CD spending is ridiculous (CDBaby addict, other independent CD sellers.... getting thank you notes from indie artists whose CDs you've purchased is kinda neat)... but they (==RIAA) will NEVER get a single penny from me again. I've even sold off all the 250+ CDs I purchased in my middle and high school heyday of insanity. I am a Pepsi/Mountain Dew drinker over Coke. BUT... since the money I'd be paying for a soda is now going in part to RIAA artists through itunes... I will not be buying sodas from Pepsi at least for the duration of this promotion. So it's a drop in the bucket, my moral adherence to this, and spreading the word. And some of you may laugh about it.... but I can't justify sponsoring their reign of terror, or any corporations who do (Pepsi paying for RIAA artist iTunes). Just a personal thing, mod me insane. *shrug* I don't know what my point even was... it just bothers me.
Technically, the RIAA doesn't produce anything. They are an association that the record labels belong to, and they are the ones who produce things. All the RIAA does is....
Hmm, what the hell do they do? Let's see:
See? They don't produce a damn thing. So why are they necessary? Anyone? They aren't. They simply control the music industry through shady deals, legislation, purchasing of politicians, and strongarm tactics. They are the only game in town, they said so themselves.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
...at the very least some of the people sued by the RIAA are going to recoup the costs of their settlements with the RIAA by getting paid for the commercial. I think it makes a huge statement about the RIAA. Being that the add will air during the super bowl, anyone who's firmilliar with the RIAA nazi tactics are going to get the message.
Seems like the RIAA are the only ones that aren't getting the message to me.
-- Is it a right to remain ignorant? -- Calvin
So one big group of companies sues these people, then another big company (oppressive regimes, experimenting on animals) uses these people in an advert for sugar-water.
Just what does it take for people to stop liking big companies?
"This ad shows how everything has changed," says Mitch Bainwol, RIAA chairman. "Legal downloading is great because fans are supporting the future of creative work in America." (emphasis mine)
That's right, Mr. Bainwol. Fans support the artists. Not the RIAA. The fans.
I have discovered many bands that I like a lot because a friend sent me an MP3. I don't think that any performer out there (okay, unless you're a member of Metallica) would complain about losing that $.02 in royalties, if it meant another person buying the CDs and attending the concerts. Which is exactly what I do, but I'm not buying crap from the latest over-hyped bubblegum act, either.
Either way, the RIAA loses.
And that's just fine with Y.T.
Addendum: I'm not exactly pleased with the whole 'wink-n-nod' attitude that the commercial apparently displays, either. Instead of bringing attention to the issue of a private organization taking legal enforcement powers unto itself, I see large corporations engaged in a mutual luv-a-thon. And there's a perverse logic to the whole thing: turn it into a joke, and people will quit whining.
At least until Grandma faces a $1.5 million dollar lawsuit for her supposed obsession with the musical stylings of Ol' Dirty Bastard.
Doing my level best to piss off the religious right wing...
2. Corporations use the lawsuits and sued kids to further "educate" the masses, and promote a contest.
3. The first person pointed out the BIGGEST problem with the story after 200 odd posts.
4. News articles about the incident don't seem to particularly detest the fact that 12+ year old kids were sued, and are going to end up paying some money for settlements.
Something is wrong here...people don't happen to mind their *or their kids'* freedoms abused by corporate entitities.
An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
Apple gets 35 cents per song, but they must pay for the servers, services, programming, and maybe even part of the cost of encoding the songs.
It's not completely clear from the article what actually happens here, but it seems like an interesting business model for the music industry: tie music downloads in with products. Could this reduce music down to the level of a cereal box toy? (For example, enter the product code into a website and get a specific song downloaded)? This seems to be a valuable promotional tool for artists (at least the ones the music industry wants to promote) and business alike.
Do you think Apple is really charging Pepsi 99 cents per track
Yes. Here's an unrelated anecdote that explains why I think that. One day (quite a long time ago), Conan O'Brian mentioned on his show that they have to pay the movie studio in order to show the short movie teasers that an actor brings with him. The MPAA are very defensive about their copyrights. Even if they have some movie clip that isn't worth anything anymore, they'd rather it not be seen that for someone to see it for free. I don't doubt the RIAA is the same way. Note that this is also the reason lots of old movies will eventually go extinct. Even though there's a large enough fan base out there to have a grassroots effort to restore old movies, it'll never happen.
Yes, I know they updated the ad with an iPod, but....
Have the Blonde being chased by RIAA police while the drones watch the latest RIAA anti-piracy ad on the big screen. Have Blonde throw the sledgehammer into the screen, etc etc.
Mod Karma -1: I sed bad wurds. If I cep my mouf shut, I wud be at riyses.
'cause that post looks like something an 8 year-old would produce.
Blar.
Since when was the RIAA "the Law" Oh yeah, when they decided that they could chase down 12 yr olds. Has the RIAA even filed a "criminal" suit or have all their efforts just been civil suits?
Still good to show actions/consequences (as pointed out before, download music, get in a SB ad)
"Look Lois, the two symbols of the Republican Party: an elephant, and a fat white guy who is threatened by change."
For that 85%, we can guarantee that you will be able to record, find distribution, people willing to work with you, and we won't break your legs! Thanks!
"it used to be called payola, now it's music marketing!"
Pepsi is all about stickin it to 'da man'
Manipulate the moderator system! Mod someone as "overrated" today.
I love foosball btw... even tho it's of da devil!
--Keeping the flame wars alive, one post at a time
I am a recent football fan, and I strongly agree with everything in the parent to my post.
/. for a few minutes before the game, just check out the rules and try to get a general idea of what's happening.
For a long time I was very anti-football. I saw it as a sport for idiot jocks that gets them billions of dollars a year. But then I was living with some rabid football fans for awhile, and I started watching.
Now, I'm hooked. Much like a turn based strategy game, if you don't know what's going on it's boring as hell (imagine watching a game of Civ with no clue whatsoever?). But once you know *why* there's pass interference, or false start, or the difference between an incidental face mask and one that's a personal foul, it becomes engrossing. Hell, I went out and bought the complete rules to football once I really started getting in to it. It's cool to be able to call out a penalty and then see the refs call it after you saw it.
Also, try to understand the different types of defense that are going on (e.g., zone (where you cover the ball / offensive players in an area) vs. man (where you cover a particular offensive player), and the blitz (where you send guys out of zone or man coverage to get the quarterback) ). Defensive stragety is *quite* interesting and fun, not to mention with a large element of psychology thrown in.
If you're going to be watching the super bowl anyway (for the ads) you might as well try to figure out what's going on. Instead of reading
In the end, I'm convinced that the reasons geeks hate football is because we got beat up by the football players in high school.
This isn't a "shot" at the RIAA. Apple knows perfectly well that they're supporting the RIAA just as much as CD makers are. This is false advertising.
It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
- E. Debs
So, once again: The RIAA members screw their artists at every turn.
Me, I only buy used or direct from the artist these days.
Mail? Put "slashdot" in the subject to pass the spam filters.
Bit like th FA cup final except the viloence is on the pitch and not in the stands.
Ironically, after committing an hour of your life debating this ad on slashdot, it has gained an infamous reputation amongst us, and when you see it during the superbowl, your gonna remember the controversy - then, and now. And when someone yells to you if you want a drink from the store you're gonna ask for a PEPSI. Remeber to stick with beer... or You lose.
[Please sign here]
1. Download music illegally
2. Get sued by RIAA, loose $3000
3. Star in Superbowl ad
4. PROFIT!!!1
Well damn. Looks like a pretty good deal to me! *Loads Kazaa*
The RIAA says to iTunes: either you only sell music that's produced through us, or you don't get ANY of the music produced through us.
~Berj
Steve Jobs recently gave an interesting interview about the music industry.
He noted that for every 10 high potential artist a major label promotes, only 1 makes it. Typically, it costs a large label around 1 million to promote, pay, and produce a single artist (I once worked for a label, I can confirm this).
So this means, it cost about 10 million dollars to find one needle in a haystack. Those artist who do "make it" have to, essentially, pay for the giant losses made by the 9 other artists who didn't make it.
According to Jobs, the record industry is a fairly shitty business.
"Things are more moderner than before- bigger, and yet smaller- it's computers-- San Dimas High School football RULES!"
You spelled TANSTAAFL wrong.
"I'm not impatient. I just hate waiting." - My Dad
how is it false advertising? PEPSI, not apple, is advertising free music downloads for the end user. these teens saying they're going to download music for free isn't false, it's a clever way of spinning what pepsi is promoting. the spot doesn't make any claim that is false or can be disproved. please get your terminology straight.
if the ad actually said: "hey, buy music from us and we guarantee that the riaa will never get a cent from the sale" then it would be false advertising.
If I get a loan from a bank to buy a house or a car, and I pay the loan back on time and in good faith, the bank doesn't keep my house or car. Not during the payback period and not after.
Now if I'm PAID to make a house or car, I don't get to keep the house or car I made.
If I don't like my employer, there are plenty of other cats to go to. The RIAA is a monopoly of the available employers for a particular industry. Smaller employers (indie labels) have a hard time breaking in.
"Love heals scars love left." -- Henry Rollins
I've never done a drug in my life, but even I was appalled about the Marijuana commercials telling me that pot funds terrorism.
Drinking Pepsi does not mean I'll download music illegally. I don't even listen to it legally on the radio, why would I spend time downloading it on the internet.
I like the good old days of commercials, where beer bottles would battle for supremecy on the gridiron. Thank jebus that at least A-B are bringing that one back for me.
I really hate Dan Patrick.
I'm surprised the RIAA response was so low-key.
Won't we see a thousand dumb kids reenable sharing in misguided attempts to garner fame and fortune by appearing in a Pepsi iTMS add...?
Never trust a man in a blue trench coat, Never drive a car when you're dead
Damn grammacronym nazi... :)
That isn't the lesson that I take away from this. This is the fans finally telling the recording industry what the artist have wanted to tell them for a long time. To put it politely, "Goodbye."
People want the convenience of downloading music. They want it on demand. And thanks to the net, there is no reason that it can't be provided that way. RIAA was scared. They know that the main hold they have on artists is their promotional muscle and distribution chain. Well if artists can get their stuff to fans on the net and make themselves known there, what do they need a record company for? Artists have hated the recording industry's contracts for a very long time.
RIAA didn't want music downloads to happen. Instead, they've dragged their feet too long. Now the fans have somewhere else to go. And all the indie record companies who are willing to deal with the artists on a more even basis should have no problem stealing them away from RIAA's members.
There are kids out there who were 12 when it was 1998, they saw the heyday of MP3s and the dot com boom in junior high school, they've almost graduated now and the RIAA is trying to tell them that what they've been doing on their computers for as long as they remember is illegal.
They're going to have a very hard time convincing these kids that CDs are worth money. You might as well be selling 8-tracks.
Wow, you're late today! What happened?
So the RIAA, in response, can run an ad showing kids ripping Pepsis off from a 7-11, saying "I still get my Pepsi for free"
Is this a great country or what?
As a musician, you are taking out a loan from a person whom you are working for, who reaps the benefits from your labor, and whom you pay back.
Sounds fair. To the employer.
The ______ Agenda
As long as you're talking about it not being free, don't forget you presumably have to pay for the bottle of Pepsi that bottle cap come off of.
Don't worry, man, you'll be living there tomorrow.
They've been telling me that for years, but somehow it's still the present...
1. Download pirated music from the Internet
2. Get sued by the RIAA
3. ???
4. Profit!
--
Will work for bandwidth.
Damn. She don't look 14.
Is anyone else planning on switching to Pepsi for the duration of the promotion for the sole purpose of iTunes songs? This is one tie-in that I actually care about (and will work on me).
...stuffed in vaults. Safes, fireproof boxes... most of what was available on vinyl, never made it to cd. most of what is recorded, was never thought to have "commercial" value in the mass production sense. So, I mean actually stuffed in vaults, decaying. Films also suffer the same fate. By the contracts the band itself signs you, of course, mean the only viable contract. As if there were an alternative. You, of course, mean the contract where the artist pays for the wining and dining necessary to get airplay. "Payola" is such an old term! They're now called "music marketers," the most influential of which is actually upstairs from my office.
In the bleak and horrible past, people made decisions for us.
This is what erks me about the Republicans. Though the Democrates are not any better (being more intergrated with the Entertainment industry than Republicans) still, the blanted disregard for individual rights diffeintly points to the system being broken. Neither side, (Dem or Repub) can do anything about it because BOTH sides are controled by special interests, (Corperations, control the Republicians, and the Entertainment industry controls the democrates) Sadly there is really nothing that any one can do to beat ethier side because of the TRAMENDOUS amount of money that BOTH sides have. The only way I see currently of restoring the peoples right is through revolution. **Runs away from Ashcrofts Gestapo Homeland Secruity**
The Independent: Reverend Spooner Arrested in Friar Tuck Incident - ISIHAC, Historical Headlines
Supporting legal music downloading is the dumbest thing the RIAA ever did. Why, you ask?
The RIAA currenly has a monopoly on physical distribution. No pirate could every touch them when it comes to their ability to crank out physical CD's. However, once they get the downloading in to the mainstream, (and I mean making it totally replace cds) they will have changed the market so that they are totally obsolete. The RIAA cannot survive in an online world...they are too big, too slow, and too hated.
Let's face it, when it comes to the internet, Geeks have a thousand times more resources for distributing information than the RIAA ever will. What's to stop new bands from using services like itunes to be promoted alongside RIAA bands, and then selling their own music over the net?
Anyways, here's to the RIAA! Thanks for helping to make a world where you are irrelevant!
But there is another kind of evil that we must fear most... and that is the indifference of good men.
Fair enough, but I'd argue that for most folks this is coming out of whatever "beverage budget" you already had. Instead of a Coke or an orange juice, you're buying a Pepsi.
It's also an economic multiplier -- "hey look, I'm getting a drink AND a song..." Or, "Hey, my drink/song costs less now..."
Yes, some outliers are going to buy litres of Pepsi, but I still think that most folks aren't actually going to drink more fluids as a result.
Exact opposite for me. I'll have to get used to Pepsi where there would usually be Jolt or Bawls. Luckily, I have a fresh caffeine candy supply from thinkgeek.
I used to get high on life, but I developed a tolerance. Now I need something stronger.
Yes, the 12 year old and 70 year old would be a great pair. I think they missed their mark though...to really make the point they could feature:
1) one of the millions who filed with the anti-trust suit in which the RIAA inflated CDS between 1995-2000. We're the victims here...
2) Prince or the Dixie Chicks explaining lawsuits around their unfair contracts with their record companies.
3) Howard Berman (Rep. Senator fighting P2P). I'd love to see Pepsi ask him about the 55 million in lobby money the RIAA spends a year.
4) Mitch Bainwol himself. I'd like to see them ask about the data posted on the RIAA site and have him explain in detail the "loss of sales" spreadsheet for last year. Apparently, the people who put together these figures assume you will buy several copies of the same CD for your car, your stereo, and your computer. It would be fun for him to watch him explain this while he's drinking a pepsi.
5) Interview someone from the CD-R division of any one of the Music companies and ask them why downloading music is wrong.
Come to my house on the 2nd and you're getting coke....
Speaking of the Bush deficit, 1 trillion dollars split 260 million ways is only about $4000. I don't know if that really warrents all the fuss. Besides once we're in an upturn economy again, we won't even need to raise taxes to make up the deficit. The government will just take in more money, like it did in the 90's. I hardly think that it would have been a good idea to raise taxes during an economic downturn to make up for the deficit. As my economics professor once said, "the last presidint who tried to balance the budjet during a recession was Hover". (that was at the beginning of the great depression)
If my (stock broker, hospital, retailer, manufacturer, spouse, etc.) is documented at only making good choices 10% of the time, then its time to re-think both the people involved and the process that supports such decisions. Or face failure.
Unfortunately, the existing record industry system (ie. monopoly) supports those high failure rates, also known as poor decisions, by overcharging the consumer. In a non-monopoly situation where the distribution channels are more open, the competitors making slightly better choices would promote the evolution of a better business model.
I would have liked to have provided an example, but I couldn't think of an industry/group that can survive with a 90% failure rate for its product choices (other than the government).
With 100M download codes, and the need to keep them short because they're
printed on bottle caps, how long until scripters start probing for music codes....
Damn pirates.
With all the talk about boycotting RIAA artists, MPAA movies, and other companies, its nice to see a company I can actually support without compromising my ideals.
That is true, but if we never repay our loans we essentially get "bad credit" for future loans (for example, people are less willing to buy bonds and so fourth...). Not that it's really an issue since the deficit is so small compared to how much the government takes in anyway.
Talk about reaping what you sow.
When you turn the industry into something about trendiness and glitz and everything except actual quality of product, this is what you get.
Of course, of the 10, all 10 are just glitz products, and the actual skilled musicians, pot-bellies and ugly faces and all, sit at home and release quality albums in batches of 1000 on independent labels. Or they play in small jazz clubs and such.
Now would be the time for the RIAA to make the switch and go all-out on internet-based distribution.
They could announce the switch by having some key managers speaking about why they think the internet is the future for the RIAA, with a white background, lots of changing camera shots, and with some dopey music playing.
You were so cool in that show. Did you really bang your secretary? That was so mod, as she was black. Did you ever go back?
... available here
[SIG] It's like putting a moose in the blender -- a recipe for disaster!
Support iTunes because it gives back to the artists.
No it doesn't. It gives those 8 cents to the RIGHTS HOLDERS. Until the musician pays off the enormous advance and other loans the record company gives them to sign and get a record going, the musician doesn't get jackshit. Until the record company gets paid back, they are the rights holder to the music and collect all the green stuff.
Furthermore, because the record companies are a bunch of theivbing bastards, they usually rig the books so they NEVER get paid back, and collect ALL the money made by the record, forever.
iTunes is lame. It will matter when ANYONE can sell music through it, and artists can bypass record companies altogether. As it is, it is just a shill for the record companies and the RIAA.
RS
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
Of course the DMCA was passed via a Republican congress and a Democratic president...
Great labels - let's also not forget Knitting Factory!
The music companies should advertise free pepsi at their concerts. Their advertising money would go to pepsi. Pepsi would give that money right back to the music company.
Much like presidential elections.
_nfotxn
FYI:Record labels like Warner Brothers, Sony, etc., sign mostly major Pop bands, and these are the RIAA's cash cow - hence the big push to preserve their profit. They sign bands like Britney Spears, Bryan Adams, and 99% of the Country drivel you might hear on the radio.
OTOH: There INDEPENDENT record labels that aren't part of some Multinational Conglomerate, that aspire to shed light on, and simultaneously elevate bands in certain genres. Some of these include SubPop, Matador, and so on. A little research should provide a healthy list of "indy" labels that are friendly to the "digital" segment of the population. Many even distribute in MP3 or other digital format. Warp records (Aphex Twin, Richard D. James, and Squarepusher just to name a few (one?) artists that *cater* to the notion that people want that control over their purchase.
Sometimes, these labels were the labels America's favorite bands start out on, and therefore release their best material with. Like mentioned about Nirvana. Soundgarden and Sonic Youth started there too. Along with most good "alternative" artists.
unless it states that the free music downloads are from iTunes and part of a 100M USD giveaway by Pepsi and Apple. A clever idea, to give songs away to create accounts and then when the giveaway is over, hopefully the people who created accounts will actually buy music at 99 cents per song.
:(
Pepsi and Apple are offering a free way to download music legally, as part of a promotion. Not telling people to use a file sharing app, but rather use iTunes.
A shame that iTunes only works with Windows 2000 and up. 98, 95, etc users are out of luck.
Remember, Slashdot does not have a -1 disagree moderation, and no, troll, flamebait, and overrated are not substitutes.
For those of you who don't recognize the artists either... ouch! I suggest you take some time to sample their music, TODAY (go ahead, hop on Soulseek and download a few tracks-- nearly all of the above artists won't mind). You may find that there is a world of great music that you haven't been exposed to; I did.
P.S.: Finding it odd that WARP wasn't mentioned among the other labels, I feared that the RIAA have a hold on them. Thanks to the RIAA Radar link in a sibling post, I now know they're "RIAA-safe". Be sure to check WARP Records out, too!
Oh, and, uhh... I was too lazy to hyperlink anything. May Google and/or /. karma-whores treat you well. :)
* - I, personally, haven't yet gotten a chance to listen to a significant amount of music from this artist. They're probably on my to-do list, though.
The Ad is avilable online at apple http://www.apple.com/hardware/ads/1984/
If you create the bits in question. You have the RIGHT to a monopoly on its distrubution. Fuck you.
All this coming from the company that brought us Mountain Dew? What better caffeinated beverage to sip upon while up in the wee hours of the night downloading free music. If only Jolt would follow in suit :-/
D.
Copyright infringement is theft.
No, its not, never has been, never will be. If I don't remove something, putting it in my possession and removing it from yours, there is no theft. Deal with it.
If you create the bits in question. You have the RIGHT to a monopoly on its distrubution.
Sure you do...thats why its called copyright, and violating that right is called copyright infringement. Still doesn't have anything to do with theft.
Some people have already gotten their hands on the iTunes promotional bottles of Pepsi. The code looks like it's 10 characters. Only letters are visible in this image of a cap.
~Philly
And then runs this Pepsi ad? Oh, wait, it's a corporate client so it's okay?! No anti-president shite on during the SuperBowl so we don't piss off the football fans (who, of course, are all dubya voters) by accident.
In case you missed it, CBS is refusing to run the bushin30seconds ad, "Child's Pay," during the Super Bowl.
Watch the ad and see if you think it's funny or worthy enough to be seen during the SuperBowl.
I found it and several of the otehrs hilarious. Especially the Mac Desktop ad.
Your complaints about being offended offend me.
Well, you obviously don't live in the future!
Ever wish companies like Nike would just STFU and make shoes, Apple would just STFU and make computers, and Pepsi would just STFU and make soft drinks? Is it too much to ask that a company does what the hell it's supposed to do, and doesn't "take a stance" on every possible disagreement on God's green earth? Jesus. The whole essence of marketing is to tell your audience that what they have isn't good enough. The last thing I want to see is the same group of marketroid assholes telling me (or others) how and what to think about political issues.
Yes, I know. STFU Bowie, go make us more tiles. Ugh.
Cheers,
Bowie J. Poag
If I my offer a prudent bit of Life Advice: Your self-worth is not defined by your choice in corporate manure.
I would strongly suggest removing the product label from the back of your ego.
-FL
I'm pretty sure all the former slaves living there would be a mighty tad pissed off at you if you burned it.
... and in the DRM, bind them.
iTunes is lame. It will matter when ANYONE can sell music through it, and artists can bypass record companies altogether. As it is, it is just a shill for the record companies and the RIAA.
An artist can get their music into the iTMS by getting a label to represent them and act as an intermediary with Apple. Any of the labels in the iTMS can submit music. So for an artist to get into the iTMS, they just need to get on CD Baby. It's easy.
Pepsi was really smart...they paid off the record companies while conditioning kids to expect free music.
They always are! Poor guys, trying to use last century OS crap! :-P
When people who were found guilty of thought crimes against big brother were paraded on tv and they said that they were wrong and they really did love Big Brother.
Low-end recoding has a long history of yeilding nice pretty fruit (I think the best example out there has to be the Guided By Voices catalogue--god knows i'll never be able to get "gold heart mountaintop queen directory" out of my head.
Garage band will not allow you rich, innovative slick production, and it will not give you the insight and experience that a seasoned sound engineer could offer (and man can that make a good sound MUCH better), but it does yield a fairly effecient idea to sound mechanism.
If i'm just in the mood to put out sound then garage band might allow me to.
I've used Reason for years and adore the results, but it's a different process than being in the studio and it yeilds a much different product.
Kicker of Elves
don't you people realise that the Pepsi costs more than the music does?? Don't just drink the Pepsi to get the "free" songs.
2) Read:
3. Profit!!!
(hey, where did my underpants go?)
. . . now the homeless will be able to look for the discarded Peps-i-Tunes caps and trade them to teenaged kids for drugs . . . . . . the future IS cool!
Ask Me About... The 80's!
Especially in Afghanistan. Those Taliban love the union of Church and State. Al Q'aida - they're also big fans. Not sure what they think of Pepsi and Apple though - or that fancy, shmancy so-called "rock and roll" music.
But so long as you're happy..
I come from a LAN down under
Where the packets flow and routers chunder
I can.
The Reagan debt was not repaid. It still has not been repaid. The current deficit will only add the Bush debt onto the Reagan debt. Our children WILL pay for all of this.
The one you never saw? That just about nobody ever saw? That got shut down because the husband of a Democrat portrayed the main character?
Yes, I remember it.
Didn't CBS just say last week that they wouldn't be running politically-charged ads during the game? They turned down an anti-Bush ad and a PeTA ad, I think. Doesn't this qualify as a political statement as well? I'm an Apple user (not a Pepsi drinker) so I don't necessarily mind them allowing this, but it seems like CBS might be picking and choosing what they find politically insensitive...
1984 Apple Commercial - The Making of a Legend, originally from Owen Linzmayer's book, The Mac Bathroom Reader.
And for you Trivial Pursuit buffs: the name of the hammer-wielding blonde is Anya Major, an obscure British actress who was a discus thrower.
Mod Karma -1: I sed bad wurds. If I cep my mouf shut, I wud be at riyses.