Slashdot Mirror
Price-Fixing Settlement Checks in the Mail
toastyman writes "Remember the Music Industry $67m settlement from way back in 2002? Seven months later than planned, your $13.86 check is finally on its way. In addition to the cash settlement, the defendants in the suit are also giving 5.6 million CD's to educational programs."
Because we're not the only ones who know their product is worthless.
"Ask not what your country can do for you." --John F. Kennedy
... sue teenagers and grand parents for using Kazaa and/or exchanging music MP3s on P2P.
Then they are condemned for price fixing. Ain't life grand? The inmates are running the asylum, the foxes are guarding the hen house, and so on and so forth.
(Yes, I know that the RIAA is probably not involved in this settlement, but the RIAA bosses... er... members are the one who are condemned in this case)
The right to offend is far more important than the right not to be offended. (Rowan Atkinson)
I'd love to see what those albums are, and what their educational value truly is. Unless they're delivering symphony recordings and classical masterpieces for a music class, I can't see how that's an advantage for consumer me.
At least when MS donated OS licenses and things, one could argue that Windows machines can actually facilitate learning in all sorts of areas (let the MS flaming begin). This sounds like a cop out to me. Blah.
Chicks dig my good /. karma.
These CDs? Yeah, they're each worth $5,000 USD.
I hate the way people can get away with giving away "content" at inflated prices. If they gave away $5.6M in MEDIA costs of CDs to educational entities, I'd feel like they were punished. This is like MS giving away a bunch of software.
I've written this many times before, but it's not a punishment/loss of revenue if there was never any money in the first place. If the CD's cost $.10 each for them to make (made that number up, but it seems reasonable), then it really cost them $560K. A large number, but not nearly as large s 5.6M. If they had to REFUND $5.6M back to educational groups that had purchased CDs, that would be the way to really punish them.
This is just like MS offering to give a bunch of money's worth of software to schools. It doesn't cost 'em anything to give stuff to a place that would have never bought it in the first place, since initial R&D is the cost, and that's constant. Distribution is a trivial cost at the end.
I purchased well over 50 CDs in my lifetime. I get back $13? From my quick calculations I feel that I should be getting back about $300 instead.
I figure that CDs should be no more than $6.00/ea (before tax) so I should get back at least 50% of the money I spent.
Instead these idiots get off by shelling out $67 million plus free CDs to educational institutions so that they can have kids listen to their music? I hope that these CDs aren't ones they own... I want them to be TRULY taxed when they have to give away that money.
Personally, I plan to take my $13.86 check and give the money to the EFF.
[Insert pithy quote here]
Personally, a check that small is a slap in the face. They did nothing to account for the number of CDs purchased during the time in question. I checked. I added well over 200 CDs to my collection during that time. Yet I get the same amount back as someone who bought just a few.
-S
--- What parts of "shall make no law", "shall not be infringed", and "shall not be violated" don't you understand?
But will it do anything about the fixed prices (ie, make them lower)??
amazingly enough CDs still are quite expensive and I don't see any true ramifications from this ruling (like forcing the CDs to cost what they should).
So we didn't 0wn0rz anyone.
Why not sell those 5.6 million cds and give the profit to educational programs instead?
For the same reason that Microsoft gives $xM worth of free software whenever possible to settle their lawsuits:
It's not a "real" penalty, it just looks like one to the rubes who don't realize that each physical software package/music CD costs practically nothing to produce, but is counted at its full retail value when given away.
Giving away profits as penalty for corporate wrongdoing? In George W. Bush's America? Ha!
~Philly
You know, $67M would go a long way towards a nice trust or law fund to help people fight these law suits. Not that they would not continue to sue to get "their" money back, but at least to put up a good fight.
A bunch of small donations to EFF maybe?
So I have 13.86 coming in the mail. I wonder what I could do with that. I could buy a cd, but that's just like giving it back. I could see a movie, but that just gives the money back to the parent company of the RIAA agencies. I could buy a book I suppose, but even that lets the money trickle back into the regime.
I guess I will just donate it to the EFF, and hope that everyone does. It would be great if they made a few million straight from the record company - would really make the settlement sting more.
I know any money is helpful, but consider that the overwhelming majority of musicians are not signed and have no hope of securing a record deal. And that iTunes (if they can get signed on), only compensates them about 11% or so.
Here's a better idea. Look at all those musicians who let you download music legally and dash them an email, saying I want to give the money to you as a way of saying thanks for being so generous and talented.
To love the music, you must share the music. Sharethemusicday .
Robert Nagle, Idiotprogrammer, Houston
the only ones who make money in these ridiculous suits are the lawyers.
Track how much the law firms involved keep in legal fees, and then you'll know in whose interest these cases are really brought.
What a slap on the wrist! No... It's not even a slap on the wrist. It's even cheaper than the money they spent greasing the wheels at Congress to solidify their tyranny to begin with. It's 30 million dollars cheaper than their annually budgeted legal department.
64.7 million dollars is less than 1 % of their yearly gross. Cheap price to pay to get away with price fixing for decades. THis price fixing has allowed them to make what, A billion extra dollars PER YEAR?
Why are there only 19 people folding@home for slashdot?
So you can give your money back to the RIAA through the CD-R tax?
[putting flame suit on]
Congrats to all those of you who joined the class action lawsuit. That mean, naughty music industry duped you into buying all those CDs - you had not the will power to say no.
Next week you should receive your check from McDonald's for forcing you to lead a life as a fatty.
[/end rant] I mean, come on. Yeah, they should pay. But why to you? Why not to a charity?
Anyone know what kind of cd's these will be? I don't care for 5.6 million Ludicrus cd's with "Sticking up" or "Freaky Thangs" going to my daughter's school, or yours for that matter...
...not to sound like michael moore, but this corporate crime thing really bothers me. this settlement adds up to a drop in the bucket for the recording companies. if corporations are allowed to be treated like individuals, so that no individual within the company is ever held responsible, then we should be able to punish corporations like individuals. legally control their business practises... freeze wages, firing, and take a percentage of their profits.
Oh No, your post was moderated "offtopic" - Looks like you did something wrong!
Don't worry about it.... here, truth is modded 'flamebait' and jokes are modded 'insightful' all the time.
try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
What part of "price fixing" don't you understand?
This isn't some weird products liability case (e.g., you McDonald's analogy.) This is a case about the RIAA using its monopoly power over the CD market to set an arbitrarily high price of CDs. It's what happens in the absence of competition. (Another consequence is that the RIAA can abuse its customers and treat us all like scoundrels, without fear of us taking our business to a competitor.)
This crime was complete when the first CD was offered for sale at $20 - even before it was purchased. So your sarcasm is poorly aimed.
David Stein
Computer over. Virus = very yes.
As far as I've seen, CD prices are exactly where they were a year ago, if not slightly higher. Anybody who thought this lawsuit would accomplish anything other than making a few scumwad lawyers rich was a naive fool.
This is why I never participate in class-action lawsuits unless I was actually wronged in some way. Accepting my money for an overpriced item I choose to buy of my own free will is not something I should be able to sue you for.
Information wants to be anthropomorphized.
There were NO geeks at work here. Just a bunch of lawyers, who got what they came for. 13 dollars is what you got if you bought 5 CDs or 5000. That's winning?
Please, do the minimum amount of research before you post. This is not your blog.
the prices are still as high and higher than before the court found them guilty of price fixing.
We are entitled to a country in which corporations obey the laws applicable to them because of their monopoly status. If we have to sue corporations as citizens because our law enforcement turns a blind eye, so be it.
It's nothing but crumpled porno and Ayn Rand.
I would but I have yet to hear of one single incident the EFF has actually accomplished anything other than bilking suckers out of their money.
Wishing I was a millionaire since 1969.
Scumbag? I am donating the money to the EFF.
Just because I didn't purchase their products BECAUSE they gouged the price, does not mean I am any less entitled to the money, which is now the EFF's.
http://use.perl.org
Like you say, lowered at most stores. My guess is these are retail discounts, not the label's decision to abandon their cartel. Even if they are decreasing prices (there's some indication they are) it doesn't change the fact that they settled for an amount substatially less than a judgement would have gotten. Lowering their prices doesn't absolve them of price fixing.
Please explain your statements. I used to purchase CDs produced by RIAA member studios, as recently as 2000. This entitles me to the settlement amount. So I claimed it. In so doing I believe I waived the right to sue them over unfair prices in the future. But I can still stand on the corner and bitch that they gouge their customers and treat the artists like shit. It's called free speech and it can't be waived, kinda like how I can't voluntarily sell myself into slavery (in the U.S.). I don't download infringing music (I get some stuff from Amazon's downloads) I listen to internet radio through shoutcast to find artists I like. Then I check out who produces their music (typically with amazon.com or discogs.com). Then I check on boycott-riaa.com to see if the studio is indie or not. If it is an indie label then I buy the CD. If it is not an indie label then I either buy it used, find a friend who has bought it and burn a copy (protected under Fair Use).
I can see how my illogical, unethical life makes things simpler.
Putz.
Not only didn't this cot the recording industry nearly as much as a real anti-trust suit would have cost, but now that they've managed to delay it for this long, I'd bet many of those checks will be returned to sender, as the people who should have gotten them have moved already. I did, and it's now long past when the post office will foreward mail.
So they skate again, by abusing our legal system. Yeah, I know, it wasn't a huge check, but as Geddy Lee said in "Take off to the Great White North,", "Hey, ten bucks is ten bucks, eh?"
Bah.
Lemon curry?
While you raise good points about what happens in the absence of competition, and that the crime happened before the first copy of the CD was purchased, I think the parent poster had a good point too. The parent poster should not be chided for observing that people could have rejected these CDs in the first place.
People need to be introduced to musicians that don't sign with RIAA-affiliated labels. The public needs to hear about independant distributors that treat the public like partners, not criminals. I host a public affairs show called "Digital Citizen" on community radio (WEFT 90.1 FM) every other Wednesday 8-10p and I talk about issues including copyright matters. If you're near Champaign, Illinois I invite you to tune in. I have interviewed musicians and distributors that work with the public to bring us good music. I also make sure that the talks and music I play on the show can all be recorded and shared verbatim (at the least). I have a huge library of music to draw from at WEFT, but almost all of it cannot be shared in the way I want my show to be shared, so I don't air any of that music on my show.
Just as these RIAA-affiliated corporations make a choice to screw the public, we can choose not to be taken. But it takes a great deal of education to get the ball rolling. It's not impossible, it just requires time and work.
Digital Citizen