RIAA Continues Distributing Dud CDs to Satisfy Settlement

cosyne writes "Part of the music industry's recent price fixing settlement involves giving free CDs to public libraries. Although they are technically complying with the the letter of the law, they're abusing the spirit by giving the libraries large piles of crud. According to the Stevens Point Journal, '[the] Milwaukee Public Library received 1,235 copies of Whitney Houston's 1991 recording of "The Star-Spangled Banner," 188 copies of Michael Bolton's "Timeless," 375 of "Entertainment Weekly: The Greatest Hits 1971," and 104 copies of Will Smith's "Willennium."' The recording industry obviously wouldn't want to have libraries loaning out music that people might otherwise buy." See also a related story about shipments to another state.

Comments

They had an opportunity to look good

[erick99]

It is shameful that the RIAA clearly attended only to the letter of the law. I believe that the ruling judge assumed that they wouldn't do something so despicable as to not only send exceptionally outdated/unpopular/fringe CD's but send them in ridiculous quantities.

Milwaukee Public Library received 1,235 copies of Whitney Houston's 1991 recording of "The Star-Spangled Banner," 188 copies of Michael Bolton's "Timeless," 375 of "Entertainment Weekly: The Greatest Hits 1971," and 104 copies of Will Smith's "Willennium," and nearly everything in between.

I hope that someone brings this to the attention of the judge(s) who could then provide a remedy that includes some sort of formula for how many CD's have to from the current or near-current top-whatever list. The RIAA should be ashamed of themselves. They had an opportunity to look good and to look generous but, instead, they took yet another dump on their customer base. For God's sake, will they ever learn and stop acting like spoiled children?

Cheers!

Erick

Re:They had an opportunity to look good

[Ieshan]

Yeah, and the worst part is, it's almost an admission that they don't know the value of public libraries.

If the public library has a complete and total music collection and sued publishers to provide them with books, only to recieve 593 copies of "Martha Stewart's: 'Cooking with the Neighbors", 1,989 copies of "Maxim: The Uncensored Cut", 184 copies of "Pete Rose: How I Gambled and Stuff", and 8,948 copies of "A Year of Baseball Cards: The 1947 Digest", NO ONE WOULD USE THE SERVICE.

Re:They had an opportunity to look good

[Pecisk]

I would like to simply second that. I don't get RIAA actions - they are all against customer these days. I really see lot of indie label rising because of all that. I don't give a shit of RIAA surviving emerging online market because of such attitude. It is very shortsighted, period.

Re:They had an opportunity to look good

[pcassell]

They gave away the old stuff because they knew everyone already downloaded the updated/popular/hit CD's in ridiculous quantities.

Re:They had an opportunity to look good

[D'Sphitz]

"and nearly everything in between"

They got 105,000 cds, what do you expect? Ever album to be a chart topper? What you're bitching about is less than 2% of the whole.

Re:They had an opportunity to look good

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd expect you to stop mixing up the numbers of Wisconsin and those of a single library.

Re:They had an opportunity to look good

[medelliadegray]

"For God's sake, will they ever learn and stop acting like spoiled children?"

Do you know of any spoiled children that just one day became cultured or respectable? I sure dont. Generally, it takes some life altering experience before a spoiled, well-off individual will take a look back and realise how well-off they really were--and that maybe they dont have to be a fecal matter hole to everyone else to enjoy what they have.

Re:They had an opportunity to look good

[Halfbaked Plan]

I really see lot of indie label rising because of all that.

Perhaps when said 'indie labels' produce entertainment that enough people like, they'll matter.

A hundred years from now, there might be a mention of Frank Zappa in large encyclopedias, but nobody will bother to include clips of any of his music. Many 'indies' produce music just as listenable, with equivalent entertainment value. They have great tuFF Rebel value, of course.

Re:They had an opportunity to look good

[yintercept]

The RIAA is using libraries to dump overstock: "Give 'em the printed CDs that we can't sell."

The RIAA could have accomplished the goal of protecting their precious main stream pop collection by giving the library volumes of cultural stuff like Brahms, the pipers of Scotland and what not that teeny boppers never buy. The libraries would have ended up with stuff worth keeping in the collection.

The sad thing about the RIAA using the library system to dump unsold CDs is that it stifles the overstocked market. In the book industry, you end up having the unsold books flowing through dollar book stores where the less affluent can pick up new cds for rock bottom prices. Of course, the dud cds will just be distributed to the public through the library's used book sales, but the buyer doesn't get the satisfaction of breaking the seal.

BTW: There is one big difference between music and books in public libraries. It generally takes a person a week or two to read a book, while it only takes an hour or so to copy a CD. Thinking in terms of checkout days, if it takes an average of 14 checkout days for people to read the Da Vinci Code and a library system has 10,000 readers interested in reading the book in the first year then the library might do something like divide 14,000 by 300 and see that they need 47 copies of the book to fit their demand.

If a music CD averages two check out days, then they will need only 6 copies of American Idol

Re:They had an opportunity to look good

[innocent_white_lamb]

There is one big difference between music and books in public libraries. It generally takes a person a week or two to read a book, while it only takes an hour or so to copy a CD.

And therein lies the problem from the RIAA's point of view.

You aren't supposed to copy the cd that you borrow from the library, just the same as you aren't supposed to photocopy the book that you borrowed from the same place. Read and return; listen and return.

The fact that you stated this viewpoint in such an offhand manner indicates that you didn't consider that difference at all.

Re:They had an opportunity to look good

[chimpo13]

I'll respond to the parent post through you, so it's close to the top. The last paragraph in the article reads:

To prevent the companies from dumping unwanted inventory, lawyers for the states came up with a formula based on how much time artists spent on the Billboard charts, Wisconsin Assistant Attorney General Eric Wilson said. But he conceded, "it may be hard to believe looking at the selections."

Re:They had an opportunity to look good

[Pecisk]

It's a little bullshit. And I will prove my point.

First, let's look at the chain of so called "entertaiment business".

Let's take for example there is some new pop group, called "Simple". Managers create PR, Image, everything. Specially hired medicore or good songwriters write possible top hits.

Radio because of special agreements overlplay those medicore songs over and over so much that even slightly good song sounds like shit for me, sorry.

So, I just wanted to point out. It's all god damned FAKED. It feels faked. It feels ... Really stubborn to play over and over the same styles and songs.

Creativity is a sparkle. Song is that what you want to say to world. For example, Keane. Yes, there are for poprock in this market. But they still get such songs like "She has no time" and "Bedshaped", which, I guess is something that no one of those medicore specially hired song writers will ever write.

Ok, I keep forgeting that music WAS a business from time being - not vice versa. Just because there are greedy middle man aka publishing companies, it doesn't make a music obligatory a business. It is like that - artist creates something, because he wants to say something/try to prove something/etc. Then publisher publishes it. And that's it. Now we live to see industry who try to fake the souls of song because they figured to make bilions out of it. And they cry out when something really don't go that way.

So, in overall, some indies are more entertaiment than mainstream. It is so. Just a problem - they don't get so much publicity. Maybe it's good. Maybe it's bad. Who knows.

Re:They had an opportunity to look good

[angle_slam]

If the public library has a complete and total music collection and sued publishers to provide them with books, only to recieve 593 copies of "Martha Stewart's: 'Cooking with the Neighbors", 1,989 copies of "Maxim: The Uncensored Cut", 184 copies of "Pete Rose: How I Gambled and Stuff", and 8,948 copies of "A Year of Baseball Cards: The 1947 Digest", NO ONE WOULD USE THE SERVICE.

I think that's the point. Dump enough bad CDs on libraries, no one will go to libraries and people will be forced to buy CDs instead of checking them out.

Re:They had an opportunity to look good

[pgnas]

What about the 749 Jano CDs? C'mon, this is defintely going to affect the bottom line.

I am hoping for some Osmond revival, or Tiffany, what the hell are you people complaining about?

This is free music! this stuff would cost you at least $.97 at Walmart....

Re:They had an opportunity to look good

[ThisIsFred]

It's obivious that they don't value a lot of the stuff they actually produce. Just goes to show, a release is worth $0 until the one payola-promoted song is on the CD, then it's worth $20. What's seriously funny about this is that the RIAA and crew are actually screwing themselves, because music production, distribution, and promotion is so vertical (and apparently expensive), that there is little opportunity to either let someone else experiment, or to get feedback from consumers. Well, they got their feedback when they didn't sell millions of "Willenium" CDs, but it was a tad late by then.

I can't say that I believe they don't value public libraries, but they certainly have no idea how they work. Public libraries get their funding based primarily on how much they circulate. They wouldn't need any more than maybe one copy of Willenium per 5,000 patrons. You could use anything in that example - one book title, one audio cassette title, whatever. This is good and bad. It's good because it rewards the libraries that best serve the taxpayers. It's bad because libraries are no longer a big archive of collected books (costs too much to track all those dusty titles), and have something more like a B&N store.

Anyway, that explanation aside... Anything donated beyond a handful is really worth nothing, since it is going to circulate. I think the RIAA's message is, "public libraries are an evil hotbed of piracy!" I still maintain that this was a terrible settlement idea, I have no idea what libraries have to do with price fixing when I (former CD buyer) am seeing no benefits, and the government got what it deserved for trying to directly fix the situation.

Re:They had an opportunity to look good

[0WaitState]

...giving the library volumes of cultural stuff like Brahms, the pipers of Scotland...

Pipers of Scotland??? Are ye daft, laddie? Does ya thenk thee RIAA wants te gie te Gitmo?

Re:They had an opportunity to look good

[OnTheMoney]

Well, at least now they can hold classes at the library to learn "CD Art". That art form is almost dead with AOL not being so generous anymore.

Couldn't they at least send their stuff on rewritable CDs?
--
Healthy Info

Re:They had an opportunity to look good

[permaculture]

You'd feel bad too, if your job had been rendered nigh obsolete by new technology.

Re:They had an opportunity to look good

[perlchild]

Why didn't the judge do like they normally do in term of damages: require money that the court gives to the plaintiff? And the libraries could by, as per market, what will interest their readers? Or is that solution too obvious?
Isn't this a bit close to the alimony giver controlling how much the victim gets?

Re:They had an opportunity to look good

[yintercept]

Actually, I was thinking about the digitizing problems. If I were in the RIAA, I would do everything possible to avoid filling libraries with the pop culture music that sells well in stores. I would try to get the libraries to stock up on boring educational oriented CDs that people are not likely to copy to their MP3 collection.

For that matter, on rereading the attached articles, I actually find myself sympathizing with the RIAA's choice of donated CDs. The articles are upset because the library didn't get a boatload of the popular music that people want. To a large extent, I think collection of music at the library should be about expanding the exposure to different types of music, rather than just playing the greatest hits of the 60s, 70s, 80s and 90s.

What I want in a library collection is a large number of obscur titles that I am likely to listen to once or twice. The only problem I have with the RIAA's selection is the large number of duplicates. It is not with the obscurity of the titles.

Re:They had an opportunity to look good

[Trepalium]

The problem with the titles is not the obscurity, but rather that they are all titles that the music industry expected to do well, but did not, and are using them to dump into the libraries. The music titles themselves have no cultural, political, or historical significance. Instead of throwing away these titles, as they would've inevitably done, they're dumping it into the library system.

Re:They had an opportunity to look good

[ottffssent]

The more I gain experience with foreign library systems, the more I respect the South Central Library System, which I grew up using and had rather taken for granted. Within about 3 days, for free, I can get any book in over 50 public libraries covering the entire southern half of the state of Wisconsin shipped to my local branch.

It's bad because libraries are no longer a big archive of collected books (costs too much to track all those dusty titles)

LINKCat, the library catalog system that SCLS uses, keeps track of all those dusty titles virtually for free, and gets them in the hands of the public with a minimum of effort on the part of all involved. Notwithstanding this technology, the library employees I have dealt with at member libraries have been helpful, courteous, and efficient. I have requested titles held in the basement archives a mere 10 minutes before library closing. About 8 minutes later someone returned from the basement with my book, apologizing for her tardiness, explaining that the lights had been turned off already, and she had to hunt through the stacks with a flashlight to get me what I wanted.

Though this level of service seems not to be universally available, public libraries certainly *can* maintain large inventories and be an incredible community resource without exceeding budgetary constraints - I've seen it happen.

Re:They had an opportunity to look good

[macdaddy357]

The RIAA throw away their garbage, and call it a settlement. This reminds me of assclowns who throw away garbage at Goodwill and call it charity. I am under whelmed. Boycott the recording industry.

Re:They had an opportunity to look good

[Gilk180]

Not really, this is more like the alimony giver having the ability to pay in cash, check, money order, or some other currency.

This is more like the courts saying that the "giver" must give 3000 pieces of paper currency a month, assuming that the pieces of currency will be USD, but they then give 3000 1 Turkey Lira notes instead. Which computes to 0.2 cents US.

Re:They had an opportunity to look good

[Anonymous Coward]

only the riaa could be so low and slimey

Re:They had an opportunity to look good

[perlchild]

The Mint doesn't pay alimony. Giving the RIAA the choice of which CDs it can use to pay, when they clearly do not have the same value over time allows them a lot of control over what the "payment" is actually worth.

Considering that the said value also presumably includes a portion for RIAA dues paid by the publisher is also a consideration.

How would the court view a lawyer normally charging 150$/hour, value his hours at 300$ and "give" them in place of alimony(say giving them for charity). Such payment in kind would not be accepted, why do they allow the RIAA to do so? The idea here is not that the RIAA can choose which form of payment it wants to use, but that the RIAA also influences the value of the good, before it makes the gift...

Re:They had an opportunity to look good

[YowzaTheYuzzum]

And yet there are photocopiers in just about every library...

Re:They had an opportunity to look good

[rockinthefreeworld]

What was said about cd's being marketed early on as cheaper to produce than tapes is absolutely correct. I would also like to point out that since cd's were first introduced they have RISEN in price steadily over the years. This pattern clearly shows That the RIAA is trying to cheat users. Every other technological advance drops in price as it becomes more widespread and technology to produce it becomes cheaper as well. Cd's are one of the only exeptions to this. And i would also like to point out that in an interview with David Draiman of Disturbed he said that he sees barely any money from record sales and that most of his money comes from the sales of merchandise and concert tickets. So downloading music is more ethical (if you are concerned about the artists making money) than buying cd's. The only people you help by buying cd's instead of downloading is the big fat RIAA pigs who not only cheat music lovers but artists as well.

Re:They had an opportunity to look good

[Onan]

From the meager data available, it sounds as if the settlement specifies certain popularities of artists, but not particular CDs. So the libraries are getting the dud albums of artists whose other works have sold well.

Re:They had an opportunity to look good

[jedidiah]

We expect for them to not get an ABSURD number of ANY particular title. Also, there are plenty of titles available that have no commercial value while having plenty of educational, cultural or historical value.

The real question here should be: what happened to all of the bargain bin classical material?

That and why these libraries are getting 1000+ copies of ANYTHING.

Even 1000 copies of the Academy of Ancient Music's complete Mozart Symphonies would be a bit much.

Re:They had an opportunity to look good

[aslate]

And when you try to photocopy a 1000 page book, no-one gets suspicious do they?

Re:They had an opportunity to look good

[dgatwood]

They wouldn't need any more than maybe one copy of Willenium per 5,000 patrons.

Methinks thou hast drastically overestimated the popularity of Willenium.

One per 5,000 libraries should be about right.

Re:They had an opportunity to look good

[ceejayoz]

No one gives a shit, because you just spent $100-$150 to photocopy a $20 book.

Re:They had an opportunity to look good

[jonadab]

> The RIAA is using libraries to dump overstock.

Sure, and I expected them to send us stuff that wasn't selling well, and the
judge probably figured too that they'd do that. But I didn't realize they'd
send so many *duplicates*. If they'd sent us fifty *different* non-sellers,
I'd figure hey, add some diversity to the collection, some stuff people might
not otherwise have listened to. But this nonsense about being able to count
the number of distinct titles on our fingers, that's plain wrong. We can't
use multiple copies of this stuff.

> BTW: There is one big difference between music and books in public libraries.
> It generally takes a person a week or two to read a book, while it only
> takes an hour or so to copy a CD.

In theory, maybe. In practice, average checkout time for a CD is *very*
similar to average checkout time for a book. CDs do get renewed marginally
less often, but they usually stay out for most of the two weeks, and they
come back late just as often as books, averaged out per item.

Now, videos, those have very different numbers.

Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[Ckwop]

The RIAA expects the customers to hand over cash for overpriced CDs, appealing to morality for justification, and yet in act of gross duplicity it gives libraries crud just to spite them because they lost a court case. This isn't about morals, it isn't even about the artists.. it's about the bloody dollars.

Don't get me wrong. I don't support piracy but the RIAA's approach isn't exactly making me willing me to go out and buy their dross. Fear not, technology has destroyed industries before. The nice thing to know is that it's usually pretty ruthless in that it takes no prisoners. I doubt the RIAA will be the exception. No amount of law making saved the canal boats from the invention of the automobile.

We now have the infrastructure to pay the artist not the army of lawyers, executives and other useless staff. I think all artists would prefer a return to the music and less of the obsession with the dollars. I'd be more willing to fork out the dollars (will pounds in my case) if I knew the artist was the key beneficiary?

Simon.

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[smkndrkn]

I've seen so much bitching about the RIAA and MPAA, and I agree with a lot of it, but you have a choice. Vote with your wallet. Do not buy their product, that is the only way you can have change. I've been RIAA free for almost a year now..perhaps even longer and I now listen to better music as a result.

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[TheSpoom]

Agreed.

To me, it's pretty simple. The RIAA is evil. I'm not going to support an evil organization.

(The last version of Windows I owned legally was Windows 95 BTW ;^)

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[NanoGator]

"Vote with your wallet. Do not buy their product, that is the only way you can have change."

Yeah, like DMCA2. The RIAA will chalk up any losses to piracy. They won't get your message, instead they'll twist that data and use it to get new really bad laws in place.

Wish I had a strong alternative, but really I don't. This is as good of time as any for somebody to speak up.

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[RLiegh]

(The last version of Windows I owned legally was Windows 95 BTW ;^)

By illegally using windows, you are still supporting MS, if nothing else but by using their file formats and by giving them marketshare (no, not for their OS, but for their other products).

Now, if you dropped windows entirely, then you'd be sticking it to the man. ;)

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[MoonBuggy]

Wish I had a strong alternative
Fire! And lots of it.

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[AKAImBatman]

The best thing you can do is support initiatives like iTunes. Believe it or not, not every Congress Critter supports the RIAA and MPAA. If you support the distribution channels you want, and support only artists you LIKE, our Congress Critters will have some wonderful statistical evidence to throw back at the [MP|RI]AA organizations.

Keep in mind that Congress generally enjoys making people sweat it while they have the floor. I think it was only about a year or so ago that congress was grilling the RIAA for the Electronic distribution methods that were promised in exchange for tougher laws, not materializing.

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[rokzy]

Microsoft has so much money that you're probably helping them more by using pirated version than paying. You give them all the satisfaction of a monopoly, plus the ability to use piracy as an argument for their DRM becoming required under law which will complete their plan for a 3000 year reich.

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[NoMoreNicksLeft]

You could try to help me...they'll still do the DMCA2, but maybe it won't matter as much.

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[Anonymous Coward]

" The best thing you can do is support initiatives like iTunes."

No, the best thing would be buying their cd's from their playvenue's : or at least from their site : ITunes is still giving too much to the money grabbers, and not to the people who actually make the music (Britneys and Justins aside)

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[Anonymous Coward]

Losses, arn't they making more money, just not selling as many singles because there not producing as many or puting as many in the shops and then trying to use that to justify there anti-copying leglislation?

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[rppp01]

Vote with your wallet?

Some of us have for years now. But realize the more we don't buy anything from them, the more they claim that piracy is stealing money from their pockets. This in turn will get them to lean heavily on Congress to push more laws that force people to pay more for less.

This isn't simply capitalism anymore. This is extortion. What's the next step? Fascism?

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[FuzzyBad-Mofo]

So we should keep them in business, or else? I think I've heard of this technique before.. ah yes, it was the mob.

I really do wonder where this is going to end. In 100 years, will people look back on this as the time when corporate greed destroyed the American music industry?

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[SqueakRu]

Chalk up losses? They have been chalking up massive gains to piracy. http://www.heraldonline.com/24hour/entertainment/m usic/news/story/1280945p-8387709c.html

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[FuzzyBad-Mofo]

Congress must not have grilled them enough then. The music industry practices still suck, and the tougher laws they bought are still on the books.

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[eht]

iTunes is a terrible alternative, artists still get shafted, cd's are more expensive than they are in the used cd stores and the quality is questionable of course don't just take my word for it. iTunes iSbogus and their parent site Downhill Battle have much more to say on it.

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[Feztaa]

(The last version of Windows I owned legally was Windows 95 BTW ;^)

And the last version of Windows that I owned period was Windows 98. Oh, I've seen XP on my friends' computers, and at work, but that's about it.

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[gilroy]

Blockquoth the poster:

I really do wonder where this is going to end. In 100 years, will people look back on this as the time when corporate greed destroyed the American music industry?

People will look back and laugh at the quaint historical anomaly called "the music industry" -- a beast that did not exist prior to 1890 and probably won't survive past 2040 or so.

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[Saeger]

No amount of law making saved the canal boats from the invention of the automobile.

And the advent of the computer & internet didn't exactly help the library system either. As the digital divide slowly closes, libraries will become little more than free (as in speech and beer) cybercafes, and museums for deadtree books and other old media.

Ahh... I can't resist a Futurama reference :)

Thanks to its incredibly generous benefactors - the Wong Dynasty - Mars University owns the largest collection of literature in the universe. The collection is kept at the Wong library on two discs: Fiction and Non-Fiction.

--

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[hazem]

This isn't anyone voting with their wallet. It's the RIAA trying to foist old and virtually worthless inventory as a way of paying off their settlement.

This would be like someone successfully suing Elvis, but instead of paying money, they agree that he'll pay by sending personal items of memorabelia to libraries, schools, and museums. Then he ships out piles of used toilet paper. Sure there might be 3 people that want that, but most of the rest of us will see that it's worthless, and he's just dodging the settlement by shovelling off his shit.

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[Halfbaked Plan]

The best thing you can do is support initiatives like iTunes.

I should shovel a bunch of money at the Apple Computer Company? Don't I have to buy their special hardware even to play those iTunes?

Shouldn't Apple generously donate the tech needed to play their iTunes to some third party, or better yet, an open hardware/software organization?

Or are they just another commercial operator?

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[Artifakt]

This subject usuually draws some "Well, pirating is still just plain wrong" responses. Your post points out the real problem with that. To the RIAA, you are a criminal, who is lieing about boycotting their stuff and is really pirating it instead. The guy who defends them by pointing out that pirating is just plain wrong, is a criminal, who is really pirating their stuff instead, and I am a criminal, who is really pirating their stuff instead.
To the RIAA, we are all criminals. Every time their sales dip, it is you, me, and everyone else who ever posted to this subject, plus a whole lot of other people, committing piracy that is the sole cause.
Stick up for the RIAA's rights, and they will take away yours to thank you for it. They need you to be thought a criminal whether you are one or not.

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[danila]

The RIAA will chalk up any losses to piracy. They won't get your message
May be the intention is that they run out of crack to smoke and when they no longer have any money to buy more they will start acting like decent human beings?

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[jvollmer]

Do what I do - buy an harmonica.

It allows me to listen to music for free.

Then, when the RIAA busts me for violating their
rights on public-domain songs, I can use it in
prison.

If it's not Consolidated Lint,it's just fuzz!

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[ScrewMaster]

Well, if it were only the music cartel at stake I really wouldn't care since I like music but don't haven't bought anything from RIAA's stable for twenty years or more. Just can't stand the thought of where the money goes, and doesn't go. I knew a bad deal when I saw it when Compact Discs first came out, and refused to buy into it.

Unfortunately, even if the traditional music corporations were to disappear tomorrow, their legacy of bad law and amoral corporate behavior (which is being emulated by numerous other corporations, I might add ... do Lexmark and DirecTV ring a bell?) may make this the time when corporate greed destroyed American industry. Period.

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[DarkSarin]

***FLAMEBAIT***
***TROLL***

Sorry, even the most dimwitted should know that iTunes is available on Windows, and I believe there is a Free Alternative available for Linux.

I don't necessarily agree that iTunes is the best way, but I think it is A way--as are other legit services of that nature, to let the *AA know that you don't mind purchasing from them when they play fair.

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[Hi_2k]

Really? I am constantly 0w|\|ing windows boxes. They make it so easy, it must be an invitation.

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[10101001 10101001]

Maybe we should take the RIAA approach and have "vote with your wallet" mean buying off Senators?

j/k

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[lakeland]

There isn't a free alternative available for linux (esp. since we're looking at the music store), and it will apparently never run in wine (though I can run it fine in VMWare).

If you do somehow get it to run (another computer perhaps) then playing .aac files is painless on linux.

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[ThisIsFred]

The RIAA expects the customers to hand over cash for overpriced CDs, appealing to morality for justification, and yet in act of gross duplicity it gives libraries crud just to spite them because they lost a court case.

Unfortunately this is how we get ourselves in trouble. While I think that the CDs are trash, and worth about a quarter of the sticker price, millions of people apparently don't. And while that revenue continues to come in, the RIAA will have money to hire lawyers and lobbyists. Voting with your wallet certainly works, but unfortunately the majority of consumers are voting "yes" instead of "no".

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[aardvarkjoe]

If it wasn't for the huge amount of piracy going on, they wouldn't have it as an excuse. If you really hate the RIAA so much, you should not only vote with your wallet by not giving them money, you should also refrain from obtaining their products illegally.

As long as people continue to use their products, the record industry will have control of the situation.

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[Anonymous Coward]

The guy who defends them by pointing out that pirating is just plain wrong, is a criminal, who is really pirating their stuff instead, and I am a criminal, who is really pirating their stuff instead.

Huh?

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[NanoGator]

" If you really hate the RIAA so much, you should not only vote with your wallet by not giving them money, you should also refrain from obtaining their products illegally."

For the record, I haven't downloaded music in over a year now. I subscribed to a music service called Rhapsody, and haven't looked back in P2P's direction.

I still have some bitterness here because I was called a thief by the *AA before I downloaded music simply because I had a CD burner. I was called a thief AFTER I did download music even though the main use of it was to find new CDs I wanted. (in my 56k days, downloading albums was damn near impossible.) Despite this, I went ahead and subscribed to the music service. I'm 100% legit now. I did NOT want any of my money going to the RIAA.

Here's the problem, though: There will always be music trading of some sort going on. There is no practical way I can stop other people. The best I've got is to let them see what I'm doing for music these days. There are always going to be people using MP3s legitimately, though the RIAA doesn't see MP3 players as being anything but tools for stolen property. Basically, I am of the belief that no matter how many people stop, the people that don't stop will keep the RIAA in its crummy position.

It's not that I'm trying to shoot your point down, it's just that I don't see it as being all that practical. The music services these days are suitable enough for me that I don't care if P2P music trading lives or dies. However, the RIAA needs a stronger message. It really shocks me that the brilliant success of iTunes hasn't changed the RIAA's tune at all. (Err, that I've found.) That kind of shoots down my idea of spending $100 there. *Sigh*

I think you're right, but I don't think it can happen on a big enough scale. I'm aching for something that sends a bigger message.

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[Anonymous Coward]

Which crack head modded parent as Troll?

Get a life.

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[ArsonPanda]

Ohhh.. I like your style.
-ArsonPanda

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[Max Threshold]

Wish I had a strong alternative, but really I don't. This is as good of time as any for somebody to speak up.

Well, with any luck, Bush won't renew the ban on assault weapons...

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[LihTox]

I don't know what the statistics are like, but it seems to me that if RIAA suffered losses while non-RIAA music labels didn't, that would be good evidence that the RIAA losses weren't due simply to piracy.

It would also help to have a declared boycott. And if there were a standardized "100% RIAA free" label which music producers could use, to put the campaign into the public eye.

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[DF5JT]

"And the advent of the computer & internet didn't exactly help the library system either."

Librarians are at the heart of the development of a society. IT-companies should seek out to hire as many librarians as they can. They know how to classify written material, organize stuff and hand it over the way best suited to customers.

I would love to have run search engines run by librarians. Give me librarians as consultants for database technolgy and can we please have librarians as consultants for interface design.

Look at he "IT-specialists" of today and compare it to librarians and their accomplished task of preserving information, put it in readable format, make it searchable and available for the benfit of the people.

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you really think capitalism with last that long? We're already almost out of money in the US as it is. :P

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[Technician]

Throwing out the baby with the bath water is the best description of the RIAA and MP3's.

There are always going to be people using MP3s legitimately, though the RIAA doesn't see MP3 players as being anything but tools for stolen property.

Too bad the RIAA is bent on killing the most used compressed format. If the MPAA wants to sell movies, they know to sell them in VHS and DVD.

The RIAA has no interest in releasing high quality MP3's, that will play in my living room (DVD player plays MP3's) in my car (MP3/CD jukebox) or at the gym (CD/MP3 player). They are only interested in selling tunes at low bitrates that can be played only on the PC that downloaded it, and/or on a propritory player. Sorry guys. If I can't play it wherever I am, I won't buy it. I have yet to find a DVD player, portable CD, and car CD player that will play the same encrypted music file that most sites try to sell online.

Maybe in a few years, Panasonic will make a portable CD MP3 player that will play content from i-Tunes and Napster. Maybe Kenwood and Pioneer will make the same for my car. Maybe Mitsubishi will make a DVD that will play them also. In the mean time, the RIAA is selling content that's not compatable with my playback devices. The MPAA knew enough to release movies on VHS. The RIAA would rather throw out sales of usable high quality MP3's in the MP3 format in the war on piracy. I'm missing that kid the RIAA tossed out with the bathwater.

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[Kenardy]

It's pretty simple. Really. If the label says RIAA on it anywhere, put the CD, tape or record back on the shelf. This is not rocket science or even algebra ... it's a plain, old-fashioned, works everytime, gets 'em where they live, wallet crunching, boycott. Like a baseball bat applied just behind the ear, there is nothing fancy to it at all but it will certainly get the message across.

If the clerk offers to help you find something, ask for their non-RIAA section. When they tell you they don't have one, thank them for their time and walk out of the store.

It doesn't matter what laws they get passed if we refuse to buy their products. The point is to stay away in droves and to let the retailers know what the problem is.

They'll find a way to fix it. They'll stop ordering RIAA titles they can't sell and maybe even start featuring the indies.

I suspect that, at least at first, the indies will be much more willing to do business our way.

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[Anonymous Coward]

People will look back and laugh at the quaint historical anomaly called "the music industry" -- a beast that did not exist prior to 1890 and probably won't survive past 2040 or so.

You mipspled "copyright industry".

The "music industry", as professional composers and performers, existed even in ancient history.

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[pjt33]

I can certainly see the web replacing libraries for reference purposes. For serious research in, say, history dead-tree probably still wins, because most history books aren't available online in their entirety, it can be hard sorting the wheat from the chaff with Google, and even the wheat probably had orders of magnitude less time spent on it. As for leisure reading of non-fiction, I'd rather have a dead-tree book: less eye-strain, better UI, and recent titles.

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[pommiekiwifruit]

Like they already have for universities? Students there will be paying for RIAA music whether or not they listen to it... No doubt the aim is to make that more widespread, until everyone has to pay an RIAA tax and they only have to provide the quality of music that they provided the libraries with.

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[Anonymous Coward]

the RIAA still gets money from iTunes, Rhapsody, etc.

you're still supporting them.

check out http://www.downhillbattle.org/

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[NanoGator]

"the RIAA still gets money from iTunes, Rhapsody, etc."

I'm aware of that. Sadly, I didn't make that too clear in my previous post. I was trying to say "It was hard to switch to a music service because I didn't want any money going towards the RIAA", but in haste, it came out more like "I switched to a music service to avoid paying the RIAA."

Thanks for the link, though. :)

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[Anonymous Coward]

Vote with your wallet.

The loss of my $13 means nothing to these people. Oh, you're suggesting EVERYBODY do it? Then, actually, you're telling me to get everyone to vote with their wallet. Suddenly, it looks like a lot more work to get things to change. I'll see ya in the next millenium when "everyone" finally agrees and does what's necessary to fix things.

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[Anonymous Coward]

We're already almost out of money in the US as it is.

Yes, but debt is a bottomless hole. Given that might makes right these days, I imagine once we threaten countries with war, they'll "extend our credit" faithfully, so that debt is a constant. The only change will be how much it is that we owe these days. It's not like people will stop lending the US money... We'd just make them sorry otherwise.

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[Frizzle Fry]

Students there will be paying for RIAA music whether or not they listen to it

Because their university has chosen to buy (actually rent) the music for them. That's not extortion. At least not anymore than the fact that "they are paying for the books the school buys for the library whether or not they read any of them" is extortion to the publishing industry. Schools buy lots of things for students and it gets paid for by student tuition.

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[Lehk228]

actually the "national Debt" is owed to AMERICANS, in the form of Gov't Bonds, we don't owe money to other countries, but many do owe US.

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA

[amliebsch]

I would not be surprised if the whole concept of buying individual copies of the song becomes completely outmoded. It's the music you want, after all, not the file. I would be satisfied with mass-coverage wifi that would let me use my Rhapsody-enabled Panasonybishi Music Device on-the-go. Integrate it into a cell phone. Who needs to carry around a data storage device if we can network to server farms?

Does using the word "continue" in the headline...

[DeepHurtn!]

...mean that we can't complain it's a dupe?

On the Road to Utopia

[mfh]

> Although they are technically complying with the the letter of the law, they're abusing the spirit by giving the libraries large piles of crud.

I think the problem is that the RIAA only has access to large piles of crud. Let's face it -- Britney, Justin, which other Mousekateers-turned-popstar are there? Chicken of the Sea Girl, Nick whatever-his-name-is, and the list goes on and on.

Indies are being given a huge door to stroll through and every time the RIAA screws up, it helps the indies get more market share. So I'm all for the RIAA being asshats, because they are on the road to Utopia.

Re:On the Road to Utopia

[Anonymous Coward]

No, that would be the road to Nirvana. Mmmm smells like teen spirit.

Re:On the Road to Utopia

[Peter Cooper]

Uh, there are plenty of indies who are in the RIAA. Most of the big indies are. Indie effectively refers to any company not in the top 5/10/20 of record labels. RIAA has at least a hundred member record companies last time I checked, which cover nearly all commercially released albums. Sure, the band of 14 year olds that lives in your town and has never toured out of county might not be involved with the RIAA, but the situation is not encouraging.

Re:On the Road to Utopia

[Jeff DeMaagd]

I don't understand why these groups are allowed to give away items by "value" rather than being required to drop cash. I'm pretty sure that those CDs aren't worth $15 but will probably be charged against the settlement to the tune of $18 because of the suggested retail price.

Re:On the Road to Utopia

[rokzy]

what a strange definition of indie.

is this like when people said "bad" to mean "good"?

you kids these days...

Re:On the Road to Utopia

[gl4ss]

well now they're just dumping the crud people wouldn't buy.

Re:On the Road to Utopia

[John Hasler]

How does one find out which "Indies" are neither RIAA members nor fronts for members?

Re:On the Road to Utopia

[geekoid]

They make millions of sales a year. Clearly, most people don't think all they have is crud.

I would have liked them to be forced only things that have gone gold.

Or books on CD.

Re:On the Road to Utopia

[ThisIsFred]

Chicken of the Sea Girl

I heard she got a job modelling for Nvidia.

Re:On the Road to Utopia

[dgoodman]

RIAA Radar is how...

Re:On the Road to Utopia

[JamesKPolk]

Er, so you're saying that "indie" has been co-opted by a bunch of arrogant RIAA thralls to mean somethign entirely different from its obvious meaning: a musician or group working INDEPENDENTLY, not for some company.

The music companies have always been good at this, I guess: manufacturing rebellion and selling it to the weak minded.

Re:On the Road to Utopia

[grepistan]

This is somewhat OT, I admit, but does your username possibly refer to a certain song by a certain truly indie band, by the way? Or are you just a fan of Mr James K Polk, our eleventh president?

Re:On the Road to Utopia

[Anonymous Coward]

The library should run a full page ad in the judges electorate.

Not a lawyer here - which is why it is illegal in Australia at least to pay or settlein goods, not currency - ie cash. 100 years ago, it made sense to pay the indigenous natives 'wages' in booze, tobacco, and what not. This was not right, so outlawed.
Australia has moved on, but it seems America still has quaint notions - hey maybe they can pay in beans next time - worked before.

Damn

[gordgekko]

This totally explains why I haven't been able to buy a copy of Willenium anywhere. All the copies are in Milwaukee!

Re:Damn

[Anonymous Coward]

actually, it's pronounced "Will-a-walk-ay." In fact, it was originally an Algonquin term meaning "the good land."

-alice cooper

Re:Damn

[jb.hl.com]

Or as it is now known, Willwaukee.

Re:Damn

[Anonymous Coward]

Download the amazing Willenium album today!

TODAY ONLY!

Amazing Offer!

Simply paste the following Pee-2-Pee address into your illegal pirate program!

ed2k://|file|Will Smith - Big Willie Style -- Willenium- Mp3 Full Album 128 Kbps Covers.zip|196913617|FA9F3480AEF56A04E63E78594D2E0 638|/

Willennium

[bl968]

Hey I own Will Smith's Willennium! Don't Dis it.

Re:Willennium

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey I own Will Smith's Willennium! Don't Dis it.

Fine, just don't complain when we start dissing YOU.

Michael Bolton

[Anonymous Coward]

Why should I change, he's the one who sucks!

RIAA

[Anonymous Coward]

Dear Noobs,

You hate the RIAA. Start at site below. IMO: Enjoy music and download what you like, buy it if you love it.

www.zeropaid.com

Enjoy.

Re:RIAA

[Secret Chimp]

Dear Spammer, We hate the Spam. Start at foot. IMO: It is best to then forcefully put foot up own ass, try it and you'll love it. Enjoy.

Re:RIAA

[Secret Chimp]

How in the hell was THAT offtopic? That freakin' spam was offtopic.

Artists

[RomSteady]

I'm wondering if the artists are being paid for their product, or if this is eventually coming out of the artist's pockets.

The reason I'm asking is that the record industry usually charges everything that it can back to the artists: production costs, advertising costs, warehousing costs, everything. Any incoming funds are applied against the record company bottom line first, and the remainder goes against the "debt" accrued by the artist.

So, are the artists getting any money from the disbursement of their product?

Re:Artists

[Zocalo]

So, are the artists getting any money from the disbursement of their product?

Not a chance in hell. One of the many breakdowns of where the money goes from record sales in the wake of Courtney Love's now infamous anti-RIAA tirade was fairly clear on that. All of the percentages are based on sales, specifically excluding "good will" copies, which are issued at the whim of the RIAA but the artists indirectly get to pay for.

Given the way they have just shown their contempt of the ruling by following the letter of the law and ignoring the spirit I expect they will do the same thing for the contracts too. In fact, I wouldn't be at all surprised if these CDs are classed as "good will" copies too and the artists essentially get sent the bill. I just hope that they build a monument to the RIAA at some point so I can go and piss on it.

Re:Artists

[spektr]

So, are the artists getting any money from the disbursement of their product?

Well, they don't have that much money nowadays, because of P2P and low ethical standards - so money seems to be out of the question... But maybe they could compensate them with gifts, like free member cards for public libraries or something.

Re:Artists

[NanoGator]

"So, are the artists getting any money from the disbursement of their product?"

Suddenly, for the first time in years, Will Smith gets an unexpected check from the RIAA...

Re:Artists

[acroyear]

When the artist makes a mistake, the artist pays for it. When the record label makes a mistake, the artist pays for it." -- Robert Fripp

Re:Artists

[foidulus]

This is why things like iTunes and the like are great for artists. After their RIAA contract expires, they can get paid for music with almost no costs to them. I'm not sure about other services, but iTunes is accepting independent artists. There are no cds to produce, and Apple will do your advertising for you if you make it worth their while.
I guess till the RIAA gets wind of this and forces the distributors not to accept independent artists lest they lose access to all RIAA titles...

Re:Artists

[sindarin2001]

I prefer to leak on THEM right now...though the last time I did, the Hastings guy wasn't very happy with me.

Re:Artists

[RWerp]

The same mechanism works in prostitution business -- the alphons takes what a prostitue earns, subtracts her 'debt', his profit, and gives the remainder to the prostitute.

Re:Artists

[Captain_Chaos]

... Courtney Love's now infamous anti-RIAA ...

I didn't know about that, so I Googled for it. It's a very good read. I had no idea that things were this bad.

Re:Artists

[kamapuaa]

Yeah, it was great how a no-talent assclown like Courtney Love (who would be playing bowling alleys if it wasn't for the heavy support of Geffen Records) can go on and on about how the major record labels are such a bad deal.

The essay was a self-righteous joke, it's amazing people take it seriously. Anyway, if she really meant it, she should have directed the essay at bands, not a general audience. She thinks music labels shouldn't have the right to exist, and bands shouldn't have the right to sign with them? Give me a break!

Since she wrote that essay, she went on to sign with Virgin Records, shows how sincere she was.

Blame the Judge on this one

[nurb432]

He should have been savvy enough to predict a stunt like this, and specified what was 'acceptable' in a bit more detail in order to prevent it..

Give a snake an inch, and they will try to eat you...

Re:Blame the Judge on this one

[Anonymous Coward]

Can the RIAA be punished with the charges of Contempt of Court by pissing off the judge ?

Re:Blame the Judge on this one

[JayBlalock]

There's no set of rules one could come up with that SOME clever \ devious person couldn't find a way to exploit. I think the schools could challenege this, personally. I'm sure the RIAA was basing how much the shipments were worth based solely on their sticker price - and the fact that they have thousands of unsold copies of these CDs would make a strong argument that their actual value is far less than what the RIAA claims. That, and sending CDs with explicit lyrics, which ANY reasonable person would consider an unacceptable gift to schools or public libraries.

Re:Blame the Judge on this one

[Anonymous Coward]

That, and sending CDs with explicit lyrics, which ANY reasonable person would consider an unacceptable gift to schools or public libraries.

Riiight, because books in public libraries don't have naughty words in them.

Re:Blame the Judge on this one

[BSDCoder]

Is any music the RIAA has to offer acceptable? I think Americans need to be exposed to some music that isn't from the U.S. The RIAA should have been forced to fund the promotion of foreign music in the United States.

Re:Blame the Judge on this one

[gilroy]

Blockquoth the poster:

There's no set of rules one could come up with that SOME clever \ devious person couldn't find a way to exploit.

How about: You are to send them $X in cash or bank notes; you are not to write this off on your taxes as any sort of "donation"; and you are list the outlay in your stock prospectus as a fine levied on the company.

The issue here, as usual, is that the parties settled. Generally, in a settlement, the group with the bigger lawyers comes out on top. In this case, the schools simply never had a chance.

Re:Blame the Judge on this one

[c_oflynn]

Please, RTFA:

The CD giveaway to schools, colleges and libraries in 50 states will cost an estimated $76 million.

To prevent the companies from dumping unwanted inventory, lawyers for the states came up with a formula based on how much time artists spent on the Billboard charts, Wisconsin Assistant Attorney General Eric Wilson said. But he conceded, "it may be hard to believe looking at the selections."

Re:Blame the Judge on this one

[JayBlalock]

At which point I'll raise the prices on me product to cover the loss, since I control 90% of the retail market and people will keep buying.

And if you ban that, I'll just lay off some of my mid-level useless workers.

And if you try to ban THAT, you are way beyond what any judge could reasonably approve.

Re:Blame the Judge on this one

[gilroy]

Blockquoth the poster:

At which point I'll raise the prices on me product to cover the loss, since I control 90% of the retail market and people will keep buying.

Maybe. It doesn't seem true that consumption is wholly independent of price. Elsewise why haven't they already raised the prices? No, clearly the labels believe that a higher price would lead to lower sales. If they don't -- if they really think they can raise prices without impacting sales, and still don't -- then their shareholders should sue for gross mismanagement.

But in fact, although there isn't a true free market in recordings (the price of songs doesn't fluctuate in response to market demand), the market does bear upon the labels. They are no immune to economic laws than the rest of us.

Indeed, that's what's got them terrified.

Re:Blame the Judge on this one

[Anonymous Coward]

No, the libraries don't deserve any money, at least no more than the recipients of "community services" sentences. This is like the RIAA being given a sentence to millions of hours of community service, and they chose to pick up litter on the stretches of highways that were already clean to begin with. Of course, you would expect the department of transportation to pick the places where litter needs to be cleaned up.

So, obviously, the libraries should have had the opportunity to choose what music they wanted. While this would have been a major undertaking to implement 15 years ago, now it would take a week to set up such a website. The RIAA defendants would submit a list of all their titles with the quantity available, and the libraries would be able to select how many of each one they want.

All the judge would have to do is require the defendants to list ALL titles in their inventories, not just those they feel they can't sell. Then, there would be no complicated formula, just compare the submitted list to actualy inventories and hold them in contempt if the lists don't match.

aQazaQa

Not so!

[SpooForBrains]

This can't be true. Only yesterday I loaned out a copy of Sounds of the Supermarket: 20 Shopping Greats.

Re:Not so!

[Gleng]

At least you still have "Reggie Wilson plays the Lift Music Classics", "Pop goes Delius", and "Funking up Wagner".

Re:Not so!

[Zebbers]

Barenaked Ladies song Shopping would be #1 :):)

They do an awesome live performance of that.

What's this going to cost in storage?

[JayBlalock]

It's kind of sweet, how the people in charge are attempting to put some kind of positive face on this. Yes, they DID get a lot of CDs, and they might potentially be able to sell them (at pennies on the dollar) in fundraising. But in the meantime, what's it going to COST the schools \ libraries dealing with the mess? Cataloging and storage isn't cheap. I wouldn't be surprised if, in the end, this ended up costing the schools (and therefore, the taxpaying public the RIAA was originally convicted of ripping off) more money than it brings in.

You can almost imagine some high mucky-muck at the RIAA laughing maniacally and twirling his moustache as he pronounced this.

Re:What's this going to cost in storage?

[SpooForBrains]

You do know you don't have to escape your spaces on Slashdot?

Re:What's this going to cost in storage?

[Landaras]

Minor quibble.

The RIAA was not convicted. The case never went to trial. The two opposing sides settled.

This isn't to say that the RIAA would not have been found guilty. But to say that they were convicted is factually in error.

- Neil Wehneman

Re:What's this going to cost in storage?

[Anonymous Coward]

You can almost imagine some high mucky-muck at the RIAA laughing maniacally and twirling his moustache as he pronounced this.

I suspect even Wonderboy couldn't solve this problem and he's far higher than these mucky-mucks.

Re:What's this going to cost in storage?

[1iar_parad0x]

To be honest, if it was my job to catalog this junk, I'd get a big box marked "CRAP" and dump it all in.

I don't think anyone would complain.

Prior Art

[Qrlx]

AOL lawyers will be in court Monday seeking an injunction against the RIAA. A company spokesman said "Mass-mailing the same useless CD over and over again is but one of many valuable innovations in AOL's patent portfolio. We find it ironic that the RIAA, purported champion of Intellectual Property rights, has adopted our highly successful business model without ever paying us one cent in licensing fees or royalties."

this has been brought up MULTIPLE times already

[JackPo]

This has been brought up at least once on /. (possibly more)... I thought part of the solution the libraries have set up was to setup a database so that different libraries can trade on what CDs they are getting in their settlement.

However, regardless, I think this is quite a despicable thing to do, not that I would expect anything less from the RIAA>

Re:this has been brought up MULTIPLE times already

[Txiasaeia]

Yeah, but does the US library system as a whole really need 1,235 copies of Whitney Houston's 1991 recording of "The Star-Spangled Banner"?

Re:this has been brought up MULTIPLE times already

[bool morpheus()]

I don't think it even needs 1. =)

BlackListing?

[MacFury]

Since the RIAA are pricks...could we blacklist their execs. I'm sure it's being too idealistic...but if we refused to do anything for them...then their lives wouldn't be so great.

Want to go to McDonalds and have a big mac? Sorry, we won't serve you because you're an asshole.

Do it to them everywhere everytime until the change their ways.

It's nice to dream once in awhile..

Re:BlackListing?

[boudie]

That be one long blacklist.

Re:BlackListing?

[jhunsake]

I don't know why this is being modded Flamebait. It's the best idea ever!

Re:BlackListing?

[treat]

Want to go to McDonalds and have a big mac? Sorry, we won't serve you because you're an asshole.

Yeah, one megacorporation is going to punish another megacorporation for mistreating consumpers. Right.

Besides, this is probably illegal in the US. I remember there was an incident where a restauraunt refused to serve OJ Simpson, citing a "no murderers" policy. They lost.

Re:BlackListing?

[Exiler]

I don't know how many execs from fortune 500 corporations eat at McDonalds. Most of them have moved on up to Wendy's.

Re:BlackListing?

[jhunsake]

Got a link to back up that story? Most restaurants reserve to the right to deny service to anyone, and they do so legally (as long as it isn't in a broad stroke to a protected class).

Re:BlackListing?

[payndz]

Nice idea, but the RIAA execs are unlikely to eat at McPuke's. They're more likely to be eating veal and caviar off the ass of a supermodel.

Now if you're a supermodel, the plan may work. "No veal for you!"

Re:BlackListing?

[foidulus]

Technically they are allowed to deny service based on the color of your skin, but only if you do not participate in any way in inter-state commerce. The supreme court enforced the anti-segregation laws by using the government's power over interstate commerce. That is how they manage to legally be able to tell people what they can do with their property.
Nothing like a bit of constitutional trivia on a Sunday!
source

Re:BlackListing?

[jhunsake]

Only if they don't want to violate federal law. Too bad most states have anti-discriminatory laws as well.

Re:BlackListing?

[Ath]

No no no NO! Completely wrong understanding of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The interstate commerce section was used as the reason Congress had the power to require restaurants and hotels not to discriminate based on race.

The federal law needed a basis for why Congress had the authority to do it. The Supreme upheld the use of the interstate commerce clause as the grant of power.

There is absolutely no exception that a business can make in one of the defined areas (hotels and restaurants being two of them) that would allow them to discriminate based on race. None! I don't care if it is a small mom-n-pop hotel in the middle of a swamp. If they rent rooms to the public, then they cannot discriminate.

Re:BlackListing?

[argent]

So does this mean that "accused murderer" is a legally recognised race?

Re:Willenium

[Echnin]

Some day, when I'm famous enough, I, too, will have the honor of being called an asshole on Slashdot. Or asshat by people who spend too much time on Fark in addition.

Honestly...

[Anonymous Coward]

Does anybody really expect any better from these slimeballs?

Another Day...

[One Childish N00b]

...another tantrum from the RIAA.

When are they going to realise that when people hear about them doing this stuff, it makes them less inclined to buy their content? RIAA tantrums induce piracy because of the affect on thousands of people every time who will refuse to buy crap from such a selfish company.

All companies are out to make money, but haven't the RIAA heard of a little thing called 'PR'? They spend enough trying to make their latest teeny-pop artist look 'cool' and 'must buy' - why don't they pool their marketing expertise and realise that when they do things like this, they make themselves look bad and in turn discourage people from buying from them - effectively inducing piracy.

Also, how many copies of 'Willennium' do they have to distribute? Every time I see an announcement like this they're handing out a new 3-figure sum of the damn things to some poor public institute!

Re:Another Day...

[Saven Marek]

They spend enough trying to make their latest teeny-pop artist look 'cool' and 'must buy' - why don't they pool their marketing expertise and realise that when they do things like this, they make themselves look bad and in turn discourage people from buying from them - effectively inducing piracy.

The general population will remember the new teeny popper for the next six months, and buy copies. They will simultaneously forget this news article by tomorrow afternoon

Re:Another Day...

[Anonymous Coward]

When are they going to realise that when people hear about them doing this stuff, it makes them less inclined to buy their content?

They realise two things:

a)their target demographic (children aged 11-21) are either not going to hear about it, or not care, or can be easily fooled into supporting "alternative" artists (courtney love, limp bizkit) who talk shit about the RIAA, but still whore out for them

b)their target audience reallly has no where else to turn to (very few people have the stomach to listen to third-rate techno, folk, punk or metal. And they're certainly not going to pay for it).

In short, the RIAA KNOWS it has nothing to worry about.

Re:Another Day...

[rokzy]

yes this kind of thing makes me happy their music is being pirated and without any sympathy at all. they've completely removed the moral argument from piracy.

when you're as big as the RIAA, anything you do in public is an advertisement.

I hope the RIAA is monitoring all this:

IF YOU WANT A PICTURE OF THE FUTURE, IMAGINE SOMEONE GIVING YOU THE FINGER. FOREVER.

Re:Another Day...

[rpj1288]

That's the problem. People DON'T hear about these things. I watch the news daily, both local and national, and yet I never hear anything about these kinds of things which create uproars on slashdot.

Re:Another Day...

[Chris84000000]

why don't they pool their marketing expertise and realise that when they do things like this, they make themselves look bad and in turn discourage people from buying from them - effectively inducing piracy.

Well then let's hope the INDUCE act passes, then we can nail them for inducing their own piracy!

Re:Another Day...

[/dev/trash]

exactly.

If women would stop provoking men, they wouldn't get beat up all the time.

Re:Another Day...

[Anonymous Coward]

When are they going to realise that when people hear about them doing this stuff, it makes them less inclined to buy their content?

Bottom line, this is what average consumers want: They want to go to their mall and into Sam Goody's and buy a CD of a song they heard on the radio, so they can put in their player in the car and listen to it with their friends while they're "Lovin' It"(tm) at McDonalds.

A lot of consumers only care about these things, and barely give passing thoughts to the RIAA's practices. In other words, you're preaching to the wrong crowd, buddy. Just TRY to get through to the "I'm Lovin' It"(tm) people, just TRY. They could honestly care less.

Re:Another Day...

[Anonymous Coward]

"they make themselves look bad and in turn discourage people from buying from them - effectively inducing piracy."

Hey, why not suggest a suit agaisnt them under the INDUCE act?

Just a thought...

Related Article

[TheFlyingGoat]

There's more info at the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. Among the quotes: 'She said there was even mold growing on a few of the 520 CDs received in Mequon - a five-disk 1999 set titled "Respect: A Century of Women in Music." ... It was disappointing because we could have actually used that one'. As a Milwaukee resident I know I'll be running to the library to check a few of these out. :P

Duh!

[HeyLaughingBoy]

What else did anyone expect? If you force me to give away 10% of my possessions of course I'm going to find the 10% of crap that I don't like, never use, or can't even sell at a garage sale. Goodbye argyle socks!

Want a real settlement? Should have made the terms such that they only give away Top 100 stuff or something like that (or better yet, cash!); otherwise there are no grounds for complaint.

Besides, I'm pretty sure that in a country of almost 300M people, at least a few like Whitney Houston

Re:Duh!

[Anonymous Coward]

Besides, I'm pretty sure that in a country of almost 300M people, at least a few like Whitney Houston

A few? You'll find that there must be a dozen of us AT LEAST!

Re:Duh!

[DosBubba]

Not even Whitney Houston likes Whitney Houston...

Re:Duh!

[treat]

Want a real settlement? Should have made the terms such that they only give away Top 100 stuff or something like that (or better yet, cash!); otherwise there are no grounds for complaint.

They *did*. RTFA.

Re:Duh!

[sinnfeiner1916]

arglye socks are bad-ass.... racist!! paddy-hater!!!

Re:Duh!

[antiMStroll]

Isn't part of compliancy with a legal decision "good will", the implicit assumption the guilty will do the best to comply with the penalty phase? Personally, I think the RIAA's actions are excellent, they display the same contempt for the courts of law as for consumers. Maybe this will be enough to make some of the human turnips warming judge's benches sit up and notice.

Re:Duh!

[Anonymous Coward]

shut your piehole you dirty potatoe eater!

Re:Duh!

[Richard_at_work]

I steal music and I'm proud of it!

Im sorry, but with that statement I class you no better than them.

Re:Duh!

[angle_slam]

Want a real settlement? Should have made the terms such that they only give away Top 100 stuff or something like that (or better yet, cash!); otherwise there are no grounds for complaint.

Who's to judge quality? Will Smith and Whitney Houston were pretty damn popular at one time so RIAA would respond, "it did reach the top 100, top 10 in fact."

Re:Duh!

[MunchMunch]

"Besides, I'm pretty sure that in a country of almost 300M people, at least a few like Whitney Houston"

Yeah, I'm reading a book about one of them now.

Re:Duh!

[Barto]

A "real" settlement would have been in cash, because any allowing companies to settle using what they produce will ALWAYS result in a reversal of the intended outcome: for example Microsoft using settlements to convert poor schools to Windows school.

Re:Duh!

[HeyLaughingBoy]

the implicit assumption the guilty will do the best to comply with the penalty phase?

I believe it is; however, even more important is that they comply with the letter of the decision. So if you do, and you can also make a case that you're trying to do it to reasonable expectations, you're probably going be OK.

Re:Duh!

[zeroduck]

And they're so embarrased that they want to keep their love of Whitney Houston anonymous?

Re:Duh!

[Anonymous Coward]

It takes evil to fight evil, havn't you seen the chronicles of Riddik?

Aren't you learning ANYTHING? That's the MPAA, man! Also, it was a pretty shitty star vehicle (I wouldn't go as far as to call it a movie), according to Rottemtomatoes.

Re:Duh!

[Anonymous Coward]

Besides, I'm pretty sure that in a country of almost 300M people, at least a few like Whitney Houston

They're called "drug dealers". Hey, Benz' and Benjamins don't grow on trees!

Did somebody say "Micahel Bolton?"

[crimethinker]

"I gotta tell you, I'm a huge fan of Michael Bolton. Of course, you must be an even bigger fan, what with you having the same name."

"Um, yeah, he's OK."

...

"I told those fudge-packers I liked Michael Bolton's music."

-paul

typo?

[Lehk228]

blacklist^WKill

much better

Idiots

[sheldon]

And I'm not talking about the RIAA.

What did you expect?

Frankly I think it's a creative point-making excercise by the RIAA. You complain about good CDs costing money, but you forget the fact that they've got 10,000 copies of Whitney Houston's recording of the Star Spangled banner sitting in a warehouse cause nobody wants that crap.

For every good CD that you want to buy, there are 20 others published that very few people give a shit about.

The CD prices are fine, quit your whining. If you don't like it, don't buy CDs! That's the only way you are going to hurt them, with your free market wallet.

Re:Idiots

[Anonymous Coward]

But if all the major publishers form a cartel and collude to ARTIFICIALLY FIX PRICES ABOVE THE MARKET LEVEL then that's not the free market!

AH DUH!

Re:Idiots

[duffel]

That's the only way you are going to hurt them, with your free market wallet.

I'm sorry, but how does the RIAA function according to the "Free Market" rules?

Re:Idiots

[t_allardyce]

Their bad stock management is not our problem. They've had 20 years to perfect the process of making CDs cheaply and predict what the market wants. 10,000 copies of whitney is probably not even worth the cost of having it dumped in a land-fill so dumping it in a library really helps them out.

Re:Idiots

[Anonymous Coward]

The CD prices are fine, quit your whining. If you don't like it, don't buy CDs! That's the only way you are going to hurt them, with your free market wallet.

Oh no no no! If you don't buy CDs, the RIAA will simply have "undeniable proof" that piracy has caused a drop in sales.

Re:Idiots

[Kevitt]

On the other hand, that's probably the best vocal rendition of the Star Spangled Banner that I've ever heard.

Re:Idiots

[antiMStroll]

Any other industry that inefficient and incompetent would be long gone. Only through the force of legislation far reaching enough to threaten the free movement of information for all, coupled with insane and rampant celebrity worship and dishonest politicians, can this most disposable of all industries get away with this kind of crap.

Re:Idiots

[gilroy]

Blockquoth the poster:

I'm sorry, but how does the RIAA function according to the "Free Market" rules?

Because the price of a song fluctuates in response to the differentiated desires of the consumer population, of course... oh, wait, I'm sorry. There's that whole price-fixing thing. Carry on.

Re:Idiots

[hendersj]

CD prices are fine? Then why were they convicted of price fixing?

The promise of CDs back when they first came out was that they were cheaper to produce than cassettes. Yet the cost of CDs has consistently - since the release of the CD as a format - has been higher than cassettes.

RIAA have the nerve to claim piracy is cutting into their profits, yet they are convicted of price fixing. Could it possibly be that the prices they've fixed are not prices the market will bear for the crap they produce? No, it has to be pirates, it couldn't be that RIAA turns out total crap and then tries to charge a price that the market simply won't bear.

Myself, I stopped buying large amounts of CDs years ago. I don't download, and I don't pirate songs, I just haven't found much worth paying any amount of money for in probably the last 5 years, and those that were worth paying for weren't worth the asking price. The few CDs I've purchased in the last few years have been used, because those prices are a lot more reasonable and in line with the actual value of the content on the discs.

Every year I vote against Hatch (I live in Utah) and every year that bastard continues to get elected.

Re:Idiots

[Saeger]

Because a free market means I'm free to form price-fixing cartels, you insensitive clod. And it means I'm free to lobby a fascist government for business-model protection. duh.

--

Re:Idiots

[DakotaK]

I live in Utah
I'm sorry.

Seriously though, how the hell does Hatch keep getting elected? He's proven he's a complete dumbshit more times than I can count, and not just on tech issues.
I haven't bought a RIAA-sanctioned CD in a long time - not that the artists I listen to (ska for the most part) are on them to begin with, but I steer clear of any bands that do sign on with them. Going to the shows and buying merch there is still the best way to support the artist directly. I do download music, and am aware it's illegal...problem is that I, along with most others, simply don't care that it's illegal. I support the artist (though I'm sure most of the leeches don't) by going to their shows.

Re:Idiots

[silverhalide]

"For every good CD that you want to buy, there are 20 others published that very few people give a shit about."

Close... I recall seeing a statistic a while back that something like 90-98% of all releases don't sell over 500 copies.

Re:Idiots

[hendersj]

No, I know what you mean. Hatch has been in office so long, it's absurd. He voted against ERA, and that was how long ago?

Our other representatives, Jim Matheson, for example, aren't much better either. On the national level, Utah is very poorly represented when it comes to individual interests. Matheson sees INDUCE as a good thing as well, even though he stated in his letter back to me that fair use was very important. He then went on to talk about how important a piece of legislation INDUCE is. Talk about two-faced. *sigh*

Local government in Salt Lake City is pretty decent, though - the mayors of SLC and of Salt Lake County are both not republican, so we get some balance in the city. But it sucks knowing that when I cast my vote for "the other guy", it isn't going to influence the electors one iota.

Re:Idiots

[dirk]

You know, I'm getting tired of explaining this every time there is an RIAA article, but I'll do it again anyway.

The price-fixing had nothing to do with the high prices of CDs. The RIAA was threatening not giving advertising budget and/or materials to places like Best Buy who were willing to sell CDs AT A LOSS just to get people in the store. It didn't say the RIAA was overcharging for CDs. It said they couldn't force prices on chain stroes to protect music only stores whoa re being hurt by by chains selling prices below or at cost to try and get people into the store in hopes they will buy something else (which is higher priced and has more markup).

So yes, the RIAA was convicted of price fixing. But, no, that settlement did not have to do with the perceived "high price of CDs". It had to do with the RIAA doing the right thing (in my opinion) and trying to protect small, music-only specialty stores from being run out of business by large chains like Best Buy, Target, and WalMart.

Re:Idiots

[Anonymous Coward]

How can you vote against Hatch every year? He's a Senator, so he's only up for election every six years!

Re:Idiots

[geweke]

You vote against Hatch every year?

Interesting electoral system you have for Senators there in Utah.

Re:Idiots

[MourningBlade]

Every year I vote against Hatch (I live in Utah) and every year that bastard continues to get elected.

Maybe you should try voting for him one year, see if there's any change.

Re:Idiots

[hendersj]

I should've finished the sentence, which was "every time he's up for re-election".

Re:Idiots

[hendersj]

While I find what you wrote to actually be interesting and informative, it still does not address the underlying issue of RIAA charing prices that the market simply will not bear - as shown by their own sales figures - in spite of the fact that it's cheaper to press CDs than it is to duplicate cassettes.

If they did not charge ridiculously high prices, the music-only stores could do better business. The mega-super-ultramarts of the world are a huge problem in the retail space, but the problem with them has to be addressed outside of any particular industry. They treat their employees like crap, they ship manufacturing jobs outside the country, but people shop there because of the lower prices. If RIAA wanted to help out with that, they could put some of the vast amount of money in their coffers into legislation that protects the smaller businesses all around, rather than using schemes that are patently illegal.

Re:Idiots

[HeyLaughingBoy]

they were cheaper to produce than cassettes

That's right: cheaper to produce. What makes you think they'll sell for less?

Basic economics (from a software engineer, no less :-)
I am selling apples for $1.50 per lb and my gross profit is $0.25 per lb.
Now, I find a way to drop my cost by $0.75, so I could in theory drop my price by the same amount and still make the same profit. But I have little incentive to do so. I already know you'll pay $1.50/lb so why should I lower my prices? I already sell out all the apples my distributor can get to me, so there's no way I could sell more even if I lowered the price, so I keep selling them for $1.50/lb and now make $1.00 in profit.

Now do you get it?

Re:Idiots

[hendersj]

Yes, cheaper to produce. Typically, you make customers happy by passing that savings along to them. Basic retail principles. And happy customers are returning customers - which are a lot less expensive to get in the door than new customers.

I worked in the IT department for one of the largest (and most successful) food & drug retailers in the US for 6 years. The business wanted to ensure that the IT workers designing systems understood how the business actually works, and as a result, my job was predicated upon understanding how this works. So yes, I do in fact get it.

The economic principles of supply and demand are that you look for the price point that allows you to sell your inventory, keeping less stale inventory (which costs money - not moving stock is quite expensive). Now, if you have a situation where you have too much stock on hand, you lower your price to move the stock. If you have too little on hand, you increase the price or you increase your inventory. Both can make you more money in the short term and potentially in the long term.

Now if consumers have an alternative, and the alternitave is less expensive than your product, some will still shop with you, but many will go to the competitor.

When an alternative appears on the scene, and you have a means of lowering your cost of production, you can compete more effectively by lowering your price by passing along that savings.

Now, when CDs first hit the mass market back in the mid-to-late 80's, the industry needed to achieve critical mass in order to lower their costs of production. Now there's more inventory to be moved, but the market size has stayed relatively the same. Principles of economics dictate that with a decreasing demand, you lower prices in order to entice consumers to purchase your product - especially if you have an excess of inventory - but if consumers aren't buying, lowering your prices is the way to move your inventory. The retailers do have to make a profit, because they have bills to pay - so RIAA keeping their price point high in order to continue to live like 'fat cats' means the retailers are stuck with the short end of the stick. They *have* to charge enough to make a margin that lets them pay their bills, or they go out of business. The supply chain for music is seriously bloated, and that needs to be dealt with.

Instead of doing what basic economic principles dictate they should do, RIAA starts suing their customers, blaming downloads/p2p networks for their current sales "slump" - as if they're OWED a living. They're not, any more than I am.

When consumers know your margin is high, it does nothing more than piss them off. Pissed off customers are customers who don't return. The cost of acquiring new customers is significantly higher than the cost of retaining old customers.

RIAA has pissed off a significant portion of their customer base by not passing savings along to consumers.

Re:Idiots

[HeyLaughingBoy]

When an alternative appears on the scene, and you have a means of lowering your cost of production, you can compete more effectively by lowering your price by passing along that savings

Which is why I was careful to state that prior to the $0.75 improvement on the cost side, all available supply was being moved quickly. In that scenario there is no incentive to lower prices and I think the record companies find themselves in a similar situation.

Re:Idiots

[dasdrewid]

Tell me, please tell me, why the F*** they even *made* 10,000 copies of Whitney Houston's recording of the Star Spangled Banner?

Good CDs do cost too much money, and complaining that it's because they over-produced Whitney is not a reasonable answer. In any business class, that'd get you big, fat F. That's called "Screwing up." It's not an inherant problem of making music, but it is an inherant problem with *their* system of it. Like the article a few weeks ago about how end-sales have gone up while shipped CDs have gone down. It's because stores are getting smarter about ordering only what they are going to sell. Yet the RIAA blames it on piracy, being very quick to ignore the end-sale numbers.

If they lose money because they do a bad job predicting how well Whitney is gonna sell, it's their problem, not ours. If a stock broker mis-analyzes a stock and loses money, he doesn't take it out on his clients, HIS CLIENTS TAKE IT OUT ON HIM. And if he tries to get legislation to make sure that his clients can't do so by switching to another stock broker (they could start doing all the buying and selling and research themselves or just take their money out of the market completely, but those really aren't realistic possibilities), they whack him. And not with a rolled up newspaper...

I'm sorry, but the RIAA hasn't had a viable defense in years. And everytime they look like they've found one, assuming it didn't have enough holes to see daylight through to begin with, they put twice as many in it on their own.

Re:Idiots

[hendersj]

I would disagree, and RIAA's citing of "rampant piracy" would seem to support my point of view in this.

Legal or not, there is an alternative means to getting their product. While I don't download music myself (there not being much worth acquiring at this time IMNSHO), if it were more cost effective for me to go to the store and purchase it than waste time downloading it, then it would be a no-brainer decision how to acquire the product.

I don't see CDs moving to the point that the supply is being moved quickly. Maybe it's just the market I'm in, but it seems that there is sufficient stagnant inventory on the shelves of the music stores.

When there is healthy competition, a lowering in cost of production is passed along simply to compete more effectively. When there isn't, the cost of product can be maintained at an artificially high price. That's the situation the music industry is in right now - and RIAA doesn't want that to change because they can't adapt to deal with sales in an internet-connected world.

There's a very old principle in retail. Adapt or Die. It's time they did one or the other.

Libraries selling CD's

[Anonymous Coward]

I live in Wisconsin and at the New Berlin Library they have a table with a bunch of these CDs on sale for about 3 bucks each, I have been there a few times after they set it up and to my surprise many of the CDs had been bought. It was rather entertaining to see the library selling Wu Tang albums.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Here's the best idea and it only took 15 seconds

[orionware]

Here's what I think would have been the fairest to the consumers.

Every time an album hits #1, the industry must give out 10,000 copies. When they've given out their quota this practice stops.

How hard was that?

Re:You voted for the RIAA

[erick99]

Ya know, before you adapt such a shrill tone and make wild assumptions, you might have asked those questions, first. However, I think it is more fun for you to behave like a self righteous shill for the cause-of-the-day. I don't buy their music. I do buy from local bands. My collection is stuck somewhere in the 80's. Oh, and you can go to hell.

Cheers!

Erick

Safeguards against dumping ignored?

[alangmead]

The article says:

To prevent the companies from dumping unwanted inventory, lawyers for the states came up with a formula based on how much time artists spent on the Billboard charts, Wisconsin Assistant Attorney General Eric Wilson said. But he conceded, "it may be hard to believe looking at the selections."

but the results don't seem to stack up. Does anyone know what the formula they came up with? From the small description there, I can imagine a few possible flaws. Either there was some minimum price, which encouraged the shipment of many, many slow moving items, or it was based on the Billboard charts results for the artist, not the album. (Will Smith and Whitney Houston have both made some very popular works, but the albums being reported to be distributed aren't among their most notable ones.)

Re:Safeguards against dumping ignored?

[Stick_Fig]

I bet you, if you searched for some of these CDs, you'd find that the bulk of them didn't actually hit the charts, which would be a boo-boo on the RIAA's part.

Let's see the proof in the pudding.

I can't even find the Martha Stewart one on allmusic.

No different than the deal with MS

[WindBourne]

Folks,
This was lost when the deal was made. It was intended for exactly this to happen. It is nice to speak about the "spirit" of the deal, but politicians and lawyers wrapped this up long ago.

Classical Music

[nick.cash]

It seems like about half of what they got was classical music. To me, this makes a lot of sense for a library to have.

Now, the duplicates and Michael Bolton crap are certainly inexcusable, but the classical music seems perfectly legitimate.

Re:Classical Music

[medelliadegray]

its doubtful that the average person who uses a library will prefer to listen to classical music half of the time. Its a shame that this happened, if there was more modern music in the libraries, then youth may be more willing to go there willingly.

these were all on the billboard charts

[treat]

The article says: To prevent the companies from dumping unwanted inventory, lawyers for the states came up with a formula based on how much time artists spent on the Billboard charts,

But since the RIAA pays to get songs on the chart instead of it being based on quality or popularity, this is what you get.

Blame the lawyers this time. They knew what they were doing.

Re:these were all on the billboard charts

[Anonymous Coward]

Seriously, what lawyer logicians structured this deal? Over a thousand Whitney Houston CDs? WTF? They should have put limits on the number of CDs from a single artist.

Is it possible for the states to pay these lawyers in CDs?

Re:these were all on the billboard charts

[Sir Holo]

The article says: To prevent the companies from dumping unwanted inventory, lawyers for the states came up with a formula based on how much time artists spent on the Billboard charts,

But since the RIAA pays to get songs on the chart instead of it being based on quality or popularity, this is what you get.

Blame the lawyers this time. They knew what they were doing.

The key word in that quote from the WI Asst AG is how much time the artists spent on the Billboard charts. Should have been album. At least, if what the libraries wanted was current pop, which seemed to be the case.

Re:these were all on the billboard charts

[alangmead]

That quote doesn't imply that the albums were all on the Billboard chart. It says that the agreed on value of the CD was based on some formula that has something to do with the Billboard's charts. The albums that never made it could be distributed. Its just the record company would have to give away many more of the failures in order to make up the same dollar value.

Wow!

[Anonymous Coward]

Michael Bolton's "Timeless"? Finally a reason for me to use my library card!

Ode to Filesharing

[binaryspiral]

They say: Make it legal files, all you smart and shifty peeps
for an RIAA lawsuit will leave you on the streets.
Sure they're suing young and old people for sharing the tunes
but they're alienating their market - the stupid buffoons

Tomorrow are you sure you would buy from them?
The pricks just scored ten grand from mom of ten!
In the 90's when CD price-fixing was raging full on
I paid over $30 per disc, RIAA you stupid greedy moron

And now that I have the simple, easy, anonymous way to score
free music from you - go blow me, you selfish whore
Music industry, I find your ethics a royal joke
You'd rather pay millions to a pop singer stoned on coke

Keep going down the evil road you travel
I enjoy watching your business model unravel
Your death grip of online tune sources will get weak
Then iTunes, Napster, and the bands will then speak

They'll market directly to the fans that gladly pay
while keeping your greedy lawyers at bay
you'll see, mark my words I am here to say,
I will enjoy that one, beautiful, precious day

Give the library the choice?

[Anonymous Coward]

I cant fathom why the libraries weren't allowed to choose the CDs.

By giving the labels the ability to choose what they hand out is obviously going to lead to them dish out whatever at the minimal cost, hence they dump CD's that were too crap to meet sales expectations, and which they wont lose sales due to the rentals. Giving "aid" where the recipient has no choices has been proved again and again to be highly inefficient.

The labels are supposed to be getting punished, not awarded some trivial exercise in PR.

RTFA

[wmansir]

To prevent the companies from dumping unwanted inventory, lawyers for the states came up with a formula based on how much time artists spent on the Billboard charts, Wisconsin Assistant Attorney General Eric Wilson said. But he conceded, "it may be hard to believe looking at the selections."

Re:RTFA

[HeyLaughingBoy]

how much time artists spent on the Billboard charts

I seem to remember both Whitney Houston & Will Smith having top ten hits. Just not from these CDs... Their lawyers found a loophole and this surprises you?

I'm listening to "Willenium" right now

[Anonymous Coward]

and what's funny is that it's a copy of the original disc. The original is sitting in a drawer filled with stationary crap and other misc junk that only sees the light of day at Christmas time.

Originally when I bought it, I thought "hey, this shiat is gonna be worth like a lot of money someday at the pawn shop.. maybe even full price!" but oh, how I was wrong about that.

If I would have known that public libraries would just be given Willenium for free in 2004, I would have waited to listen to this masterpiece.

Anyone want to buy this historical album from me?

Re:I'm listening to "Willenium" right now

[Anonymous Coward]

For those of you that are wondering how I managed to make a copy of Willenium, and then years later managed to sell the unopened original disc on eBay.. wonder no more -- I copied the CD with my mind :)

Money is all they understand

[t_allardyce]

The hole thing is a farse, companies shouldnt be able to make settlements by giving away products that have low physical value but high retail value. How much is this really costing them? They should be giving away money and lots of it. To me..

OJ didn't do it...

[CaptainPinko]

...as far as the law is concerned. He could admit to it and you could have 10 different witness there at the scene of the crime with it all on video tape and I'm quite sure IANAL that you would still have to treat him like any other innocent person since he was found innocent in his criminal trial. Everything else doesn't matter in the eyes of the law. But irregardless I fail to see what relevance your OJ annecdote has to do with blacklisting corporations.

Re:OJ didn't do it...

[Anonymous Coward]

wtf does "irregardless" mean?

Re:OJ didn't do it...

[Anonymous Coward]

Ya but he was found guilty in his civil trial.

Re:OJ didn't do it...

[Anonymous Coward]

adv : regardless; a combination of irrespective and regardless sometimes used humorously - dictionary.com

Re:OJ didn't do it...

[CaptainPinko]

Why don't you ask Webster's Dictionary?

It ain't perfect english but then again this is only /. and for here it's good enough.

Grade schools got this stuff too...

[WareW01f]

My wife's school just got a box of CD's (which was out of the blue for them) It's a grade school. "Spooky Scary Sounds for Halloween from Martha Stewart" was one of the few CD's that was even useful. The principle basicly wanted the CD's off the school property. A letter with the CD's stated the following:

"We note that the CD's that are being distributed were selected will an eye towards making a distribution that is representative of all generes of prerecorded music. For that reason we wish to caution you that some materials being distributed may be suitable only for use by teenagers, yough adults or adults."

Um, ya. On a brighter note on things, despite the fact that a lot of the CD's where in fact cut-outs the letter goes on to state:

"If you receive CD's which are not appropriate or useful for you collection, or which are duplicative, you may wish to use those CD's for fund-rasing purposes, such as through library sales or auctions. However, if you do so, any funds raised must be used in a manner that complies with the settlement agreement as noted above."

So let me get this straight, they couldn't sell them, but we're welcome to try... Yah, thanks. Someone dropped the ball here. The music companies just basicly got a chance to clean out the warehouse. One of the CD they got was even smashed. I'm sure that the record companies where able to claim the full value of the CD as being donated, hell they are probably even going to get to write it off!

Ah well, at least this halloween the kids will have really spooky music to listen to. (Even spookyer now Martha's going to be an ex-con, eh?)

Re:Grade schools got this stuff too...

[wkitchen]

"If you receive CD's which are not appropriate or useful for you collection, or which are duplicative, you may wish to use those CD's for fund-rasing purposes, such as through library sales or auctions. However, if you do so, any funds raised must be used in a manner that complies with the settlement agreement as noted above."

That is interesting. Any chance you could fill us in on what kind of uses the agreement would or would not allow?

Re:Grade schools got this stuff too...

[WareW01f]

That is interesting. Any chance you could fill us in on what kind of uses the agreement would or would not allow?

Sorry, that's even better. From the letter:

"According to the settlement approved by the court, the CD's must be used to further music-related programs or purposes reasonably targeted to benefit a substantial number of the purchasers of compact discs and cannot be used to replace or supplant any funding for the purchase of pre-recorded music."

WTF? The school purchases CDs, but I wouldn't say that the kids qualify as "a substantial number of the purchasers of compact discs". (Course Kindergardeners do prolly drop a wad on Raffi CD's these days, right?) Maybe these are for the staff lounge? It's nice that they prevent the school from trying to cut any money gained out of the "Fund For The Purchase of Pre-Recorded Music" (which you know that all schools have) Wouldn't want any of this to hurt future sales, now would we? (Prolly another reason for sending crap they can't use.)

All I can say is that very few CDs in the box could "further music-related programs" on the grade school level, (Unless they add that new Aerosmith competency requirement to the standards) which makes the whole thing moot.

Re:Grade schools got this stuff too...

[silentbozo]

One of the CD they got was even smashed. I'm sure that the record companies where able to claim the full value of the CD as being donated, hell they are probably even going to get to write it off!

Of course they're going to write it off. According to US Tax code, if you have to pay out a judgement, that counts as a loss against profits, and IT IS PERFECTLY LEGAL TO WRITE THE ENTIRE THING OFF. In other words, if they win the lawsuit, they win. If they lose the lawsuit, they still win, money-wise, by getting a chance to write off garbage that was taking up valuable warehouse space, further reducing apparent profits, and thus cutting the amount of taxes they have to pay for the fiscal year.

What they should have done was to force the music industry to grant a certain number of yearly "credits" that could be used, either to purchase new CDs from current stock, or used to duplicate old stock (ie, via CD burners) so that libraries and schools could legally purchase and copy a "master" CD, instead of having to buy new recordings when the old ones wear out.

Re:Grade schools got this stuff too...

[Frank T. Lofaro Jr.]

"Spooky Scary Sounds for Halloween from Martha Stewart"

Such as the clank of a closing prison cell? :)

Re:You voted for the RIAA

[Omestes]

I've only bought one new CD in the last 3 years (A Perfect Circle: Thirteenth Step), and for that I got 10 people to chip in $1.50, then burned 10 copies of it. I figured this plan is a good compromise between supporting bands I respect, and screwing those nasty RIAA people.

Some bands under RIAA labels are still decent musicians, capable of decent and creative music. I wish there was a decent way to support them, and not their corporate overlords. I'm not going to boycott good music just because the RIAA sucks, this is shooting off my nose to spite my face.

Also most indie bands suck. I know this is a sin to say in some circles, where obscurity equals good. The sad fact is that most obscure bands suck. My local scene is choked with bad punk bands (whos only talent is producing mildly amusing covers, too bad that isn't my thing), amatuer death metal, and the garage band ressurection. Nothing I really want to hear. Though there are a couple small-venue bands that I have purchased CDs from, but most of those CDs are of poor quality.

I was thinking that if I stopped supporting RIAA attatched bands that I respect, that they might get a clue, and start some independant release scheme, but them realized that that is dumb. The majority of people will continue buying from RIAA folk, because that is what is available, and being with a big company affords visibility. Fleh.

Duhcracy

[Doc Ruby]

With Orrin Hatch as their champion in the Senate, the RIAA will get away with any stupid acts they deem profitable.

Not that bad

[challahc]

I'd rather bitch about the media on this one. I looked at the complete list from the other article, and I have to say it was pretty easy for them to go through the list pick out some crap and make it look horrible. For example, they mention "Entertainment Weekly: The Greatest Hits 1971" well what about the other ones that were included 1965 - 1993. For a library that is a pretty good set.

Not that I like the RIAA, but really I don't think it is as bad as it looks from the articles.

Re:Not that bad

[dema]

Its understandable to say the media may have picked what they wanted to highlight. And maybe some people would love to check out Entertainment Weekly: The Greatest Hits 1971. But do you really think a library needs 375 copies of it? IMO, the problem here is quantity, not quality (although I am in no way implying that any of the quality is good, again, IMO).

Re:Not that bad

[rlp]

The media sorted the list in descending order by quantity. And yes, the top items on the list are 'junk'.

Re:Not that bad

[Anonymous Coward]

Not that I like the RIAA, but really I don't think it is as bad as it looks from the articles.

All news media (and that includes slashdot) stretch the truth if it will get them ratings/page hits/etc.

Actually, I'm surprised at how low slashdot has dropped on the Intentionally Misleading Headline scale. They are after page hits (read: money), and nothing else. They've just got a good gimmick (target the geeks!) and are pumping it for all it's worth.

Re:Not that bad

[Stick_Fig]

The good stuff (the best recent mainstream stuff I saw: Ben Folds Five, TWO Outkast discs (in fact their best two), Alice in Chains, Rage Against the Machine, and some good archive stuff by Johnny Cash, Merle Haggard, etc.) was only in small handfuls in comparision to the Whitney Houstons and Will Smiths in there. Putting a handful of good stuff in with the crap does not take one's eye off the huge amount of crap in the pile. I don't think the media sensationalized it one bit. If some truck driver dropped off 1,500 copies of the same CD of Whitney Houston singing the Star-Spangled Banner, wouldn't you be a little pissed too?

Re:Not that bad

[MrPerfekt]

Yeah, but a vast majority of the CDs with quantities over 100 are as noted "crap". Alot of the useful stuff (non-pop) has quantities of 1.

Re:Not that bad

[sanity_slipping]

From the spreadsheet that you linked to, these are the fifteen items with that they sent out the most of:

HOUSTON, WHITNEY: STAR SPANGLED BANNER*
1355 $4,314.32
Michael Bolton: TIMELESS
619 5932.5
ANTHONY LEWIS/ENGLIS CHAMBER ORCHESTRA PURCELL: DIDO & AENEAS
520 $4,567.68
Nas: NASTRADAMUS/CLEAN
517 4954.93
ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY: GREATEST HITS 1971
413 $3,297.39
Lehmann/BPO: Brah: German Req
393 $3,763.37
Big Pun/ Big Punisher: YEEEH BABY/CLEAN
387 $3,709.01
Eagle-Eye Cherry: DESIRELESS
372 $3,565.25
WHITE, BARRY: STAYING POWER
356 4835.9
ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY: GREATEST HITS 1981
351 $2,802.38
MONKS OF SILOS: MYSTERY OF SILOS
338 3239.39
Will Smith: WILLENNIUM
310 2971.04
KRAVITZ, LENNY: MAMA SAID
309 $2,961.46
ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY: GREATEST HITS 1993
269 $2,147.70
Carlos Santana/ Bill Laswell: DIVINE LIGHT
259 $2,896.66

Re:You voted for the RIAA

[Anonymous Coward]

I for one welcome our RIAA corporate overlords...no wait, what am I saying?! I wasn't thinking clearly for a second.

It's nice to know...

[DumbWhiteGuy777]

It's nice to know someone in the RIAA has a sense of humor.

Re:You voted for the RIAA

[ziggy_zero]

Also most indie bands suck.

This is most definitely true, but what you have to remember is almost ALL bands suck, regardless of genre or popularity.

It's all about wading through the mountains of crap to get to the good stuff.

You CAN support artists under the RIAA, by going to their concerts. The band gets a lot more percentage of the profit that way.

Dont think about the public ...

[polyp2000]

Think about how Michael Bolton feels, having been deposited from the rectum of RIAA unto the public library.

NOFX said it the best

[Anonymous Coward]

From NOFX-Dinosaurs Will Die

Kick back watch it crumble
See the drowning, watch the fall
I feel just terrible about it
That's sarcasm, let it burn

I'm gonna make a toast when it falls apart
I'm gonna raise my glass above my heart
Then someone shouts "That's what they get!"

For all the years of hit and run
For all the piss broke bands on VH1
Where did all, their money go?
Don't we all know

Parasitic music industry
As it destroys itself
We'll show them how it's supposed to be

Music written from devotion
Not ambition, not for fame
Zero people are exploited
There are no tricks, up our sleeve

Gonna fight against the mass appeal
We're gonna kill the 7 record deal
Make records that have more than one good song
The dinosaurs will slowly die
And I do believe no one will cry
I'm just fucking glad I'm gonna be
There to watch the fall

Prehistoric music industry
Three feet in la brea tar
Extinction never felt so good

If you think anyone would feel badly
You are sadly, mistaken
The time has come for evolution
Fuck collusion, kill the five

Whatever happened to the handshake?
Whatever happened to deals no-one would break?
What happened to integrity?
It's still there it always was
For playing music just because
A million reason why
All dinosaurs will die

Re:You voted for the RIAA

[Sexual Asspussy]

What the fuck did you just say? You actually gathered 10 friends to buy one fucking $15 CD and you call this a compromise involving -- how did you call it -- support bands you respect?

Let me break it down for you real slow.

Bands get JACK SHIT when 10 people buy 10 $15 CDs.

Bands get (say it with me you simple piece of shit) LESS THAN JACKSHIT when you start your own burning club.

I'm not saying I wouldn't copy music for ten friends of mine. Firstly, I'm making fun of you for not buying a $15 CD your damn self, having had three years to save up for it. I am also making fun of you for rationalizing that your little plan was to benefit anyone other than yourself, and was somehow, in your lukewarm, clotted brain's defective worldview, fair to bands. I think that makes you look very silly. Actually, not silly so much as Richard Simmons, Greg Louganis, bathhouse-scrubbing, popper-huffing, dying-of-mouse-pneumonia-at-38 gay.

Take some action

[serutan]

Does anybody still have sympathy for the RIAA any more? They've been acting like a bunch of selfish 4-year-olds for years. "They're only protecting their legal rights." Record companies excel at doing exactly what is required of them and nothing more. They've honed this skill over decades of writing usurious recording contracts. And when that's not enough they get new laws written to suit their needs. What they do is wrong.

If you live in Utah, please VOTE AGAINST Senator Orrin Hatch, the entertainment industry's number one toadie and one of the most technologically clueless legislators in the country. He's the guy who a couple years back said record companies should be allowed to attack the computers of people whom they suspected of copyright infringement.

If you live in Kansas, please VOTE FOR for Senator Sam Brownback, who introduced the bill last year that stopped the RIAA from getting rubber-stamped subpoenas for identities of internet users they decided had infringed them.

If you live anywhere else and you are interested in the copyright issue, don't just read Slashdot, look up your senator's voting record and vote accordingly.

Re:Take some action

[Dachannien]

Those in Virginia's 9th district should also keep Rep. Rick Boucher in mind as a crusader (and frequently a lone voice) for fair use and limited copyright as well as free (as in speech) innovation.

Re:Take some action

[0x0d0a]

Second the argument for Boucher (and don't live in Virginia, dammit).

Re:Take some action

[B.D.Mills]

Other action you can take:
Write to all current Congresspeople. The RIAA are once again trying to extend the copyright expiration term. Will this be the last time they seek to extend it, or will they eventually have it out to life + 500 years?

Speak out against copyright extension. Use this dumping of CD's on public libraries as evidence that the RIAA cannot be trusted.

Re:Take some action

[kamapuaa]

Does anybody still have sympathy for the RIAA any more?

Sure, as much as I would for any other big group of businessmen. As they don't have a stranglehold on popular music, musicians aren't forced into signing with them if they want to make a career out of music. Slashdot has a strong libertarian focus, and so it seems incredibly hypocritical to think big government should stop the RIAA from enforcing their contractual rights (or, musicians from signing contracts with the RIAA). Under a more libertarian system, RIAA-like groups would flourish.

And while I'm at it, popular music in the US may be inane, but I prefer it to popular music in Europe or Japan.

Re:Take some action

[Anonymous Coward]

ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.

I grew up Mormon and so I know... (nothing against Mormons, except thier blind ignorance to anything that is against what thier leaders say, but that's an issue with any major religion...)

There is no way in hell the Mormons in Utah are going to vote against Orrin Hatch.

From his own biography page:
"His great-grandfather, Jeremiah Hatch, founded what is now known as Vernal, located in eastern Utah's great Uintah basin. Senator Hatch married the former Elaine Hansen of Newton, Utah. They are the proud parents of six children and have twenty grandchildren."

He's a family man... and not just a family man, but the typical large-size Mormon family man. He's a Mormon poster child. The Mormons aren't going to vote against him.

Re:Take some action

[serutan]

RIAA companies can do anything they want with the artists they sign. My beef with record companies involves the extent to which they have arranged the laws to suit their needs. Nobody should be able to do that.

Speaking of contractual rights, copyright is a contract between the holder and the public. In exchange for paying the cost of enforcing the copyright, the work becomes public after a number of years. Oops, unless the entertainment industry bribes Congress to change the law.

So how is this that much different...

[Kevin Burtch]

How is this that much different from the gov't allowing Microsoft to pay off its penalties with vouchers for schools to get more Microsoft products?

OK, the Microsoft deal was worse, as it propogates their monopoly, but still... give one gigacorp a massive break, you have to give it to all of 'em, right?

Re:So how is this that much different...

[evilviper]

How is this that much different from the gov't allowing Microsoft to pay off its penalties with vouchers for schools to get more Microsoft products?

Because the schools get to choose which products they actually want... This is as if Microsoft decided that they all get a million copies of Windows 3.11.

Sure, it's slimy and underhanded, but it's much less slimy and underhanded than what the RIAA is doing.

Re:So how is this that much different...

[Kevin Burtch]

I dunno... I think the MS deal is worse, as the government is helping them maintain their monopoly, when they're supposed to be doing the exact opposite.

Both are sleazy, underhanded ways around a real penalty, but the record deal just dumps garbage, the MS deal ends up making them even more money and creating more people that think that MS is the only solution.

By the way - I love your .sig!

Re:So how is this that much different...

[evilviper]

I think the MS deal is worse, as the government is helping them maintain their monopoly

No, no... This isn't a case where schools were using Macs and Linux on a large scale, and are now going to switch... The fact is, schools use large quantities of Microsoft software, and would with or without this settlement.

It's sleasy, but it's going to have practically no effect on the market-share of Microsoft products.

Besides, giving junk CDs to librarys, instead of good CD (forcing people and librarys to buy them at full price) is also helping to perpetuate a monopoly (well, a cartel anyhow, or oligopoly, etc).

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

If the RIAA was ordered to pay libraries

[Orion Blastar]

a settlement, would they have used Confederate Dollars? :)

Actually have the libraries use eBay or half.com to sell off the extra CDs they don't want, and then buy the ones that they do want to have in stock. That way the RIAA doesn't get any more money from them.

Re:If the RIAA was ordered to pay libraries

[Lord Bitman]

you dont quite get it, do you? The reason the libraries dont want these CDs (and incidentally the exact same reason the RIAA is giving them these CDs) is there is absolutely no demand for them. Zero. How would eBay help? If you've found a way to sell things for which there is zero demand, please contact me and we can go into business (for a short time, before the whole of the world economy collapses due to fundamental laws of trade no longer having any meaning)

Smock knows

[isorox]

Milwaukee Public Library received 1,235 copies of Whitney Houston's 1991 recording of "The Star-Spangled Banner,"

"He would have to consult the ultimate source of knowledge, the font of all wisdom, the keepers of even the most obscure yet vital facts in the universe. He dialed the frequency of the Milwaukee Public Library Ready Reference service and crossed his fingers."

10 points for who "He" is

Re:Smock knows

[Anonymous Coward]

Ford Prefect?

Re:You voted for the RIAA

[Raul654]

I'd mod you +9 insightful if I could for speaking the utter, unvarnished truth. On the other hand, it's a shame that some zealots are going to come along and mod you down to -1 troll because they don't see the wisdom in what you speak.

spite

[Doc Ruby]

Everyone I ever knew who worked in management or promotion of pop music hates their customers. At best they're condescending, thinking of the public as millions of unpopular children in the playground, who depend on them, the popular kids, to "have a life". It's no surprise that, when these music biz bullies get power over the consumers, they shake them down and deride them at every opportunity

Re:Does using the word "continue" in the headline.

[Anonymous Coward]

No, that's only is they say "stonecutter".

Are you talking about the RIAA group NOFX?

[Anonymous Coward]

Is that the NOFX you mean?

Re:Are you talking about the RIAA group NOFX?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, the punk band NOFX...

Best quote of the article.

[u-235-sentinel]

"We definitely have duplicates and we have a lot of plain - is there a nicer word than junk?" Medenwaldt said.

Best quote of the article. It's no wonder that the music industry has been hurting for so long. They sell "junk" and people respond by not purchasing it. Obviously the RIAA is aware of this otherwise the CD's would never have been shipped to the libraries.

Very sad.

Re:Best quote of the article.

[zestymonkey]

They sell "junk" and people respond by not purchasing it.

Some of the mass-marketed overhyped junk has sold really well, but consumers have grown cynical of mainstream music and broadcast music radio.

Re:Best quote of the article.

[Anonymous Coward]

We definitely have duplicates and we have a lot of plain - is there a nicer word than junk?"

It's Slashdot without Natalie Portman!

RIAA is power

[Doc Ruby]

Of course the RIAA is fixated on the money - that's their only function, as an industry organization. But the real crime here is their monopolization of power over music consumption. Abuse of their market power was the damage proven in the case they lost. They compond that damage as they subvert the remedy. But their essential power remains unchallenged, as they get away with their unjust subversion, without threat to the perpetuation of their power.

no longer a consumer of music

[maryjanecapri]

as much as i hate this i'm no longer purchasing music unless i can buy it directly from the artist. i've grown so tired of the recording industry pulling lame stunts (and bending the laws just enough to suit their needs) like this that i can't willingly give them any more cash. i just hope like heck RUSH starts selling their own music or i'll be biting my tongue come their next release. never the less - up yours recording industry! this little stunt lost you a customer.

Is anyone really surprised?

[HangingChad]

A morally bankrupt industry pays off a judgment with crap product and probably has a good laugh about how it helped them dump excess inventory and they're probably getting a write off for it on top of that.

Makes you wonder if they're the exception or us.

and why

[Anonymous Coward]

Haven't we seen the artists stand up for their rights? I think it is the artists responsibilty to stand up to the riaa and say no and no to the record industry as well. Isn't it pretty much obvious by now who they really care about? If the artists are to protect their own future they should do so now and stand up and call a reform of the record industry.

Pennies on the dollar

[PMuse]

There's cheap, and then there's cheapskate. A settlement in which RIAA gives CDs to libraries should be what you call a win-win scenario. RIAA can produce at cost and claim a tax write-off at market price. The libraries theoretically get far more CDs than a money settlement from RIAA would every buy at market prices.

RIAA was already getting a great break on this deal. Donating unsellable crap* is just pathetic.

(*As opposed to sellable crap -- it's not like RIAA has very much "good music" after all.)

On Whitney..

[Zygote-IC-]

I don't like Whitney Houston's music. If I ever hear her version of "I will always love yoooooooooooooooooooooooooou" again I will likely slit my wrists.

All that being said, her rendition of the Star Spangled Banner in 1991 from Super Bowl 25 -- Giants 20, Buffalo 19, Scott Norwood missed -- was excellent. It brought tears to my eyes and NFL Films leads with it as their intro to their highlight film from the game.

But even I don't need 1,235 copies.

Re:On Whitney..

[geekoid]

down, not across.

Re:On Whitney..

[Lord Bitman]

what kind of pansy ass lame fuckwit chooses one or the other? Just sit there knifing your arms until it's hard to describe them as arms anymore.
PS: wrists are for asswipes anyway. Ram some knives into your guts and then we'll talk about who's hardcore.

Re:On Whitney..

[Anonymous Coward]

The point is to ensure that you cause a wound that will be fatal, as oposed to just cutting yourself up. A stabwound to the abdomen is fatal in 2-3 days, unless you hit a major blood vessel, which is damn hard to do.

The point of the wrists is that it's an easily accessable artery / vein that's about as close to a guarentee as anything. Strictly, the barachial artery in the upper arm is better, but is more tricky to find. The carotid arteryin the neck is actually probably the best one, as it'll empty the body quickly, is easy to cut, and pretty irreversable.

It's also probably the hardest thing to do, to cut your own neck. Hence, the wrist. If you want to claim hardcore, go for the neck. But forget about the abdomon, unless you want to wake up a couple of days later.

Oh, and the point about down, not across, is so that you don't sever the tendons, so that you can pick up the knife in your other hand, and cut open the other wrist. That's pretty hardcore...

Re:1,235 Copies

[Anonymous Coward]

Pay to throw them away, of course. You could potentially cause a business to close up shop by giving them more stuff than they can afford to have thrown away. (it costs my retail business a couple grand to have the trash picked up, although we use rather large dumpsters).

You forgot the best line.

[Feztaa]

Samir: "You know there's nothing wrong with that name."

Michael Bolton: "There was nothing wrong with it... until I was about 12 years old and that no-talent ass clown became famous and started winning Grammys."

Re:You voted for the RIAA

[fleener]

> I was thinking that if I stopped supporting
> RIAA attatched bands that I respect, that they
>might get a clue, and start some independant
> release scheme, but them realized that that is dumb.

It's that kind of thinking that keeps RIAA and Microsoft in power. It's also what keeps America's political duopoly in power, but that's a separate debate.

Correction

[bezuwork's friend]

OJ didn't do it...
...as far as the law is concerned.

That's true for the criminal case. However, he was found guilty in the civil one.

Re:Correction

[Anonymous Coward]

He couldn't be found "guilty" in a civil trial. It's gibberish to suggest it. He was found liable, and not of course for "murder", again that isn't a concept that civil law deals with.

Re:You voted for the RIAA

[fleener]

Thanks. Many good posts get modded as flamebait simply because the moderator disagrees. For a 1 point message, it takes only one moderator to vanquish your idea, so low now that other moderators will never look at it. God forbid I should suggest people buy direct from local bands instead of RIAA labels. How shocking of me to flame such an idea! I'm a bad boy!

Your sig ruins the whole tone of your post.

[Anonymous Coward]

that's why I've always hated "happy" sigs like Cheers, and whatnot.

Re:Your sig ruins the whole tone of your post.

[Anonymous Coward]

I completely agree, to the point that I "Foe" anyone ending their posts with "Cheers!" (especially a negative post) or a "forced .sig" (one that you can't disable through preferences).

Think!

[not_hylas( )]

Think about it ... They're playing right into our hands,
The RIAA has had an opportunity to set an example of conduct, showing "downloaders" what they consider "doing the right thing (tm)" is.
This (one of many examples) should ring in the ears of musicians/music makers affiliated with this organization.

Independents will fill this void rapidly with their wares.
If you think that this is impossible, check some of the grassroots efforts - here's an example (click above).

I hope the RIAA continues in this vein, we'll have better music and the money will end up in a more proper place.

nothing stopping the artists themselves....

[zogger]

... from just ceasing doing business with the promoters and professional copiers/distributors of the RIAA and getting their own organization. For all I know it may exist. They voluntarily agree to use these guys services, so it's a binary choice then, you can support RIAA represented music, or not. the bands can use RIAA companies, or not. Seems simple enough. If we DIDN'T have the net and alternative ways to hear and get music, I'd say it would be tough, but not now, it's possible and do-able to bypass the RIAA folks. that's as much of a clue as they are gonna get I think.

Besides that, the government is always talking about this alleged "terrorist al queda chatter" on these various Islamic websites. Maybe *someone* might accidently just go post there that the RIAA thinks muslims are teh suck and neener neener and various troll stuff like that there leave their addresses and names..... %^)

Re:You voted for the RIAA

[Omestes]

I agree, it is that type of thinking that lets these big nasties exist. But, sadly (and contrary to the cliche) one person does not make a difference, especially in a world where 90% of the people don't give a shit, or are just plain ignorant. Also, how would my not buying a CD tranfer my intent to the artist? Abscence does not contain any clear meaning, it could attributed to piracy, or lack of interest, or a myriad of other things that would lead to a (minute) drop in sales.

Second Hand CD's

[slasher999]

I starting going to ebay first when I want a "new" CD. I look for second hand copies. I figure I have enough old CD's that I don't listen to any more - many are going on ebay on a regular basis. From the looks of ebay a lot of other people are in the same boat. Granted, this isn't a perfect solution but it does help limit the number of CD's that the RIAA makes money on. Why buy a new one and put more money in their pocket (along with the 50 cents or so the artists get) when there are so many neglected copies out there looking for a new home?

Dinosaurs Will Die

[delirium of disorder]

The RIAA should be forced to buy librarys non-riaa music. The indys make a better product so us library goers would benifit, and such a ruling would help competition in the industry. Kick back watch it crumble See the drowning, watch the fall I feel just terrible about it That's sarcasm, let it burn I'm gonna make a toast when it falls apart I'm gonna raise my glass above my heart Then someone shouts "That's what they get!" For all the years of hit and run For all the piss broke bands on VH1 Where did all, their money go? Don't we all know Parasitic music industry As it destroys itself We'll show them how it's supposed to be Music written from devotion Not ambition, not for fame Zero people are exploited There are no tricks, up our sleeve Gonna fight against the mass appeal We're gonna kill the 7 record deal Make records that have more than one good song The dinosaurs will slowly die And I do believe no one will cry I'm just fucking glad I'm gonna be There to watch the fall Prehistoric music industry Three feet in la brea tar Extinction never felt so good If you think anyone would feel badly You are sadly, mistaken The time has come for evolution Fuck collusion, kill the five Whatever happened to the handshake? Whatever happened to deals no-one would break? What happened to integrity? It's still there it always was For playing music just because A million reason why All dinosaurs will die All dinosaurs will die All dinosaurs will die --NOFX (Fat Wreck Cords)

very close

[geekoid]

You are very close to using the power of IT to bring change.

Blacklist all the RIAA mail servers.

Re:You voted for the RIAA

[CodeBuster]

I was thinking that if I stopped supporting RIAA attatched bands that I respect, that they might get a clue, and start some independant release scheme, but them realized that that is dumb.

They cannot start an independent release scheme because they are bound by contract to produce music exclusively for the label that they signed with for a long period of time (typically 7+ years). If that is not bad enough the costs of producing the albums, including recording studio time, promotion (er..payola), and marketing fees are paid for by the label, but charged to the artist as a LOAN. Thus, many of the bands are trapped in their contracts with the labels until they can pay off all the money that they owe. If an album doesn't sell well then the artist can be left with little to show for months or years of work other than a six figure debt.

Sounds like I Need to Visit The MPL

[CristalShandaLear]

According to the Stevens Point Journal, '[the] Milwaukee Public Library received 1,235 copies of Whitney Houston's 1991 recording of "The Star-Spangled Banner," 188 copies of Michael Bolton's "Timeless," 375 of "Entertainment Weekly: The Greatest Hits 1971," and 104 copies of Will Smith's "Willennium."' The recording industry obviously wouldn't want to have libraries loaning out music that people might otherwise buy."

Depends on your definition of "people".

I think Whitney Houston's performance of the National Anthem is simply the best from her pre-crack days. I've recently been thinking of gathering together a scrapbook for my mom that includes music from the year I was born: 1971. I am an old school Will Smith fan who found his most recent bit of on-screen nudity, ahem, nice.

Just because something seems pointless to you, doesn't mean it is to everyone else.

Dumping unsold stock. AC1

[Anonymous Coward]

Anyone who's worked in the industry knows that distributors charge for the storage and dumping of unsold stock.

It's probably saving them a load of money to clear out stored stock by giving it away, rather than having to keep paying for the warehousing.

Talk with $$

[quantaman]

I've come to the conclusion that until the RIAA makes some serious changes in the way they treat their artists and their customers I won't buy a thing from them. Does this mean I'm giving up music?

No, though it does mean I won't be buying some of my favorite artists. It also means I need to find some new ones and the place I've been looking is Magnatunes, they're true to their slogan, "We are not Evil", and have a fairly large selection of artists, not all of them are my taste but then again I don't like a lot of big label artists either. You're probably not going to find a Paul Simon or The Beatles here but I've found some nice music. No harm in checking out of course, no harm worrying that you'll buy an album that you won't like. You see all their music is available for listening right on their website so you can listen to a particular album as many times as you want before buying (in a good but lossy format though), then if you decide you want to buy you get to pay anywhere from $5-$18 US, the artist gets half of course. Of course you're wondering if people will actually buy when they can get the music whenever they want for free? Well I've bought two albums already and am quite close to buying a third. Go ahead RIAA, make as much trouble as you want, I don't need you anymore, whine until you end up on the street with the other crackheads, I'll be helping the good guys.

Re:You voted for the RIAA

[geekoid]

How does that, in anyway, help the artist.
Now they seem to have only 1/10 the fans so they don't even have a large base to use for negoitiations. Pluse thats 1/10 the money the get to pay BACK the record company.
What you got was a 1.50 reduction in guilt.

Most bands suck. All bands suck when they forst start. Most Indie bands would sell out to a large record company in a second.

What would ahve helped more, in the long run, was to buy from iTunes. The more people who do that, the larger the viability for bands to not use a major record.

AOL Patents

[0x0d0a]

Speaking of AOL patents, AOL holds a patent on running a tracker server used to contact users (basically, instant messaging). There are an insane 200 claims in this patent, but you don't need to read many ...

Can't Really Blame Them

[stevemm81]

I mean, think about it. If you settled/lost a lawsuit, and you were ordered to give the winner a thousand music CDs, would you go out and buy the most expensive and desirable ones you could find, or would you run to the 99 cent bargain bin?

The judge should have known better, and you can't blame the RIAA for not giving more than they're required by law. Who would?

Landfill

[Esion Modnar]

At least they're saving all that space they would have taken up in the landfill. After all, litter makes our Native American friends weep.

Just...

[Cyno01]

call the DHS on them. :D

Did anyone get their $13.86?

[PW2]

I didn't.

Re:Did anyone get their $13.86?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah I got mine ages ago. It was fairly plain and unobtrusive. It didn't exactly scream "RIAA SETTLEMENT CHECK ENCLOSED SO DON'T MISTAKE ME FOR JUNKMAIL AND THROW ME OUT."

If you were not careful you might have tossed it out with junk mail.

Re:Did anyone get their $13.86?

[BoneFlower]

Have you gotten any mail from the state Attorney Generals office? That was the return address on mine.

Re:Did anyone get their $13.86?

[PW2]

I don't move often and open every piece of mail - I didn't get it (I haven't bought many CDs recently, so I don't feel too bad about it)

Re:Did anyone get their $13.86?

[PW2]

I didn't get mail from them (I open everything so I can decide if the paper gets recycled or shredded) -- I did get a check for under $1.00 once this year (some phone company settlement or something) - I didn't cash this because I wasn't directly their customer and didn't want to inadvertantly make some kind of agreement by signing the check.

Re:Did anyone get their $13.86?

[YoungHack]

I think I did. Some time ago.

Re:Did anyone get their $13.86?

[/dev/trash]

I got mine. It took a while, but I got it. Of course in the period that was covered by the settlement I bought 25-25 CD's so I was shafted.

Least favourite

[rawr90]

These of course, the albums least downloaded on the internet

If I was a library administrator

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd send them a crazy huge bill for hazardous waste disposal, with all kinds of service charges, poloroids of the mold, and then, 30 days later, send it to debt collection, or sue them.

Punish the RIAA's insolence

[Anonymous Coward]

Dig up a platinum CD you have in your CD collection, rip it into mp3s, and make it available for downloading.

Ask Will

[PW2]

It would be entertaining for some magazine to ask Will Smith how he feels about the RIAA using his name and product in this manner.

Willennium is now synonymous with dumping unwanted product to satisfy a court order that any further attempts could easily be referred to as "pulling a willennium".

This Will End When...

[Nom du Keyboard]

This will end when...

The lawyers who crafted this settlement, and the judge who approved it, are all forced to have their salaries paid in kind.

Remember that the next time you're in a class action suit. Demand that your lawyers are paid in the same manner that your settlement arrives.

sense of humour

[No Such Agency]

... in the same sense that if I broke into your house and vigorously cornholed you, but did it while wearing a clown suit, it would constitute "humour".

No no no

[Anonymous Cowpat]

They sell "junk"

They don't sell junk, at least not enough, that's why they're complaining.

Instead, it's "everyone's pirating our junk!"

Utterly missing the fact that they aren't selling because it's junk.

Show the RIAA what you think, buy a CFM box-set!

In their defense

[nwbvt]

That was a stupid part of the settlement.

I'm curious, would everyone be happier if they gave out free Brittney Spears CDs?

Willennium a dud?

[Anonymous Coward]

Please! It's one of the finest hip-hop records ever released!

Re:Here's the best idea and it only took 15 second

[svallarian]

Yeah, and then they bill it to the artist.

Lovely.

Steven V.

Grammar Nazi strikes again

[Anonymous Coward]

The word "loan" is a noun. "Lend" is the proper verb to use.

Libraries don't loan anything; they lend stuff.

Didn't anybody here pass English grammar?

Give Credit where its due and bill for the garbage

[Obaki]

Libraries and schools should issue a receipt to the RIAA in the amount of $14.95 per title delivered. And a bill for disposing of the other 1039 copies.

Spirit of the Law

[lousyd]

So, first we say that the RIAA must serve the people. Then we say that, once the people have spoken, and the RIAA obeys, it's still not good enough. Now the RIAA has to read minds! For everyone who trotted out the "spirit of the law" shtick, fuck you.

I hate the RIAA, but I like objective law.

Re:Spirit of the Law

[edraven]

You misspelled "I am a troll". HTH

Re:Spirit of the Law

[lousyd]

You misspelled "I am a troll".

Or I could have been angry. One or the other, surely.

Shatner or Nimoy

[manganese4]

Any libraries getting free cds of the those wonderful shatner or nimoy records?

Re:You voted for the RIAA

[fleener]

The world is what we make it. If you don't believe you can make a difference, you never will. You can bank on that. It's the new mob mentality. The mob enables the RIAA to exist. The RIAA counts on you to do your part for their survival.

*vouchers*

[Anonymous Coward]

They should have required the RIAA to give the libraries *vouchers* of a certain total value, that the libraries could then use to purchase whatever CDs they wanted.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

RIAA musicians do not deserve support

[Anonymous Coward]

The poster was pretty much right actually, although he was wrong to call it a compromise.

The idea that popular musicians deserve support is completely false, because they choose to sign up with labels and they want to live in their hyped, image-led, label-sponsored and money-hungry community. It is they that are creating this problem in the first place. The RIAA merely represents them, and the musicians are not complaining about what is being done in their name.

Kicking RIAA-protected musicians in the teeth is exactly what we should be doing. Burn on! Maybe some of them will wise up, let go of Mummy RIAA's skirt, and join the 21st century.

What?

[metalhed77]

Libraries are for boring old people and boring old music. They shouldn't stray from canonical works.

Re:What?

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, you see very few old people at libraries. I work in a library and most of the patrons are kids (with thier parents) or students (studying). Well, then there's the folks that just read magazines while waiting for the 1-hour internet stations to open up. But yeah, that's pretty much it.

RTFSS

[jefu]

Read the f-ing spreadsheet.

All kinds of interesting things show up in it. Yes, there are some nice bits of classical music on it (and some other stuff) but there are lots of other good questions to ask and the spreadsheet makes it easy to ask and answer them.

I was surprised at how few Christmas titles there were (only 39 titles and 350 sets). Whitney Huston's national anthem was only valued at $3.18 (perhaps she should be as upset as anyone). (Or does the disk only contain that one piece? In which case, um, I'm not at all sure what to say - especially if I'm to steer clear of legal action.)

On the whole though, it looks to me like the RIAA decided to dump quite a bit of junk and included just enough good stuff to make it possible for the easily duped or their bought off defendors in politics and the press into defending them. Hey, after all, they did send out 520 copies of Purcell's "Dido and Aeneas".

Re:RTFSS

[FleaPlus]

> Whitney Huston's national anthem was only valued at $3.18 (perhaps she should be as upset as anyone). (Or does the disk only contain that one piece? In which case, um, I'm not at all sure what to say - especially if I'm to steer clear of legal action.)

The album contains two songs (totalling 3 minutes and 49 seconds), not one. What a deal!

Whitney on eBay

[Handpaper]

Nine discs offered, no takers

Re:Whitney on eBay

[Orion Blastar]

Shipping cost of $4USD or more for a CD and $2USD for insurance? I wonder why? Shipping and insurance seem to cost more than the bid for the CD. I can buy the CD from a used CD store for $5USD.

This is a Pets.com paradox, where the shipping costs more than the product. Like $15USD for a 50 pound bag of dog food that costs $40USD to ship it. Net cost $55USD, cheaper to buy it for $20USD at a local Pet Store and spend $2USD on gas to get there and back.

So, you would pay $761,665.71 for the whole lot

[Anonymous Coward]

So, you would pay $761,665.71 for the whole lot of them? Since that is what the RIAA thinks they are worth. I think at the very best they may get $100,000.00, but more likely would only get $10,000.00 to $50,000.00. It looks like a list of really old overstock!

Would pay $761,665.71 for the whole lot of them?

[Anonymous Coward]

So, you would pay $761,665.71 for the whole lot of them? Since that is what the RIAA thinks they are worth. I think at the very best they may get $100,000.00, but more likely would only get $10,000.00 to $50,000.00. It looks like a list of really old overstock!

Re:You voted for the RIAA

[Cecil]

one person does not make a difference

Sorry, guy, I think you're wrong. One person does make a difference, it just doesn't happen instantly. The red sea does not part, angels do not descend and sing. It takes blood, sweat, tears, effort, persistance and sacrifice. The instant-gratification mentality that pervades society isn't going to get you anywhere.

RMS is one person, he has made a difference. The Apache group were just a few people, they have made a difference. But you don't have to be them to make a difference. Look at Linux's slow progress. It isn't happening because Linus or RMS or anyone else is working super hard to get things done. I don't deny that there are people working hard on Linux at the moment, but that's not why it's becoming a force to be reckoned with, that's not why more commercial software than ever before is being developed for it. It's because of one person at a time switching sides, and adding their small voice to the movement. Even if they never actively do a thing, all it takes is one person to see their Linux desktop, or see their count in an access log, and they've made a difference.

It'll take time, but if you support indy music, you'll be a part of killing the RIAA by death of a thousand cuts. It won't happen tomorrow, and you won't be the person who tips the balance, but that doesn't mean you don't matter.

Re:You voted for the RIAA

[aardvarkjoe]

I figured this plan is a good compromise between supporting bands I respect, and screwing those nasty RIAA people.

How does this support bands you respect? Sounds to me like you're screwing over both parties.

Stevens Point

[bumbobway]

Wow, I'm from Stevens Point. This is the first time I've seen a link to their site on Slashdot. Put your hands up Wisconsin!

Re:Stevens Point

[SuiteSisterMary]

(Sounds of crickets chirping. From somewhere in the back, a man coughs. More crickets.)

Re:You voted for the RIAA

[csplinter]

Why don't you all do like me, download what ever album of your favorite p2p network, and then send a dollar or two directly to the artist. Belive it or not if everyone did this the artist' profits would more than double. (ok i guess thats pretty belivable :))

Radio One, Clear Channel, Infinity Broadcasting

[Anonymous Coward]

The RIAA pays these clowns to put what they want to sell on the radio. What's worse is that these three companies have some new crappy "high definition" radio technology licensed through a mysterious company called Ibiquity that some New York VC clown is cashing in on. Go figure.

the RIAA equates ANY losses with piracy

[Anonymous Coward]

dip in sales due to magnatune label = piracy
dip in sales due to boycotting = piracy
dip in sales due to people thinking the music sucks = piracy
dip in sales due top people hating the RIAA's practices = piracy

Whether it actually occurs or not.

The music industry is amoral...

[Snaller]

... so what did you expect.

RIAA vs Public libraries? Only a matter of time..

[Simonetta]

Given the mentality of the RIAA, it's only a matter of time before they launch a serious attack on public libraries. After all, libraries allow people to freely take CDs home, listen to them (consume RIAA product without a per-use payment), and then bring them back if they don't like them (actually bring them back whether they like them or not).

This situation seems just guaranteed to make the RIAA foam at the mouth. And these are the guys that wanted Congress to put DRM in every $1.50 Digital-to-Analog convertor chip, so you know their enthusiasm is not tempered by logic.

So an attempt by the RIAA to force the public libraries to remove all the CDs and DVDs from their shelves seems inevitable. They probably think that they can file one brief with one judge someplace and the next day all the CDs and DVDs would be removed from the all of the stacks. They probably think that putting pressure on the libraries is going to be even easier than setting 100 Harvard Law Graduates on a high school girl downloading Britany outtakes. They probably think that they're going to wake up the day after filing their little brief and find hundreds of millions of dollars in checks piled up at their doorstep sent to them from librarians in unpaid royalities from all the people who checked out CDs, took them home and listened to them,... Without Paying the RIAA anything!

Personally, myself, I wouldn't mess with the librarians. They handled many yahoos before. Bozos like the RIAA are nothing new to them.

Every generation, someone NEW to the publishing industry makes the observation that people who read books from the library aren't actually buying the books that they read... and this ain't right. The other publishers point out that they might sell 500 copies of some fool's first novel if he stands on his head long enough on TV, but the public libraries buy 50,000 copies on the basis of a thumb's up review in NY Review of Books, at full list price.

The RIAA isn't all that bright, so, maybe, messing with the Public Library institutions of America may be the force that knocks them back to their caves.

Still better than AOL coasters...(sigh)

[Fantasio]

At least the libraries will be able to reuse the jewel cases, we always need some of these.

Even better line

[TopShelf]

"Why don't you just change your name?"

"Why should I? He's the one who sucks..."

Re:Here's the best idea and it only took 15 second

[Anonymous Coward]

You do know the charts are manipulated, don't you? They can make "Micheal Boltons' Willenium" number one for a few weeks, thus dumping their stock under your scheme and fulfilling their quota of Evil for the month.

Simple, like a simpleton.
(Incidentally, the Booksellers charts are just as fucked.)

obligatory..

[Anonymous Coward]

Skinner: Well, the kids have to learn about "Whitney Houston"..er.."Tek War" sooner or later.

the remedy is simple...

[dvd_tude]

The mistake the court made is that they expected the RIAA to be fair. Well, the RIAA schooled them on that.

Fact is, the RIAA is arguably the most consumer-hostile trade group today. This cynical move on their part cetainly proves it beyond all doubt.

So how to fix them?

The court should re-value the RIAA's "donation" at fair market value. Now here's the beauty: in this case, these CD titles are scrap, so they have negative value. They cost more to dispose of than they're worth.

So the RIAA owes libraries for tossing their (RIAA's) trash. I say fine RIAA that amount, and little extra to punish them for being asshats.

Now since RIAA cannot be trusted to secure and distribute titles of value for the libraries, simply take that job away from them. Impose a cash settlement from RIAA and let the libraries use those funds to acquire the titles themselves, from whomever they choose (including non-RIAA artists, out-of-prints, and so forth.)

I doubt the RIAA will learn any lesson given their track record of dogged hostility, but at least they could be forced in actually bringing about improvements in library media stocks.

Re:the remedy is simple...

[Steve B]

Either that, or note for the record that this shall be considered binding precedent for valuing the payments made to RIAA members when they win a lawsuit (i.e. if you get caught at illegal file-swapping, just FedEx them whatever crap happens to be at the back of your closet).

Michael Bolton....

[vwjeff]

that no talent ass-clown.

Re:RIAA vs Public libraries? Only a matter of time

[walt-sjc]

... And monkeys might fly out of my butt.

Remember: The MPAA and the RIAA have bought extentions to copyright over and over. It's now "forever" for most practical purposes (more than my lifetime anyway.) They also brought us the DMCA. Congress and the courts are in their back pockets.

Re:You voted for the RIAA

[darkewolf]

Whilst I can see that most indie bands would sign over as you suggest, there are a great many that were prefer to keep it small, work with small labels or self-produce and work with only a distribution label.

I think there is a fear (from my experience with 'indie' bands and personal experience) about the risk to ones image and future stake holdings if one gets involved with a major label.

The problem comes if major labels start trying to buy out the indies or force them out of business so that they are the only ones allowed to distribute music. That in itself would be much worse than the current sabre rattling going on now.

Mind you, maybe my viewpoint is slightly skewed, I have fairly free distribution license on my audio work. Distribute it as much as you want, burn it to CD, give it to your grandparents, just dont edit it. Oh well :)

Re:Does using the word "continue" in the headline.

[DMUTPeregrine]

Hmm. Perhaps we need a follow up image, like on fark? Bill gates borg, dna chromosome, phonograph, follow up.

Re:1,235 Copies

[/dev/trash]

The same thing they do with books, loan them out. THAT's why the RIAA is donating crap CDs, because who would waste their time to go borrow Willenium and copy it?

Iowa's Attorney General refused to accept the list

[Gendalia]

The other AGs could have too, if they'd looked at it.
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/art icle?AID=/20040704/NEWS10/407040348/1011

I have the same problem

[MichaelCrawford]

I'm a musician too but I play the piano rather than sing.

I use my middle name to distinguish myself from that OTHER Michael Crawford. I shouldn't have to - he changed his name for the stage.

Let librarians do *their* job

[Randym]

Although they are technically complying with the the letter of the law, they're abusing the spirit by giving the libraries large piles of crud.

Librarians are professionals. Mandating the dumping upon them of CDs of the RIAA's choice is just insulting; the judge should have made this *subject to the approval of the librarians*.

I suggest to the librarians that they keep the CDs which -- in their *professional* opinion -- are worth keeping, and *send the rest back* (at the RIAA's expense, of course). Repeat until enough CDs have been received that fit the *librarians'* criterion for inclusion in the collection.

The RIAA of all "people" should *not* be allowed to decide what the libraries get -- especially since they *lost* the case.

Re:You voted for the RIAA

[Omestes]

Your examples are insightful, though different from the context. These are active groups, not passive agents contributing a meager amount of influence to a very large system. My passive action (not buying CD A), is not going to change the actions of the thousands of people who will. And in not buying CD A, I'm depriving myself from some a good work of music, it seems that the sacrafice is not worth the price.

I try to tell my friends about the nastyness of the RIAA, which is an active responce, and hopefully a fruitful one. I try to compromise with the burning circle idea. I figure spreading the word enough might help. But until someone develops a better mechanism for the distribution of polished music, I have a feeling that it is all moral masterbation.

I would gladly support indie bands, if the grand majority of them didn't suck, or offerend some sort of quality production values on their CDs. But then again, supporting indie bands isn't like supporting freedom fighters, most of them would sign with an RIAA company is the chance presented itself.

The whole concept is bogus...

[bwalzer]

What happened here is that there wasn't actually any real settlement value. Letting an entity use some sort of intellectual property for stuff like this is just silly. The court could just as well have allowed the losing party to paint a nice picture, value it at millions of dollars, then contribute the picture. Microsoft did the same sort of thing by supplying software to schools as part of a settlement. Good deal if you can get it.

Re:You voted for the RIAA

[Omestes]

Actually, this was before I got turned on to iTMS, now I probably would.

The action was as close to a compromise I could think of, if someone could think of a better one (besides iTMS and indie bands), please enlighten me.

I have made some use of iTMS since I discovered it, though some of the tracks I want are quite old and obscure, and not offered.

Re:Iowa's Attorney General refused to accept the l

[base3]

+5, Informative. Nice that all the other states were apparently derelict in this regard.

“late fees”

[Slaytanic213]

Hello everybody, this is my first post. I use to live in Milwaukee and I didn't like the remodel they done. The section in the library where the computer books where is now the book sorting place when they get returned.
I spent many hours standing (no chairs) in this small section of the library never getting bothered except the few who would walk down to use the rest room.
This section was the d. d. s. classification 000 generalities to some UFO books. COMPUTER BOOKS! Reading about my old Atari 800XL and 6502 Assembly Language Programming.
Anyways here is a link and a slice
http://www.startribune.com/stories/1557/4886667.ht ml "Katie Nelson, head of the audiovisual section at the Frank L. Weyenberg Library in Mequon, said the consensus there is that the companies ``emptied their vaults.'' Nelson said there was even mold growing on some of the 520 CDs received there, and less than half the shipment will be used."

Mold growing on some of the CDs, now that's funny!

http://www.jsonline.com/news/gen/jul04/245182.asp? format=print "Of the 646 CDs that Menomonee Falls received, many will be placed in circulation, including music from Johnny Cash, Wynonna Judd and Louis Armstrong, Schall said. A few pop gems such as OutKast's "Stankonia" and recordings from Cat Stevens and Otis Redding are also likely to be hot items, Gay said."

I know there will be a few "late fees"!

B.A.

music services

[AmbyVoc]

Even a cheapster like myself can listen to music, and totally free via sites like opsound.org or magnatune.com. Ofcourse there is also the good old radio and icecast/shoutcast on the Internet.

Re:RIAA vs Public libraries? Only a matter of time

[chartreuse]

You obviously didn't hear about Pat Schroeder.

Eh...

[Aldric]

In all seriousness, that might be the only way to get the RIAA/MPAA to stop attacking our rights. When their executives start getting shot and patriots claim reponsibility, then they might listen.

Re:Eh...

[Max Threshold]

Yeah. But as much as I favor gun ownership, I don't really have much taste for violence. The main purpose for owning guns is to threaten corrupt politicians and businessmen. Before I actually kill anyone, I'm going to push for independent local politicians to raise militias and enforce Federal income tax immunity.

In the future...

[Aldric]

I would hope that judges remember this and act accordingly. Cash only next time. I'm starting to think the RIAA may be the most evil organisation on the planet - even Microsoft didn't offload junk for their settlement.

Re:RIAA vs Public libraries? Only a matter of time

[Simonetta]

I must admit that I was a little taken back to realize that libraries would loan the latest pop music records (this was about thirty years ago). It seemed so incongruous, this image of the little old lady (not far off the mark back then) and these sex, drugs, and rock'n'roll pop albums.
Later I realized that librarians are the guardians, defenders, and custodians of culture for the country. They take this role seriously and cultivate a lot of back channel resources. Plus the record industry sends millions of copies of the latest stuff to the libraries for free, either as a tax write-off or as general promotion (of course, it all comes out of the artist's royalities).
It's too bad that all the libraries dumped all their vinyl LPs when the CDs became the primary audio medium. This happened before the MP3 revolution. Now we could back up all the old vinyl on CD-R, but many of the LPs that didn't make it to CD are gone.
Libraries have deep, but quiet, support that the RIAA doesn't in American society. The RIAA would not be wise to mess with them, because they could well suffer a big defeat. Congress may support the RIAA because they get paid-off, but the Supreme Court would probably side with the librarians if a case of the librarians vs. the global media corporations came before them.

Re:You voted for the RIAA

[IAmMacManiac]

I think the post above yours made some very valid points, and despite your name calling and your holier-than-thou attitude, I don't see where you apply logic or information in your reply to refute his or her statements. So my question is, are you an RIAA ringer, or just someone with too much time on your hands and no mental horsepower to apply it to something useful? Oh, and you mean this isn't hell? I could have sworn I got on the right bus....damn! with all due respect, Bri

Re: Goodwill

[MORTAR_COMBAT!]

This reminds me of assclowns who throw away garbage at Goodwill and call it charity.

When I do my yearly closet clean-out, there are 2 piles: trash and donate. Usually trash (worn out or stained) wins out over donate (good condition but not my style or size any more) for the biggest pile, because I agree that Goodwill is not a dumpster.

Re:1,235 Copies

[SuiteSisterMary]

Urm, doesn't the CD explictly say that you can't, lend, borrow, rent, hire, and so on?

Will the RIAA turn around and sue said library should the CD wind up on shelves?

Is there a nicer word than junk?

[davidescott]

Yes, Virginia, there is -- Shit, Crap come to mind.

Re:Sorry. I hate the RIAA--potentially offtopic

[IAmMacManiac]

Yes. that is exactly what is next: fascism. Except "next" happened about 50 years before we were born. Wake up and smell the burning flesh--it isn't coffee! This kind of stance by industry and legislation in service of that stance should be a surprise only to those who have been living a hypnotic hallucination for the last century. Examples: currently we have the Bush administration claiming that medical treatments and drugs approved by the FDA (an arm of the pharmaceutical industry and the AMA masquerading as a regulatory agency) is somehow justification to preclude citizens from suing for damages from injuries that may result from their use. We have the soldiers who are ostensibly trained for "good" activities (like attacking without provocation a sovereign nation to topple a regime that our own government put into power) fallen to torturing the prisoners they have taken, Geneva Convention be damned. We've even had another infamous Reichstaag burning, namely the WTC attacks on 9-11, which makes it twice in less than 10 years the intelligence communities and neoconservatives bombed the same target, while the very same Senators and Congresspersons that spin laws based on the RIAA's bottom line sat on their hands and let them get away with it. (Let us remember, but not dwell on, the other attacks the government has made against Americans: Oklahoma City, Ruby Ridge, Waco Texas.....) But the move toward fascism started even before FDR illegally stole all the gold from the citizens of his day and then allowed the country to be attacked to stimulate patriotic fervor for an unpopular war. So we howl about the RIAA and how they impact our wallet on some meaningless bit of fluff that we "enjoy" in our oversaturated lives? THIS is what makes us lift our heads and complain that fascism is next? The decadence that this speaks of is so enormous that I have no doubt many readers and posters here will have no idea what I am talking about. But by all means, recognize these moves by the RIAA for what they are: fascist attacks against Americans without justification. And while you're at it, take a look at what is happening in health care, in Iraq, in the oil-rich and heroin-rich Afghanistan/Pakistan regions, in the policies of an appointed government made up of "evil-doers" that "hates our way of life." That government HAS ALREADY destroyed our constitutional freedoms, made a mockery of the word justice in the courts, incapacitated our citizens and soldiers with poisons and deceit, and is now calling for an end to the electoral process altogether. The question I have is why did we not notice it before now? Are we so shallow that we can only recognize fascism when it kicks the aural pacifier out of our ears and attacks an institution like public libraries and demands that we pay the piper's keeper, or else? Did no one notice when Dubya's dad used Ross Perot to throw the election to Clinton, who eviscerated social programs in a way that would have made Ron Reagan blush, if he could only remember that once he too was president? Got to watch out for those flu shots, Ron! Oops, too late.....

Re:You voted for the RIAA

[Anonymous Coward]

The world is what we make it.

Emphasis on "we". Question is, when was the last time "we" ever thought alike, and when did "we" ever do something about it? How many people does it take to make a "we" anyway? Do you stop after spending a year gathering 1,000 people who think similarily? Or is this one of those unreachable goals you're just supposed to be blinding shooting for, feeling good about yourself until the end of time, even though it didn't change squat? Anything other than "I" is outside your realm of control, bud.

Re:You voted for the RIAA

[Anonymous Coward]

Belive it or not if everyone did this the artist' profits would more than double. (ok i guess thats pretty belivable :))

Pop quiz, hotshot. What are the chances that everybody WOULD do this? Better to buy lottery tickets; your odds are SO much better than banking on some moral unobtainable goal. But it makes ya feel good, doesn't it? Fine, make that the reason for doing it, not some pie-in-the-sky blanket quote.

Re:Here's the best idea and it only took 15 second

[orionware]

Soundscan is independent aren't they? they'd have to manipulate the actual scanning of albums at the checkout counter.

I'm assuming if they manipulated albums that were shit they'd then have to explain to the artist why they aren't getting paid more or renewed etc.

"But I sold 100,000 albums!"

"umm. Well. Actuall you only sold 1000. Glitch"

Re:1,235 Copies

[/dev/trash]

Without written permission of the copyright owner.

Whitney Houston's Star-Spangled Banner rules!

[Frank T. Lofaro Jr.]

I bought (back in the day) Whitney Houston's 1991 recording of "The Star-Spangled Banner" and it was well worth it.

They play it at the last showing of the fountains at Bellagio in Las Vegas, NV (12 AM every night).

It is awesome, as was Whitney until she let the drugs get out of hand.

Re:You voted for the RIAA

[csplinter]

Hey, why do i care if everyone does this, hotshot! :)

it's just an inocent suggestion

Buy/Sale of used CDs.

[SeanDuggan]

The few CDs I've purchased in the last few years have been used, because those prices are a lot more reasonable and in line with the actual value of the content on the discs.
*wry grin* Anyone remember when the CD and video game manufacturers were pushing to make non-retail sales of CDs and games illegal? After all, it's unregulated and you probably don't report that income to the IRS. Oh, and of course they don't get the extra sale from the person buying the used CD, but that's beside the point, right? *sigh* Personally, I too check out used CD racks and definitely used games. *shrug* Heck, I'm one of those people who tends to find a good book, buy a good sturdy copy of it, then leave it in public places with a note written on the inside encouraging people to read it and leave it for another person to read. Goodness knows half of them probably eventually wind up on someone's bookshelves or in the trash, but it makes me feel like I'm passing something on to the world. And aren't my feelings what matters most? :-)

Define zero demand

[Orion Blastar]

Perhaps I'd have better luck selling them to the Whitney Houston fan club in a country where they cannot buy the CDs because they are not distributed there.

Somewhere on the planet is a demand for those CDs, the hard part is finding out who wants to buy it. Now price is a totally different matter.

Re:RIAA vs Public libraries? Only a matter of time

[Anonymous Coward]

The RIAA may argue that people who use public libraries do not pay for the content they get, but that's complete bullshit, since public libraries are funded by the US tax payer - including the cost of purchasing the collection in the first place. Now who's paying for that? Besides, there's also the tax you pay on rewritable media, a part of which goes to the publishing companies and/or recording artists or authors, i.e. the owners of the intellectual content. So this is just another attempt of the publishing industry to suck money out of everything they can, without actually doing or producing anything. It's fairly clear who are the real leaches here.