Slashdot Mirror
Music Download Pricing Lawsuits Pending?
larry bagina writes "New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer has subpoenaed Warner Music Group, apparently looking into allegations of price fixing with Sony/BMG, EMI, and Vivendi, and apparently more subpoenas are in the pipeline. 'As part of an industrywide investigation concerning pricing of digital music downloads, we received a subpoena from Atty. Gen. Spitzer's office as disclosed in our public filings. We are cooperating fully with the inquiry.'"
remember downhillbattle and EFF. They are fighting for your rights.
Test 1 2 3 4
Who'd have thunk it, the music industry being crooked? So, who are the pirates now?
It does seem maybe these (alleged) crooks may be losing their grip on the industry: getting caught with their hand in the pricing cookie jar, and potential other investigations into payola (the other way they control the flow and exposure to music/artists).
Disclaimer: I know, innocent until proven guilty, but with the propensity and willingness of these (alleged) crooks to string up the customer like so many Christmas (Merry!) lights, publicly indicting/convicting consumers before trial. How's the shoe feel on the other foot? Maybe there really is a Santa Claus(e)!
Does he even have jurisdiction for this? Isn't this a federal matter?
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Pricing of Downloaded Songs Prompts Antitrust Subpoenas
I don't care what his motivations are, whether he's a demagogue or not, at least somebody is standing up for the little guy and trying to put these scumbags in their place.
I too have felt the cold finger of injustice.
Dear recording industry: Ha! Merry Fucking Christmas, motherfuckers!
Clever signature text goes here.
Then why s warner alone subpoenaed?What about others?
Why does yahoo do this
No better way to treat your favorite publishers than to sue them, right? At least that's what we were taught...
at the online music stores. My thought is that the music companies want this investigation, because they in fact want to sell music for more money, but are being prevented from doing so by yahoo, itms, etc. So, Spitzer might be working for them this time.
Arguably he's done it to boost the public's impression of him, but at least he's done something real good to do it unlike latching on to divisive issues. He's punished so many crooked corps: Wall Street, insurance, payola, and now the music companies again. Here's a profile: Wikipedia Profile The consumers will lose a great public advocate when he goes on to become Governor (although one hopes he'll use his clout there to do even more reform.)
Ahhh yes. Totally clueless. That must be why he has such a good record. It's so easy to convince judges and juries when you don't know what you're doing.
The L.A. Times is reporting that Warner Music Group disclosed that "As part of an industrywide investigation concerning pricing of digital music downloads, we received a subpoena from Atty. Gen. Spitzer's office..,". N.Y atty. Gen Eliot Spitzer, fresh from multi-million dollar settlements in the radio payola law suits against the industry giants, is now examining if there is collusion on the wholesale price of digital music. Spitzer is also at the heart of the recent 50 million dollar lawsuit by the Beatles against EMI. It's hard to say if this helps or hurt's Apples case for a 99cent price cap on downloads.
Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
wouldn't be the first time http://www.usatoday.com/life/music/news/2002-09-30 -cd-settlement_x.htm
I remember a case back in the late 90's where I got a small check.
Maybe he really doesn't care about the little guy. Maybe he spent too much on the family this year for Xmas, owes his bookie or maybe he's just looking for some extra cash. He could just be doing this to get a secret payoff. The case will suddenly disappear. He won't find anything worth charges, just some suspicious/questionable items,enough for some hush money.
BTW, I got to open one of my Xmas presents early. The wife and kids made me a brand new tin-foil hat.
He's not standing up for anyone but his campaign!!! He is going on a fishing expedition, nothing else... I can't wait until a grand jury starts an investigation on him
there's no mention of this in the bible, music downloads are just a theory of atheist scientists
According to the FTC complaint detailing the charges, in 1997, Warner and PolyGram (predecessor to Vivendi Universal), two of the largest music distribution companies in the world, formed a joint venture to distribute compact discs, cassettes, videocassettes, and videodiscs to be derived from the next public performance of The Three Tenors. Warner would distribute the 1998 releases in the United States, and PolyGram would distribute the 1998 releases outside of the United States. As the concert date approached, both companies became concerned that the new products would be neither as original nor as commercially appealing as products already available to consumers. In an effort to shield the new products from competition, Warner and PolyGram agreed not to discount and not to advertise certain of their catalog products for a limited period of time, the complaint says. The FTC alleges that the agreement violated federal law
http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2001/07/tenors.htm
Why does yahoo do this
You know, the one where they got fined and then CDs still cost the exact fucking same?
Might want to ask yourself who Spitzer works for, new yorkers or the record companies. Have you noticed a pricing change in CDs since his initial win? I havent - they still cost way too much. A few million bucks is nothing to these people, i say they are getting off way too cheap and then can hide behind these weak settlements if the questions ever come up again. If i was a record company i would be overjoyed to see this guy coming. So what benefit does attention to online music pricing give to record companies; Steve Jobs doesnt want to change itunes prices - be funny if he was ordered to in court wouldnt it...
I was crazy back when being crazy really meant something. (Charles Manson)
Not at all ... they all just happened to set the exact same prices at the same time. Purely coincidental, you know.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
Anyone read Google here?
Why does yahoo do this
It's difficult to not admire the tenacity and inginuity with which he pursues these people. But it's also difficult to make the case that they are punished in proportion to their transgressions. Steal hundreds of millions, but you'll have to give millions back. Where is the disincentive? Collude to steal billions, and be forced to offer rebates that customers won't take wide spread advantage of because we've got to make it convienent for the criminals. These people who do economic harm on this scale, they need to lose everything and spend everyday of the rest of their lives in a very deep, dark, lonely, empty hole. That's disincentive. But to think, we live in an age when half-measures from politicians are genuinly deserving of praise. It's sad.
My god! A new meme has spawned! Er... i mean it was designed... intelligently.
And if they are convicted/found guilty of price fixing the lawyers and gov will get the bulk of any monetary settlement and we as the end consumers will probably end up with a coupon for $5 or $0.50 off the purchase to any of their already over priced CDs, either way they get your money. It's time for some creative sentencing, the price should be lowered by the difference between their fixed price and the market value. 99c has been the market value since the creation of iTunes, they wanted to fix prices at $2.50, the prices should be set to -$1.51. Or a coupon to buy a $125 or $75 iTunes gift card for $50. Gift cards are the same as cash with ebay.
F7 doesn't work, ignore spelling and grammar
Like I said, I don't care about his motivations -- he's getting attention drawn to the abuses as well as results in court. If I were a New Yorker, I'd vote for him in a minute. At least he's not the typical government official slavishly trying to serve big business.
I too have felt the cold finger of injustice.
... wow. While I'm ok with this partilcular lawsuit, when's the last time you woke up and check the news and didn't see few new gigantic lawsuits happening every damn day?
Is it just me, or we have waaay too much lawsuits going on here. I mean, lawsuits are supposed to be the exception, and the regulator is supposed to be the law with the help of a possibility for lawsuit.
Today, we just have a bunch of lawsuits from people raping the system, and no benefits. For how long can the system sustain this?
You know this is millions of people giving part of their wage for lawyer/lawsuit expenses. You have to work more and get less, so that all those lawsuits can happen. Directly or indirectly.
God damn it everything is so wrong.
**head explodes**
Spitzer is an asshole and this is nothing more than another publicity stunt to get his name in the papers again. See this from the WSJ: "Scary By JOHN C. WHITEHEAD December 22, 2005; Page A14 Last April, The Wall Street Journal published an op-ed piece by me titled "Mr. Spitzer Has Gone Too Far." In it I expressed my belief that in America, everyone -- including Hank Greenberg -- is innocent until proven guilty. "Something has gone seriously awry," I wrote, "when a state attorney general can go on television and charge one of America's best CEOs and most generous philanthropists with fraud before any charges have been brought, before the possible defendant has even had a chance to know what he personally is alleged to have done, and while the investigation is still under way." Since there have been rumors in the media as to what happened next, I feel I must now set the record straight. After reading my op-ed piece, Mr. Spitzer tried to phone me. I was traveling in Texas but he reached me early in the afternoon. After asking me one or two questions about where I got my facts, he came right to the point. I was so shocked that I wrote it all down right away so I would be sure to remember it exactly as he said it. This is what he said: "Mr. Whitehead, it's now a war between us and you've fired the first shot. I will be coming after you. You will pay the price. This is only the beginning and you will pay dearly for what you have done. You will wish you had never written that letter." I tried to interrupt to say he was doing to me exactly what he'd been doing to others, but he wouldn't be interrupted. He went on in the same vein for several more sentences and then abruptly hung up. I was astounded. No one had ever talked to me like that before. It was a little scary. It's up to others to make their own conclusions. I have only set out here what happened. Mr. Whitehead, former chairman of Goldman Sachs, is chairman of the Lower Manhattan Development Corp."
I thought the Electronic Frontier Foundation had outlived its usefulness.
The future isn't in people charging for things like content, it is for people charging for things like service. For some sectors that offer service value (like Linux) that is good - for other sectors (like music and movies) - that have littlemore than entertainment value, that is bad. And as for those who rely on a content revenue stream now, they are DOA. It's sorta unfair, because everyone crys kneejerk tears for all the "poor" folks in the content industries, but doesn't even give a ratts ass about all the billions who are economically inhibited by the "infrastructure of control" that copyrignt imposition requires.
essay: Straight Talk About Copyrights
While I like some of the things he has done, he also can be a grade-A asshole. He decided that AIG, the Starr Foundation, Hank Greenburg, and a few others responsible for building up AIG over the last 40 years were criminals, and so prosecuted them to get evidence for his suspicions.... and he is still looking for that pesky evidence, and gosh darnit, he hasn't found it yet. AIG has restated their earnings for the last 5 years (which is a massively big deal, for those of you who don't know), and in doing so, changed their estimated net worth from about 81 billion to 79 billion. Whooo-fucking-hooo. He is now trying to investigate transactions made between AIG and the Starr Foundation going back to 1967 in order to find something to justify the ruining of the lives of lots of people at those companies.
Don't get me wrong - I hate abuses by large corporations, and I think he has done many good things to protect consumers. But he has a large ego, and doesn't know when to quit. I think he was hoping AIG was the next Enron, and when it turned out it wasn't even close, he got vicious and couldn't let it go, despite the fact he is hurting a lot of innocent people in the process. Of course, I am a bit biased, since I personally know some of the people whose careers he has ruined and finances he has messed up.
He's better than many, but he ain't no saint.
Let's stuff a bunch of bullshit into an already bullshit-clogged legal system.
Seriously, the only way our problems with the recording industry are going to be solved is if they change their business model to reflect the 21st century. Until then, it'll just be the same old shit over and over again. Our legal system is warped beyond belief, so it's not going to help anyone here.
All your base are belong to Google.
I wonder why, considering we have more than one state, that it's always New York taking the lead to try and give consumers an even break? He went after the mutual fund timing trades, record company payolla, and now more record company misbehavior. California also went after Edward Jones. California and New York the only states sticking up for consumers instead of standing by and watching consumers get the sticking.
That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
Where are the people who normaly say that there should be no governement control and that the market will decide what to do?
Hope you understand why governement involvement is needed.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
Everyone of us!
This is what we have said all along: "Reasonably priced (according to cost, not to traditional prices and unencumbered by nasty DRM schemes, we are willing to pay for music"
If this indictment goes forward, it might give honest distributors the occasion to prove the point. The cost of downloading a song on the Internet is pennies. Even considering a decent profit, a reasonable pricing will do wonders to discourage pirating. The value is there for the consumer and the business model is simple.
The message of this is: stop suing your consumers or your consumers will beging to sue you back!
This only affects those of us who choose to pay for music. :V
Very true. Even if you are one of the cynics and are stating that he is doing this to get younger votes, he probably is starting to really tick off Sony BMG. Afterall, he filed a class action lawsuit over the Sony Rootkit fiasco, and now he is looking into price fixing. Makes you wonder why he is out to get them, but it sure is nice to see a politician finally going after these guys. And the fact Sony BMG is squarely in his sights is really nice. If I was an exec over at Sony I would start looking at finding out when his term is up, and start looking at funding a potential person to run against him -- get him out of office, or get someone in Albany to cut his budget or something so that he couldn't pursue it. But I am all for it. I am really glad to see that states AG's are starting to treat RIAA like the scum they are.
The views expressed are mine own and do not express the views of my employer.
The music industry should take a lesson from the porn industry. We give away full access to our content @ 39.95 a month. We have over 1.2TB of downloadable contant, with a 500 gig cap per day on our users. The can download the wmv's/avi's/asf's/etc burn it to dvd and spank it on their plasma tv if they like... our videos are pirated constantly (more than music) and we still enjoy an amazing revenue stream. We purposely stay away from DRM & other technologies... how many times can you spank it to a single milfhunter video before needing something else to satisfy you? Its advertising, and does well... Hail pr0n!
is the fucking man. This man should be President.
The Doormat
If you're not outraged, then you're not paying attention.
The cost of downloading a song on the Internet is pennies
but the cost of processing the transaction is not nearly as cheap. Google for terms such as micropayment and you'll see what I mean. This is one of the biggest challanges to cheaper pricing in general.
I've solved the problem on my end.
I don't buy music anymore.
I can live without it -- the real question is, can they live without my money? The answer to that one is probably also "yes", but that's okay. I'm not out to destroy them, I just don't want to be a supporter of their industry anymore.
It's true no man is an island, but if you take a bunch of dead guys and tie 'em together, they make a good raft.
So here goes
For a show called, "10 types of people"
Start spreading the news.
I'm leaving today!
I want to be a part of it,
New York, New York!
I want to wake up
In a city that doesn't sleep!
I'm a consumer with rights
I want my fair price!
And no price fix-iiing!
No DRM crap
For me in New York
I really love that Eliot
Spitzer, Spitzer!
Oh Mr. Spitzer,
Please remove that Sony Rootkit!
And give my music to ME
Without some greedy
Hollywood scheeeeeme!
In Manhattan and Queens
And Bronx if I dare
My iPod has cheap music
Bought in New York
We told that Warner
To stop screwing the litttttle guy!
"You have to set a fair price!
No fixing or die,"
Said Spitzer, Amen!
Eliot Spitzer
We love you so much
New York is fair and balanced
Because of yooooou!
We want to thank you
For protecting consumer rights
We really love you a lot
In-a straight kinda way
We're really not gay!
Without the DMCA and other strong copyright and licensing regulation there wouldn't be any point to the kind of DRM in the "Sony Rootkit", or Windows Media Player 9 and later, or Palladium, because there wouldn't have been any laws criminalizing reverse engineering. You'd buy the CD and pick up the patch to Windows to disable the DRM at the checkout counter.
This kind of after-the-fact bandaid on a few of the worst excesses of government interference in the market is hardly proof that the government needs to be involved.
ELOI, ELOI, LAMA SABACHTHANI!?
The music recording and distribution companies have come to the end of their usefulness. They are like dinosaurs in the space age.
Because recording and distribution has now been commoditized by the internet, there is no need for a "Recording and Distribution" specialized commercial function between the music artists and their fans and customers.
Don't you think that the recording industry sees that reality, and when anything is fighting for it's life, like the music Recording Industry is, there are "no holds barred". But that won't stop nature taking its course, extinction and replacement with something more suited is always inevitable.
Drunk on the power of his office, and vindictive. Here's a nice little interaction he had with a former chairman of Goldman Sachs:
Last April, The Wall Street Journal published an op-ed piece by me titled "Mr. Spitzer Has Gone Too Far." In it I expressed my belief that in America, everyone -- including Hank Greenberg -- is innocent until proven guilty. "Something has gone seriously awry," I wrote, "when a state attorney general can go on television and charge one of America's best CEOs and most generous philanthropists with fraud before any charges have been brought, before the possible defendant has even had a chance to know what he personally is alleged to have done, and while the investigation is still under way."
Since there have been rumors in the media as to what happened next, I feel I must now set the record straight. After reading my op-ed piece, Mr. Spitzer tried to phone me. I was traveling in Texas but he reached me early in the afternoon. After asking me one or two questions about where I got my facts, he came right to the point. I was so shocked that I wrote it all down right away so I would be sure to remember it exactly as he said it. This is what he said:
"Mr. Whitehead, it's now a war between us and you've fired the first shot. I will be coming after you. You will pay the price. This is only the beginning and you will pay dearly for what you have done. You will wish you had never written that letter."
I tried to interrupt to say he was doing to me exactly what he'd been doing to others, but he wouldn't be interrupted. He went on in the same vein for several more sentences and then abruptly hung up. I was astounded. No one had ever talked to me like that before. It was a little scary.
It's up to others to make their own conclusions. I have only set out here what happened.
Mr. Whitehead, former chairman of Goldman Sachs, is chairman of the Lower Manhattan Development Corp.
I HAVE CUBIC WISDOM THAT TRANSCENDS AND CONTRADICTS ONE DAY GODS
when you can do what the insurance companies do and just report your upcomming rates to everyone. Then everyone can raise their prices at the same time, nice and legal.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Anyone care to explain what this whole "Price Fixing" thing is? Seriously. From the way I see it (maybe I don't completely understand the concept), shouldn't a company be allowed to choose what price they want to sell their product for?
Nobody's gay for Mole-Man.
Time Warner spun off Warner Music Group in early 2004.
Visa/Mastercard/AMEX et al could make the process a whole lot cheaper, but they frankly have no need to. Its not the technology; it's simply the incumbents already have a monopoly and they see no need for cheap micropayments.
You must be kidding, they would never do that..
*yawn*. nothing to see here but the consumer getting screwed yet again.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Money is no longer real. Its simply printed and/or blipped on computers. It is not backed by gold or silver like it used to be. The money holders (banks) hold less and charge people for giving it away (service) and they don't even own anything besides nice buildings (although that is changing). Its pretty much a crime to own a decent amount of cash money for some reason.
You know, I was reading that just as I was thinking if there was ever a kind of way that I could give a christmas present to people I don't even know. And then it came to me - my gift to people this year is the plea:
"PLEASE BUY GOLD AND SILVER".
Really! and I am not a "gold kook", it's just that the same information age forces that are killing the copyright cartell are also going to kill central banks ability to lie to people about the value of their currency. I am serious, the economic fundamentals today are WAY worse than the 80's when gold went to $850 usd/oz. Also, today the economony is sevral times more efficient so when the adjustment happens, it will happen several times faster. During the great depression, our currency came out OK, because it was backed by gold. During the 80's our currency came out OK, because Americans didn't have much debt. This time it really is different, and there is nothing to stop the US economy from heading off a hyperinflationary debt cliff after the over-indebted housing market falters and that's why the silver and gold market have been going up so high over the last 5 years.
Food for thought: in 1935, there was about $35 in circulation for every ounce of gold held by the central banks, in 2005 there is about $35000 in circulation for every ounce of gold held by the central banks. People should really buy silver and gold like their butts depended on it. Merry Christmas!!!!
If it wasn't for lawsuits coffee would be dangerously hot instead of lukewarm like it is now.
Doctors would be able to treat just anybody whether they could pay or not and the health inurance industry wouldn't employ so many people.
It still gets me how the soundtrack for a movie costs more than the movie itself.
I'm really liking this guy!
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Saddam Hussien claimed he was beaten by attorneys for the RIAA...
the music industry price fixing? *cough*1990s*cough* NEVER!
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
Grammar Syntax Error: unmatched parenthesis.
'Yes, firefox is indeed greater than women. Can women block pops up for you? No. Can Firefox show you naked women? Yes.'
It interesting, he's one of the few AG's to go after white collar criminals with any vigor. The stock research stuff was so obvious, they kept on hyping it, but it was basically sales literature. His point (correct I think), was that you can hype stuff, just don't dress it as independent research.
The music companies claim they are trying to help the consumers. Forced to pick between them and itunes (who released an honestly useful app with reasonable DRM) I'd pick apple in a heartbeat.
Anyway, fixed them on my side. I simply do not and will not buy ANY labelled product from these turkeys. Got to go to the library and listen now. Bought my son a iRiver, so they can't complain about Steve ;>
Right; that judgement was a win for Wal-Mart and Best Buy. Wal-Mart and Best Buy went to the government when Universal was handing out program money (funds for newspaper advertisements and the like) to Tower Records and TWE in return for setting MAPs (minimum advertised prices). The only result was that the record companies ended their MAP programs. You only theoretically saved money if you'd bought CDs at Tower Records.
Many Slashdotters are under the impression that the price fixing settlement was a win for consumers, when in reality it was a loss for independent record stores, and a win for Wal-Mart and Best Buy, who get to keep selling CDs as loss leaders without worrying about stores like Tower (which subsequently filed for bankrupcty) and other dedicated music stores from being too much of a problem. Actually, if you're a fan of the mainstream music that Wal-Mart and Best Buy dole out, then it's a win for you, but I don't count myself in that crowd.
Sitting in my day care, the art is decopainted.
And what happens when higher prices cause less people to download from pay sites? The music industry claims that every download is a lost sale. So is this intended to create more lost sales? If you can't get your fully inflated price, then you won't take any price? That kind of thinking only made sense when you actually did mostly control the only source of supply. Then along came the cassette deck recorder and your lives have never been the same since.
People are obviously stupid in so much as they continue to support the music industry at its present prices (I remember when CDs first came out the promise was that as manufacturing efficiencies increased that prices would actually drop significantly), but even stupid people reach a point where they know they're being ripped off -- and don't like it!
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Ha ha, the joke's on you!! Funny +5 doesn't affect your karma at all!!
"It's the height of ridiculousness to say for those 9 lines you get hundreds of millions."
Bullshit: Store credit.
--- Hindsight is 20/20, but walking backwards is not the answer.
Definately good that he is doing this mess.
Yes, Sony will see him as a threat. However, with how many states it seems are jumping in on the rootkit, he may not be the only one.
As for the budget, if he really wants to get Sony, he will find ways to stretch the budget to get it. If they shave on his budget too hard, it could be political suicide for the ones that made that decision if something high profile has to be let go due to an empty budget.
Really, I think Sony's only move is to get him voted out of office. Either that or pull a SCO and delay infinitely.
A general comment on the whole Holiday/Christmas thing - the thing I think most ironic about this is that people arguing to call it "Holiday" instead of "Christmas" are also generally the same people that complain about how commercial Christmas has gotten. How ironic then they would seek to remove the one non-commecial element from the whole holiday - the name itself!
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
Do away with exclusive contracts for artistes. When a consumer can obtain the same music from multiple different producers (not outlets), then there is price pressure downwards as the competition will then be on price not preference.
I'm from New York, and so what if he's looking for publicity. He's doing the right thing. I'm not a democrat, but I'd vote for him because he does the right thing.
And yeah, just in case you were wondering, the ends justify the means.
So you see what had happened was....
how do you think they were going to offset the legal costs of the case?
before the suit it was a case of price-fixing and gouging.
after the suit it was recouping a loss, which is perfectly legal...
</sarcasm>
-- it's ridiculous how many people misspell ridiculous... (damn, damn, damn...)
"AIG has restated their earnings for the last 5 years (which is a massively big deal, for those of you who don't know), and in doing so, changed their estimated net worth from about 81 billion to 79 billion. Whooo-fucking-hooo. He is now trying to investigate transactions made between AIG and the Starr Foundation going back to 1967 in order to find something to justify the ruining of the lives of lots of people at those companies."
He may be an asshole, he may overreach but according to you AIG had to restate earnings for FIVE years. That isn't a minor mistake. In many companies stockholders rightfully flee like rats from a sinking ship when something like this happens. And the fact that you find major accounting violations strongly suggest other lapses....
In short, the primary people responsible for ruining the careers and lives of people at AIG are the current and former management. The AG is only the messenger. Even if he is a vindictive one.....
I suppose you think that means something, but I think all it means is that you don't really know much about the whole micropayment problem. It really does exist, and if you do as I suggested and google for it, you'll find that a great deal of brainpower has been thrown at it, with less than stellar results. Wikipedia is not a bad place to start, just look up micropayments there.
No, he's arguing that Copyrights are government interference.
Whether that's desirable, or whether it's undesirable, or whether it's too much or too little, is a different debate. Whether government intevention is desirable or not is not the point.
The point is that ANY market that depends on copyrights, patents, or any related tools is a government mandated and controlled market. It's ludicrous to cheer on this as a demonstration that government intervention in a "free market" can be a good thing. This market has not been "free" in anyone's memory.
AIG has restated their earnings for the last 5 years (which is a massively big deal, for those of you who don't know), and in doing so, changed their estimated net worth from about 81 billion to 79 billion. Whooo-fucking-hooo.
Hey dumbass, that's TWO BILLION DOLLARS.
I know if I was a shareholder of AIG I would be rightfully pissed.
Lying about the worth of the company is one step away from actually stealing two billion dollars.
I think he was hoping AIG was the next Enron, and when it turned out it wasn't even close, he got vicious and couldn't let it go, despite the fact he is hurting a lot of innocent people in the process.
If these people are innocent, then why is AIG restating their earnings? The actual facts you've present run completely counter to your accusations of trying to ruin people's lives for no reason.
Of course, I am a bit biased, since I personally know some of the people whose careers he has ruined and finances he has messed up.
What this statement does not say is that you personally know that these people are innocent of any wrongdoing.
Bullshit like this is a big drain on our economy. Why would you invest in any company only to find out you just paid too much because they lied in their legally required disclosures?
Life is too short to proofread.
"I think all it means is that you don't really know much about the whole micropayment problem."
Nope, it means that people who thing there is a micropayment problem simply don't see the solution.
Transactions are cheap, forget what the companies in the transaction business want to tell you, they are just in there to make a buck, not to make it easy or cheap to exchange money.
The solution is not complex either. When I make a phone call, I get charged micropayment per minute that I call. QED.
If you still see problems, you're just looking for a problem, not a solution.
--- Hindsight is 20/20, but walking backwards is not the answer.
it means that people who thing there is a micropayment problem simply don't see the solution.
Ah, so you didn't bother to look up any of the links I suggested, because if you did, you would see that some of the finest minds in the world are working on this, that virtually all companies who take payments admit it's a huge issue, and that no completely satisfactory solution exists at present. Unfortunately I don't debate people who believe that their uninformed opinion is better than actual knowledge, and who can't even be bothered to do a bit of basic research.