Slashdot Mirror


Attorney General Investigates Music Price Fixing

An anonymous reader writes "The Guardian is reporting that the US Attorney General has launched an investigation into whether or not record labels are engaged in price fixing of music downloads. From the article: 'The department of justice inquiry centers on the activities of the four largest record labels: EMI, Sony BMG, Universal and Warner Music. Subpoenas are believed to have been issued to all parties, with federal officials understood to be focusing on whether the companies have been colluding to keep the price of downloads artificially high.'"

6 of 257 comments (clear)

  1. And if convicted... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...they have to pay a $50 fine and publish a press release including the words "We are vewwy, vewwy sowwy." Rinse, repeat 10 years later...

  2. *Cough* by Dr.+Sorenson · · Score: 5, Insightful

    They are 10 years late and investigating the wrong medium. I don't see anything wrong with 99 cents per song, my issues were the $21 for a CD with one decent song.

  3. Re:Music industry answer: by Znork · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "I always think of how it can cost 99 cents to download a full song from iTunes... but then a ringtone... costs 3 dollars"

    That's because p2p networks still keeps prices on downloads down.

    Pricing on copyrighted material isnt set relative to costs, it's set relative to available capital for purchases. If the consumers get more money, then the prices will rise, regardless of actual costs. The only 'competition' there is is illicit copying.

    The DOJ suing the labels for 'collusion to keep prices up' is rather ironic and just shows how far from reality the concept of IP has gone.

    To the attorney general: Yes, of course there is price fixing and collusion to keep the price up. It's in the damn code of law. Look under the heading 'digital millenium copyright act' in your own bookshelf and you'll find all the evidence you need. 'Keeping the prices up' was the whole point of it.

  4. Cash by nighty5 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    1) Cold hard cash will be transfered under "campaign contribution" from the mysterious Big Four to the US Attorney General.

    2) Investigation will reveal nothing.

    3) Profit!

  5. The root of the problem by Spy+Hunter · · Score: 5, Insightful
    I don't see how price fixing can even be *defined* in the music market. The entire industry is built on government-granted monopolies (copyright). Supply is infinite; competition is crippled; prices are arbitrary even in the absence of any shady dealings.

    Even if the attorney general did decide to take some action, it would undoubtedly be some slap-on-the-wrist fine or equally ineffective measure. Nobody seems to ever consider doing something that might be effective. In this case, the problem is at its root caused by the government-granted monopoly of copyright. No copyright, no problems! If the government is unhappy with the copyright monopolies they have created, why not strike the problem at its root and weaken the copyrights of those who abuse them?

    This would work not just on music companies but on any business built on copyright; for example software businesses such as Microsoft. Instead of a fine, simply slash the duration of copyright on the company's assets, or even release some portion of them to the public domain immediately. This would not only serve as a deterrent to future abuses; it would actually reduce their *ability* to commit abuses in the present, and it would measurably benefit the public as well.

    --
    main(c,r){for(r=32;r;) printf(++c>31?c=!r--,"\n":c<r?" ":~c&r?" `":" #");}
  6. answer by caffeination · · Score: 5, Insightful
    why don't we all go to Digg and set up camp at the new epicenter for geek news on the net?

    A few reasons.

    1. AJAX is bloaty. Digg takes an age to load.
    2. The right tool for the right job. AJAX for news? Why?
    3. Digg users are immature. NO DIGG FAGS
    4. Digg comments are a bitch to read through.
    5. The background gradient behind comments is buggy for long comments.
    6. Most front page stories on Digg aren't very good.
    7. Too many front page stories on Digg are blog links.
    8. Slashdot users are an older generation of internet users. Digg is all Web 2.0, and we don't get it.
    9. Lots of front page Digg links are beginner tutorials for css, perl etc. This does not appeal to the Slashdot demographic.
    10. Slashdot is about discussion. Digg isn't. They are completely different sites.

    I'm not 'flaming', or trying to be a prick in any way. It just seems that most Digg users don't understand why we aren't deserting Slashdot in droves for their site. You asked, I answered.