Slashdot Mirror
More Music File-Sharing Lawsuits in Europe
rfunches writes "The New York Times is reporting that 20,000 cases in 10 countries were brought against file-sharers in Europe, according to the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI). '...Users targeted for legal action included a Finnish lumberjack, a British postman, a Czech IT manager and a German judge,' according to the article. More than 70 computers were seized in Italy by authorities investigating illegal file-sharing. IFPI targeted both those who
'illicitly downloaded music' as well as uploaders serving copyrighted material on file-sharing networks. Total music sales were down 3% in 2005 according to the IFPI, with the decline in physical media (e.g. CDs) countered by 'soaring' digital music sales."
Music industry, you know the solution, why not use it. Find need new chicks to show more skin! None of those "don't call me a chick", chicks, it does not work.
If the assholes would just realize the problem is them charging $20 for a CD that 20 years ago they promised would eventually be cheaper than cassettes and vinyl ever were. If CD's cost something more commesurate with their value and production cost downloading wouldn't be an issue beyond the fringe.
AE
When will this end?
Does file sharing stop? No.
I over see here in Germany no headlines related to the IPFI cases.
Heise.de - primary source of IT news in Germany - would have picked the story up immediately. Presuming there is a story. Apparently there is none.
Or can anyone provide a link to the nytime source?
All hope abandon ye who enter here.
FTBlurb
IFPI targeted both those who 'illicitly downloaded music' as well as uploaders serving copyrighted material on file-sharing networks.FTA
The IFPI's legal proceedings were aimed not at people who illicitly downloaded music but ``uploaders'' who put copyrighted music onto file-sharing networks.so which is it?
Stop Computers/Cars Analogies on S
Music Industry Unleashes More Lawsuits in Europe
By REUTERS
Published: April 4, 2006
LONDON (Reuters) - The music industry launched a new wave of lawsuits and criminal proceedings against file-sharers across Europe on Tuesday, part of its drive to curb online piracy and encourage the use of legal music services.
About 2,000 cases were launched in 10 countries, the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry said, bringing the total to 5,500 people in 18 countries.
That figure does not include the United States, covered by its sister group the Recording Industry Association of America, which has filed about 18,000 lawsuits.
Among the countries targeted was Portugal, where sales of physical formats like CDs have slumped by 40 percent in the past four years amid heavy file-sharing usage, especially by college students.
Other users targeted for legal action included a Finnish carpenter, a British postman, a Czech IT manager and a German judge, the IFPI said.
``A large number of cases involve men aged between 20 and 35 and parents who have not heeded successive education and warning campaigns,'' it stated.
In Italy authorities have seized more than 70 computers in the search for evidence of illegal file-sharing.
The IFPI's legal proceedings were aimed not at people who illicitly downloaded music but ``uploaders'' who put copyrighted music onto file-sharing networks.
The IFPI said last week that digital music sales soared in 2005, but not enough to make up for a continuing decline in physical formats like CDs, sending total sales down 3 percent.
And now they are coming to get us here in good'ol Portugal ... ohhh the fear!!!!! Better get those 10 million letters ready, you wouldn't want to miss none of the thieves ...
I know it will never happen, but I wish that these people would understand that filesharing gave birth to a new age of music -- digital music. Apple has already sold a billion tracks and they don't thank anybody. Seriously, though, this is never going to end.
2,000, not 20,000.
The summary is remarkably incorrect, even for a Slashdot story.
But I'm a fire-sharer, I didn't care.
Now they're coming after us people doing fire-sharing.
Oh no no no no, can you cold people come and help us, PLEASE for the love of humanity, don't take away the fire !!!!
There are places where the networks are not touching,and there are places where they are-Boeing's Lori Gunter
... anybody else red "International Federation of the Pornographic Industry"?
As long as only a small minority is concerned, people in power won't care much. However as soon as they are themselves concerned, directly or indirectly through family, children, friends etc. they might start to think. And that might hopefully lead to a revolution in the thinking about copying, copyrights and the like.
So I am especially pleased when I read that judges and politicians are sued.
Copyright was not designed to handle file sharing networks. Most of it was based on the idea of criminals ripping off records and making large numbers of copies and selling them. Not ordinary people sharing for free. The sheer number of people doing this indicates that people simply don't see anything wrong with it. Laws that the vast majority disagree with are not usually a good thing.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Just listen to / get free music legally from The Kahvi Collective, Magnatune, music.download.com, Electromancer, ... or why not online "radio" services like last.fm or Pandora? You have to be pretty strange these days to like overcommercialized music but not anything from any of those.
Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
Well, let's do some divination here (could someone lend me a copyright lawyer, I need some entrails to read)...
My guess is that people will first of all get afraid, then careless again, then share and leech again. What else do you want to do? Buy it? We're talking about 20 for a CD and about 35 for a DVD. Who can afford that? If you want to see one movie a week, it means you'd have to spend about 150 bucks a month on movies alone. Who can set aside 150 a month just for movies? Add in 2-3 CDs a month and you're well over 200.
So people won't buy it. No matter what. Take away the internet and they won't. Because they simply cannot afford it! If a starving man has no money and he can't steal, he will die. He will not buy bread with the money he doesn't have, he will simply die.
And music and movies aren't essential for living. They are, essentially, luxury (and double so at this price!). So they are amongst the first things people start to cut back on. Sure, they will download them when they're available, hey, if it's free, why not? But if it's not free, they'll simply do without.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Didn't know it was illegal to share fire.
Must be some new anti-smoking law.
from grnadparent they will seek other, safer ways to share
from parent Sure, they will download them when they're available, hey, if it's free, why not?
Even if the Internet is shut down, people have social circles. My kids are on dial-up (so am I). That only slows them down just a little. Sneaker net is very big in the schools. They bring home lots of stuff that has a parental advisory that I would never let them buy. The social net bypasses all web filters and parental controls. If parents can't control it, an external orginisation such as the RIAA hasn't got a chance. They can't see and be everywhere. P-P is infiltrated online only. They can't touch the offline P-P sneakernet.
The only thing the **AA has done is managed to get some taxes on some media, which breaks their claims. If I pay a royalty on a music CDR, you bet I'm going to put music on it and not feel guilty. They have set a price and I found it acceptable. Don't charge me a media royalty tax and then try to tell me I can't record music on it.
The truth shall set you free!
Some good stuff on these. My taste is probably a bit different to most readers, but the fact that Magnatune includes material from the Dufay Collective is impressive.
Okay, so Europe and the US are getting harrassed. What about China, India, Malaysia, Thailand and Vietnam? Nothing going on there huh? Probably not in this lifetime for those guys. Half the world's population in that corner.
You know China is currently estimated to have one hundred and eleven million Internet users. How many of them were fined this weeek? India only has fifty million. Weren't at least a few of those fifty million Indian users targeted? Come on, now. These IFPI guys need to get on the damn stick. Two thousand in all of Europe? Europe has 290 million users. Two thousand? Is that a serious effort?
What about Brazil? Has everybody in Brazil been fined once so far? There's only twenty six million users there. How about the seventeen million Internet users in Mexico? Were any of them harassed this week? A mere seventeen million in Mexico and yet they have the nerve to rest on their laurels with a mere two thousand!
They missed me... :)
I'll subscribe to Slashdot when I see a month without a dupe, a typo, or an article the "editors" didn't read.
Not a hint of this story in Germany. However, the German Parliment is getting ready to enact new laws very similar to the US laws (if they haven't already). Actually, that might be an European Union thing. I don't really pay attention though.
/sarcasm/
I'm sure it will get worse once the new laws begin to be enforced.
I guess it's time to move to Canada!
When it became clear that illegal file sharing was reducing the amount of money record company's were making, I remember having the thought "Good. I hope this stops people manufacturing bands to get a chunk of the money that should go to real artists." - maybe its starting to happen?
I know certainly here in the UK there is more talent in the charts now than there has been for the last 20 years, real people with real music. Thats what its about.
Also lets not forget, if you get a top 10 single in any country, irrelevant of the number of illegal copies, you aren't going to be left out of pocket.
I for one support file sharing.
I'm a lumberjack and I'm okay I sleep all night and download all day IFPI: He's a lumberjack and he's not okay were going to sue him like the RIAA I pirate songs, I eat my lunch I go to the Lavatory. On Wednessday I got summonsed for my acts of pi-rac-ie IFPI:He pirate songs, He eats his lunch He goes to the Lavatory. On Wednessday he got summonsed for his acts of pi-rac-ie Chorus: He's a lumberjack and he's not okay were going to sue him like the RIAA ..............
In the not too distant future, next Sunday A.D.
I'm a lumberjack and I'm okay
..............
I sleep all night and download all day
IFPI: He's a lumberjack and he's not okay
were going to sue him like the RIAA
I pirate songs, I eat my lunch
I go to the Lavatory.
On Wednessday I got summonsed
for my acts of pi-rac-ie
IFPI:He pirate songs, He eats his lunch
He goes to the Lavatory.
On Wednessday he got summonsed
for his acts of pi-rac-ie
Chorus: He's a lumberjack and he's not okay
were going to sue him like the RIAA
In the not too distant future, next Sunday A.D.
The New York Times is reporting that 20,000 cases in 10 countries were brought against file-sharers in Europe, according to the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI).
OMGWTF, the first time I read it as "according to the International Federation of the Pornographic Industry (IFPI)" !!!
The law is a dangerous tool to play with.
At the moment there is a lot of grey area with copyright and the internet (IANAL) - which is why 'legal' music sites like allofmp3.com have disclaimers regarding local laws rather than concrete advice. In my own local jurisdiction the law appears to be clear about importing copyrighted material (and it's quite similiar in most other places) - i.e it's ok for personal/domestic use.
When the rights organisations test these laws the outcome might not be the one they want - and it will send a message to the mainstream users, who up to this point have been terrorised into not downloading music, that it is actually safe to do so.
They are playing with fire - and their time would be far better served coming up with a better business model than trying to defend an outdated one.
Genesis 1:32 And God typed
According to this interview in a Portuguese Paper (http://www.publico.clix.pt/shownews.asp?id=125269 8&idCanal=1453),
"The worst [country] was Germany, but (...) In Germany and the UK, the number of users who legally buys music online has grown over the number of users who illegaly download it."
So the question is, they don't care if users do download, as long as others pay for it. So they stopped.
Another great quote:
"Worldwide we started about 25,000 law suits (5,500 of them in Europe). 1,000 of them reached a deal before going on trial, paying fines between 2,500 and 3,000 EUR."
Well, I don't know in other countries, but in Portugal (and I bet the whole EU) how is the IPFI gonna get the information about users BEFORE starting the law suit? It's not like the ISPs can give that kind of information to them...
See the Wikipedia entry on fire-sharing
Set your phasers on "funky"!
I think the biggest part of the big money's ways is that the corporations do not think about the customers but about the consumers...
and in their view there is a subtle difference..
the consumers are like cattle, and can be force-fed all their BS and all the products they wish to slush down the consumer's throat.
But you are right, it would be way more profitable to just give the customer what they want... sadly they don't really see it that way.
Customers and the big industry are locked in a vicious circle, and one of us has to step out...
80 CC D8 AF AE D3 AB 54 B7 2E CE 67 C7
Things like I2P and freenet are going to get a boost. Currently only a few whackos toy with freenet & co, but if you force enough people to consider their safety something is going to evolve. And then they will have a very tough task to ban cryptography...
Some weeks ago in the German magazine c't there was a feature on the legal situation of copying / downloading / sharing music and movies in Germany.
Apparently, the law firms have worked out a nice scheme to get the money out of people using p2p for downloading music / movies. It works as follows. Please forgive me my lack of law-related terminology in English.
First, one company tracks down the p2p users and files mass criminal suits against them. The charges get dropped by the court very quickly (unless it concerns someone dealing music / videos big time) -- but now, they have names and addresses, as they are not allowed to inquiry them directly at the provider.
Now what happens is this: some weeks after, a law company representing the big corps sues the user for some $BIGNUM of euros. The given user has a short time in which she or he has to react, contact a lawyer, file a protest etc. -- otherwise, the charges get lawful. Some angry letters later they propose to settle for a moderate amount -- 1-3 kEUR. Most of the people pay it just for the sake of getting out of the situation, and out of fear of having to pay $BIGNUM.
The whole process seems to be almost automatic and pays well off.
j.
I can understand arresting the postman, the manager and the judge. But the finnish chap, he's a lumberjack, and he's ok. For sure that was a mistake.
It's really no wonder why college students download music and movies off the 'net. Here in Finland, music and movies cost a lot - renting a movie is ~5e, a music CD is between 16 and 30e. Now, the students of the country generally don't have jobs, as studying takes up the majority of their time, so they receive around 400e; per month from the government, and may take loans up to 1200e per six months.
Now, 600e per month may not sound bad, but after rent, which is between 200 and 500e, most are left with ~200e a month to live on (most don't even take a loan, if they in any way can live without it, so that reduces the amount of money by 200e a month). THAT is tough, but still manageable. Yet, it's not like we're inclined to spend 20e on the latest bubblegum popstar or boyband CD every week... We need to eat.
And they're suing college students.
...Users targeted for legal action included a Finnish lumberjack, a British postman, a Czech IT manager and a German judge,'
All we need is a Spanish construction worker and we'll have the Euro-Village People!
Is it wrong to download copyrighted music without paying for it ? Sure it is. And the high price of a CD/DVD should be no excuse for doing it.
Still, one cannot avoid finding revolting the amount of effort placed to fight this type of fellony when compared to other major types of crime that remain a threat to society: armed robbery, drug smuggling, kidnapping, etc. Sure, the power of the record/movie industry, blah-di-blah.
Another thing I wonder is about the day when people start questioning themselves if is it worth paying for internet where the only things they can do is visit websites with 90% ads and receive spam and virus by e-mail.
See that car across the street?
The electricity company when they came to "check" the meter while you were out?
That extra millisecond its taking to connect to websites?
That knocking downstairs?
But don't worry, you'll never appear in court, or anywhere.
- Brought to you by the linking of Terrorism and Music Piracy
There ain't no usch thing as downloading music. The essence of P2P is uploading, that is you also share what you have, else you would get nothing of what others have. Therefore you cannot use P2P legally to obtain copyrighted material because uploading copyrighted material without permisson is illegal everywhere. The days of pure-download mp3 and movie access are long gone, there are no more HTTP and FTP sites giving you top20 songs in mp3 and not-yet screening hollywood movies rips for free. They have all been closed.
/.ers as well. Bush and RIAA is better that Osama and Taleban, because sharia law bans all music, while RIAA bans only unlicensed music. We must understand and accept that. Sandalpunk anarcho-communism must end if the free world is to live.
Similarly P2P will end, because either Cisco or Huaweii will ally with RIAA and make routers devnull unauthorized copyrighted material traffic. The one who complies will get the whole market, because those companies and ISps who buy non-DRM routers will be publicly named by RIAA and investors will learn those companies are unamerican who try to undermine the war on terror by taking away tax dollars from uncle sam. Please buy MP3s from legal webshops, because the tax from every purchase you make helps put one more bullet in the clip of a GI's M16 rifle. Without your purchases and thus his clip empty, he will be victim of an islamist throatcutter. When he is fallen, jihadist will come and chop up
I just saw this story on the bbc, but they say only 2000 people were targeted.
Who's got it wrong?
I've been posting on the net since 1994 and I still haven't come up with a good sig!
Well,
All these lawsuits as wasting court time and money,
it is a DoS Attack against the courts by record companies.
The legislation should legalize on-line libraries,
so people can 'check-out' files, music, books, etc.
So There.
Remember way back in the old days,
when it was only Communists that got censored?
The music industry needs to realize that what they are seeing is an economic 'dead-weight loss'. Most people that pirate music and other copyrighted content are not the same people who would buy said content if it couldn't be pirated. Since the first tape recorders, people have been "pirating" content. The only difference between then and now is that record labels and other content producers want a bigger piece of the pie. By attempting to reach a very diverse population, they manage to fail in targeting most audiences, and instead churn-out media with very little intellectual/entertainment value. I think that companies just need to bite the bullet and accept that there are some people who aren't going to pay for their content. I'll go out and buy a great movie if I see one, but I'll be damned if I'm going to pay $40 just to show my friends how horrible the new King Kong was. By maliciously prosecuting those who simply download the media made available to them, content producers feel that they are setting an example for those who would steal their rightful revinues. In fact, there is always going to be a certain percentage of the population that will not buy their CD/DVD regardless of the price. Suck it up, take the money you've got, and be happy you've got more than Kevin Federline's record label.
"Bad times have a scientific value. These are occasions a good learner would not miss." ~ Ralph Waldo Emerson
As long as there's Allofmp3.com I'm not worried.
MC Lars - Download this song.mov is actually on the radio playlist(s) here, which is quite the feat actually, if indeed he's got no major label behind him. Sure, the tune is ripped (Passengers?), but the lyrics is on the mark:
Though 10 years is a bit optimistic.
“Total music sales were down 3% in 2005 according to the IFPI”
It's a start, I suppose. How far does it have to drop so that they won't have the money to sue anyone?
Good, let them push... I hope they go around machinegun-firing lawsuits... Let them push until they push too far, until they manage to cause public outrage.
And don't forget that although the politicians are all too happy to oblige big commercial interests, what they really fear is the public, and the *IAA indiscrimate lawsuits of pensioneer, little girls, etc, reach the point where a significant percentage of the population become outraged, the politicans will happily sacrifice the commercial interests to protect their hides, and you'll be seeing alot of new laws that definitely won't be to the *IAA taste (and quite possibly a few investigations on breachs of anti-trust and cartel laws).
Let's hope they will keep suing people in increasingly large number, not tens of thousands, but hundred of thousands.
I still read this as 'International Federation of the Pornographic Industry' every time I see it.
"I bow to no man" - Riddick
Follow the logic. Why not go to your local library and borrow the CD and rip it to the format of your choice?
e2dk://fear
Downloading?
Its quicker to swap a stack of 25 4.5 GIG dvds of MP3s!!!
It takes one day to swap, then 12mins/dvd = 300mins, easy going.
Face it, all 250 years of music is in within easy reach of everyone for zero cost + $12.95 for some blanks.
Sure musicians are artists, but they dont deserve more money than the creator of a cpu or a car. Its only music, its not
a cancer cure.
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
Forgive me, but who would like to buy a CD for $20, if its available on vinyl for less (like £5 for single 12" and £12 for 2xLP)? :-/
Why pay more for inferior quality?
Fist of all, they announced 2000 not 20000 cases. Secondly, it's funny to see how they keep on suing the same people. The judge, chef and councilor are in every press release.
The reason why your CD sales are slumping is because what you are putting on them is not very good.
Thanks for your time.
Yours Lovingly
Joe Public
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
Only in Americ... err wait
I've considered it, but I figured that at some point, they will roll over and spill all their names and accounts to the RIAA and then they'll essentially have a name and address of people to sue.
It looks to me to be safer to just download stuff, never upload, and don't be stupid enough to leave a paper trail about where you've been downloading.
And in other news today - someone gets 9 months for murder. So what as the term for copying a DVD again?
Brain Recorder. If a machine was built that could record everything that you seen heard smelt And felt. We are talking about probes attached to your head and hooked up To a computer. Could the RIAA sue you for the contant if you shared it over the internet. Say you went to see a movie and sent the data from what you recorded from you brain to a machine , not machine to machine. could you be sued ? if so is our own brains going to be covered under the DMCS act ? I know this sounds far fetched but so did the PC, Cell Phone and the Ipod 20 years ago. http://delflyzero.somee.com/ [somee.com]
Hunh? $35 for a DVD? Outrageous. I'm hoping you live somewhere outside the US cuz if not, you seriously need to try a different store. I usually buy DVD's right when they come out, and they're discounted in the $15-$18 range. I almost never spend more than $20 on a movie, even if it's a huge hit and I buy it just after release day. The most expensive movies I can think of are Disney films, and even those typically sell for just under $30 each even at normal retailers like Best Buy and Walmart. I typically buy three or four movies a month, and I rarely spend more than $100 - it's usually around $70. I couldn't tell you the last time I bought a CD - it's been years. Those things are way too expensive (roughly $1.50 per track), but I think they're still in the $15-$18 range.
Hope he doesn't try himself.
new movies are £15 - £25 here in the uk, thats $27 - $45, us.
music cds are £10 - £17, thats around $18-$30.
movies also have later release dates here, so our 'new releases' will probably already be in american bargain bins.
Web Design
Frostwire (a free fork of Limewire without the DRMA crap) and mIRC are two programs that I know of that the user doesn't specifically *HAVE* to share files. If one sets up Frostwire correctly, it will neither share downloads, nor anything else. By default, though, FW does share all files downloaded by the user until he/she moves them out of the incoming directory.
.MP3 files. I have the almost the entire collection from OverClocked Remix that I use to "pad my stats" if you will. Though, I don't know if "padding" is the right term, since that's the only thing that I allow to go out from my system.
With mIRC, the process is rather detailed, and not very n00b friendly. There are several helper programs, (such as OmenServe's Addons (AutoGet specifically. A GUI interface for your mIRC downloading needs.))
I do share over 2,000 files, but they are all 100% legal, public-domain
Lofting the cyberwinds on teknoleather wings, I am... The Blue Drache
So, this is the reason that I like to use the term monopoly. It is the singleness of it. A monopoly will never turn on itself, while (for example) OPEC has had members undercut or (more often) overproduce on a regular basis. There are also countries that don't join OPEC, and they are not only able to thrive they also are able to apply pressure to ensure that OPEC can't exercise monopoly control.
So I think it's important to change the term Intellectual Property for one that is more correct: Intellectual Monopoly. Part of accomplishing this is to ensure that at every possible legitimate* place the term monopoly is used to describe how the members of an oligopoly act. I think this helps bring it to focus for people, as (most?) people associate "monopoly" with "bad" thanks to the local telephone and cable companies...
It's all part of taking back the language from those that sell 'restrictions' as 'rights', 'ideas' as 'property' and 'fair-play' as 'fair', 'plays-for-sure' as somehow to my benefit (shouldn't that be true by default?).
*just 'cause they lie, doesn't mean I will....
If you think imaginary property and real property are the same, when does your house become public domain?
IFPI = International Federation of the Pornographic Industry na cant be, those people behave...
I don't understand any of you can seriously justify illegally downloading of copyrighted material. Don't you think that the creators of this material have the right to protect their own interests? And the excuses that you use to try to justify it.
1. The music that they sell is crap - then why are you downloading it?
2. They charge too much - then go without. You don't steal something simply because you can't afford it! Besides, a product is worth exactly what people are willing to pay for it; no more, no less. This is Capitalism at its best. You should be voting with you dollars.
The only reason why you all think there's nothing wrong with it is because you can typically do it anonymously and it's easy. Would you be willing to walk into a music store and steal a CD? I doubt it, but it IS the same thing. You are not entitled to this stuff you download. And I think the RIAA and the IFPI are doing exactly the right thing. If you download copyrighted material, you're breaking the law and should be prosecuted. So get a sense of responsibility and get your music the right way - pay for it.
And somewhere...Some poor man is buying a Minivan
an oligopoly is simply a situation where several large companies control such a large proportion of the market, that between them, they have the power to fix prices/supply.
a cartel is when several large companies, in a oligopoly situation, collude in order to fix prices.
cartels are oligopolies, but not all oligopolies must be cartels. however, it is in any private companies best interests to form a cartel with their 'competitors', if they find themselves in an oligopoly.
yes, cartels do tend to act like monopolies & abuse monopoly power to set prices at the maximum level the market will bear, but they are not monopolies, they are cartels.
a monopoly is where one company controls the market, an oligopoly is where several companies between them have the power to control a market, but don't neccessarily use it, a cartel is where several companies in an oligopoly collude, so they can set prices as if they were a monopoly.
cartel is the correct word you were looking for.
its also in wide enough usage to be understood by anyone that cares . if you start misusing the term 'monopoly', people will dismiss your ideas, as you obviously don't know what a monopoly is.
Web Design
I don't disagree with your sentiments - however your population figures are all wrong. A mere 290 million? That's more like the population of the U.S.A. Depending on how you define Europe it ranges from 550 million to 705 million people.
If 100,000 people did this, it would severely hamper their operations. And, although IANAL, I don't think it's obstruction of justice because it's civil, not criminal.
Thoughts? Ideas? Is there a group I can join? (No, not EFF)
-Clio
Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
So a Finnish lumberjack, a British postman, and a Czech IT manager walk into a bar......
Like Ebaums World? You'll love Shizzville
So here goes anyways ;-)
Whereas the Oil Cartel (an admitted/explicit cartel) all sell oil that is indistinguishable one from another, Matisyahu's new studio album Youth is not an alternative to Coldplay's X&Y, and are very distinguishable from one another. Further, while any of the OPEC members can sell oil to any buyer, only EMI can (legitimately) sell you a new copy of X&Y. (meaning Sony can't sell it to you despite the fact that they sell Youth). It's important to note that one piece of creative work is not an alternative to another. They are not in direct competition any more than Braun is with Ford. Coffee makers and cars compete for the same dollar, true, but we don't decide to buy one and therefore not need the other. We may run out of money and only be able to buy one, but we don't buy one to replace the other.
Read this if you're still interested. (multiple PDF warning)
If you think imaginary property and real property are the same, when does your house become public domain?
well, i can't tell the difference between most of the mass market crap put out by the major labels.
technically you're right, but a lot of the pop music is so generic now, you could argue that they arent really so unique. each label has similar 'artists' that are supposed to compete for the same audience.
certainly if EMI dropped their prices by 50%, the other labels would have to as well, or face a drop in sales. if one of the labels increased their prices, without the others following, they'd see a drop in sales too.
some some ways the music industry is like several monopolies, but it resembles a bigger oligopoly more, as these seperate 'monopolies' are all related to each other.
cartels aren't often caught, due to their power & the difficulities in proving cartels, and in most places cartels are illegal, so you dont get many self-admitted cartels either. however, theres is a great pressure to form a cartel in any oligopoly situation.
it can also be argued that you get similar effect through perfect competition in an oligopoly, because each company realises that a price cut would only bring a (very) temporary increase in profits, untill their competitors follow & then it leads to a drop in profits across the industry. I think the main difference between that & a cartel, is its also hard to raise prices, unless they all agree to do it at the same time. cd prices rises, at least here in the uk, do tend to happen at the same time & by the same amount, which suggests collusion between the companies.
Web Design
the record companies did actually lose at least one court case in the usa about price fixing, so it is legitimate to call them a cartel.
i ng%20court
http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=cd%20price%20fix
Web Design
I propose that we petition congress to start a war on all the wars we're in. Maybe then we'll stop having all of the "War on ???" type of wars.
Most artists, upon signing with a record label, do so knowing full well they are paying back a loan, until the label says it's paid.
Come on, any artist signing a new deal with a major label these days is just stupid.
down here -- Brasil -- minimum wage is US$ .75/hour. This means people get by with less than US$ 200/month. US$ 15 for a CD -- which is the current price here -- is not an option. But US$ .75 -- which is how much a pirate CD costs in a street corner -- is. The recording industry is doing this to itself. People would pay US$ 2 for a CD. But not $15.
It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
Don't know why I never heard this one, (I'll have to do some reading now)
Strange, isn't it, how we never hear so much in the media about the recording industries crimes against humanity near so much as we hear about a couple of 'illegal' downloads... less strange that they admit no wrong doing and settled at $20/person (gimme a break!) to avoid costly litigation and move on with business...right.
If you think imaginary property and real property are the same, when does your house become public domain?
Its the man trying to keep us down. Use a better (non public) way to share your music. If you are going to download stuff illgaly do it smart.