Digital Music Downloads Too Expensive?

threeofnine writes "The Sydney Morning Herald has an article written by a copyright and technology lawyer asking if we are paying too much for digital downloads. From the article: 'Parallel imports are unavailable in the Australian digital market, however. Australian consumers cannot purchase downloads from iTunes or Wal-Mart in the US, which are often cheaper than downloads available here, without a US-issued credit card. And restrictive licensing conditions imposed by copyright owners also limit the sale of digital downloads across international borders. For both reasons Australian consumers miss out. And retailers cannot buy downloads from overseas and resell them here, even if it is worthwhile for them to do so. In a recent analysis, the prices of Australian-made CDs of artists such as Bon Jovi, REM and Robbie Williams were compared to those of legal parallel imports. It was found that the local product was as much as 300 per cent more expensive.'"

Comments

both sides of their mouths.

[yagu]

Interesting key (and somewhat conflicting) points from the article:

This is not the fault of retailers. Prices for digital downloads are based on wholesale prices, and are determined on a territorial basis by record companies based on their perception of what each market can bear

and:

As a border-free environment, the internet was supposed to bring down market barriers. But record companies use the internet to create boundaries and increase protectionism in the market for sound recordings, to the detriment of consumers

So, in addition to lobbying in the United States to encumber music and entertainment beyond any previous restrictions (to the point of unusability if they get their way), the music industry tries to layer artificial geographical artifacts over the internet to further increase their (already obscene) profits. I find it interesting the entertainment wonks get away with this under the "protection of artists and intellectual property" canards juxtaposed next to the argument that many people lose their jobs to outsourcing as a result of the "global economy" and the breaking down of these alleged geographic boundaries.

Seems like those in power define by expedience.

(As an aside, another tasty tidbit in the article:

When will parallel-import laws be extended to the digital market, so that Australian consumers are finally charged a fair price for downloads?

I find this an interesting question -- maybe when Americans are also charged a fair price for music (they aren't today). Sigh.

Re:both sides of their mouths.

[TubeSteak]

Those two points aren't contradictory at all.

Both support the assertion that the recording industry is still artificially keeping prices up.

Maybe someone will start up a business to issue low value American credit cards to foreigners so they can buy from iTunes. Even if it makes digital downloads 200% more expensive, there's still a savings.

Re:both sides of their mouths.

[aristotle-dude]

I had hoped that you would have a better grasp of economics when I saw you quote the the first part but alas, it was not so. The wholesale prices and retail prices of goods and services are usually determined not only on what the market can bear but also on the cost of doing business in each country. Do you honestly think the companies have no brick and mortar operations in each country for logistical purposes? They need to have a head office in each market they are dealing in and people on the ground scouting for new talent. All of this costs money and the amount varies from market to market based on the cost of living and government imposed payroll taxes.

I have a few questions for you. How would they determine how much of the sales to provide for each sales region if there was only one store? Which region would be used to determine the price? How would you handle currency fluctuations? Why should some regions suffer with lower margins in times of currency market instability while others profit more? If prices fluctuated with the currency markets, should wages do the same?

I really don't think the slashdot community understands some of the basic tenents of local economics and how the internet plays into it. If you can a company without a presence in other countries, then you can ship anywhere and charge the same price+shipping to everyone but if you have a presence in each market, you have to be able to cover your margins in those regions with slightly differing prices. Also, if you are going to have universal pricing of physical goods, chances are that your customers will have to foot the bill for import duties.

In closing, I really don't blame the slashdotters themselves but rather the clueless media which have led people to believe things which are not true like that the internet will bring down all barriers to trade. Such notions are naive and simplistic because they cannot apply to every business model out there. The only way you could have a single market is if you had a single currency and a single set of labour practices/taxes.

Re:both sides of their mouths.

[Maximilio]

the assertion that the recording industry is still artificially keeping prices up.

I can confirm for a solid fact that this is extremely true. I can have on-demand CD's printed off Lulu for $5.75 a pop. On-demand printing is proportionally 150% or more expensive than mass-produced printing, which I also know by comparing what it costs to print off my book versus what a trade paperback goes for in the store. So imagine what the real per-unit cost of a CD is, factoring in just about everything else (and the fact that the record companies' "advance" to the band usually deducts all of the costs of recording the actual music), it is probably below $3.00, and very likely below $2.00. We're talking a ballpark markup of about 1,000%

No connection

[suv4x4]

Did anyone notice the article summary has no connection with the title whatsoever...?

Stop the RIAA

[zufar]

EFF is collecting signatures to stop RIAA

To The United States Congress: We are the customers and former customers of the member labels of the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA). We love music and will gladly pay a fair price for it, but we are outraged by the RIAA's tactics in suing ordinary Americans for filesharing....

Let's slashdot the Senate and House Commerce!

Re: Stop the RIAA

[goldspider]

To The United States Congress: We are the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA). We love selling music and will gladly sell it for a fair price, but we are outraged by filesharers' tactics in acquiring our product without paying for it...

Spin works both ways.

Prices never go down, only up

[$RANDOMLUSER]

Why do CDs cost as much as vinyl LP albums did? The production costs for (digital) CDs are several of orders of magnitude less than they were for (analog) LPs, yet the price-point never moved.

Re:Prices never go down, only up

[NickFitz]

Actually, when CDs first appeared in the 80s they were a fair bit more expensive than LPs, and only moved back to more normal levels as production capacity was ramped up. The cost of the medium was never a major part of the overall cost of producing either an LP or a CD; the real question is why CDs are two to three times the price that an LP was in the mid-80s, given that the price of cocaine (which is where the majority of the recording industry's costs lie) has remained virtually static.

Off topic, but true story: at the Stonehenge Free Festival in 1984 a friend of mine, feeling thirsty, approached an ice cream van which had cans of soft drinks on display. He asked "How much is the Coke?" to which the vendor replied "£50 a gram".

Re:Too expensive? I don't think so...

[Anita Coney]

Actually, in the US it is not illegal. Actually, there is a little known loophole in US law that allows you to import music from outside the US without any copyright violation.

17 USC 602(a)(2) says that "importation, for the private use of the importer and not for distribution, by any person with respect to no more than one copy or phonorecord of any one work at any one time" is NOT infringement.

Thus, if you "import" one song from say, allofmp3.com, or from some other foreign server, for personal use, and do not distribute it to anyone else, the RIAA could not legally come after you.

Re:I find Bittorrent and Sharaza.......

[AndersOSU]

I both buy albums, and download music (illegally), and to tell you the truth, from a moral standpoint I feel worse about paying for it.

By paying for music I am propping up an anachronistic distributing chain whose business practices I take issue with. Which, for me, is more of an issue than violating a business friendly law, or depriving the artist of the miniscule cut of the sale he'd be receiving.

For me something that is mutually beneficial would support both the artists and the consumer; paying for music ain't. I'd rather see no one pay for music and watch the record labels go down in flames (artists can still make money touring), so that when I do want to buy an album I can know that the artist is getting a reasonable cut of the sale.

Re:Too expensive? I don't think so...

[Anita Coney]

Very interesting. Thanks! I guess it's not "little known" anymore.

This point should be stressed: "There is no private right of action for violations of customs law." Thus, the RIAA still could not come after an Allofmp3 user directly.

The RIAA is going ballistic over allofmp3. But they are trying to handle it via the governments involved, not directly with the users. Considering that the RIAA has no problem suing customers, I find that very informative.

My guess is that the RIAA does not want to risk an unfavorable ruling regarding 17 U.S.C. 602(a)(2). Can you imagine if that occurred? Suddenly downloaded music from foreign servers, even on P2P, would not be infringement. The shit would really hit the fan.

Thus, the RIAA's first step is to get Russia to shut the site down but pressuring the US government. When and if that fails I'd guess that they'll have Congress amend 17 U.S.C. 602(a)(2) to specify that it does not apply to downloaded music. Heck, their probably already working on that! Once that is amended, then they'll start suing Allofmp3 users.