Slashdot Mirror
Antitrust Case Against RIAA Reinstated
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "After Starr v. SONY BMG Music Entertainment was dismissed at the District Court level,
the antitrust class action against the RIAA has been reinstated by the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. In its 25-page opinion (PDF), the Appeals court held the following allegations sufficiently allege antitrust violations: 'First, defendants agreed to launch MusicNet and pressplay, both of which charged unreasonably high prices and contained similar DRMs. Second, none of the defendants dramatically reduced their prices for Internet Music (as compared to CDs), despite the fact that all defendants experienced dramatic cost reductions in producing Internet Music. Third, when defendants began to sell Internet Music through entities they did not own or control, they maintained the same unreasonably high prices and DRMs as MusicNet itself. Fourth, defendants used MFNs [most favored nation clauses] in their licenses that had the effect of guaranteeing that the licensor who signed the MFN received terms no less favorable than terms offered to other licensors. For example, both EMI and UMG used MFN clauses in their licensing agreements with MusicNet. Fifth, defendants used the MFNs to enforce a wholesale price floor of about 70 cents per song. Sixth, all defendants refuse to do business with eMusic, the #2 Internet Music retailer. Seventh, in or about May 2005, all defendants raised wholesale prices from about $0.65 per song to $0.70 per song. This price increase was enforced by MFNs.'"
Who is going to compensate me for my increased stress level from living in fear of being sued by the RIAA? If I had kids and I wanted them to behave, I'd just tell them stories about the RIAA coming to get them and financially ruin them.
Don't jaywalk kids because the RIAA will come get you.
Eat your vegetables so you can be strong to fight the riaa.
Seriously though, I hate those guys.
--------- I have no signature
The advantage is that you don't get screwed. It's not that you're going to be homecoming queen, it's just that you get to sit at the cool kids' table and no one shoves you in a locker.
Thanks for keeping us in the loop NYCL.
These seem to be serious allegations. I hope there's action taken this time.
These deserve to be kept in mind:
http://archive.salon.com/tech/feature/2000/06/14/love/ (Courtney Love Does the Math, from 2000 - looking at it now, oddly prophetic)
http://www.negativland.com/albini.html (The Problem with Music, by Producer Steve Albini - great insight into the process of Major Label music)
This is why we should care. I know that it's clichéd, but these companies care nothing about you, or about music, or about the well-being of the world in which they operate. They are wholly evil, in a way that almost no other business is.
sig?
i think the point is that 1) all the record companies set the same price and 2) they all raised their prices together. these two facts seem to demonstrate collusion in the market. that being the case or not is up to the courts.
turn up the jukebox and tell me a lie
I think the difference is that Al Capone DIDN'T pay off the right government officials. That's probably not the case here.
Can't [all major labels' simultaneous royalty] increase (approximately 7%) be explained by typical inflation and justifiably be expected every two years?
Why doesn't it decrease as the cost of producing music decreases? Look at how much it cost to record an album in 1980 vs. now.
It's not the price, it's the collusion. The labels are supposed to be in competition with each other. Slashdot has repeatedly recognized that the business of a business is to make money - by whatever means possible. Without collusion and general agreement in the backrooms and lounges, one or more labels might actually become convinced that giving away lots and lots of music is the true route to fortune. Baen Books has learned that lesson - especially with older books. They release an out of print book, FOR FREE, and people not only start asking for that book, but they purchase even more books by the same author, and/or in the same genre.
In the case of the labels represented by RIAA, everyone is part of the Good Old Boy's club, everyone is in lockstep, with the same program, same menu, same tactics. They have a happy status quo, and no one is about to rock the boat with anything so barbaric as COMPETITION!!
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
Thanks for bringing this to our attention NYC, but if you'll excuse the pun, we've heard this tune before. Suppose that the RIAA loses and is ordered to pay restitution, but instead of cash the court allows the RIAA and its members to "pay" by donating a selection of CDs or downloads of their choice (i.e. their choice of the worst selling items) while valuing them, for the purposes of the settlement, at "full retail" (even though almost none of them actually sell at that price in the real world). What will prevent them from offering an equally "useless" settlement payment, as they have been allowed to do in the past, again this time?