RIAA Grabs Student's Life's Savings

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
One last note: ElFENIX, the price of CD's still is on avg $15-17, I think you're wrong. When u peruse the aisles, you only see the promo stuff like Metallica on sale for say $11.99 because it's popular and they're using the price as a gimmick. For any other CD that's NOT pop rock (this comprises like over 90% of music in the world) it will be $15-17. A good example is HERE. The new John Mellencamp is still $14.99 PLUS SHIPPING!!

which is still lower than the $20 that was claimed in the one article and the range is mostly lower than the $16.98 (soon to be $17.98!) claimed in the other article. i didn't claim that CDs were any specific price, either. so, no, going by what you've presented i'm not wrong at all about the first article and maybe only a little wrong with the other (though with how long ago it was written you'd have expected those $18 CDs already).

if you're paying for shipping thats you're own damn fault. go to the store and get it

Shipping hurts the millions of people that pay for CD's online, so to exclude this fact of life is not very logical: the end price of a CD with shipping will be about $18 ON AVERAGE WHEN BOUGHT ONLINE. What the percentage is of CD's bought online vs store, I couldn't tell you! But the fact is that millions of people are still getting their pockets picked.

With regards to an actual STORE PRICE, maybe some people could elaborate on here who have been to a Sam Goody, a Walmart, or Best Buy? Let me ask you, how does the CD get to the store?? Maybe these big record companies have deals for shipping, but I seriously doubt that on avg they're $12-15, I would think they are higher... but we need more facts to prove how much a CD is today in a store.

Let me ask you, how long were CD's in the $18-20 range???? I know for a fact while growing up in the 90's when I bought CD's, that they were in this range. I used to spend all of my allowance and minimum wage money on them. So theoretically, you could say that the record industry has been knowingly raping its consumers for about a full decade before people started to wise up and look for other ways (mp3's) to counter this absurd(IMO) theft of consumer dollars. It's Darwinism at its finest, people will only pay for what something's worth and corporations will continue to thrive as long as they can prey on a sucker... how long it takes the consumer to realize this, is an entirely different thing (in this case, about 10 years!). Technology is a double edged blade, CD's had us by the balls by corporations(monetarily). Now, mp3's have THEM BY THE BALLS. You can't have your cake and eat it too is what I say to them!!!!

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Originally posted by: ElFenix
which is still lower than the $20 that was claimed in the one article and the range is mostly lower than the $16.98 (soon to be $17.98!) claimed in the other article. i didn't claim that CDs were any specific price, either. so, no, going by what you've presented i'm not wrong at all about the first article and maybe only a little wrong with the other (though with how long ago it was written you'd have expected those $18 CDs already).

if you're paying for shipping thats you're own damn fault. go to the store and get it

Shipping hurts the millions of people that pay for CD's online, so to exclude this fact of life is not very logical: the end price of a CD with shipping will be about $18 ON AVERAGE WHEN BOUGHT ONLINE. What the percentage of CD's bought online vs store, I couldn't tell you! But the fact is that millions of people are still getting their pockets picked.

With regards to an actual STORE PRICE, maybe some people could elaborate on here who have been to a Sam Goody, a Walmart, or Best Buy? Let me ask you, how does the CD get to the store?? Maybe these big record companies have deals for shipping, but I seriously doubt that on avg they're $12-15, I would think they are higher... but we need more facts to prove how much a CD is today in a store.

Let me ask you, how long were CD's in the $18-20 range???? I know for a fact while growing up in the 90's when I bought CD's, that they were in this range. I used to spend all of my allowance and minimum wage money on them. So theoretically, you could say that the record industry has been knowingly raping its consumers for about a full decade before people started to wise up and look for other ways (mp3's) to counter this absurd(IMO) theft of consumer dollars. It's Darwinism at its finest, people will only pay for what something's worth and corporations will continue to thrive as long as they can prey on a sucker... how long it takes the consumer to realize this, is an entirely different thing (in this case, about 10 years!). Technology is a double edged blade, CD's had us by the balls by corporations(monetarily). Now, mp3's have THEM BY THE BALLS. You can't have your cake and eat it too is what I say to them!!!!

i never saw CDs in that range and according to the link nemesis provided with average CD prices they were about $13 or $14 throughout that. sure, there were probably CDs in the $18 to $20 range, but it wasn't the vast majority of them. except those stupid "2 casettes for $19.99 or 2 CDs for $24.99" BS that was on late night TV. as for theft, you were willing forking the money over. not like the record companies were holding a gun to your head and forcing you to buy CDs.

if i'm going to be paying shipping for something i usually buy a few things so that that $5 shipping charge is only $1/item. again, not doing that is your own damn fault. also, shipping is a service above and beyond the CD itself, so, no, its not pertinent to the conversation anyway since its going to fedex or ups or usps and not the record company.

 

[jjones]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: jjones
I'm glad people are stealing from the RIAA. It's payback for them stealing from me for every blank CD I buy.

its the israeli-palestinian conflict of the US!

No it's not. The RIAA has in its hands both the capital and the technology to make everyone happy. They have a win-win situation just as they always have but, just as they always have, they refuse to embrace changing times and use new technology for their advantage and the mutual benefit of their business and consumers alike. They prefer to use, just as they always have, strongarm techniques instead of sound business techniques. This goes way back to Big Music demanding a tax on the tubes used in radios because they said radio was going to destroy their business. Instead radio was the biggest boon to the music business in their history. The history of the music business is replete with such examples. I have no sympathy for them at all and as I've always stated, if they continue in this manner, I hope they choke to death.

 

[athithi]

RIAA should go after Creative Labs, Intel, nVidia, CD/DVD drive/media manufacturers and mp3 player manufacturers. They are the devils that enable people to commit copyright infringement If it were impossible to listen to music on any device (such as a computer or mp3 player) unless it were played from an original CD, music piracy would stop being an issue. It appears to me that RIAA is just trying to pick fights that it can win. Nothing wrong with that, except I feel like saying, "Pick on someone your own size".

 

[Linflas]

Originally posted by: jjones
I'm glad people are stealing from the RIAA. It's payback for them stealing from me for every blank CD I buy.

Isn't that only the case if you are dumb enough to buy blanks labeled as "Music CD-R" media? I think those are the ones with the built in royalties.

 

[Linflas]

Originally posted by: athithi
RIAA should go after Creative Labs, Intel, nVidia, CD/DVD drive/media manufacturers and mp3 player manufacturers. They are the devils that enable people to commit copyright infringement If it were impossible to listen to music on any device (such as a computer or mp3 player) unless it were played from an original CD, music piracy would stop being an issue. It appears to me that RIAA is just trying to pick fights that it can win. Nothing wrong with that, except I feel like saying, "Pick on someone your own size".

They sufficiently intimidated the potential equipment makers of DAT machines that those products never came to the mass market as anything other than backup media.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: SP33Demon

Shipping hurts the millions of people that pay for CD's online, so to exclude this fact of life is not very logical: the end price of a CD with shipping will be about $18 ON AVERAGE WHEN BOUGHT ONLINE. What the percentage of CD's bought online vs store, I couldn't tell you! But the fact is that millions of people are still getting their pockets picked.

With regards to an actual STORE PRICE, maybe some people could elaborate on here who have been to a Sam Goody, a Walmart, or Best Buy? Let me ask you, how does the CD get to the store?? Maybe these big record companies have deals for shipping, but I seriously doubt that on avg they're $12-15, I would think they are higher... but we need more facts to prove how much a CD is today in a store.

Let me ask you, how long were CD's in the $18-20 range???? I know for a fact while growing up in the 90's when I bought CD's, that they were in this range. I used to spend all of my allowance and minimum wage money on them. So theoretically, you could say that the record industry has been knowingly raping its consumers for about a full decade before people started to wise up and look for other ways (mp3's) to counter this absurd(IMO) theft of consumer dollars. It's Darwinism at its finest, people will only pay for what something's worth and corporations will continue to thrive as long as they can prey on a sucker... how long it takes the consumer to realize this, is an entirely different thing (in this case, about 10 years!). Technology is a double edged blade, CD's had us by the balls by corporations(monetarily). Now, mp3's have THEM BY THE BALLS. You can't have your cake and eat it too is what I say to them!!!!

i never saw CDs in that range and according to the link nemesis provided with average CD prices they were about $13 or $14 throughout that. sure, there were probably CDs in the $18 to $20 range, but it wasn't the vast majority of them. except those stupid "2 casettes for $19.99 or 2 CDs for $24.99" BS that was on late night TV. as for theft, you were willing forking the money over. not like the record companies were holding a gun to your head and forcing you to buy CDs.

if i'm going to be paying shipping for something i usually buy a few things so that that $5 shipping charge is only $1/item. again, not doing that is your own damn fault. also, shipping is a service above and beyond the CD itself, so, no, its not pertinent to the conversation anyway since its going to fedex or ups or usps and not the record company.

I was NOT willing to fork over the money, but that was my ONLY alternative. Now, it's not. I haven't bought a crappy CD in about 6 years, now I'll only buy the ones that I think are spectacular and I want to commend the artist by owning it on CD. The only other way, back in the day, to own a song was to tape it off the radio. And that sounded like #$%!
This is analgous to OPEC holding us by the balls with oil: They charge us $25-35 a barrel because THEY HAVE MOPOLIZED THE PRODUCT. Wait until new technology (hydrogen fuel cell's) is fully developed and we won't need OPEC anymore (wicked evil grin)... it will be what the mp3 is to the CD.

Once again, regarding shipping, you're not looking at REALITY. It doesn't matter WHERE the money is going to (Fedex/UPS/USPS), what is the final price that online consumers will PAY to OWN A CD? Somewhere in the $18-20 range... so theoretically Nemesis's article still holds weight in my book. I understand that shipping is not the NOMIMAL price of the CD, but you have to look at the big picture and what is reality... Consumers don't care what the price of a CD is, they want to know what is coming out of their credit/checking accounts. Once again, if someone can testify that the price of a CD on average is lower than $15 then I will change my views. Anyone buy a CD in a store lately?

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
I was NOT willing to fork over the money, but that was my ONLY alternative. Now, it's not. I haven't bought a crappy CD in about 6 years, now I'll only buy the ones that I think are spectacular and I want to commend the artist by owning it on CD. The only other way, back in the day, to own a song was to tape it off the radio. And that sounded like #$%!
This is analgous to OPEC holding us by the balls with oil: They charge us $25-35 a barrel because THEY HAVE MOPOLIZED THE PRODUCT. Wait until new technology (hydrogen fuel cell's) is fully developed and we won't need OPEC anymore (wicked evil grin)... it will be what the mp3 is to the CD.

Once again, regarding shipping, you're not looking at REALITY. It doesn't matter WHERE the money is going to (Fedex/UPS/USPS), what is the final price that online consumers will PAY to OWN A CD? Somewhere in the $18-20 range... so theoretically Nemesis's article still holds weight in my book. I understand that shipping is not the NOMIMAL price of the CD, but you have to look at the big picture and what is reality... Consumers don't care what the price of a CD is, they want to know what is coming out of their credit/checking accounts. Once again, if someone can testify that the price of a CD on average is lower than $15 then I will change my views. Anyone buy a CD in a store lately?

actually, you did have an alternative which was to not have a collection of high quality recordings. obviously you thought, at the time, having the collection of high quality recordings was more important than whatever else you could have bought with your money. you yeah, you WERE WILLING.

as for opec holding us by the balls... please! opec is one of the loosest cartels on the planet. they don't monopolize the product, in fact opec countries make up about 40% of the market. heck, of the top 10 oil producers only 3 are opec countries. plus, opec countries cheat all the time because they don't want to lose market share vs each other. if they work together they can certainly influence prices, but its pretty rare when that happens.

once again, the price of shipping is not the price of a CD. shipping is a separate product and nemesis's articles were talking about what the supplier is selling the CD for, not what the end cost is to the consumer. LIST price does not include shipping. NOR is any of that money seen by the recording industry. if you want to bitch about amazon's shipping rates then thats fine, just know that its not pertinent at all. hell best buy has FREE shipping on music.

 

[SP33Demon]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
I was NOT willing to fork over the money, but that was my ONLY alternative. Now, it's not. I haven't bought a crappy CD in about 6 years, now I'll only buy the ones that I think are spectacular and I want to commend the artist by owning it on CD. The only other way, back in the day, to own a song was to tape it off the radio. And that sounded like #$%!
This is analgous to OPEC holding us by the balls with oil: They charge us $25-35 a barrel because THEY HAVE MONOPOLIZED THE PRODUCT. Wait until new technology (hydrogen fuel cell's) is fully developed and we won't need OPEC anymore (wicked evil grin)... it will be what the mp3 is to the CD.

Once again, regarding shipping, you're not looking at REALITY. It doesn't matter WHERE the money is going to (Fedex/UPS/USPS), what is the final price that online consumers will PAY to OWN A CD? Somewhere in the $18-20 range... so theoretically Nemesis's article still holds weight in my book. I understand that shipping is not the NOMIMAL price of the CD, but you have to look at the big picture and what is reality... Consumers don't care what the price of a CD is, they want to know what is coming out of their credit/checking accounts. Once again, if someone can testify that the price of a CD on average is lower than $15 then I will change my views. Anyone buy a CD in a store lately?

actually, you did have an alternative which was to not have a collection of high quality recordings. obviously you thought, at the time, having the collection of high quality recordings was more important than whatever else you could have bought with your money. you yeah, you WERE WILLING.

as for opec holding us by the balls... please! opec is one of the loosest cartels on the planet. they don't monopolize the product, in fact opec countries make up about 40% of the market. heck, of the top 10 oil producers only 3 are opec countries. plus, opec countries cheat all the time because they don't want to lose market share vs each other. if they work together they can certainly influence prices, but its pretty rare when that happens.

once again, the price of shipping is not the price of a CD. shipping is a separate product and nemesis's articles were talking about what the supplier is selling the CD for, not what the end cost is to the consumer. LIST price does not include shipping. NOR is any of that money seen by the recording industry. if you want to bitch about amazon's shipping rates then thats fine, just know that its not pertinent at all. hell best buy has FREE shipping on music.

What kid didn't buy CD's?? To justify record companies' looting of young kids' money by saying the kids "were willing" to buy the CD's is ludicrous. It doesn't matter if the kid was willing or not, THEFT IS THEFT. A kid doesn't know how much a CD is SUPPOSED to reasonably cost, he/she's not old enough to make an informed purchase. That's like saying, I just sold a kid a baseball card and he was willing to pay $100 for it. Since I'm the only person in the US that makes baseball cards, of course that sucker kid doesn't know I charged 10,000% markup on it.

"opec is one of the loosest cartels on the planet". And are CARTELS ILLEGAL in the US? YES!!! Actually, you're wrong according to the BP Amoco Statistical Review of World Energy (2000). There are 4 top producers in OPEC: Iraq, Iran, Venezuala, and Saudi Arabia. Quoted off of Opec's Official Website FAQ: "Does OPEC control the oil market?

No, OPEC does not control the oil market. OPEC Member Countries produce about 41 percent of the world's crude oil and 15 percent of its natural gas. However, OPEC's oil exports represent about 55 percent of the oil traded internationally. Therefore, OPEC can have a strong influence on the oil market, especially if it decides to reduce or increase its level of production."

That last line should puntuate my point that OPEC is an illegal cartel fixing prices on the majority of internationally traded oil.

I will give you the list price thing, b/c I just checked Best Buy's website and many of their CD's are under $15 and have free shipping. Of course, I won't regulary buy CD's until they're $9.99 or less (personal opinion!).

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
What kid didn't buy CD's?? To justify record companies' looting of young kids' money by saying the kids "were willing" to buy the CD's is ludicrous. It doesn't matter if the kid was willing or not, THEFT IS THEFT. A kid doesn't know how much a CD is SUPPOSED to reasonably cost, he/she's not old enough to make an informed purchase. That's like saying, I just sold a kid a baseball card and he was willing to pay $100 for it. Since I'm the only person in the US that makes baseball cards, of course that sucker kid doesn't know I charged 10,000% markup on it.

again, you didn't have to buy it. if the seller is committing fraud or something thats a different circumstance

"opec is one of the loosest cartels on the planet". And are CARTELS ILLEGAL in the US? YES!!!

whether cartels are illegal in the US or not has nothing to do with if its loose cartel or not.

Actually, you're wrong according to the BP Amoco Statistical Review of World Energy (2000). There are 4 top producers in OPEC: Iraq, Iran, Venezuala, and Saudi Arabia.

i didn't say what the top 4 producers of opec are. i don't see how you could say i was wrong about something i didn't make a statement about

Quoted off of Opec's Official Website FAQ: "Does OPEC control the oil market?

No, OPEC does not control the oil market. OPEC Member Countries produce about 41 percent of the world's crude oil and 15 percent of its natural gas. However, OPEC's oil exports represent about 55 percent of the oil traded internationally. Therefore, OPEC can have a strong influence on the oil market, especially if it decides to reduce or increase its level of production."

and the stuff that isn't traded internationally still has to be bought and sold at market. ignoring all that oil is pointless. and yes, they can have a strong influence on the market, if they work together. i did mention that if they work together they can influence it, so, you still haven't refuted anything i've said.

That last line should puntuate my point that OPEC is an illegal cartel fixing prices on the majority of internationally traded oil.

wow, now you're changing your point after seeing that your first one didn't hold up. good move. your original point was that opec has us by the balls because they're a monopoly. maybe you forgot.

I will give you the list price thing, b/c I just checked Best Buy's website and many of their CD's are under $15 and have free shipping. Of course, I won't regulary buy CD's until they're $9.99 or less (personal opinion!).

well, good, don't buy any then. maybe you'll force them to change their pricing structure.

 

[SP33Demon]

"as for opec holding us by the balls... please! opec is one of the loosest cartels on the planet. they don't monopolize the product, in fact opec countries make up about 40% of the market. heck, of the top 10 oil producers only 3 are opec countries. plus, opec countries cheat all the time because they don't want to lose market share vs each other. if they work together they can certainly influence prices, but its pretty rare when that happens."


My response was that "Actually, you're wrong according to the BP Amoco Statistical Review of World Energy (2000). There are 4 top producers in OPEC: Iraq, Iran, Venezuala, and Saudi Arabia." I meant that of the 10 top producers, 4 of them are OPEC countries. You said 3...


"wow, now you're changing your point after seeing that your first one didn't hold up. good move. your original point was that opec has us by the balls because they're a monopoly. maybe you forgot. "

55% could be considered a monopoly, especially since they are a CARTEL. Definition of a CARTEL off dictionary.com:

car·tel ( P ) Pronunciation Key (kär-tl)
n : a consortium of companies formed to limit competition; "they set up the trust in the hope of gaining a monopoly" [syn: trust, combine]

If 55% (over majority) conspire to price fix, I would consider that pretty close to a monopoly.

I'm glad that we can come to an agreement on most of this stuff, and that you can respect my opinion that I don't want to buy CD's until the price comes down...

 

[Linflas]

Originally posted by: jjones

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: jjones
I'm glad people are stealing from the RIAA. It's payback for them stealing from me for every blank CD I buy.

its the israeli-palestinian conflict of the US!

No it's not. The RIAA has in its hands both the capital and the technology to make everyone happy. They have a win-win situation just as they always have but, just as they always have, they refuse to embrace changing times and use new technology for their advantage and the mutual benefit of their business and consumers alike. They prefer to use, just as they always have, strongarm techniques instead of sound business techniques. This goes way back to Big Music demanding a tax on the tubes used in radios because they said radio was going to destroy their business. Instead radio was the biggest boon to the music business in their history. The history of the music business is replete with such examples. I have no sympathy for them at all and as I've always stated, if they continue in this manner, I hope they choke to death.

This tactic of "it is the end of our industry" is a staple in both the music industry and Hollywood as well. I recall when I was a kid going to the movies and seeing petitions there against "pay TV" claiming that it would be the death knell of the film industry. 30 years forward and we have tons of pay TV with Hollywood making a mint on it.

 

[skace]

And writing a search engine is still not illegal.

He had illegal software on his hard drive so you assume the search engine was for illegal use. By that logic, I can bust 90% of the people here on just about anything, and to back up my claims I will search their hard drive for cracked software / copyright materials. You are probably using Anandtech PM service as a front for your illegal warez! "Hot Deals" Indeed! Time to shut Anandtech down because the people who use it probably also have illegal software.

Warezing is bad, tools that can be used for warezing are not inherently bad. That is my stance. To fight warez, companies continually attack the tools. In turn, the tools are turning towards encryption. Let the fun begin.

 

[UglyCasanova]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: SP33Demon
One last note: ElFENIX, the price of CD's still is on avg $15-17, I think you're wrong. When u peruse the aisles, you only see the promo stuff like Metallica on sale for say $11.99 because it's popular and they're using the price as a gimmick. For any other CD that's NOT pop rock (this comprises like over 90% of music in the world) it will be $15-17. A good example is HERE. The new John Mellencamp is still $14.99 PLUS SHIPPING!!

which is still lower than the $20 that was claimed in the one article and the range is mostly lower than the $16.98 (soon to be $17.98!) claimed in the other article. i didn't claim that CDs were any specific price, either. so, no, going by what you've presented i'm not wrong at all about the first article and maybe only a little wrong with the other (though with how long ago it was written you'd have expected those $18 CDs already).

if you're paying for shipping thats you're own damn fault. go to the store and get it

Any store where I live charges about $17.99 for a CD unless it is Classical or in the bargain bin. I could go to Walmart, which seems to be somewhat cheaper, but their CD's are edited (found this out the hard way) and they have a horrible selection. The CD stores in the mall aren't much better. While they have a slightly larger selection and are not edited, the CD's all cost around $18. Hell, the CD's on sell are $13.99. Most of the time they do not even carry the CD I want in the first place, so I have to order online. Those of you who live in the cities or nearby suburbs have it easy with a Best Buy or a decent music store, but many of us are not fortunate enough to have one so we are stuck paying extreme prices, online or not.

 

[PowerMacG5]

I did not read the entire thread, but Jesse Jordan went to my high school (Oceanside High School in Oceanside, New York).

 

[0roo0roo]

nothing quite as sad as a thief justifying his theft. ask most shoplifters and they'll give you about the same reasons.

just admit it yeesh.

i sometimes steals cuz i can! its dat simple!



ok, back to figuring out how i can sneak that geforce 4 fx out of the store its 5 dollars of pcb/solder and a bit of silicon. damn companies mark it up by insane margins.

 

[isaacmacdonald]

Originally posted by: dparker

Originally posted by: syberscott
The irony is that the RIAA would not be resorting to such tactics if people would just stop stealing music.

The irony is people would stop stealing if something decent was put out and the price was lowered to a reasonable level.

exactly. I'll be buying hail to the thief (though I did download the prerease months ago), but that's about the only thing I've heard recently that is worth plunking down 14 bucks. These guys need to get with the program.

 

[0roo0roo]

not exactly at all. you can say that about any theft. if it were cheaper, they wouldn't have to steal it. duh!

just ask your friendly neighborhood carjacker.

 

[lowfatbaconboy]

(did read the whole thread btw)
the reason prices are still high on cds is b/c the artists take a cut from every cd sold(least thats what im told) sometimes and the companies still wanna make a lot of profit


none of this is going to stop me ive had the its people at my school b!tch at me and it didn't scare me
hell if a guy down the hall can jack some guys t3 connection and set it up to send ssl encrypted crap to him so he can get around the network limits on p2p programs and he only gets a little slap on the wrist

i bet combining all the users on the forum we will take more than 12,000 bucks worth of stuff from MPAA and RIAA in a week or less

 

[LordMorpheus]

I doubt that this search engine 'hijacked a college network to use for blatant piracy' and whatnot . . . .

I mean, There is nothing on the site which suggests piracy, and it could very easily be used to grab high demand school-related files . . . . or research and info and whatnot.


The main complaint, if I read that court thing right (damn lawyers and their twisted words) is that people used this to get music, and that our buddy JJ had music on his harddrive that he never bought the CD or rights to.

Honestly, the part about people using it for evil is complete bullcrap. Witness Google, Yahoo, KaZaA, eMule, Morpheus, the internet, etc. etc.. There is no way to easily regulate copmyrighted stuff, kazaa, morpehus, the like don't, why should he? easier target with less money, I suppose.

The part about having music w/o copyrights.

I dare you, one person here claim innocence. I doubt that .1% of 10-30 year olds with a computer and internet who know how to use it don't have any copyrighted stuff without the artists (or the artist's lawyer's) permissions.


so, I believe that this guy shouldn't be docked 12 grand. You have my reasons: A) the illegal use of it is not PROVABLY its intended purpose. and B) If he is guilty of part 2 then so is 25% (at least) of all US citizens. Sue us, motherfuc*ers.


my question: how could the RIAA prove that piracy was chewplatic's intent?

 

[SludgeFactory]

Originally posted by: dparker
Any store where I live charges about $17.99 for a CD unless it is Classical or in the bargain bin. I could go to Walmart, which seems to be somewhat cheaper, but their CD's are edited (found this out the hard way) and they have a horrible selection. The CD stores in the mall aren't much better. While they have a slightly larger selection and are not edited, the CD's all cost around $18. Hell, the CD's on sell are $13.99. Most of the time they do not even carry the CD I want in the first place, so I have to order online. Those of you who live in the cities or nearby suburbs have it easy with a Best Buy or a decent music store, but many of us are not fortunate enough to have one so we are stuck paying extreme prices, online or not.

DeepDiscountCD
BestBuy.com
CircuitCity.com
Half.com
Django
BMG
Columbia House



Most anything released domestically can be found online, new for $13-$15 max, often with free shipping. The trend lately with new releases is $9.99-$11.99 at B&M's like BB, CC, Target, Kmart, etc. BB and CC online have the same prices w/ free shipping.

That's not even getting into used CD's at half, django, ebay, etc. Or the CD clubs with an average price of $4-$5. CD's don't have to cost $17.98 or $19.98 or whatever crazy price Sam Goody is asking.

It's never going to change for smaller cities w/o the big B&M's. Might as well accept that most of your buying will have to be done online if you want to have good selection & price. At least there's that option, before the internet you were really screwed! The online price is no worse, usually better -- you just need a little patience, as you're probably aware.

 

[SludgeFactory]

Originally posted by: isaacmacdonaldexactly. I'll be buying hail to the thief (though I did download the prerease months ago), but that's about the only thing I've heard recently that is worth plunking down 14 bucks. These guys need to get with the program.

Circuit City -- $8.99. B&M or online (free shipping IIRC).

Thread about this in HD, that somehow turned into an argument over Thom Yorke's right to express his political views

 

[codeyf]

Originally posted by: RossMAN
Time to do some borrowing

 

[Lonyo]

Haven't read the whole thread, don't know if it's been pointed out before but....

"With one click of a mouse, you can get music, you can get anything you wanted."

Umm, yeah, anything oyu wanted, so it's not actually file sharing at all, it is, as he says, a search thing, and they admitted this much by saying you can get anything you wanted. Sounds like Google to me.

"The people who run these Napster networks know full well what they are doing: Operating a sophisticated network designed to enable widespread music thievery,"

Their description is of Google, then they say Napster (something with which you could NOT get anything you wanted, only music files)

Jordan knew students were sharing files on his network: pictures, PowerPoint presentations, physics notes, anime, and music. But he refutes the RIAA's claim he "hijacked an academic network" and "installed an emporium for music trading."

And again, a legitimate use for what he had created. So, umm, what's wrong with that?

"We don't think it's ridiculous to call someone a thief who is, in fact, stealing music. And that's exactly what his system did," said Weiss.

Surely Windows Media Player, and ripping software paves the way for music sharing and swapping, and maybe the RIAA should go after Microsoft and any other company who wants to allow people to create the files to share.

 

[kami]

Originally posted by: SammySon
Gives me more reason to pirate now.