Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Music

Submission + - Digital music prices: are they illegally fixed? (arstechnica.com) 1

suraj.sun writes: A federal lawsuit against the major music labels calls them a cartel which has banded together illegally to fix the prices of digital music. A New York appeals court has ruled the case can proceed.

As lawsuits go, this one's a humdinger, charging that the labels engaged in a price-fixing conspiracy to ensure that they each made about 70 cents per track sold online, and that no one received a better deal than anyone else. The case had earlier been tossed for a "failure to state a claim," but the Second Circuit Court of Appeals has reinstated it and ordered the trial judge to proceed with the case.
Most Favored Nations

The case in question, Starr V. Sony BMG, actually began life as a host of cases filed by various plaintiffs in various state and federal courts in 2005 and 2006. The cases were eventually consolidated into a single one to be heard in a New York federal court, and that case covers behavior that goes all the way back to those dark post-Napster days when the labels attempted to foist MusicNet and pressplay onto an unsuspecting public.

Those early services were at first the only way that the labels would allow their music to be sold over the Internet, and the control exercised was extreme: they were actually label-controlled ventures, neither store had a complete selection of music, and the DRM was flat-out ridonkulous.

ARSTechnica : http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2010/01/digital-music-prices-are-they-illegally-fixed.ars

Submission + - Antitrust case against RIAA reinstated (blogspot.com) 2

NewYorkCountryLawyer writes: In Starr v. SONY BMG Music Entertainment, an antitrust class action against the RIAA, the complaint — dismissed at the District Court level — has been reinstated by the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. In its 25-page opinion (PDF) , the Appeals court held the the following allegations to 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 [most favored nation clauses (MFNs)] 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.'
Security

Submission + - 10th anniversary of Y2K (lifeboat.com) 1

Maria Williams writes: The 2009 Lifeboat Foundation Guardian Award has been given to Peter de Jager on the tenth anniversary of Y2K which he helped avert. This award is in recognition of his 1993 warning which alerted the world to the potential disaster that might have occurred on January 1, 2000 and his efforts in the following years to create global awareness of the problem, and the possible solutions. His presentations, articles, and more than 2,000 media interviews contributed significantly to the world's mobilization to avoid that fate.

Comment Re:Tried it (Score 1) 365

++Insightful

Shouldn't that be insightful++ ? I mean, ++insightful would be moderating before you read the comment - something akin to commenting before you read the arti.... oh wait, nevermind.

Comment Re:Smoking Gun? Hardly (Score 1) 406

"Statutory rape," you say?

1.) Statutory rape is just that - A rapist who has committed "statutory rape" is considered only to have done so only because there's a law that says so, no matter how much the activities differed from what rape really is.

2.) Linus' post on the Minix newsgroup announcing the project was on 25 August 1991, which is not quite yet 18 years ago. Technically, Linux is still underage enough to be statutorily raped. ;P

Regarding point 2. It could be argued that the "location" of Linux is primarily based on country of origin. What with Linus being Finnish, that puts the age of consent at 16. So linux only has another few months of being screwed over illegally. Q4 marks the time that Linux comes of age! This *is* the year of linux on the desktop, after all!

NASA

Mystery of the Missing Sunspots, Solved? 99

PRB_Ohio writes "The sun is in the middle of a century long solar minimum, and sunspots have been puzzlingly scarce for more than two years. Now, for the first time, solar physicists might understand why. The gist is that there is a 'jet stream' like phenomenon about 7,000km below the surface of the sun. The streams migrate slowly from the poles to the equator and when a jet stream reaches the critical latitude of 22 degrees, new-cycle sunspots begin to appear. Scientists at the National Solar Observatory (NSO) in Tucson, Arizona, used a technique called helioseismology to track and analyze the streams."

Comment Re:They could make a fortune... (Score 1) 135

Mod points, mod points, my kingdom for some mod points!

The beauty of wine is that it's all different. Year, to year, country to country, region to region, vinyard to vinyard. Hell, even bottle to bottle.

There's all too little art in the world...can't you people leave the art of fermentation alone?

(Darn kids...get off my terroir)

Comment Re:sigh (Score 1) 1870

No the real bummer is that so many people like you think that they are not criminals. Last time I checked, its illegal to take something that is not yours and you didn't pay for.

You make a copy. You don't take something.

Just because you're making a copy, doesn't mean that you're not taking something that is not yours. Copyright == the right to copy. Something that according to the law you do not have unless expressly permitted.

And it has been that way for thousands of years.

No, it isn't. You could copy the Mona Lisa until you're green in the face, no problem.

Well - you can do that today. What you can't do is pass it off as the original, neither can you copy somebody else's comparatively recent interpretation of the Mona Lisa without permission.

You fully well know what they are trying to accomplish with their site. Don't pretend like its something its not.

They are providing torrent files. Plain text files. On which no copyright lies, or at least nobody minds that they copy those.

And herein lies what should be the crux of the legal dispute. Separating their intent from their actions. Their intentions should be immaterial in the guilty / not guilty verdict. However, the severity of the sentence *is* determined, at least in part, by their intentions.

It is for encouraging piracy plain and simple.

Piracy happens in the coastal waters of Somalia. What you mean is called "copyright infringement".

Agreed. Additionally I disagree that TPB was for "encouraging piracy plain and simple". It did also serve to highlight the discussion of usefulness of current copyright law in the digital age.

Slashdot Top Deals

Air pollution is really making us pay through the nose.

Working...