Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Music Media Government The Courts Your Rights Online News

Price-Fixing Settlement Checks in the Mail 269

toastyman writes "Remember the Music Industry $67m settlement from way back in 2002? Seven months later than planned, your $13.86 check is finally on its way. In addition to the cash settlement, the defendants in the suit are also giving 5.6 million CD's to educational programs."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Price-Fixing Settlement Checks in the Mail

Comments Filter:
  • Wonderful! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Leola ( 754828 ) on Friday February 20, 2004 @10:26AM (#8339496) Homepage
    This is pretty great, but weren't the checks supposed to be a bit larger, closer to 20 (US) dollars?

    Not that I'm complaining, since it's great we finally get to stick it to those thieving bastards. My brothers and sisters all should be getting checks too, as well as my father. I for one am going to put the money towards a new hard drive to store all the music I download. :-P *
    • YIPPY (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      and with this money i am going to go buy myself that new britteny album!!!!
      • I think it still costs $20. I guess the suit that got you the ~$14 didn't work well enough after all. Not to mention you waived your right to bitch about CD prices bt accepting the settlement. At least I still have that (even if I don't have the new Brittney album).
        • Not to mention you waived your right to bitch about CD prices bt accepting the settlement

          I can bitch all I want, and I do, and they can't stop me. What are they going to do, ask for their $14 back? I suppose I can't sue them in the future for price fixing. But I stopped buying their CDs a few years ago anyway, it's used and independent only now.

    • by notque ( 636838 ) on Friday February 20, 2004 @10:39AM (#8339647) Homepage Journal
      Seven months later than planned, your $13.86 check is finally on its way

      "I for one am going to put the money towards a new hard drive to store all the music I download. :-P"

      Forget that. I think 13.86 is the exact price, with tax for 100 cd-rws at the fry's near my house.

      You may think that 13.86 isn't a lot of money, but I'll make it back...
    • Re:Wonderful! (Score:5, Insightful)

      by 3terrabyte ( 693824 ) on Friday February 20, 2004 @10:44AM (#8339695) Journal
      Pretty great?

      What a slap on the wrist! No... It's not even a slap on the wrist. It's even cheaper than the money they spent greasing the wheels at Congress to solidify their tyranny to begin with. It's 30 million dollars cheaper than their annually budgeted legal department.

      64.7 million dollars is less than 1 % of their yearly gross. Cheap price to pay to get away with price fixing for decades. THis price fixing has allowed them to make what, A billion extra dollars PER YEAR?

    • since it's great we finally get to stick it to those thieving bastards.

      $67M is chump change to those thieving bastards. They could wipe their ass with it an not miss it. They can keep it and I'll remain a thieving bastard myself on Kazaa.
    • Re:Wonderful! (Score:2, Insightful)

      by FatAlb3rt ( 533682 )
      [putting flame suit on]
      Congrats to all those of you who joined the class action lawsuit. That mean, naughty music industry duped you into buying all those CDs - you had not the will power to say no.

      Next week you should receive your check from McDonald's for forcing you to lead a life as a fatty.

      [/end rant] I mean, come on. Yeah, they should pay. But why to you? Why not to a charity?

      • Re:Wonderful! (Score:5, Interesting)

        by eln ( 21727 ) on Friday February 20, 2004 @10:55AM (#8339808)
        You're assuming everyone that joined the class actually bought a CD during that time. While statistically probably that the majority did, since no proof of purchase was required, we can safely assume there are at least a few people who hadn't bought anything but signed up for the free money.
        • by notque ( 636838 ) on Friday February 20, 2004 @11:01AM (#8339866) Homepage Journal
          You're assuming everyone that joined the class actually bought a CD during that time. While statistically probably that the majority did, since no proof of purchase was required, we can safely assume there are at least a few people who hadn't bought anything but signed up for the free money.

          No need to assume. I'll end your questioning right now. :)
      • Re:Wonderful! (Score:5, Insightful)

        by tambo ( 310170 ) on Friday February 20, 2004 @11:03AM (#8339885)
        That mean, naughty music industry duped you into buying all those CDs - you had not the will power to say no.

        What part of "price fixing" don't you understand?

        This isn't some weird products liability case (e.g., you McDonald's analogy.) This is a case about the RIAA using its monopoly power over the CD market to set an arbitrarily high price of CDs. It's what happens in the absence of competition. (Another consequence is that the RIAA can abuse its customers and treat us all like scoundrels, without fear of us taking our business to a competitor.)

        This crime was complete when the first CD was offered for sale at $20 - even before it was purchased. So your sarcasm is poorly aimed.

        David Stein

        • Re:Wonderful! (Score:3, Interesting)

          by FatAlb3rt ( 533682 )
          But what makes you think that you are entitled to anything? Why isn't this a fine levied by the government?

          I bought an assload of CDs in the 90s. But it was all my choice - I saw a CD, looked at the price, and made a conscious decision that I was willing to part with $15.99 to buy it. I could have just as easily decided that it was too much, and that maybe, just maybe, I can actually live without it.

          • Re:Wonderful! (Score:4, Insightful)

            by IthnkImParanoid ( 410494 ) on Friday February 20, 2004 @11:36AM (#8340215)
            Why isn't this a fine levied by the government?
            I'd argue the RIAA does have to pay the government for their abuse of monopoly power....in the form of campaign contributions.

            But what makes you think that you are entitled to anything?
            We are entitled to a country in which corporations obey the laws applicable to them because of their monopoly status. If we have to sue corporations as citizens because our law enforcement turns a blind eye, so be it.
            • Re:Wonderful! (Score:3, Interesting)

              by FatAlb3rt ( 533682 )
              If we have to sue corporations as citizens because our law enforcement turns a blind eye, so be it.

              I agree with that. It's just too bad that the people who are actually passionate about the cause are (more than likely) well-outnumbered by the people who simply see this as Free Money.

        • While you raise good points about what happens in the absence of competition, and that the crime happened before the first copy of the CD was purchased, I think the parent poster had a good point too. The parent poster should not be chided for observing that people could have rejected these CDs in the first place.

          People need to be introduced to musicians that don't sign with RIAA-affiliated labels. The public needs to hear about independant distributors that treat the public like partners, not criminals

    • I have over 500 cds and easily 1000 records..

      how does the cost of ONE cd make up for what i was screwed out of over the years?

      Oh, i wasn't one that signed the petition either... i *never* agreed to that ludicrous of a settlement. ( notice cd prices haven't dropped since then.. )
  • We should all (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Ymiris ( 733964 ) on Friday February 20, 2004 @10:26AM (#8339501) Journal
    Give our HUGE check to the woman fighting the RIAA, that would be good :)
    • EFF (Score:3, Informative)

      by akad0nric0 ( 398141 )
      Give our HUGE check to the woman fighting the RIAA, that would be good :)

      Why not donate your check to the EFF? Not that individuals can't have noble causes, but your money might be better spent at an NPO or similar organization that fights for your rights as a consumer...
  • $i3.86? (Score:5, Funny)

    by PollGuy ( 707987 ) on Friday February 20, 2004 @10:26AM (#8339508)
    Talk about a poke in the eye to the RIAA.
  • Refund! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Mick Ohrberg ( 744441 ) <mick.ohrbergNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Friday February 20, 2004 @10:27AM (#8339509) Homepage Journal
    Oh yay! With that $25 tax refund, I'll be stylin'!
    • Re:Refund! (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Wow. That $13 totally makes up for the price-fixing on my existing 800 CD's for which I spent about $13,000 on - and we're totally even. I feel so much better now, because I'm sure that the price fixing only caused me to be over charged by about two cents per $16+ compact disc.
    • Yeah, (Score:2, Funny)

      by bsDaemon ( 87307 )
      You may be able to afford the new Britney Spears albumn.
  • Big bloody deal. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by grub ( 11606 ) <slashdot@grub.net> on Friday February 20, 2004 @10:27AM (#8339518) Homepage Journal

    the defendants in the suit are also giving 5.6 million CD's to educational programs.

    I bet these will be the first CDs to sport the New & Improved FBI Anti-Piracy Seal [slashdot.org]

    Jokes aside, the story doesn't quote the exact number of people getting cheques ("More than three millions") so I'll err to averages that 3.5 millions people will get $13.86. That's $48,510,000. Who gets the other $18,490,000? The lawyers.

    Another nit to pick is that they'll be giving out 5.6 million CDs. big deal, they can write that off in the accounting office. What they'll donate are discs that are sitting in warehouses because of poor sales. After all, a write off is better than dumping them in a landfill.

    The recording industry isn't taking a bit hit on this by any stretch, the only ones to profit are the lawyers.
  • by ViolentGreen ( 704134 ) on Friday February 20, 2004 @10:27AM (#8339521)
    In addition to the cash settlement, the defendants in the suit are also giving 5.6 million CD's to educational programs."

    Why not sell those 5.6 million cds and give the profit to educational programs instead?
  • by cableshaft ( 708700 ) <cableshaft@y a h o o . com> on Friday February 20, 2004 @10:28AM (#8339529) Homepage
    5.6 million CD's to music-education programs? Did the government specify what counted as educational? They could have just used this as an opportunity to send more "Don't be an evil pirate, YAAAR!" propaganda to the schools.
    • by AndroidonPPC ( 737311 ) on Friday February 20, 2004 @10:57AM (#8339829) Journal
      "Yaaarrr.... well, I guess it started innocently enough. I thought I had power over me piracy, yarr I did, downloading a song heeeere, a dirge there. I still bought cd's, but I did so less and less. Eventually, yaaaar, it escalated to movies and the last games for me X-box. But it didn't stop there.

      "Pretty soon I had me eyepatch and started swashbuckling. I spent all me bullion on spiced rum and me ship, a fine seafaring vessel she be. Yaarr, I thought I could stop, but now it's gone to far. Now I am stuck in an endless loop of pillage, sack and plunder, yaaarrr."

      Remember kids, only pirates wear eyepatches. Don't be a pirate, YAAAR!
  • by jayhawk88 ( 160512 ) <jayhawk88@gmail.com> on Friday February 20, 2004 @10:29AM (#8339535)
    Well, at least it's nice to know that as punishment for their sins, record industry executives will have to settle for regular leather instead of the Corinthian leather on their next Lexus purchase.
  • by Patik ( 584959 ) * <cpatik@g m a i l . c om> on Friday February 20, 2004 @10:29AM (#8339539) Homepage Journal
    the defendants in the suit are also giving 5.6 million CD's to educational programs
    Not to be outdone, AOL announced they will donate 56 million CDs to LFAA (landfills across America).
  • The same people... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Noryungi ( 70322 ) on Friday February 20, 2004 @10:30AM (#8339548) Homepage Journal
    ... sue teenagers and grand parents for using Kazaa and/or exchanging music MP3s on P2P.

    Then they are condemned for price fixing. Ain't life grand? The inmates are running the asylum, the foxes are guarding the hen house, and so on and so forth.

    (Yes, I know that the RIAA is probably not involved in this settlement, but the RIAA bosses... er... members are the one who are condemned in this case)
    • The inmates are running the asylum, the foxes are guarding the hen house, and so on and so forth.

      True. But according to the article:
      The settlement...also bars the defendants from entering future agreements to fix CD prices.

      So you don't have to worry anymore.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 20, 2004 @10:31AM (#8339558)
    Buy CD-R's [provantage.com]
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 20, 2004 @10:31AM (#8339560)
    The plural of CD needs no apostrophe.
  • What the heck? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by TimTurnip ( 560651 ) on Friday February 20, 2004 @10:32AM (#8339564) Homepage
    They're donating millions of CD's for educational purposes?

    I'd love to see what those albums are, and what their educational value truly is. Unless they're delivering symphony recordings and classical masterpieces for a music class, I can't see how that's an advantage for consumer me.

    At least when MS donated OS licenses and things, one could argue that Windows machines can actually facilitate learning in all sorts of areas (let the MS flaming begin). This sounds like a cop out to me. Blah.

    • They're donating millions of CD's for educational purposes? I'd love to see what those albums are, and what their educational value truly is.

      Come now, "I'm gonna get you naked by the end of this song" is at least as educational as Microsoft Encarta.
    • Re:What the heck? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Speare ( 84249 )

      It's like Microsoft "donating" their own software product to schools as a "penalty" in their anti-trust cases. And the ice-cream company who settled a "your product is too fatty" class action with coupons for more ice cream.

      We need to outlaw these donation penalties in anti-competition cases. They really just work to entrench the guilty corporation in the market, the problem instead of mitigate the problem. The penalties should not be calculated in retail or street value, but in the actual bottom lin

  • By the way.. (Score:5, Insightful)

    by XaXXon ( 202882 ) <<xaxxon> <at> <gmail.com>> on Friday February 20, 2004 @10:32AM (#8339570) Homepage
    These CDs? Yeah, they're each worth $5,000 USD.

    I hate the way people can get away with giving away "content" at inflated prices. If they gave away $5.6M in MEDIA costs of CDs to educational entities, I'd feel like they were punished. This is like MS giving away a bunch of software.

    I've written this many times before, but it's not a punishment/loss of revenue if there was never any money in the first place. If the CD's cost $.10 each for them to make (made that number up, but it seems reasonable), then it really cost them $560K. A large number, but not nearly as large s 5.6M. If they had to REFUND $5.6M back to educational groups that had purchased CDs, that would be the way to really punish them.

    This is just like MS offering to give a bunch of money's worth of software to schools. It doesn't cost 'em anything to give stuff to a place that would have never bought it in the first place, since initial R&D is the cost, and that's constant. Distribution is a trivial cost at the end.
    • I'd like to write it here right now that I can't read. (And I can't since I have to wait 2 minutes between posts...)

      5.6 million CDs. Not $5.6M in CDs.

      I'm going to shoot myself now.

      Thank you, and have a nice day.

      • Re:By the way.. (Score:3, Informative)

        by rokzy ( 687636 )
        yeah but your point is valid.

        imagine...

        Judge: you are hereby fined $100million

        MS: okay, we've just made a new educational office suite. all the business tools/server parts have been removed. our Sugested Retail Price is 1million, so I guess 100 licenses* will cover that fine.

        *only 1 CD, no manual. Do not make illegal copies of the CD.
    • It depends, I'd say, on just how much those schools really need, or want, those disks.

      If these disks were like textbooks, and it saves the schools $5.6M in costs that they'd have to pay anyway, then it really is worth something to the schools and, simultaneously, costs the RIAA money that they would have had coming in. The language CDs by Pimsleur, for example, are expensive but worth the money.

      On the other hand, if these are a bunch of remaindered country-funk-ska-polka CDs that are primarily saving the
  • I think I'll take their money and go buy a couple used discs.

    Or maybe 13 DRM infected iTunes tracks (yeah, right).
  • So... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by garcia ( 6573 ) * on Friday February 20, 2004 @10:33AM (#8339574)
    I purchased well over 50 CDs in my lifetime. I get back $13? From my quick calculations I feel that I should be getting back about $300 instead.

    I figure that CDs should be no more than $6.00/ea (before tax) so I should get back at least 50% of the money I spent.

    Instead these idiots get off by shelling out $67 million plus free CDs to educational institutions so that they can have kids listen to their music? I hope that these CDs aren't ones they own... I want them to be TRULY taxed when they have to give away that money.
    • Wow. Only 50? I've bought over 2500, I should be cleaning up. Oh, waitaminute, 80% of that was used CD's.

      Nevermind.

      That said, I still feel ripped off.
    • Re:So... (Score:5, Funny)

      by ortholattice ( 175065 ) on Friday February 20, 2004 @11:09AM (#8339931)
      I purchased well over 50 CDs in my lifetime. I get back $13? From my quick calculations I feel that I should be getting back about $300 instead.

      You're doing the math wrong. Here are the equations you should use; it's actually quite simple:

      If you are a customer and (potentially) screw a record company by infringing a copyright, you owe $150,000 times the number of incidents.

      If you are a record company and (actually) screw a customer by illegally overcharging, you owe the customer $13 times the number of incidents, then divided by the total by the number of incidents.

      You left out the denominator.

    • Re:So... (Score:3, Informative)

      by shark72 ( 702619 )

      "I purchased well over 50 CDs in my lifetime. I get back $13? From my quick calculations I feel that I should be getting back about $300 instead."

      Only if you bought all fifty at TWE, Tower Records or MusicLand, and you haven't bought any CDs in the past two years. If you've largely bought the CDs elsewhere, the price fixing didn't affect you.

      "I figure that CDs should be no more than $6.00/ea (before tax) so I should get back at least 50% of the money I spent."

      Do you think it's possible to be prof

  • Yippee. (Score:2, Redundant)

    by cableshaft ( 708700 )
    Wow, a whole 13.86. Feels like Christmas all over again.

    Maybe I'll spend it on a CD! I might even have enough money left over to tip the cashier a few nickels.
  • We fought the law, and... we won!

    We 0wN RIAA!!

    Who's next!?!

  • Great! (Score:5, Funny)

    by donnyspi ( 701349 ) <.junk5. .at. .donnyspi.com.> on Friday February 20, 2004 @10:33AM (#8339578) Homepage
    Now the Music Industry is only suing me for:

    $100,000.00
    - $13.86
    -----------
    $99986.14

    Yipee!

  • by telekon ( 185072 ) <canweriotnow@@@gmail...com> on Friday February 20, 2004 @10:34AM (#8339583) Homepage Journal
    I think a better settlement would have forced the recording industry to stop producing

    Oh, wait, but if they actuallly had something resembling a worthwhile product, they probably never would have felt the need to engage in price-fixing. Silly me.

    Maybe I'm wrong. But has any major label released anything halfway decent in the last ten years?

    I want a check from the RIAA for the pain and suffering caused every time I've been within earshot of a Top 40 radio broadcast.

    Demand Justice!

    • Re:Nice, but... (Score:3, Offtopic)

      by pyros ( 61399 )
      But has any major label released anything halfway decent in the last ten years?

      Sure. Zero 7 and Kinobe (Zomba) kick ass. I think Tantric is pretty good too. There's Moby, Fatboy Slim, Massive Attack/Tricky, Joe Satriani, ... Jet's single is kinda cool. There's pleny of decent suff. It's just mostly drowned out by the crap that gets over-marketed to ensure high sales figures.

  • Priceless (Score:5, Insightful)

    by rlp ( 11898 ) on Friday February 20, 2004 @10:34AM (#8339587)
    Personally, I plan to take my $13.86 check and give the money to the EFF.
    • As a bonus, you'll be able to deduct this donation on next year's U.S. taxes. It's a wonderful opportunity to let the music industry pay their opponents' legal costs, and get a tax break in the process.
  • Just my luck. The RIAA finally pulls out their checkbook, but I've long since moved. I sure hope that mail forwarding is still in effect.

    I have to wonder if they were hoping this would happen with a lot of the settlement checks.
  • A complete rip-off (Score:5, Insightful)

    by sdo1 ( 213835 ) on Friday February 20, 2004 @10:35AM (#8339596) Journal
    Do yourselves a favor and donate your refund to the Electronic Frontier Foundation [eff.org].

    Personally, a check that small is a slap in the face. They did nothing to account for the number of CDs purchased during the time in question. I checked. I added well over 200 CDs to my collection during that time. Yet I get the same amount back as someone who bought just a few.

    -S

  • But.... (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday February 20, 2004 @10:35AM (#8339598)
    But will it do anything about the fixed prices (ie, make them lower)??
  • by st0rmshad0w ( 412661 ) on Friday February 20, 2004 @10:36AM (#8339614)
    So I guess this would explain the state of school systems and education in general.

    "OK kids, for next week you need to write a 2 page report on the latest 'Britney' CD."

    Pointless.
    • Get over yourself. (Score:4, Interesting)

      by Valdrax ( 32670 ) on Friday February 20, 2004 @11:02AM (#8339880)
      So I guess this would explain the state of school systems and education in general.

      "OK kids, for next week you need to write a 2 page report on the latest 'Britney' CD."


      You do know that the RIAA also sells classical music, audiobooks, educational children's songs, discs that teach you how to learn to speak a foreign language, and all sorts of other material than the latest pop music, right?

      Maybe if your education and purchasing habits were broader and deeper, you'd know these things and appreciate that there actually is a wealth of material that the RIAA could donate to schools.

      (Of course, I'll bet you that it's still a slap on the wrist because the value of the discs for purposes of the settlement is probably the value they sell them for instead of make them for, but I digress.)
  • by bmf033069 ( 149738 ) on Friday February 20, 2004 @10:38AM (#8339634)
    You know, $67M would go a long way towards a nice trust or law fund to help people fight these law suits. Not that they would not continue to sue to get "their" money back, but at least to put up a good fight.

    A bunch of small donations to EFF maybe?
  • by AtariAmarok ( 451306 ) on Friday February 20, 2004 @10:38AM (#8339635)
    In a related story, SCO has been forced to send checks for $699 each to every single Linux user.

    Oops. it is not April 1. Sorry, "DarlDay" has not yet happened.
  • I've just checked out if I could receive any money but just have independent labels from that period of time (1995-2000), no RIAA albums.
    So I think I won't receive any money, but wait, I didn't gave them anything in the first place :-)
  • EFF, here I come! (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Nutcase ( 86887 ) on Friday February 20, 2004 @10:38AM (#8339639) Homepage Journal
    So I have 13.86 coming in the mail. I wonder what I could do with that. I could buy a cd, but that's just like giving it back. I could see a movie, but that just gives the money back to the parent company of the RIAA agencies. I could buy a book I suppose, but even that lets the money trickle back into the regime.

    I guess I will just donate it to the EFF, and hope that everyone does. It would be great if they made a few million straight from the record company - would really make the settlement sting more.
  • $13.86 (Score:2, Informative)

    When you add in shipping, $13.86 US isn't even enough to buy the new #1 CD by Norah Jones [amazon.com]
  • by rjnagle ( 122374 ) on Friday February 20, 2004 @10:41AM (#8339666) Homepage
    I know any money is helpful, but consider that the overwhelming majority of musicians are not signed and have no hope of securing a record deal. And that iTunes (if they can get signed on), only compensates them about 11% or so.

    Here's a better idea. Look at all those musicians who let you download music legally and dash them an email, saying I want to give the money to you as a way of saying thanks for being so generous and talented.

    To love the music, you must share the music. Sharethemusicday [geocities.com].
  • by boxless ( 35756 ) on Friday February 20, 2004 @10:41AM (#8339667)
    the only ones who make money in these ridiculous suits are the lawyers.

    Track how much the law firms involved keep in legal fees, and then you'll know in whose interest these cases are really brought.
  • In addition to the cash settlement, the defendants in the suit are also giving 5.6 million CD's to educational programs

    Anyone know what kind of cd's these will be? I don't care for 5.6 million Ludicrus cd's with "Sticking up" or "Freaky Thangs" going to my daughter's school, or yours for that matter...

  • by onyxruby ( 118189 ) <onyxruby@ c o m c a s t . net> on Friday February 20, 2004 @10:49AM (#8339746)
    Donate your check to the EFF and help fight for those freedoms you keep complaining about being taken away. Just forward your check to:

    Electronic Frontier Foundation
    454 Shotwell
    San Francisco, CA 94110

    You can also make a donation at their website:
    https://secure.eff.org/
  • Really? What do they own?

    So here's a simple guide to some basic grammar, you illiterate morons. [angryflower.com]

    : )
  • by JWG ( 665579 ) on Friday February 20, 2004 @10:51AM (#8339765)
    ...not to sound like michael moore, but this corporate crime thing really bothers me. this settlement adds up to a drop in the bucket for the recording companies. if corporations are allowed to be treated like individuals, so that no individual within the company is ever held responsible, then we should be able to punish corporations like individuals. legally control their business practises... freeze wages, firing, and take a percentage of their profits.
  • Of course, now my address has changed, and it was so long ago that the check most likely will not be forwarded to my current address. @#$(*%&(
    • I'm in the same boat. I'm sure there are a ton of people who won't even get the check because they have moved so long ago that mail forwarding no longer applies.
    • Re:Murphy's law (Score:4, Informative)

      by lavaface ( 685630 ) on Friday February 20, 2004 @11:14AM (#8340000) Homepage
      From questions [musiccdsettlement.com] section of the settlement site:

      If you have a change of address after you submitted a claim, you need to provide your new mailing address to the Administrator at the address below. Additionally, it is recommended that you update your mailing address with the U.S. Postal Service.

      Compact Disc MAP Litigation Administrator
      PO Box 1650
      Faribault, MN 55021-1650

      better hurry!

  • by st0rmshad0w ( 412661 ) on Friday February 20, 2004 @10:55AM (#8339816)
    How misleading.

    You say the prices have been fixed, but the local Sam Goody still has eveything at $14 and up!

    *sigh*
  • Of the CDs (Score:4, Informative)

    by skidmarek ( 267036 ) on Friday February 20, 2004 @10:56AM (#8339822)
    There should be no apostrophe in CDs you insensitive clod!
  • <please fasten your tinfoil hats>

    So, in that seven months time it just so happens that I have moved, as probably numerous individuals which leads to a higher probability of people not cashing their checks which means that the RIAA is out only $0.37 for the stamp....

    Is it really possible that they delayed this as long as possible knowing that, statistically speaking, a larger portion of the checks would remain uncashed and their penalty be lessened? What a load of crap, I just hope the new tennants a
  • by xutopia ( 469129 ) on Friday February 20, 2004 @11:33AM (#8340186) Homepage
    the prices are still as high and higher than before the court found them guilty of price fixing.
  • by skintigh2 ( 456496 ) on Friday February 20, 2004 @11:48AM (#8340300)
    I bought about 200 CDs during the time when they were convicted for price fixing and over charging by up to $5 per CD. So, having been robbed of $1,000 in late 1990's dollars, I am offered $13.86 in 2004 dollars. Woo fucking hoo.

    No, I did not sign up for the lawsuit as I correctly assumed it would be a waste of my time and they would probably just sell my personal info for a profit.

    Now that they have been convicted, perhaps it would be a simple matter to sue and win in small claims court? Any lawyers out there?
    • by shark72 ( 702619 ) on Friday February 20, 2004 @02:23PM (#8341987)

      "I bought about 200 CDs during the time when they were convicted for price fixing and over charging by up to $5 per CD. So, having been robbed of $1,000 in late 1990's dollars, I am offered $13.86 in 2004 dollars. Woo fucking hoo."

      There's a lot of misunderstanding of what happened here. A lot of people think this has to do with the margin that the record companies charged channel-wide. Reading the original article does provide some of the details, but it doesn't cover everything. I posted the below as a response to another message but I think it bears repeating. The article covers the basics: also named were Tower Records, TWE and MusicLand. Why just those three?

      Set the way-back machine to the early days of the 21st century...

      1. The big box stores (Best Buy, Wal-Mart, etc.) started selling CDs at little or no profit as an incentive to bring customers into the store (where they'd presumably also buy a high-margin item at the same time).
      2. Smaller vendors and specialty vendors -- Tower Records and the other chains eventually named in the charges -- as expected, freaked out and complained to the record companies.
      3. The record companies starting using a mechanism (already common in many other industries) called MAPs, or Minimum Advertised Prices. Retailers who sold their wares had to agree to not advertise CDs below a certain price -- they could sell them for any price they want, but not advertise them. This was done to help protect the specialty retailers (again, read: Tower Records, etc.) who didn't have a metric buttload of high-margin CE devices in the back of the store and thus couldn't slash prices on CDs as a draw.
      4. The big box retailers complained to the government.
      5. The record companies stopped doing MAPs. Meanwhile, lots of other merchandise in your local Best Buy is sold with a MAP arrangement -- the difference is that nobody's complained to the government. Yet.
      6. Specially retailers who can't compete on price continue to go out of business. For example, Tower Records has filed for bankruptcy.

      Putting this in black-and-white terms for /. readers, in this case the "bad guys" were the record companies, as well as TWE, Tower Records, and MusicLand, who originally complained to the record companies regarding unfair competition from the big box retailers. The "good guys" are Best Buy, Wal-Mart, and the other large retailers who used CD sales as a little-or-no margin incentive to bring customers into the stores. I am generally not a fan of Wal-Mart and its business practices, but in this case, they've won one for the free market economy.

      The price fixing affected what you paid if (a) you bought those 200 CDs Tower Records, MusicLand, etc. who kept their prices high in a (sometimes successful) effort to stay in business. If, like many other people, you shopped around for the lowest price, then it's less of an issue.

      By the way, if a manufacturer sells an item into the distribution channel for a fixed price (for CDs, it tends to be around $8), if the retailer marks it up by 10%, 20% or even 100%, it does not affect how much the original manufacturer made when they sold it to the distributor. I'm not privy to the price that record companies sell in to Wal-Mart vs. specialty retailers, but the price difference between stores is often more about the store's profit margin, not the manufacturer. For the record companies, this was less about how much they made per CD, and more about protecting their retailers, so that they could ultimately sell more CDs.

  • by MsWillow ( 17812 ) on Friday February 20, 2004 @02:55PM (#8342486) Homepage Journal
    Not only didn't this cot the recording industry nearly as much as a real anti-trust suit would have cost, but now that they've managed to delay it for this long, I'd bet many of those checks will be returned to sender, as the people who should have gotten them have moved already. I did, and it's now long past when the post office will foreward mail.

    So they skate again, by abusing our legal system. Yeah, I know, it wasn't a huge check, but as Geddy Lee said in "Take off to the Great White North,", "Hey, ten bucks is ten bucks, eh?"

    Bah.

C'est magnifique, mais ce n'est pas l'Informatique. -- Bosquet [on seeing the IBM 4341]

Working...