Die David Geffen, die!!!
Posted by: ErikL on 16 June 2004
I just received Sonic Youth's new "Sonic Nurse" in the mail. On the back:
"FBI Anti-Piracy Warning: Unauthorized copying is punishable under federal law."
and
"NO GUARANTEE: The enhanced cd content is provided without guarantees or warranties of any kind. Universal Music Group shall not be liable for any direct, indirect, or consequential damages arising out of use or inability to use this CD."
Knowing I was screwed I still loaded it into my CDP for kicks- it shut it down. Can't play it. I only paid $9.78 for it but I'm torqued.
Die David Geffen, die! Prick.
Posted on: 16 June 2004 by Jez Quigley
The CD industry is hell-bent on self destruction. All the young people I know use their PCs as mp3 juke boxes and have stopped buying all but the occasional CD.
As for me I buy far less CDs now than I did (armfulls until fairly recently) and instead buy or rent more and more music DVDs. It won't be long before most people's "entertainment systems" are a wireless networked pc hooked up to a home cinema system with content (vid and music) stored on the hard disc. Content that deliberately makes itself a hassle to use in these systems won't get a look in.
Posted on: 17 June 2004 by Simon Perry
Ludwig,
Its extremely tedious isn't it? I can't think of another industry where such an adversarial relationship has developed between companies and their customers (well, public transport perhaps). Once 'the kids' aren't able to rip their own CDs there's really no more encouragement needed to download them illegally.
Still, I like to think that Geffen and the record companies won't be around in their present form for too much longer.
Simon
Posted on: 17 June 2004 by ErikL
It is indeed tedious. My CDP plays almost all enhanced CDs but ocassionally I buy one that refuses to play, and they're always on major labels. To make matters worse, the online retailers don't allow returns of opened CDs, and they're very inconsistent/unwilling in labeling copy-protected discs as such.
When an industry uses its customers to test its products (in this case, the copy-protection schemes provided by Macrovision, Disctronics, Sunncomm, etc), they're just begging to get poked in the eye.
I wonder if there's any class-action lawsuit groundswell. I mean, how can you pay $10-15 for something that you can't consume and then be told by the retailer and label "we refuse to refund you, but thanks for the $10"?
Posted on: 17 June 2004 by ErikL
Posted on: 17 June 2004 by Mike Sae
I buy far fewer CDs as well. Instead of 3-4 per week I'm buying 3-4 per month.
At the height of Napster, I was still buying armloads of CDs. Getting "free music" wasn't appealing to me at all.
Now with copy protection, there's a small chance that any given CD won't work. I've been burned a few times and got fed up.
Now, I just download from the newsgroups, hell with it.
I hardly use the hifi anymore.
Like Jez said, my PC is now my all in one jukebox.
I want to pay for music but won't play their game. Ludwig put it best:
"how can you pay $10-15 for something that you can't consume and then be told by the retailer and label "we refuse to refund you, but thanks for the $10"?"
Nevermind the current state of the music industry where art is considered "product" (see that recent Frontline ep"). One needs to dig deep in the independant scene to find anything worthwhile.
Posted on: 17 June 2004 by ejl
Although as you may know, Mike, that independent scene is also one in which LPs are still available for a majority of new releases. I still buy lots of music, but it's relatively rare that I have to buy a CD for anything anymore -- the new Sonic Youth included. (CDs I burn off of the LP12 sound better anyway <smug grin>.)
