The Shame of Apple

Matthew

Do you have something personal agains Apple? Did you buy bad shares (unlikely! ) or were you upset that they ever left the Garage and became another big company?

Your subject should have been 'The shame of Corporate America' or 'The shame of humans?' Or even 'The shame of the RIAA, Pepsi and Apple and kids who don't respect intellectual copyrights', surely?

Haven't read the whole lot, but did Apple and Pepsi force the kids to play these parts or what? (Serious question by the way....)

(Stephen ducks for taking on the 'Wrath of Robinson'}



Stephen ( I bet you have a PC, go on, own up!)

Something niggles me about this story, insofar as I don't think we are seeing the whole picture. This is tabloid reporting with the facts being manipulated. IMHO of course.

Steven -- I have nothing against Apple. I just thought it was an interesting story given how much we talk about Apple here. I suppose that the title should really be "The Shame of Apple and Pepsi" but fizzy sugar solutions are one of the few things we don't seem to cover in The Padded Cell. Also the story is interesting to a certain extent becuase its so un-Apple.

To answer your question the second paragrpah of the report reads "Instead of using actors to dramatize their shame, the RIAA, Apple and Pepsi have forced the children themselves to conform with the copyright regime, and to look suitably browbeaten as a series of captions reads: INCRIMINATED … ACCUSED … BUSTED … CHARGED"

Matthew

I saw the advert in question, and it's no where as bad as the articles are making out. You just see a girl going on about how she was sued for downloading, then she says she is till doing it and you can too, then you see the free tokens with pepsi. None of them look as if they are being shamed or forced. I also fail to see how they could be forced to do this for free?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Matthew Robinson:
Steven -- dramatize their shame, the RIAA, Apple and Pepsi have forced the children themselves to conform with the copyright regime, and to look suitably browbeaten as a series of captions reads: INCRIMINATED … ACCUSED … BUSTED … CHARGED"_

Matthew

---

Forced? How?

and it's STEPHEN!!

Stephen,

One assumes its part of their out of court settlement.

It does seem a bit odd though and I begin to wonder if its some sort of elaborate but non-obvious joke.

Matthew

[This message was edited by Matthew Robinson on TUESDAY 03 February 2004 at 15:13.]

quote:

---

One assumes its part of their out of court settlement.

---

I don't see why the RIAA would make them do an advert for Pepsi as part of thier court settlement.

"I have nothing against Apple."

Yeah right. And Osama Bin Laden likes nothing better than curling up in front of the telly to watch Sex and The City
John

An iPod wearing nobber bumped into me on Wardour St. this morning nearly causing me to drop my Latte. That's the sort of behaviour one has come to expect from Apple users -- enforced child labour and Latte spillage.

OBL would never watch S&TC as he is neither a woman or a gayer. Plus he is too busy defending terror against the war on terror.

Matthew

So you wander down Wardour Street gussling Latte.

You really have sunk to an all time low.

Regards

Mick

PS For the benefit of our overseas viewers, Wardour Street is infested with 60 yr old hookers and 60 yr old record shops. Definitely not the place where nice boys should go.

Pepsi hired the teens, and the girl from Long Island mentioned by Two-Sheds publicly stated that she's using part of her earnings from the appearance to pay off settlements owed to the RIAA (roughly $3,000). I think that's a good thing.

The Register's reporter in San Francisco must have an axe to grind with Apple, who had little to nothing to do with Pepsi's ad decisions in this promotion.

I think you are getting confused -- Wardour St. is the centre of the UK TV, film and advdertising industries. Its mostly offices, restaraunts and shops and is perfectly respectable. If you wish to find 60 year old hookers I suggest you look elsewhere.

Also I was not "guzzling" my Latte as I have been brought up by my Mother to have good table manners.

However, if you can suggest another more suitable route between my office on Shaftesbury Avenue and Oxford Circus tube that doesn't involve going through Soho I'll consider changing.

Matthew

I think the Register and the some of you are reading this thing all wrong. Pepsi and apple are snubbing thier noses at RIAA, not forcing the victims to shoot ads to disgrace themselves. After seeing an ad like this, I should think the RIAA would be freaking livid. This ad is designed to make heros out of the kids who were prosecuted and make fun of the RIAA. I simply cannot see this any other way.

Personally, I find the ad disgusting, but not because it objectifies these kids, but because it strikes me as an incitement to steel music. Sure, Apple is giving music away for free. Fair enough (it could not be any other way). But the message is clear - Apple and Pepsi say "Fuck the RIAA and the record labels - we'll do whatever the hell we want, and we hope you will too".

I've yet to see one reasoned, inteligent argument that downloading copyrighted material from the internet is morally grounded. Where the fuck do these kids (and adults, of course) get the notion that they have a "right" to all the music that they want for free. Where does this mentality come from. What I don't understand is why popular recording artists put up with this. Every time a song is downloaded for free, the artist loses money. Why doesn't Jon Mayer and Norah Jones tell thier millions of fans to stop ripping them off.

I support the RIAA lawsuits 100% (provided the correct perpetrator is identified). These kids are stealing. What else to this is there?

Judd

Relax Judd.

The message of the ad is clearly "there's a new way, kids, and it ain't against the law". A way that's legal and sometimes free- iTunes. The playing of "I fought the law... and the law won" in the background furthers the argument for doing the good puritan citizen thing. The RIAA responded positively, saying the ad represents a welcome change to more legal downloading. I think it's a brilliant bit of marketing, because it keeps the RIAA off Pepsi's back, promotes a legal downloading service, and doesn't alienate those who used the illegal P2P networks.

I take it you never recorded anything off the radio, dubbed a cassette, or recorded a CD when you were a kid? Come on dude, lighten up.

Having re-read it I am sure there is some joke or irony I am missing but its all a bit confusing. I can't imagine that Apple would want to really annoy the RIAA given that their bizarre agreement with the evil cartel is the centre of their iPod strategy.

Justin -- viewed in isolation file swapping is theft. But you do have to remember that this is an industry that has for years ripped of its customers with articially inflated CDs and has constantly rejected more flexible, imaginative and equitable pricing models in favour of suing and harrassing its customers into stumping up the last dollar of profit.

Matthew

yea,

that is what the ad is about. I got that much. My main point was that it was not designed to hang these kids out to dry. It was designed to make heros out of them, certainly the girl at the end.

I stole golf-balls as a kid from a local golf course. I shoplifted a some stuff from Sears and Robucks as a youngster as well. I can count a couple of handfulls of infractions in much the same vein. It doesn't touch the argument I'm making now, which is that I cannot understand even for a moment how any sort of moral or reasoned argument can be made for the systematic larceny that passes for a past-time.

Had sears decided to prosecute me (they did not), I'd have thought it a bit harsh (no doubt so would my parents) but I'd not have come up with any arguments as to why I should be permitted to continue to steal. Don't you see the difference here. Illegal downloading is widespread and indemic to western youth culture. To the extent it is illegal and wrong and, yet, still goes on is nothing novel or much to get upset over (kids will always steal, smoke pot and jump lines). My point is that orthodox transgressions are recognized for what they are - infractions for which there is no moral exculpation. Music steeling seems to be something else entirely. These kids feel they have a right to do so. I didn't think I had a right to golf balls. The course was not keeping me down.

Judd

quote:

---

Originally posted by Justin:
Where the fuck do these kids (and adults, of course) get the notion that they have a "right" to all the music that they want for free

---

The one legal copy to many illegal copies relationship has obviously existed for a long time, so there's quite the history of precedents (recording any source you wanted from friends- vinyl, radio, cassette, 8-track, reel-to-reel, CD). I believe the recording industry lost battles against technology in each case up until now (or maybe DAT?).

I see what you're saying Judd, but I disagree that it made the girl out to be a hero. My initial reaction was, "oh, she was a crook, she got beat up for it, and now she's doing the legal iTunes thang". It will be interesting to see how I feel when I see the spot again, following this chat.

I also see what you're saying about the innate "right to free music". I don't understand that mentality either, but I imagine it's an extension of the precedents I raised combined with an anti-establishment teeny-bopper attitude and growing up with lots of free stuff online (email accounts, news, ringtones, community gathering places, software, etc, etc).

(I stole 1 pack of gum, (ironically) a talking Coca-Cola vending machine, and several dozen albums dubbed on cassette as a teen. Oddly, only after lifting the pack of gum did I feel wrong.)

How did you lift a coca-cola vending machine? Those are huge!

Judd

A friend's dad had one of those gargantuan pickup trucks with dualie wheels and massive mirrors (for hauling a horse trailer, IIRC). One night we borrowed it, piled about 8 more buddies into it, and went and stole the Coke machine outside a tiny convenience store. Aftwerwards, we stored it in said friend's workshop/barn and never discussed or bothered with it again.

Okay, I saw the ad again last night. If I consider the girl's comments alone, it's totally cocky. But if I also consider the background music and the scrolling text, then the overall message is appropriate.