Sony-BMG Exec Tells Two Whoppers In File-Sharing Trial
from the say-what? dept
Wired's Threat Level blog has been doing some excellent work covering the first RIAA file-sharing case to go to trial, in my home state of Minnesota. In the latest post, reporter David Kravets quotes a couple of whoppers in the testimony of Sony BMG exec Jennifer Pariser. First, Pariser claims that "Selling music is the only way a record company makes money." That's just silly. While record sales are certainly a major source of revenue for record labels, there are lots of other revenue streams out there: concert tickets, merchandise, online subscriptions, endorsement deals, advertising revenue, and so forth. Just yesterday we had an excellent example of a band experimenting with offering name-your-own-price downloads coupled with a premium "discbox." And even some of Pariser's fellow record label execs have begun acknowledging that relying so heavily on music sales is a bad business strategy. At least I can see why Pariser might have thought it was a good legal strategy to pretend that record sales are the only conceivable revenue source for the music industry. Her other claim is even more puzzling: when asked if it's legal to make just one copy of a song you've legally purchased, she apparently said that was "a nice way of saying, 'steals just one copy.'" Not only is that flatly untrue as a matter of law, but saying it also seems like a lousy legal strategy, because (as Kravets points out) some of the jurors probably own MP3 players and won't like being accused of stealing. It's also worth mentioning that this is something the industry keeps flip-flopping on. Sometimes (like when they're arguing before the Supreme Court) they say that of course iPods are legal. Other times they call anyone who rips their CD collections for personal use thieves.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: business models, copyright, fair use, file sharing, recording industry
Companies: sony bmg
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Woo Hoo!
What? You say they are only available from Sony on the proprietary and DRM riddled Blu-ray format? Damn. Thats a shame. Too bad I haven't purchased a Sony product since they made the mistake of making minidiscs useless for anything except their proprietary hardware...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
First point not really a lie
This is why the Radio Head make me an offer for the recording deal scares the record industry. They figured out that they didn't make much money selling albums but they did make the money touring, selling t-shirts and etc. They may more if the only get a couple of bucks per album downloaded than if the recording industry gave them a fairly standard if not great recording deal.
The recording industries main problem is that they became fairly risk averse and stopped putting out new and interesting stuff. So we get sold Britney and American Idols and they wonder why people aren't buying this crap at the inflated prices they are offering it at.
It is the same problem with publishing all over not enough mid-list creators getting paid enough to get buy and the industry only betting on homerun hitters. They don't give people room to grew into careers that would make them both money just not as quickly.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Who understands the technology
Like Senators, Judges, and anyone else over 30 -- do they even understand what they arguing over.. besides money?
I doubt they do.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Oh Well, I don't mind...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
First point still a lie
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Who understands the technology
[ link to this | view in thread ]
2 Whoppers and a large fries, mam!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Quotes
I'm no legal buff but I thought to outright lie in court was illegal in itself.
Just My 2 cents.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Only Way to Make Money
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jury selection
I'm willing to bet that the first question the RIAA lawyers asked during jury selection was "Do you own an MP3 player?" and then claimed anyone who answered yes was biased.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re #11
This lady should be thrown in jail.
#6, very true, but your comment is amusing, even if true.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Jury selection
[ link to this | view in thread ]
My Nose !
Yo ! You Callin' me a Thief ?!!?!!
'Supp ?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Sounds to me like this case is not about the woman but about the whole issue of copyright and file sharing. That can be good or bad.
Good in that this issue will start to be defined in the eyes of the law. They are talking about the overall issue, not what this woman is charged with. One way or another, there will be an answer.
The bad is that if the woman loses, the court will probably look to make an example of her as a warning to others. Personally, I never want to be made an example of. She could get hammered if she loses. Hopefully the folks that are backing her will take care of her fines should she lose.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
hmm
Good point, thanks for clearing that part up.
I wonder though- if a jury is supposed to be made up of your "peers" it would be interesting to compare these people to the overall demographics of the area/US.
I know that isn't how jury selection works, but of the 12 people only 5 own mp3 players and some have little to zero experience of with the internet.
I wonder how this translates to the real world? Is 5/12 close to accurate for mp3 owners vs non owners nowadays? And what level of internet usage is typical compared to the people on the jury.
In any event I think it's likely you would see a very different outcome if the jury was stocked with people that are a) internet savvy with no exclusions vs b) non-users entirely.
Would have been an interesting study to have put the court system under the microscope and have 3 separate trials to see what/if there was a difference (1 very internet, 1 non-internet, and 1 as we have now).
hmmm....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Would be grand to catch Pariser out in the hallway between court sessions listening to her iPod with some ripped tunes on it...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
i need this item
i am juliet rose and i am urgent need your item for my son who secure an admission into university in abroad ,who birthday is coming up , i am kindly to pay sum $900Usd for the ipod because of the urgence of the item asap and for the payment to be done asap get back to me with this details
Name:
Address:
Country:
Zipcode:
Tel no:
Regards,
2) valid email adress .........
i want it fast , cos he is on my neck and soi want the business to fast asap so you can contact me by my email address(betadays10@yahoo.com)
THANKS
REGARDS
[ link to this | view in thread ]