Apple May Anger The Antitrust Gods: Pressuring Labels To Stop Participating In Amazon Daily MP3 Deals
from the ftc-calling-on-line-3 dept
Yet more indications that Apple no longer thinks it can really compete in the marketplace. After finally going on the offensive and suing HTC over its Google Android phone implementation, apparently Apple is pressuring music labels over how they deal with competitor Amazon when it comes to music downloads. Paperbag alerts us to the news that Apple is supposedly demanding labels not participate in Amazon's successful MP3 Daily Deal promotion.Sources say that iTunes representatives have been urging labels to rethink their participation in the Amazon promotion and that they have backed up those warnings by withdrawing marketing support for certain releases featured as Daily Deals.Apple's concern, apparently, is over Amazon scoring temporary exclusives for early sales. Given Apple's dominance of the digital sales market, you could certainly see the FTC reading this as being an antitrust violation. It will be interesting to see if this effort comes back to haunt Apple.
In response, label executives at Capitol, Capitol Nashville and Jive recently opted against participating in Daily Deal promotions they had been considering for Corinne Bailey Rae's "The Sea," Lady Antebellum's "Need You Now" and Ke$ha's "Animal," sources say.
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: antitrust, music, promotions
Companies: amazon, apple
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
ipad
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Title
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Title
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Title
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Title
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I'd be even more interested to see
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I'd be even more interested to see
FTFY kid....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I think this is Apple competing in the marketplace. There is no government intrusion here. Apple is not running to the ITC or suing. It is telling its business partners, if you want our deals, you can't make certain deals with our competitors. The labels are free to agree or to tell Apple to frick off. These types of contracts occur all the time in the real world.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Indeed. I'm just saying that this is the sort of thing that the FTC has looked unkindly on in the past, because of what it will consider Apple's dominant position in the market. If the company has such a strong position that when it makes those sorts of requests, companies really don't have the option of telling Apple to "frick off," the FTC is likely to get involved.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The "facts" we have also support numerous contrary conclusions just as much as they support this conclusion. For all you know, Apple may have come to the conclusion that they would make X more dollars this year without suing anybody, and X+Y dollars with suing somebody.
But, I guess, without unsupported conjecture, we wouldn't have the headlines and opening sentences, not to mention baseless conclusions, we've come to expect from techdirt.
By the way, the article about how long it took the Patent Office to reject the hollow hot dog patent - painful to read. If I am stupid enough to want to waste tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars, I can file all the Requests for Continued Examinations I want with the Patent Office. Perpetual filing this way doesn't mean that I am ever any closer to obtaining a patent than the firt time an Examiner looked at my application. It's like continuing to sign up for driver's test at the DMV even if I fail every time. It's not up to the DMV to decide I should never have the chance to show them I can drive. It's the DMV's job to judge whether I have proved I deserve a license once the test starts.
Please, reading about the "patent process" here is like reading my computer works by having ants carry 1s and 0s around inside my CPU.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: ANT!!?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: ANT!!?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: ANT!!?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: ANT!!?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: ANT!!?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Unlike just about every other poster, commenter, and article writer at techdirt, I've actually worked with patents every day for well over a decade (not a lifetime of experience, but still I've managed to learn enough to wince in torment at the misunderstandings I see here on a daily basis).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
so why do you keep reading and commenting and wasting your time? we dont like reading your comments any more then you like reading ours.. its time to pull your thumb out of your butt and wash your hands!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
your mom.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
No doubt. In fact that's clearly likely. But the reasons *why* that is is because they don't appear to think they can innovate their way to that level of revenue. From a general economic/social welfare standpoint, that's a pretty big problem don't you think?
By the way, the article about how long it took the Patent Office to reject the hollow hot dog patent - painful to read. If I am stupid enough to want to waste tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars, I can file all the Requests for Continued Examinations I want with the Patent Office.
Indeed. And you don't think that's a problem as well? My point was how ridiculous the setup is. And your response is "you idiot, that's the system!"
Please, reading about the "patent process" here is like reading my computer works by having ants carry 1s and 0s around inside my CPU.
Hmm. I didn't describe the system *incorrectly*. I was just commenting that the way it does work is problematic. Your response is "but that's the way it works!!" Which, of course, totally misses the point.
This seems to come from the patent guys all the time. I describe why something doesn't make sense, and the response is "but that's how the system is!" I never said that's NOT how the system is setup. I'm questioning the rationale for it.
Any system that allows a patent application like that to last for as long as it did is a broken system.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
not to become a tam but
bias?
now i actually agree however that this behavior is the sign of lawsuits to death do you part
so if jobs has a brain left he better get on using it
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wait, I thought you hated release windows?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Wait, I thought you hated release windows?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Wait, I thought you hated release windows?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Wait, I thought you hated release windows?
A one day discounted promotion is not a "release window."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Wait, I thought you hated release windows?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
The Sherman Antitrust Act means that it is illegal for any one firm to create a monopoly in an industry by engaging in practices that hurt competition.
Preventing or penalizing someone from entering in contracts with competitors would appear to be a violation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not a problem
So while this is an interesting piece of news it's actually a good example of the free market at work.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Googlezon here we come! ! !
http://idorosen.com/mirrors/robinsloan.com/epic/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The average discounted MP3 album price is $2.99-4.99. These are music purchases I would not have made otherwise. I refuse to pay Itunes' $9.99+ prices for downloadable MP3 albums. When the price on Amazon is low enough, I'll pay for the MP3 download even though I know I own the actual CD - our enormous CD holder was kicked to rubble 3 times - earthquake, toddler on a tricycle, and a guide dog puppy we were training.
After the last one, I'll be goddamned if I'm going to spend another weekend mating CDs and cases with cardboard inserts and reshelving a thousand CDs. So I spend money on Amazon buying music I already own, money that would go unspent if it weren't for the MP3 deal of the day tempting me.
The Amazon prices are also low enough to convince me not to bother downloading the music illegally. I haven't bought a brand-new CD in almost 10 years - the 1000+ CDs my husband and I own are mostly things we bought when we were in high school and college. So the only place the music industry is going to get my money is through those discounted MP3 purchases on Amazon.
If Apple succeeds in strong-arming the industry into dropping out of the program, I'll spend that money buying something else. Game over. My brother used to play a computer game, and when he lost, a snarky voice would yell out Loser, loser, looooser! That's what you're facing, you greedy scumbags.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
If you already bought the CD, it's not illegal to download the mp3 version off a file sharing service. At least that'll by my defense if the RIAA ever comes for me.
For a while I was buying LPs and leaving them shrink wrapped and in mint condition, but then I'd go and use bit torrent to get the album on my computer. This way, I've given the recording industry their cut, got the music in the formats I want, and have something that might grow in value someday. Since I could actually rip the LP into mp3s if I wanted, I don't think the labels would have much of a case against me.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Sources Say?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]