[Cody Dawg]

Link

Sony says it has instituted an exchange program for consumers who purchased the affected CDs and says the issue involving the CDs arises only when the discs are played on computers.

“We share the concerns of consumers regarding these discs, and we are instituting a mail-in program that will allow consumers to exchange any CD with XCP software for the same CD without copy protection and receive MP3 files of the same title,” the company said.

That's not enough, Sony. You shouldn't have done it in the first place. That's only what we all know about...who knows what else their secret programs have been doing?

Sony deserves it. I hope every single states sues Sony.

Though, I must admit, I love their electronics.

[andreas_g4]

This whole thing is a nightmare for Sony.

[Cody Dawg]

Yeah. They weren't doing so well to begin with. This is an unmitigated disaster, you're right, andreas.

[Cody Dawg]

I wish Florida would sue them. I'd be part of the class action. Where do I sign?

Oh yeah. I don't have any Sony CDs.

[Mastrap]

I'd try and buy some if that would mean I could add my name to the list.
I'll be boycotting Sony for the foreseeable future, for whatever that might be worth.

[Big Mac]

It's nice to know that most consumers won't bend over for companies trying to force restrictive DRM on them. Maybe this is the wake up call both the RIAA and the PC industry sorely needed.

[olePigeon]

What?! Are you saying that the RIAA doesn't have our best interests at heart?!

I don't believe you.

[tooki]

The worst thing about copy protection is that it's only hurting paying customers. The people who download songs off of LimeWire are unencumbered by the copy protection.

I mean, you get treated like a criminal more by buying the product than by pirating it...

tooki

[Cody Dawg]

The worst thing about copy protection is that it's only hurting paying customers. The people who download songs off of LimeWire are unencumbered by the copy protection.

I mean, you get treated like a criminal more by buying the product than by pirating it...

Awesome point.

[His Dudeness]

Originally Posted by tooki

The worst thing about copy protection is that it's only hurting paying customers. The people who download songs off of LimeWire are unencumbered by the copy protection.

I mean, you get treated like a criminal more by buying the product than by pirating it...

tooki

It costs a bunch of money in attorney's fees to sue file sharing places. I don't think it costs that much to put that file on the cd.

And I don't understand the stigma of playing music on, or downloading to, a computer. What's the big deal anyway?

[sek929]

Originally Posted by tooki

The worst thing about copy protection is that it's only hurting paying customers. The people who download songs off of LimeWire are unencumbered by the copy protection.

I mean, you get treated like a criminal more by buying the product than by pirating it...

tooki

Exactly.

Sony makes mediocre products anyways.

[andreas_g4]

Originally Posted by Big Mac

It's nice to know that most consumers won't bend over for companies trying to force restrictive DRM on them. Maybe this is the wake up call both the RIAA and the PC industry sorely needed.

I wouldn't count on that (and I believe you don't count on it too much, too. Correct me if I'm wrong…). The headz of the majors should know by now where the future is leading, at least that it doesn't go on like they were used to.

My theory is that everything they do is strategically planned. They just believe that brute force will be more helpful than intelligent, customer friendly business. Even if they claim to be "into the digital music market", they still consider it more of an enemy, IMHO. They suck big time. Period.

[Cubeoid]

When I saw the bwahaha-ing in the thread title..I thought of Rob.

[ghporter]

I'm going to have to look into this pretty carefully. A NON-DRM'd version of a Sony disc may be a good thing. Or it may be otherwise copy protected. Time will tell.

Still, this is the first Truly Good Thing I can remember Mr. Abbott (Texas Attorney General) doing since taking office. And it sort of lessens the sting from so many of my fellow Texans being closed minded in our recent election...

I'm kind of surprised that they list so few discs as containing the copy protection software. This may cause me to rethink my purchase plans; I'm suddenly (sadly) in need of a replacement for part of my (otherwise totally Sony) entertainment system.

[gradient]

Originally Posted by His Dudeness

And I don't understand the stigma of playing music on, or downloading to, a computer. What's the big deal anyway?

The issue is that every song you illegally download is a piece of some musician's livelyhood. Musicians only make money if people pay for their product in one way or another, and it IS a fulltime job for any commercial musician. The record industry has, of course, blown the issue far out of proportion in some ways and has obviously taken the wrong tact against consumers but the core issue is very valid. It is not different, in principal, then stealing any other item that someone produced and is selling to pay their bills.

I download music ONLY if they are offered free of charge by the artist and if I like it enough to listen to it repeatedly, I will buy their CD.

[goMac]

The EFF has joined in, also filing a suit:

http://www.eff.org/news/archives/2005_11.php#004192

[alligator]

Here's a thought, if the recording industry can't seem to get their business model right, why doesn't a competitor jump in that can satisfy the consumer desire? Songs available for download, or better quality DVD-Audio discs in stores? Keep turning over new content, and that will force people to pay more money.

How hard is this concept?

[gradient]

Originally Posted by alligator

Here's a thought, if the recording industry can't seem to get their business model right, why doesn't a competitor jump in that can satisfy the consumer desire? Songs available for download, or better quality DVD-Audio discs in stores? Keep turning over new content, and that will force people to pay more money.

How hard is this concept?

ummmm...... sorta like iTunes or Napster??

[Kevin]

I have bought more CDs because of illegal file sharing than I have before it was available.

I always want the high quality version of stuff I really like.

And I don't get burnt by CDs that have a few songs that are good, and the rest suck.

If it wasn't for Audio Galaxy (I loved that thing), I'd have never heard of Queen Adreena.

[JoshuaZ]

I hope the other 49 States, and several territories, join in and sue. That would be nice.

[Cadaver]

I hope Sony's stockholders complain about this... Maybe it'll teach 'em a lesion.
(yeah, wishful thinking)

[volcano]

Originally Posted by gradient

The issue is that every song you illegally download is a piece of some musician's livelyhood. Musicians only make money if people pay for their product in one way or another, and it IS a fulltime job for any commercial musician. The record industry has, of course, blown the issue far out of proportion in some ways and has obviously taken the wrong tact against consumers but the core issue is very valid. It is not different, in principal, then stealing any other item that someone produced and is selling to pay their bills.

On the contrary, an artist/musician profits much more from the sales of concert tickets and merchandise when compared to the measly amount they make per CD sold. I'm not justifying the illegal sharing of music over the internet, but think about it: so many obscure bands have really made a name for themselves by utilzing the powers of the internet. Had they not done so, they wouldn't have as large of a turnout at their concerts, merchandise wouldn't sell as well.. etc. Besides, artists could be found just as guilty - they often leak tracks from upcoming albums just to get the reactions of others, even though they claim they are "appalled" by this kind of distribution! Figure that one out. It's a double standard. From what I've learned in life, you can't have your cake and eat it, too.

I'm impressed that Mr. Abbott pursued this. I saw a story on this pitfall earlier tonight on my local news.

[His Dudeness]

Yeah, bands and musicians don't get those houses in Beverly Hills from cd sales. CD sales might pay their car insurance, but most of the money goes to the label, what, about 80 to 90% is my guess?

[Railroader]

Originally Posted by volcano

On the contrary, an artist/musician profits much more from the sales of concert tickets and merchandise when compared to the measly amount they make per CD sold. I'm not justifying the illegal sharing of music over the internet, but think about it: so many obscure bands have really made a name for themselves by utilzing the powers of the internet. Had they not done so, they wouldn't have as large of a turnout at their concerts, merchandise wouldn't sell as well.. etc. Besides, artists could be found just as guilty - they often leak tracks from upcoming albums just to get the reactions of others, even though they claim they are "appalled" by this kind of distribution! Figure that one out. It's a double standard. From what I've learned in life, you can't have your cake and eat it, too.

I'm impressed that Mr. Abbott pursued this. I saw a story on this pitfall earlier tonight on my local news.

Explain Mariah Carey then. She was loaded well before she performed her first concert. She didn't used to tour. Some musicians don't make much touring, they just use it as another marketing tool.

[wdlove]

Hopefully Sony will learn their lesson. I don't own any Sony products, they are more expensive just because of the name and not quality.