bit-tech.net— Elliot Spitzer has slapped subpoenas on 'the four largest record labels'. Looks like he too doesn't like the idea of iTunes changing to a variable pricing model as suggested by the RIAA et al...
Dec 27, 2005View in Crawl 4
As long as the record labels get the agreed-upon licensing fees from iTunes, then they're getting what they're owed and should have ABSOLUTELY NO SAY in what itunes charges for a download.
For all intensive purposes, supply would be vertical, or would it?I would surmise that at the greatest supply is limited to the number of residents of a nation (or market). After all, would you buy two copies of the same song. So, although it is inaccurate, I would say that census figures put the U.S. population at 300 million. Estimate that half of those own pcs and maybe five percent are actually the target market. So it is vertical, but the guess is the market size... where on the "quanitity" axis, does the supply curve sit.As the quantity demanded increase (this is not a change or shift in Demand, that would move the demand curve to the right or left), price DECREASES. This is upheld by the microeconomic theory of "the law of demand" (there is no law of supply). <a class="user" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demand">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demand</a>At any rate, from what I can gather, you are right, the price is really the only thing that they can guess at (since market is the real issue, but that is an even harder guess... who knows who will buy it until it is purchased... well, hiring market analysts for each song is probably a bit rash). I think alot of the real problem is how much of that money DOES NOT GO to the artist. Granted, companies have expenses and perhaps as much as seventy percent of the profit on a cd should go to the company... but it is much higher than that.Big record companies are abusive, but consumers and musicians alike do not have much choice. I think the government has to step in (even most independent labels are part of the RIAA).
The gasoline price gouging example is even dumber than this iTunes stupidity.All that the anti-gouging laws did was assure that no one could get gas ahead of, during, and immediately after evacuations at any price.Price controls, no matter how noble in intent, do nothing but insure shortages."Whereas it hath been found by experience that limitations upon the prices of commodities are not only ineffectual for the purpose proposed, but likewise productive of very evil consequences--resolved, that it be recommended to the several states to repeal or suspend all laws limiting, regulating or restraining the Price of any Article." --Continental Congress of the United States, 1778
@ jkfan87You are a moron. Apple does NOT want to raise prices, quite the contrary.Also, these so-called luxury items are monopolized which means that if you are going to stop buying them, you are shut out from any form of entertainment. WHAT A GREAT SOLUTION THERE, MISTER INDUSTRY SHILL!
riceDec 27, 2005
And how long have we been able to block user's comments for? Sweet.
nicepantsDec 27, 2005
As long as the record labels get the agreed-upon licensing fees from iTunes, then they're getting what they're owed and should have ABSOLUTELY NO SAY in what itunes charges for a download.
ezweaveDec 27, 2005
For all intensive purposes, supply would be vertical, or would it?I would surmise that at the greatest supply is limited to the number of residents of a nation (or market). After all, would you buy two copies of the same song. So, although it is inaccurate, I would say that census figures put the U.S. population at 300 million. Estimate that half of those own pcs and maybe five percent are actually the target market. So it is vertical, but the guess is the market size... where on the "quanitity" axis, does the supply curve sit.As the quantity demanded increase (this is not a change or shift in Demand, that would move the demand curve to the right or left), price DECREASES. This is upheld by the microeconomic theory of "the law of demand" (there is no law of supply). <a class="user" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demand">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demand</a>At any rate, from what I can gather, you are right, the price is really the only thing that they can guess at (since market is the real issue, but that is an even harder guess... who knows who will buy it until it is purchased... well, hiring market analysts for each song is probably a bit rash). I think alot of the real problem is how much of that money DOES NOT GO to the artist. Granted, companies have expenses and perhaps as much as seventy percent of the profit on a cd should go to the company... but it is much higher than that.Big record companies are abusive, but consumers and musicians alike do not have much choice. I think the government has to step in (even most independent labels are part of the RIAA).
latroDec 27, 2005
The gasoline price gouging example is even dumber than this iTunes stupidity.All that the anti-gouging laws did was assure that no one could get gas ahead of, during, and immediately after evacuations at any price.Price controls, no matter how noble in intent, do nothing but insure shortages."Whereas it hath been found by experience that limitations upon the prices of commodities are not only ineffectual for the purpose proposed, but likewise productive of very evil consequences--resolved, that it be recommended to the several states to repeal or suspend all laws limiting, regulating or restraining the Price of any Article." --Continental Congress of the United States, 1778
cvrti5Dec 28, 2005
If every song on iTunes is 0.99, then iTunes is price fixing.
Closed AccountDec 28, 2005
From suing Myspace (News Corp) to this, this guy is friggin awesome. He stands for everything I stand for.If he runs for president, he gets my vote!
worbdDec 28, 2005
@ jkfan87You are a moron. Apple does NOT want to raise prices, quite the contrary.Also, these so-called luxury items are monopolized which means that if you are going to stop buying them, you are shut out from any form of entertainment. WHAT A GREAT SOLUTION THERE, MISTER INDUSTRY SHILL!
Closed AccountDec 28, 2005
I wont buy new music from iTunes if prices go above 79p our current price in the UK.Bit-rate would need to double to make me warrant paying more.