More disdain for Pepsi iTunes ad | iLounge News

News

More disdain for Pepsi iTunes ad

The Register UK has received open letters to Apple from its readers in disgust with the Pepsi iTunes Music Giveaway ads featuring several RIAA sued teenagers. One of the letters read, “I was planning on purchasing a new Ibook, it would have been my 5th Mac. Tell Steve he can take this “Jobs” and shove it. Putting that obnoxious Pepsi ad on the website was not a good decision. Jack Del Croix” Another letter read, “The only thing you have to do to be in the front of the NEXT revolution is lose Pepsi and the RIAA. It is a brutal irony to me that you chose the 20th anniversary of the most famous Superbowl ad of all to totally reverse your own image, team up with big brother, and most indefensible of all, participate in the exploitation of underaged alleged “criminals” in a literal public stoning. Shame on you!”

« Online music in UK outsells CD, cassettes and vinyl

Apple sued over iPod battery life »

Related Stories

Comments

21

god, it’s pepsi’s commercial - complain to them…

Posted by me on February 10, 2004 at 2:27 PM (PDT)

22

Get something straight. You can only be prosecuted for breaking copyright law if you make a demonstrable profit by doing so. I believe the dollar amount is $5,000US. Only those pirating and reselling works are in criminal violation of copyright. Joe User downloading an mp3 or even 50 GIGS of mp3s cannot be arrested, cannot be tried, and cannot be prosecuted for those actions. Your personal morality is not the law. Law and morality (and for that matter, religion, manners and ethics) are seperate for extremely good reasons.

They are however certainly subject to civil suits by the offended parties. Whether these civil suits will be held up in a court of law is unclear. Because no *individual* has enough heft to demonstrably damage the recording industry’s sales, and the RIAA cannot pursue what would in effect be a reverse class-action suit against all file sharers for the cumulative damages they believe file sharing has caused their business, there’s quite a significant chance that when it comes down to it, a case that goes to court will be thrown out by the judge, or decided in favor of the defendant.

My personal view? it’s decidedly bad manners to download shared music rather than pay for it, if you intend to keep it for more than a day or two or use it for anything beyond simply listening to. If something’s worth keeping, it’s worth paying for, *if* there is a way to pay for it. (after all, who do I pay for all those old radio show recordings some guy ripped off of old LPs by a company that went ouf of business in the 50s?)

As for the ad, to get back on the real topic here… I think it’s *supposed* to be a little biting of the thumb at the RIAA, but of course that doesn’t work when the RIAA is benefiting from it, so it’s a bit silly. But the people getting really bent out of shape about it need to go outside and get some air.

And pepsi is *far* superior to coca cola, especially when consumed in a premade format rather than from a fountain; coke is always dry and bitter from bottle or can.

Posted by JC on February 10, 2004 at 2:31 PM (PDT)

23

and for this… “CD prices drop to 9.99$ (or lower) like the iTunes sotore”

I’m tired, really tired of that. People keep saying albums cost 10 bucks on itunes.
They don’t.
They START at 10 bucks and go up from there… and very few of them actually are the 10 bucks. Most of the ones I’ve looked at were 12.99 or 14.99 or higher. The one album I really gave serious thought to buying, I got cheaper on Amazon, and had nice liner notes, to boot. And of course, it’s always cheaper to go to a used CD place and buy the CD and rip it, much of the time. At least, if they have the disk you want, which of course is a big point in iTMS favor.
Buying entire albums on iTMS is seldom a particularly good deal. The real glory is being able to buy the two or three decent songs on an otherwise crappy album, which only really applies to people who like artists who release mostly crappy albums (ok, so that’s just about everyone who listens to top 40 radio, but still)

Posted by JC on February 10, 2004 at 2:51 PM (PDT)

24

Pepsi is the devil’s smeg.

Coke is soma.

Posted by smeg on February 10, 2004 at 3:12 PM (PDT)

25

Well, I think this is all ridiculus.  I believe it isn’t theft as well, copyright infringement yes theft no.  I also have yet to see any artist say he/she is hurting for cash because his songs were being downloaded for free.  I personally don’t use Kazaa or Limestone or any service like that because I just don’t wanna go thru the headache.  But I will borrow a buds CD case in a heartbeat to copy a cd.  Call me a thief or whatever, don’t care.  I paid my money (well over 3 grand in cds) for my cds.  If I like it I’ll buy the hard copy if not, I’ll copy what I like it.  If you wanna get technical don’t go after the consumer, go after the company that made it possible.  DVD/CD copy software, drives tape decks and the like.  You make it, I buy it, damned if I won’t use it.  Hell iTunes itself lets you download music multiple times.  I have had 3 iPods download the same library without and manipulating of the soft ware or anything.  As far as the kids in those ads, I think their parents were idiots for allowing their kid to be exploited like that but thats what money will do.  You guys need to chill and lets enjoy the iPod.  Let the judges, lawmakers and lawyers decide what is legal and what is not.  Cause your opinion don’t mean squat to them and aint gonna pay their bills…

Posted by Laffin@URiaaIdiots on February 10, 2004 at 3:21 PM (PDT)

26

Oh yeah, me likes reg Pepsi, hates reg Coke but me likes Vanilla Coke.  OH YEAH!!!! To the DumbAzzez who say Pepsi rots your teeth and Apple is helping?  Rockhead, Pepsi AND coke AND have been doing that for years!  Apples aint gonna have any impact on that fact.  Just another thing for ppl to complain about and jump on the media bandwagon.  And who above ALL benefits from this?  the media!! New movie comes out, OH my kids are doing that!!!!  New video game comes out, OH my it made my kid do that! New Cd comes out, OH my it made my kid do that!  How do you find out about it all?  Who blows it WAY outta proportion?  THe media!  Lay off Apple and get a life, find something else to complain about….

Posted by Laffin@URiaaIdiots on February 10, 2004 at 3:29 PM (PDT)

27

who cares how bad the comercial was or wasn’t all it wanted to do was get all of u morons to be talkin about so it suceeded. I dont give a crap if u r boycottin this pepsi itunes thing go tell someone who cares. Just thought i should get that out to all of u

Posted by blah on February 10, 2004 at 3:41 PM (PDT)

28

What a joke. Why are there so many idiots in the world.

Listen:

Apple didn’t make the ad.
Pepsi, who made the ad, were making fun of the RIAA.
Pepsi, who made the ad, paid the kids well.
The kids in the ads all agreed to be in it.

Good god. It’s like reading a board only occupied by trolls.

Posted by Ian Struckhoff on February 10, 2004 at 4:27 PM (PDT)

29

FINNALLY SOMEONE AGREES

Posted by Blah on February 10, 2004 at 5:27 PM (PDT)

30

If someone decides they prefer Windows over Panther because the theme of a Pepsi ad annoys them… there is some serious brain malfunction at work smile

And by the way, albums DO start far below $10 on iTunes. The cheapest album I bought was $4.95. I’ve paid about .75 per song average, and have never paid even close to as much as stores—or Amazon—charge for a full CD.

People really pour out a lot of energy prior to thinking sometimes smile

Posted by Nagromme on February 10, 2004 at 5:51 PM (PDT)

31

The only way for Apple NOT to “side with the RIAA” is not to sell music in any useful way. That situation isn’t Apple’s fault. If you want Apple to get out of music… maybe an iPod site is the wrong place for you smile

The ad was little more than an extended pun. Whether you find it humorous or not, web stats after the SuperBowl showed that the ad was effective. The ad has no long-term geopolitical effects.

One Pepsi ad is not, in short, the end of the world.

Posted by Nagromme on February 10, 2004 at 5:55 PM (PDT)

32

I have moral/ethical reasons behind the downloading of music.

I view it as civil disobedience. I only pay for CDs for Artists I REALLY LIKE. I mean REALLY LIKE. (Outkast etc.)

Posted by enjoilax on February 10, 2004 at 10:00 PM (PDT)

33

Civil disobediance means a public statement. Take a stand, get caught, fight it, and change the laws or at least make a public protest.

Secretly and anonymously pirating an artist’s creative work because you wish they’d signed a different deal isn’t morality, just greed. It’s the easy way out, and it is as morally wrong as shoplifting from an overpriced store. Listening to an artist you enjoy but find overpriced is not a right—it’s a choice. (And really, how hard is the hard way? Delete the illegal files and listen only to the ones you paid for!)

If you don’t like an artist enough to listen to them… then why is their music in your collection?

If you do like them enough to listen, pay the price they’ve agreed to or don’t listen. Write letters. Protest publicly. Anything, but don’t take their work for free. Otherwise “theft” may not be proper legalese, but it’s exactly the word that comes to my mind.

And if you download purely to get a better preview—do you truly delete it after you’ve heard it, and then buy it or forget it?

Posted by Nagromme on February 11, 2004 at 1:11 AM (PDT)

34

Listen:

Apple didn’t make the ad.
Pepsi, who made the ad, were making fun of the RIAA.
Apple have linked their early 2004 and 20 year aniversary marketing campaign to this ad
It’s backfired
And it’s no less Apples fault

Posted by Chris Matchett on February 11, 2004 at 7:29 AM (PDT)

35

Here is an excerpt of an email I sent to the Register, that they will never have the nerve to print (Full text exceeds comment posting limit):

I have been following this tempest in a tea cup since Mr. Orlowski’s first article on this commercial. An article, which I’m afraid is more biased opinion than news. Simply read the first line “Four children bullied by the Recording Industry Association of America will re-enact their shame for tens of millions of TV viewers today, at the behest of two giant American corporations: Apple Computer and Pepsi Cola Inc. ” This opinion was posted before the commercial was even aired. Perhaps this was to stir up a controversy that truly didn’t exist. Perhaps it was sensationalism to drive traffic to theregister.co.uk. Perhaps it was to further Mr. Orlowski’s own cause, which you can read up on here: http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/6/35260.html

It’s a shame, Mr. Orlowski, that you attack the one music service that has presented a viable alternative to the RIAA’s distribution practices over the years. It is also a shame that you take a viable news source and use it to parade your editorials as news. Editorial commentary always has it’s place in the news, as long as it is presented as it actually is: Opinion. I won’t be abondoning the Reg completely, I will still continue to read articles here, as long as the begin with the header “BOFH” and those don’t get paraded as news.

Posted by Andrew Bohm on February 11, 2004 at 10:38 AM (PDT)

36

iTMS is not a “viable alternative” to the RIAA - iTMS is just the standard RIAA rip-off-the-artists racket with a new shiny front.

You want to help an artist? Buy a teeshirt. Most will make several hundred times as much from that single sale as they do from a typical RIAA CD sale.

You want viable alternative, try Bleep or Weed or any other of the dozens of fair portions for artists schemes.

Posted by viable me arse on February 11, 2004 at 11:29 AM (PDT)

37

iTMS DOES have independent artists who are not under the thumb of labels. Both Rain Dog and CD Baby offer cheap services to make this happen easily for an aspiring musician.

http://macslash.org/article.pl?sid=04/02/05/1545222&mode=thread

The MAJORITY of music in the iTMS catalog is through the big labels though. RIAA is the source for much of the music the market is currently demanding. That’s not Apple’s fault, that’s music today, and yes, it’s a shame. NOTHING Apple could do would change that overnight. Apple can’t kill the RIAA and shouldn’t be blamed for failing to instantly do so—it’s amazing what concessions Apple HAS gotten from them. (I can buy singles!) But Apple IS changing things for the better—at a more realistic pace.

If you think Apple should have boycotted the big labels and only gone with alternative sources of music… how could iTMS make it that way? Do you think Apple’s store would have been “viable?” with a tiny catalog of music that excludes almost everything the market demands? No. That’s NOT viable. It should be, I wish it was, but it’s not—and that’s not Apple’s doing. If you wish for Apple to try that, you’re simply wishing for iTunes to vanish and Microsoft to step in. I agree, it’s a sad state of affairs.

Also, I can’t help but noticing that artists as a group are not coming out against online buying, or in favor of piracy. Those viewpoints seem to be quite the minority among the artists people are valiantly making a stand for… by pirating their work!

Posted by Nagromme on February 11, 2004 at 1:08 PM (PDT)

38

Got a good point there Nagromme, I haven’t seen or heard any artist step up and support the RIAA.  It seems like its the record labels that are losing money not the artists.

Posted by Laffin@UIdiots on February 11, 2004 at 1:24 PM (PDT)

39

>You want to help an artist? Buy a teeshirt.
>Most will make several hundred times as much
>from that single sale as they do from a typical
>RIAA CD sale.

Yeah, right. You tell me the artist that doesn’t want you to buy their CDs. For goodness sakes people. How did you find out about the artist to begin with? If not through friends, it was through marketing (and more than likely, if you heard about it through a friend, it was because they were marketed to themselves.)

Do you realize what would happen to any mainstream artist (who are not hurting for money by the way) if their CDs stopped selling? They’d be dropped by the record company, and they’d be unable to tour.

It is inconceivable how completely ignorant people can be when trying to justify downloading music. Absolutely ludicrous.

Posted by Berad on February 11, 2004 at 2:10 PM (PDT)

40

Blah blah blah, not justifying downloading music.  Nothing last forever except death.  An artist is not gonna be a hit forever, they have the opportunity to do something with their money if they don’t who’s fault is it.  People will always buy their music and ppl will always go to see an artist on tour.  Drop by a record label?  Only if an artist puts out crap, you gonna buy your fav artist new cd if its crap?  Would you buy a cd for ONE or TWO good songs off an otherwise crappy album?  I get my music the way I get my music, don’t care what anyone says. 

Last, It is inconceivable how completely ignorant people can be when they believe artists only revenue is selling a cd or that they will actually lose money because ppl “illegally” downloading their music…like I said blah blah blah.

Posted by Laffin@UIdiots on February 11, 2004 at 3:35 PM (PDT)

Page 2 of 3 pages  <  1 2 3 >

If you have a comment, news tip, advertising inquiry, or coverage request, a question about iPods/iPhones/iPad or accessories, or if you sell or market iPod/iPhone/iPad products or services, read iLounge's Comments + Questions policies before posting, and fully identify yourself if you do. We will delete comments containing advertising, astroturfing, trolling, personal attacks, offensive language, or other objectionable content, then ban and/or publicly identify violators.

Commenting is not available in this section entry.
Sign up for the iLounge Weekly Newsletter

Email:

Recent News

Recent Reviews

Recent Articles

Sign up for the iLounge Weekly Newsletter

Email:

iLounge is an independent resource for all things iPod, iPhone, iPad, and beyond.
iPod, iPhone, iPad, iTunes, Apple TV, Mac, and the Apple logo are trademarks of Apple Inc.
iLounge is © 2001 - 2014 iLounge, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Terms of Use | Privacy Policy