HP To Pay German Antipiracy Fee For CD Burners 236
RiotXIX writes points to this USA Today story which reads in part: "Hewlett-Packard has become the first company to be snagged by a German law requiring firms to pay fees for making CD burners that are being used to illegally lift the latest hits off the World Wide Web.
The case sets the stage for other European countries to possibly adopt similar rules to stem an epidemic that cost the music industry an estimated $5 billion last year." He adds, "DeCSS was attacked partly because the courts felt the creation of LiViD was not it's primary intention. Is this therefore insinuating that computer CD-writers were initially created to ruin the music industry?"
cost the music industry an estimated $5 billion (Score:1)
Re:Imagine this. (Score:1)
If you do, you have a very optomistic view of human nature.
KTB:Lover, Poet, Artiste, Aesthete, Programmer.
Re:After all HP pays about $6 per CD burner to the (Score:2)
Where do you get this figure from? It sounds implausible to me.
Re:Imagine this. (Score:1)
It's pretty obvious that without so much will to pirate HP would've sold much less media and CD burners, but I don't think that's any argument to convict them.
HP wasn't peddling illegal MP3's or inducing people to pirate music on the internet. They have profited on that, true, but they haven't done anything wrong.
Put yourself in HP's place. I'd be pissed, that's for sure.
Flavio
Re:not different at all (Score:1)
There is one giant loophole in this law, though, which is that these fees don't apply to computer based systems, only to standalone ones. This was put in, IIRC, specifically because legislators recognized that there were so many legitimate, non-copyright related uses for computer based equipment- specifically backing up data. That's part of the reason that computer CD-RW drives, and all of the reason that computer CD-RW disks, are so much cheaper than their standalone counterparts. What people apparently didn't anticipate was that A) computers would be quite so ubiquitous so rapidly, to the point that anybody technically sophisticated enough to want to copy CDs would have a computer to which a CD-RW drive could be added and B) that it would be possible to engage in massive on-line trading instead of casual, friendly trading. Those two factors have triggered the explosion in copyright violation that's making the RIAA and friends so upset.
Q: German readers: related resources? (Score:2)
The couple of DM they charge for a burner do not matter much, but once they put taxes on the media...
I don't like the idea of paying for the ability to store copyrighted material when in fact I just burn some videos from the last family reunion.
Re:EGADS! (Score:1)
Re:Imagine this. (Score:1)
He oughta know it ain't polite to tell people their concerns are insigfignicant (ok enough GWB puns).
Re:bummer.... (Score:1)
Re:That's absolutely ridiculous! (Score:3)
A clarification from someone affected by GEMA (Score:4)
It isn't. Here in Germany, every recordable media and recording equipment is affected by this pseudo-tax, since decades. The money is collected by royalty agencies such as GEMA [www.gema.de].
This, btw, includes audio equipment such as audio tape, mini discs as well as paper copiers, e.g. copying machines, telefax machines, scanners etc. For paper copiers, the often used example is the copier in the local library. Everyone is allowed to make a copy for private use and since every copy is indirectly pseudo-taxed, the authors of printed books get their share.
The money is then distributed to companies and the authors of copyable works (books, music, film, tv and radio broadcasts).
I see this system from two perspectives.
On the one hand, yes, it is a strange, bureaucratic conglomerate of royalty collecting agencies taking money from consumers.
On the other hand, I am a semi-professional singer who has done some small studio jobs with my band [sechsrichtige.de]. We have written a song that aired in a children's show on National German TV and - boom - we got an extra check from the GEMA royalty agency (that very same agency that is responsible for the HP story above). Our album was played on some small radio stations and again, the GEMA got notified and we got a little extra income.
There is another royalty agency collecting money from those using my band's vocal work (e.g. for jingles or dubbing work), so if we did the vocals for an advertisement song and that advertisement would be broadcast a gazillion times, we'd benefit from that (we're not that professional, though).
And a friend of mine, a freelance radio journalist, gets extra money through an agency that is exclusively collects money for spoken radio broadcasts, so that whenever a radio stations airs some of his work as a repeat, het gets a little share from that.
So yes, the system works. It is a strange and scary system, but the authors, composers, singers, speakers and actors who create the content for recordable media benefit from it.
With analog media, all this kind of (*) made of sense. But with digital media, things start to become strange. In fact, there are now two different versions of CD-Rs on the market, one for computer data (no GEMA-pseudo-tax) at around 2 DM/disc and one for audio data (GEMA included) for around 5-6 DM/disc. Techically, these discs are identical. This shows that the system does not work as intended anymore.
------------------
Re:Imagine this. (Score:1)
Yes, piracy is wrong, but this seems kind of like taxing pens and copy machines because they could be used to copy copyrighted books, or taxing VCRs because they could be used to copy movies, or taxing cassette tape recorders because they could be used to copy music, or removable disk drives because they could be used to copy software (Maybe those things are taxed already. If they are, maybe this isn't such an outrageous tax. Anybody know?).
Re:A clarification from someone affected by GEMA (Score:2)
------------------
Gutenberg Revisted? (Score:2)
"Guns don't kill people... I do!" - Sledge Hammer
Re:Imagine this. (Score:2)
This is correct. The great majority of this data is either illegally copied music or software.
That is the real world, deal with it.
I know you probably want to assuage your guilty conscience by portraying music executives/copyright laws etc as 'evil', but the simple fact is that these things are there to protect the artist.
My primary data type is the music I make, Mr ME, and I am very annoyed when I find people pirating it. This is why I welcome these laws.
KTB:Lover, Poet, Artiste, Aesthete, Programmer.
Re:Maybe HP should just take it's toys and go home (Score:2)
The U.S. already has a similar law (Score:2)
Re:Media (CD-R) tax with illogical reasoning.. (Score:1)
Electricity Tax (Score:1)
Re:Return of the Old Aristocracy (Score:1)
Re:Not "Antipiracy" (Score:2)
german cd burners won't wrtie tocs with audio tracks in non GEMA disks
:-(
well i won't buy such a device
:-)
War crimes & Military tech production (Score:1)
Re:Does this mean it's LEGAL now? YES! (Score:2)
Re:Sure. (Score:1)
Re:Maybe HP should just take it's toys and go home (Score:2)
It is for German consumers and business users to seek to advocate more liberal policies to their government. Of course, if the german business users do succeed then (cf another post on this strand) they could be construed to have replaced one plutocracy with another.
HP responsibility (Score:1)
Re:Imagine this. (Score:1)
Of course. You're a freeloader. I wouldn't expect anything else.
Re:The Math is: (Score:1)
Consumers and a seperate Industry vs. Industry = Consumers and seperate Industry wins.
Pissing off HP might not be a good idea for the music industry to do."
Unfortunately, corporations (and HP is a huge one) don't behave morally or ethically, but financially. If HP can make a profit selling these things in Gernmany with this "RIAA Tax", then they will do so.
You are correct, "comsumer" vs corporation always ends up on the corpers side. However, laws are supposed to protect CITIZENS equally. Laws that favor corporations over CITIZENS must be fought at every turn.
Re:A better way (Score:1)
Re:Tax on media (Score:1)
Re:No toys in Europe? (Score:1)
Only if they look inside the package. And I have yet to have that happen to me (thank smurgnarf, I could never afford paying import taxes...)
Mikael Jacobson
The flipside (Score:2)
A portion of my purchase price goes to the "copyright holders".
Does that mean I am legaly entitled to copy their works now? After all I just paid them something - what do I get in return?
I'm sure this argument doesn't hold any legal water, but I think it stands on moral grounds.
Re:Does this mean it's LEGAL now? (Score:1)
I don't think the numbers add up (Score:2)
Why do newspapers just reprint biased estimates from institutions with an axe to grind? This is where journalists should get busy and do a bit of background research. In particular when the numbers are so out of whack.
This is particularly common with AP stories, where no journalist ever signs responsible for it. The AP seems to have turned into a glorified PR newswire.
Re:Help! (Score:1)
Just keep telling the ladies size doesn't matter, I am sure they will eventually believe you.
Re:Not "Antipiracy" (Score:1)
Re:That's absolutely ridiculous! (Score:1)
not different at all (Score:2)
But, of course, collecting these fees wasn't enough for the US industry--they keep merrily complaining about piracy and implementing various technical means to deny consumers fair use rights. And the same will probably be happening in Germany.
Re:License to Copy for $13 (Score:1)
Possible Paycheck? (Score:1)
Really? Man, I got to get a copyright on something that can be burned on to a CD. Then maybe I can get a check from GEMA.
--
Re:blame the democrats (Score:1)
As for being able to do anything you want: you aren't even capable of electing a goddamn president! You may have a lot of weapons, but your economic power is waning, and anything that requires a basic level of intelligence (e.g. voting) is beyond your abilities. The fact that you haven't even figured out how to post as something else than "Anonymous Coward" is proof enough of that.
COOOOL!! NOW IT'S LEGAL TO PIRATE!! WAY TO GO .de! (Score:2)
Zolltarif macht frei (Score:1)
Boss of nothin. Big deal.
Son, go get daddy's hard plastic eyes.
Asinine (Score:1)
Re:Reality check (Score:1)
Huh, no because he still lacks the 270 electoral votes the law says he needs. The race would then go to the House of Representatives.
human eyes are better
I hope you are never faced with eye-witness testimony in a court of law as the only evidence against you. The human eye is open to human interruptation, the machines are impartial.
The Florida Supreme Court are all liberals, and the Federal Courts in Florida were all Clinton appointees. Fuck the courst, have a re-vote = with the sudden urgency in the my vote matters the other 90 million Americans that didn't bother would decide the election.
Re:gotta love europe (Score:1)
Maybe HP should just take it's toys and go home. (Score:5)
Irony (Score:1)
Sure. (Score:1)
----------
Re:Imagine this. (Score:2)
Check out on the CD-Recording FAQ, its under section 7-13.
http://www.fadden.com/cdrfaq/faq07.html
I don't think, that they charge a tax on the CD Recorders yet tho.
Also here (Score:2)
Do the same thing to weapons / ammo manufacturers (Score:1)
But there's far too much money in weapons for the govt to do that. Better just pick on nasty CD copiers.
FNORD!
Europe is walking a fine line.... (Score:1)
Re:Right to bear arms? (Score:1)
Of course this relies on the honour system, so it probably doesn't achieve much, but an interesting thing to note is that it is now 100% legal for me to burn a song (that I have not paid for) to one of these expensive CD's.
Not "Antipiracy" (Score:5)
Never trust what you read in the newspapers... The fee is actually not for illegally copied music, but for legally copied music. Any music privately copied and given to friends is legal. So this is a general fee that is required for all manufacturers of equipment capable of making copies of copyrighted works (audio, video, photocopiers). I think the law is from 1965 or so. It assumed that there was no practical way to control private copies of media works, so it was allowed and this general reimbursement was introduced (fee on copying equipment and media).
The problem is obviously with computer equipment that is not just used for media, but also for data storage.
HPs defense strategie is to say that with CD roms the manufacturer is able to prevent making private copies or at least control the copying, so the fees for their equipment should be less. I am not shure if I like the thoughts behind that more than the general fee.
To put in into perspective: After all HP pays about $6 per CD burner to the GEMA. They announced starting work on better copy-protection schemes now.
does anyone know of any links (Score:1)
Free software should receive it's share as well! (Score:2)
Since blank CDs are used to copy free software as well, perhaps free software organizations (FSF, Debian
Re:Maybe HP should just take it's toys and go home (Score:3)
Clone some Hawaiian shamans?
It's a little weird, but it might work.
Re:Not "Antipiracy" (Score:4)
Um, UN has fucking TANKS, dude. (Score:2)
Who is ultimately responsible for my well being?
Will police take the rap for murder if they fail to protect me? Will you? Fuck no. And even a 3 minute wait for cops to arrive and defend an unarmed citizenry is long enough for the bad guy to blow you away, rape your kids and slit your wife's throat.
Fuck you, sir, for attempting to jeopardize me and my family by taking away my gun.
So what if it's primary purpose is to kill? Nothing wrong with killing, so long as the right people get killed. I have the right to denend myself with deadly force.
Just get over it, m'kay?
Re:gotta love europe (off-topic) (Score:2)
No, we have a president, and his name is Bill Clinton. We just don't have a president-elect. There is a lag time of 75 days between the election and the inaguration, and we're only a couple of weeks into that. There is still plenty of time to settle the election before the winner has to take office.
And as a side note, all these jokes about the "Banana Republic of America" are missing something. There haven't been any riots. If this situation had existed in just about any other country in the world, there would have been riots by now. That is what separates America from a banana republic.
By your logic... (Score:2)
Re:Asinine (Score:2)
You want examples of what you're talking about? Look at any South American banana republic, or several Central/East African nations. Where the government has an armed uprising to contend with, the result is CIVIL WAR. And whilst only a minority of the country may be involved in the uprising, the majority will be affected due to looting, murder, starvation, etc.
There's 2 ways that a country can be ruled, and only 2. Either you allow democracy, in which case ppl are voted into office and voted out of office; or you accept the rule of "might is right" and if you get in the way you get killed or disappeared. You want to allow ppl the right to shoot whoever they choose, then fine - just don't expect sympathy when it's your kids that are murdered.
Armed uprising sounds all fine and dandy to your average hormonal teenager who's not seen too much of the outside world, and learned everything he knows playing Quake. Grown-ups, particularly those with spouses, children and other loved ones, have a rather different view of arbitrary violence.
Grab.
Re:Sure. (Score:2)
Re:Maybe HP should just take it's toys and go home (Score:2)
You should already *have* that freedom...you shouldn't have to pay extra for it. You shouldn't have to pay for constitutional rights. Should I pay a "knife" tax to compensate for those people who might buy knives and stab others?
EGADS! (Score:2)
I am an artist. I use CDRs to store my stuff for sale. I do not need to pay the German gov't a tax (through increased prices on equipment) which never comes back to me, the artist.
I also use pen and paper. I've heard there's artists out there who use pen and paper to copy other artists' lyrics.
Pay me for your ink and paper.
Re:Sure. (Score:2)
In a similar vein... (Score:4)
Paper can be used to copy copyrighted works. Why not put a surcharge on paper?
FLASH-RAM can be used to copy copyrighted works. Why not charge that as well?
I know the proceedings are supposed to go to the artists (they do, in fact, go to institutions like BIEM, GEMA, BUMA/STEMRA et al, which are supposed to share the spoils with the artists) for 'legal copying of protected works for personal use'. But why do they have to be paid for that? The law in many countries says it is legal to reproduce a copyrighted work for personal use, as long as you have paid the copyright fees (by buying the CD, video, etc). After you've paid, you may copy the work as many times as you wish, as long as you do not violate the copyright by giving those copies to others who have not paid. So I see no reason why there has to be an extra payment so you can do what is already legal.
Of course, part of the reason for these fees is that people DO in fact give copies to others who have not paid. But by putting a fee on 'suspected' devices and media, buyers are automatically 'fined' for 'crimes' they have not comitted (yet).
All European laws uphold the principle that a person is innocent until proven guilty. By making people pay a fine before they commit a crime, they (state governments) are breaking their own laws. They are violating their own constitution. If the laws can not be upheld, they should either change the law or find ways to make people abide by them. They should NOT make people pay for crimes they have not commited. By doing this, they create the illusion that it is OK to break the law, since the fines have already been paid.
[I also posted this comment on linuxtoday btw.]
I use 'em to back up my xxGB drives, ass-hole. (Score:2)
Don't call me a fucking crook. I buy from MP3.COM and direct from the artist and not from the multi-mega-buck churn mills who make sure that this week's hits are tomorrow's has-been to make space on the shelf more important than what you want to hear.
I loathe the slime that musicians have to deal with to get their music out. Been there, done that and the industry toadies can find a splintery telephone pole and impale themselves 'til their guts squirm out of their throats.
I've seen talentless scum who were willing to play the game get deals while better musicians than I got fuck-all and even the talent-challenged are now working as office temps because the mill guarantees that you make it against the industry not with it
Sound strangely familiar? (Score:2)
They are all out to steal from us (Score:3)
A very good recomendation was for HP to pick up and leave. I wish to extend this notion.
No.. EVERYONE should pack up and leave. Microsoft due to lack of effective piracy laws and IoMega for the potental for piracy using the Zip and Jaz drives.
Both sides are hurt by this addatude...
Hardware makers for being tagged negitively and content sources for lack of protection against theft.
Hay let's hit Intel.. they make ROMs that can store data.. and CPUs that can convert that data into music or other such information sources.
Napster, Sony, HP, Intel, Linux, Microsoft it's all one great big conspericy to steal music we can not posably contend with it so we'll just pass some dumpy laws instead.
[Incase anyone was wondering.. Sony sells tape recorders.. My reel to reel tape is a Sony]
Let me get this right... (Score:2)
Peace out,
-Kefabi
Punished? (Score:2)
Seems to me that if you _pay_ to be allowed to do a thing, that thing is tacitly accepted by the people you're paying. I don't see much grounds for 'you aren't ever allowed to do this! But gimme a buck in case you do anyway'.
Re:Imagine this. (Score:2)
Do you mean to say that your band name/stage name is taken directly from a They Might Be Giants song on the 'Lincoln' album, 1988? Or was this just your unusual way of saying that you feel protective over 'Kiss The Blade' music?
It seems strange to on the one hand be totally anchored in the musical tradition of ripping off artists you like, and on the other hand not giving your potential fans this liberty. It's rather like Led Zeppelin ripping off old blues artists (but their art is not free! Oh no!) except that almost anyone will recognize 'Mr. Me' as a TMBG song if they have any familiarity with that album.
Sheesh...
Does this mean it's LEGAL now? (Score:4)
Is that the sound of lawyers drooling on the table that I hear?
Re:I use 'em to back up my xxGB drives, ass-hole. (Score:3)
That's WHY they want taxes like this. That way you pay them off no matter what you choose to do. An indie artist who buys equipment to produce their OWN CD also pays the RIAA/MPAA. It seems the RIAA/MPAA think they have some kind of fundamental RIGHT to ever increased profit.
similar in Canada for CD-R media (Score:2)
A better way (Score:5)
Re:Music /Industry/ (Score:3)
I'm not siding with the RIAA or the MPAA, I think they are both overly greedy, but how do we usually become familliar with a band? Radio, MTV, etc. Do you really think that studio time, advertising, music videos, and touring are cheap? One hand does wash the other, record companies spend big $$$ promoting bands, bands get big $$$ from promotions, (concerts, tshirts, hats, etc.), and the record companies make their money back, and profit, from CD sales. Too much profit, I agree, but that is how it works.
Ask any band who is trying to make it "big". They're all begging for a record contract. It would be nice to say that we could do away with greedy record companies, but the investment required to make a return is too great. Any artist can make music free, but music, as an industry, will always need some type of investor assistance.
So, in response to the previous posters comment "Burning their music hurts the /industry/ more than the artists themselves.", he/she is probably right, for the most part. But don't overlook all aspects of the record companies involvement. It does, in the end, hurt the artist as well.
Freeing ourselves from record companies will have to begin with the artists themselves, taking huge leaps of faith, and huge chances, promoting themselves on the internet. Huge, because the amount of propaganda and mass media control (radio, TV) will always belong to the deep pockets of large corporations.
German copying laws are different than in the US. (Score:5)
In Germany you are _allowed_ to rent a movie and copy it for personal use (use with familly or having close friends over). People pay a special "copying" tax for this. In Germany macrovision is illegal because it stops you from using your right to copy video tapes which you paid a tax for.
This is why it's not unusual for them to tax CDROM burners because those are used for copying also.
Did you know that the LiViD web site is hosted in Germany for legal reasons?
It's not as bad as Slashdot is making it seem. It's just different.
Re:Does this mean it's LEGAL now? (Score:2)
--
Music /Industry/ (Score:2)
So I say, screw the industry, free the music, and pay for the awesome concerts
Uh, too late. (Score:2)
You _didn't_ actually know that if I an independent musician buy consumer blank cassettes to record my music on, I'm forced to pay off my own deeply entrenched competition? That I PAY THEM to obliterate me? This isn't a free market, what made you think it was? We're talking about the MUSIC BUSINESS for crying out loud ;P
An interesting sidenote is that if you wiped out government it'd be all the easier to exert this type of force on a purely economic basis- in other words if there's no government taxes are even HIGHER as long as there's an RIAA capable of extorting the taxes out of small store owners and putting them out of business by withholding product if they won't play ball.
Personally I'd like to see _more_ government involvement, just not this corporate-welfare sort, speaking as someone who has literally paid RIAA taxes on his own musical endeavors for years.
The Math is: (Score:2)
Consumers and a seperate Industry vs. Industry = Consumers and seperate Industry wins.
Pissing off HP might not be a good idea for the music industry to do.
That's absolutely ridiculous! (Score:2)
Re:A clarification from someone affected by GEMA (Score:2)
What I'd like to know is how much the GEMA actually forwards to the musicians, and how much they keep for themselves. Anyone?
Re:Asinine (Score:2)
Why not go after the people who actually break the law?
The answer is simple: they don't want to. It's easier to "tax" the product and distribute it to corporate monopolies like the RIAA.
I guess they can tax paper, pens and xerox machines because they can be used to copy books.
BTW, isn't this German statute similar to one the RIAA/MPAA tried to get in the USA some time ago?
Something has to be done to get lobbyist influence OUT of government.
A Bribe By Any Other Name... (Score:2)
Of course, the money will never go to the people supposedly harmed by the action they are collecting the money for. It will just go into the government's coffers and never be seen again.
What bothers me the most is that they seem to think that the general polulace is too stupid to figure this out. (Then again, they may be right...)
Imagine this. (Score:2)
Now it's payback time.
Or so you thought. It turns out that everyone has the capacity to ruin your work & livelyhood at a whim. Wouldn't you want to license this technology?
Imagine you work as a programmer (as you probably do) and furthermore that you make your money from the code you write.
Now imagine that somehow someone has invented a way of getting the source from your binaries and copying at will. Wouldn't you be annoyed? The boot would be on the other foot then, wouldn't it?
I purport that these measure are perfectly reasonable. I mean, what are 99% of CD-RW's used for anyway? It is right and good that the artists should be compensated.
KTB:Lover, Poet, Artiste, Aesthete, Programmer.
Re:No toys in Europe? (Score:2)
No you have software patents, the DMCA and possibly the UCITA instead. America has just as many crap laws as Europe.
Re:Sure. (Score:2)
Re:Tyranny (Score:2)
Re:Maybe HP should just take it's toys and go home (Score:2)
Re:Not "Antipiracy" (Score:2)
Re:In a similar vein... (Score:2)
Here's my view: As a North American (both Canada and the USA do this), I'm paying a tax to the MPAA, RIAA, et al. when I buy a CD burner or blank CD. Therefor, I no longer have any moral obligation or good financial reason to NOT copy material with this burner. In fact, they seem to be encouraging that behavior. Any law that says differently is contradicting their statements of what they want you to do. I'm being punished for breaking a law I haven't actually broken, so I might as well get something out of it.
Yes, I know this wouldn't work as a defense in court. And I am aware of the posts that say German copyright law works differently. But it needs to be said, to point out that these groups have lost whatever moral high ground they may once have held.
-RickHunter
Re:Music /Industry/ (Score:2)
Granted, a large percentage of Napster users likely just search for the "big name" artists, hell, thats what I first did. But then, after awhile, I started browsing the music of people who had songs I was interested in, and as such, I've been exposed to a huge amount of music I'd otherwise never have heard of.
Sure, the recording industry is still necessary, but they're becoming less relevant everyday. For me, they're practically useless. I have no interest whatsoever in the Britney/N'Sync/etc crud. And it really pisses me off when I purchase a CD, knowing that they get the lion's share of the profits. But I still buy 'em, knowing that at least a bit of the money gets to the artist. About the only thing that I feel guilty about is the mp3's I really enjoy that I can't find CD's for.
Re:Return of the Old Aristocracy (Score:2)
Troll? Ehhh.... (Score:2)
Writable CDs are a HUGE market and I too have my doubts on how much of it is for "legitimate" use. Also, most people use CD-Rs and not CD-RWs as even now the cost of CD-RWs aren't worth it, although I don't know what the situation is like in Europe.
In either case, copying CDs isn't "getting the source from your binaries", it is a lot more like copying the binary software itself, as few people have software that turns an audio stream into sheet music and/or lyrics, which is closer to "the source code" of music, the PCM stream on a CD is not "the source code" as it is "compiled" using instruments, vocals and mixers.
BTW: Artists usually don't get compensated when recording media and devices get taxed and probably never have been. The taxes typically fatten up the "label", the company that signed them, but this might vary by country as well.
Re:Maybe HP should just take it's toys and go home (Score:3)
Partly, at least, because there's a lot of overlap between the hardware manufacturers and the content providers. Companies like Sony and Phillips are heavily involved in both sides of the market. It appears that they currently make more money from milking copyrights than they do from manufacturing consumer electronics, so the music and movie people get to call the shots. One more reason why massive conglomerates are bad for the consumer.
Re:Imagine this. (Score:3)