BuyMusic is a very shady operation. There are rumours that it has licensed its entire catlog from a shady operation:

see macintouch (link will die in a few days)

As for brand tarnishing/theft/what have you, I don't think so. It's just a jab at the competition. Apple did it to Intel and Microsoft. I find it a cheap way to go about marketing, but that's how things go.

Going off topic a bit, I do find the Itunes store to be fairly well designed. It is a fairly slick experience. Unfortunately, they don't have the albums I wanted to buy last time I was there.

I feel the same way about this situation. I can tolerate Apple getting ripped off product-wise (like that's never happened before), but this is way too far. I've heard from multiple sites that this is indeed an unlawful act and should be a sueable offense. Personally I'm not a fan of Tommy Lee destroying the guitar on the iTunes Music Store homepage either, but at least that was somewhat discreet.

So now, they can tout they're selling tracks at $.79 and they can say they have a library of music of over 300,000 songs. But what they don't tell you is that it comes from musicians/bands that were not asked for permission, and who will likely not see a penny of any sale made through BM. By their very own site policy they are committing copyright infringement. They have done this to lure PC/windows users to their site in hopes to sell the few major label aquired songs they do have, at a price that is much higher than Apple's $.99. - Jody Whitesides, Musician

I saw part of the Tommy Lee ad briefly the other day and I remember how quickly my mind instantly decided that whatever product he was selling, I wasn't buying. I don't think I've ever experienced that kind of revulsion with any other ad before. (I didn't even know it was a BuyMusic ad until the end since I tuned in half way through the ad)

it's a shame that companies resort to theft so blatantly, but apple has been accused of that very thing, so nobody's perfect.

it seems that buymusic.com simply doesn't care about any of this because by the time anyone tells them to stop they've already gotten their message across and i don't think the avril lavine listeners of the world (or whatever the hell mtv is pushing these days) care about it either. so, they get away with it paving the way for the next sleazy company to do the same thing.

glad i'm not in marketing, i'd hate myself.

Apple did it to Intel and Microsoft.

apple has been accused of that very thing, so nobody's perfect.

Can you guys delve into this a bit deeper? Call me naive, but I don't remember anything as blatant as this.

Microsoft copied Apple's switch campaign when they came out with it, there was some controversy - oh the woman in the ad was a stock photo I think!

i was referring to the theory that apple stole it's original interface design (i guess system 6) from xerox.

it was one of those things that i'd heard from a mac geek manager i had who was nuts on apple/mac history and stories.

that's where the "sosumi" alert was supposed to come from, it was a noise that xerox copiers made at the time.

Microsoft copied Apple's switch campaign...

I do remember that, didn't last long though.

Can you guys delve into this a bit deeper?

There was the burning dancing intel men commercial, which was a direct spoof of Intels IP.

The entire 'think different' campaign could have been considered blatant theft of so many personal identities. (Really, what did Ghandi have to do with hawking PCs?)

The switch campaign, while not a blatant rip off, was certainly a low-brow jab and MS.

Apple store = GAP store.

Sherlock 2 = Watson.

Etc.

All's fair in love, war, politics and capitalistic marketing campaigns. ;o)

The "sosumi" alert sound doesn't have anything to do with Xerox; it has to do with an Apple Records (home of the Beatles) lawsuit against Apple Computer... and come on, that Xerox PARC stuff was disproven over a decade ago ;)

BuyMusic has almost certainly infriged upon Apple: they're presenting their product as if it is the Windows version of the iTunes Music Store, using an almost identical advertisement. I can't believe they haven't gotten sued yet.

But what they don't tell you is that it comes from musicians/bands that were not asked for permission, and who will likely not see a penny of any sale made through BM. By their very own site policy they are committing copyright infringement. They have done this to lure PC/windows users

into buying pirated music on record! Buymusic.com is owned by the record companies and they are luring people into a trap! They are keeping track of everyone who buys music from buymusic.com and they're going to lock them up for copyright infringement!

That's my conspiracy theory for the day.

Y'know, I think recontextualizing is fine. It's no different from sampling, which really is often more homage than theft. I mean, how many posters have you seen, for example, that look like they're soviet propaganda? Taking something, remixing it and presenting it as (quasi-)new is totally fair, IMO.

However, this isn't about art, influence, or paying tribute to what came before. This subterfuge is blatant theft, one that is specifically designed to mislead consumers. The "Music Downloads for the Rest of Us" tagline, so obviously ripped from Apple, would be laughable if it weren't so damn sleazy.

I suspect that their method here is to milk the service for what it's worth and then disappear. Obviously they know about the flaws in their system and TOS Of course they know that Mac users, a rabidly loyal bunch, were bound to make noise about this (anyone witrh a Mac tried to visit the site?). This seems like a losing gambit set up for a quick buck. All sizzle, no steak - as evidenced by Tommy Lee (Powerbook guy) appearing in their ads.

-R

SEE! you live under a false assumption you've got the goods on something and it all goes to pot. i guess that's what i get for passing on misinformation, sosumi?

apple/xerox - i know, it's just such good silly crap. :)

But what they don't tell you is that it comes from musicians/bands that were not asked for permission, and who will likely not see a penny of any sale made through BM. By their very own site policy they are committing copyright infringement. They have done this to lure PC/windows users

into buying pirated music on record! Buymusic.com is owned by the record companies and they are luring people into a trap! They are keeping track of everyone who buys music from buymusic.com and they're going to lock them up for copyright infringement!

That's my conspiracy theory for the day.

Sorry for the interruption--I'm posting this to test some technical difficulties. Please disregard and happy a good day. Thanks.

hey, check this out.

my fave .."as easy as prison rape"

I saw the commercial yesterday and was also amazed and appalled. It is literally the exact same except for the sign off. I wonder if that was driven by the client or the agency.

Similarly, every single cosmetic and hair coloring commercial is the exact same to me as well. Whether it is Beyonce or Jessica Biel or any other Model/Actress/Singer, they all have exactly the same tone, lighting, pacing, and content.

my fave line..."as easy as prison rape".

Mine's "...a neo-nazi whore..."

sorry for the triple post. it gave me some sort of funky error message, so hence 3 tries -- Kiran, can you nuke the dupes and this one in the movable blog page?

thanks bud.

I think Tan broke the site everyone.

hey Armin, I don't know what happened....I just came home, and found it this way.

I think David W broke it.

But what they don't tell you is that it comes from musicians/bands that were not asked for permission, and who will likely not see a penny of any sale made through BM. By their very own site policy they are committing copyright infringement. They have done this to lure PC/windows users

into buying pirated music on record! Buymusic.com is owned by the record companies and they are luring people into a trap! They are keeping track of everyone who buys music from buymusic.com and they're going to lock them up for copyright infringement!

That's my conspiracy theory for the day.

Damn, something is wrong. The counter is stuck, and is anyone else getting the error message when posting?

Yep error when posting

sorry for the triple post. it gave me some sort of funky error message, so hence 3 tries -- Kiran, can you nuke the dupes and this one in the movable blog page?

I've been nuking double and triple posts all day! Even though you get an error it does post.

it's buymusic.com come to sink us!

get 'em! oh wait, somwbody already did. (thanks, tan.)

did you guys find the link to the switch campaign? i wanna know who did that site.

i wanna know who did that site.

I wanna know who was the agency behind the TV ads. And I wanna hear Debbie's view!

It seems that getting too close to another company's marketing campaign only contributes to their branding efforts that they've already established in the marketplace.

Todd said he thought it was an advertisement for iTunes except for the BuyMusic logo at the very end [I haven't seen the ad]. If you miss the logo, you'll think it's an iTunes ad.. seems very ineffective. Shouldn't BuyMusic be distinguishing itself from the competition?

> I've been nuking double and triple posts all day!

hey, the site has gotten its very own repetitive stress injury.

what was the concensus on a cure? a brace, chiropractor appts, and some yoga....oh, and the site has to go somewhere on its lunchbreaks.

Message to Buymusic: Get your own damn idea.

Geez! As the Apple Turns is also having a field day with this wholehttp://www.appleturns.com/yesterday/" target="_blank">thing. Now if you want a good read, they are funny every day!

I think Apple is letting this one go without any legal action of brand theft/tarnish because buymusic.com is not really getting any rave reviews from anyone about this new service. Any mention of buymusic.com results to praise of how great iTunes Music Store is. Therefore, those iTunes looking ads (40 million ad budget..yikes) equals to free iTunes advertisements.

i was referring to the theory that apple stole it's original interface design (i guess system 6) from xerox.

it was one of those things that i'd heard from a mac geek manager i had who was nuts on apple/mac history and stories.

Nope, common folklore. Xerox got paid by Apple for the idea.

that's where the "sosumi" alert was supposed to come from, it was a noise that xerox copiers made at the time.

That is from litigation between Apple computers and Apple Records (the Beatles' label). Comes down to Apple Computer promised Apple Records they wouldn't go into the music business. When they added audio capabilities to the Mac, one of the alert sounds was named Sosumi as a thumb of the nose to Apple Records.

More on topic, Apple has made their own jabs at other commercials, namely the Intel bunny commercials, but at least they did it with style. In my mind it still looked like an Apple ad.

If just the ad by itself was the issue, I am not sure I would raise a stink about it. It sounds though that it is not the only issue with this company, and it is those deeper concerns that really need to be addressed.

A bad agency uses the competition's commercials and changes the name at the end and hopes the audience knows the difference. A good agency should be able to establish your brand by differentiating your product from the competition (maybe by using their brand against them). A great agency establishes the brand, with or without competition.

I think what Buymusic.com is trying to show, by using multiple "singers," the Apple-style background and type, and the tagline "Music for the Rest of Us," is that their service is available to the majority: non-Mac users. Likewise, with Tommy Lee smashing the guitar, which apparently is featured in one of the Apple promos.

Now, that being said, they seem to be totally trading in on Apple's branding — if it's intended to be satire, it's way too close to the original and not really that clever; it just comes across as trying to ride on their coattails.

Sorry to hijack this thread for quality control. Is everybody still having problems?

This is a bit off topic but BuyMusic.com does not seems to be the only organization ripping Apple ads off. Here in St. Louis, a local TV station runs an ad acmpaing that is a direct copy, albeit very cheaply and pporly produced, of Apple's Switch ads. As a matter of fact, some characters talking about how this TV station changed their lives are picked to resemble, as close as possible, the people on Apple ads.

I was appalled when I saw those ads and thought that it was not possible. Then BuyMusic..com came along and, well.....

Unrelated to any branding, BuyMusic is taking more heat. From Macintouch:

Privacy policies are something I don't usually pay attention to but really should, but what buymusic.com has in theirs is just wrong. Jenett linked to Stereoboy's post where he pointed out this little tidbit from their policy: "we may disclose, sell, trade, or rent your Personally Identifiable Information to others without your consent". Not cool.

Take a look at this article.

The attempted humor is probably meant to make BuyMusic seem more approachable, but this notion is more or less drowned out by the overwhelming message that BuyMusic is a me-too idea. And that message ignores the fundamental truth that advertising is a form that's essentially antithetical to self honesty: It may be true that in real life "the rest of us" are trend-followers, not trendsetters—but none of us like to think of ourselves that way.

Right on! I like seeing this viewpoint on a Microsoft property.

So like I do music and shit with Pro Tools and design Albim covers- DVD, whatever. Anyway, I'm not using this forum as an outlet to plug my services...

Apple has like 8 Major scams and like 15 minor. (By the way, I'm using my wintel machine to type this.) The biggest is the iPod: 5 years ago I bought an MP3 player for like 90 bucks when they first came out. Mp3 players were looked down on. Anyways I've written reviews on iPod at epinions.com if you wanna read my "New Media" article. But put that scam aside, I predict Apples next move:

After Christmas everyone and thier mom will have a fucking iPod. And not only computer hardware companys like Dell and Compaq and shit will be making supped up MP3 players but the music electronics companys like Sony, Panasonic, Aiwa, JVC, RCA, Zenith, and even NIKE are pushing this fucking crap. At that time Apple crawl back into the hole it came out from and pretend like they never chargged $400 bucks for an MP3 player....But no, no...I won't forget.

After Christmas while Apple's slanging iPod batterys for the super low price of $90 bucks.(they die in like 4 months)MicroCocks will have MP3 players for the car (where musics most important), and everything will be back to normal.

The heart of the scam is in the MP3's. iTunes, Buymusic. They don't realise THE MP3 IS OURS!!! The internet used to be a paridise until corporate came into OUR world, complained about and fought MP3's in court, and then somewhere along the line said "I got an idea" and now there here slangin Time Warner music on MP3! As if people wanna listen to 40,000 songs on the headphones.

So what did I do? I bought a IBM desktop and a Sony laptop. I only use my G4 for Pro Tools and shit. But I'm waiting for that to burn out. Fuck the iPod Fuck Apple! I got my Vaio and my 80 dollar mp3 player! Fuck, all you need is a computer and a cheap mp3 player.

Ipod= $300-$400

iRock MP3 player + Lacie 80 gig Hd= $230.

I save and I also look good doing it. Because no one looks good with an iPod. Maybe to other Wacinoff users. But fuck them. They like being scammed.

In case you're wondering why I'm mad, Apple scammed me by selling me an iBook 500, that broke one month after my 1 year of Apple care expired and they dissowned me as a customer. That just scratches the surface. When ever I post on the Apple site forums: They delete them.(of course)But anyway, this model was recalled because it's logic boards couldn't handle the heat.Here's a picture of my broken iBook: HwackinOff

And I know there's someone out there to dissagree with me:

He'll say: "The iPod is more than an MP3 player its got..."

and I'll say: "I know I have one!"

And he'll say: "What?"

And I'll say: "Yea, 2 of em. I stole em' from Comp USA."

> Apple has like 8 Major scams and like 15 minor

Is this, like, an official classification for scams? Major if they really screw you and minor if they just screw you a little bit? Or how does that work?

ooohhheeee! My first post. Now I can stop being a lurker.

Anyway, my new favorite thing about the iTunes music store is the "Celebrity Playlists." Now there's only a few of them but being able to see what's in Michael Stipe's head is very interesting. I love seeing where peoples influences come from. Whether it be art, music or books. I find it fascinating.

I'm not sure if this is the appropriate thread for this topic, but since it involved blatant theft of style and brand, I think it fits.

Earlier in June, Nike unveiled the campaign graphics for its latest Nike SB (skateboarding) tour and exhibition, called Major Threat. I'm no punk or skater, so I wouldn't know to question the design. But most involved in that community knew instantly that Nike had co-opted the cover of punk band Minor Threat's 1984 self-titled album.

Needless to say, there's quite a bit of outrage regarding this, including from Minor Threat's label.

Now, co-opting corporate graphics by anti-establishment skaters and musicians is nothing new. Even that rebel Eric Clapton has used a modified version of the former DC Comics logo (probably with permission). I admit I'm not coming to mind with anything more specific, but I'm sure you can add something.

Paula Scher's been through the ringer within the design community before concerning her Herbert Matter Swatch homages (done with permission from Matter's wife). Design Observer recently went head-to-head with STEPinside magazine over a cover photograph.

So, is Nike out of line? Is the punk community, typically suspect of corporate motives, up in arms over nothing? Has Nike simply grabbed onto the aesthetic of their target audience? Is it too naked? Is it even an acceptable thing for them to have done? Yawn?