8 ms·

> inMusic isn't free from controversy. Formed in 2012 by Jack O'Donnell, a former vice-president at DJ equipment brand Stanton > Roger Linn, who made many grou

by scns 3y ago

> inMusic isn't free from controversy. Formed in 2012 by Jack O'Donnell, a former vice-president at DJ equipment brand Stanton > Roger Linn, who made many ground-breaking drum machines in the '80s before creating the MPC 60 for Akai, has accused O'Donnell of failing to pay him royalties after acquiring Akai, repeatedly calling him unscrupulous and a "bastard" in interviews. Is it absolutely necessary to fuck people over to get to the top? Would love to get some counterexamples.

throw_m239339 3y ago
"Business is war"... there are very little ethical businessmen out there so you're swimming among sharks and think that it becomes a game of ripping off each others. I've seen some pretty nasty stuff done in order to maximize profit... I don't want to be negative but there is a reason why these jobs attract a certain... profile... or if you can't "adapt" quickly, you're done. Of course some small shops still exist when it comes to synths, especially in Europe where one manufacturer can make direct deals with European retailers, that's why the Eurorack module format is a thing. But these aren't "maximizing their profit". It's a scene that has loyal customers that are ready to pay a bit more for ethical purposes. Does the market tend to find "inefficient" areas and someone comes in and "maximize efficiency"? I think Behringer is trying to catch all revenue in that space... edit: changed some phrasing.
- JodieBenitez 3y ago
  > Does the market tend to find "inefficient" areas and someone comes in and "maximize efficiency"? I think Behringer is trying to vacuum all revenue in that space... Yes. Behringer, from the start, was always about copying other brands and offer products to a larger audience through low prices. They used to do so with results of questionable quality... but not anymore. Their output in the synthesizers department has been excellent: low prices, good quality, good sound. They still rip off other brands for 95% of their stuff though... there is absolutely no imagination there. They see what works well in the market, come with a much cheaper version with a different (or not so much) design and it's done. Latest release, a Moog rip-off: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5LADPPcaN0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5LADPPcaN0
  - elihu 3y ago
    At least with Edge and Crave they changed the UI so someone wouldn't necessarily know it's a clone unless they were familiar with both synths. I kind of wonder if this was an intentional decision for Behringer or if Moog trademarked their interface and thus forced Behringer to do something different?
    - navane 3y ago
      the advantage of keeping the UI the same is that you don't have to relearn a new interface.
    - JodieBenitez 3y ago
      I don't know... but they didn't change much the UI for many older synths. Maybe some kind of patent expiration at play here ? I'm not into legal matters.
      - elihu 3y ago
        I suppose the interface might be covered by design patents, which are sort of like trademarks. I doubt it would be covered by a utility patent unless there was something really unusual about the interface. At any rate, patents expire after 20 years, and trademarks do not. Copyright could theoretically come into play, but I think the "look and feel" lawsuit pretty much established that it's pretty darned hard to enforce any kind of copyright on a user interface. Some of the very old synths that Behringer has been cloning were probably protected by utility patents that covered the electrical circuits, but those have long expired, and I think trademarks become unenforceable if your aren't actively selling a product that uses it anymore. I don't have any moral objection to cloning the old synths either -- our laws have mechanisms to grant inventors exclusive use of their ideas for a limited time, but when that expires it's part of the commons. That's a good thing. I do think it's gross though to clone a popular recent synth just because you can and because the original designer didn't file the right paperwork to stop other people from doing that. There's a continuous flamewar on /r/synthesizers between the people who think Behringer is a detestable parasite and the people who think they're making high-quality analog synthesizers available to the masses in a way that they never have before. I think both camps are right to a degree. I will defend Behringer's right to use the stuff that's clearly in the public domain, but I also think they have no class. They do things that damage their reputation even when it wouldn't have required much effort not to. (I'm not an IP lawyer, so don't take this as expert commentary.)
- Dalewyn 3y ago
  >"Business is war"... The one I heard (and love because it's true) is that business is the art of ripping someone off without pissing them off. And for the ones still naive to not really understand what I mean: "Costs of labor", "handling fees", and similar line items in an invoice are merely an inverse reflection of how generous the guy billing you feels at that moment.
tommiegannert 3y ago
Another possibility is that you become a target for more acts of attempted greed if you get to the top. I don't know anything about this particular case.
iamben 3y ago
Couple of relevant PG essays: http://www.paulgraham.com/mean.html http://www.paulgraham.com/mean.html http://www.paulgraham.com/safe.html http://www.paulgraham.com/safe.html
- wahnfrieden 3y ago
  Is that his essay that talks about how lisp knowledge can save future 9/11 attacks from happening? That’s a favorite of mine. Written right after the attacks. But I wonder why he delisted it while still hosting the essay to make it hard to find but still accessible
  - tjr225 3y ago
    [dead]
  - kazinator 3y ago
    You are almost certainly referring to this: https://www.paulgraham.com/hijack.html https://www.paulgraham.com/hijack.html Paul Graham compares the hijacking of an airplane to a buffer overflow attack. He doesn't claim that tools for writing more secure computer programs could prevent terrorists from hijacking a plane. He proposes the idea that some similar reasoning can be applied to preventing hijackings. It's not enough to monitor who gets on the airplane carrying what, but to separate the cockpit space from the passenger space.
    - wahnfrieden 3y ago
      I know, that’s what I said his essay was about: Lisp knowledge would have prevented 9/11 and can prevent future hijacking attacks. Thanks for providing additional details - it's a treat to re-read his thoughts on 9/11
      - kazinator 3y ago
        Likewise, knowledge of effective hijacking prevention techniques could be relevant in defensive program and system organization. I don't think his point is very good because array overruns in a heap can be exploitable. Lisps (and other kinds of run-times) don't necessarily separate code from data in their heaps.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
Doctor_Fegg 3y ago
Whether or not it's necessary, it's common in the music production business. There are several egregious examples, Gibson Guitar being perhaps the best known.
- 8bitsrule 3y ago
  My opinion of Gibson was permanently formed when they bought Opcode and its brilliant Vision software (tens of thousands of customers) then just made sure that it died.
- sireat 3y ago
  Gibson took over an audio startup a relative of mine had co-founded. Gibson offered extremely promising terms - funding, keep creative freedom, just deliver cool products. The startup delivered the products and met the goals -just in time for Gibson to go bankrupt. Inside Gibson there was endless corporate infighting. - an executive that was championing the acquisition of the startup was fired - the support was basically nonexistant afterwards (no marketing, nothing)
  - tnecniv 3y ago
    It’s been a pretty open secret that Gibson has been a hot mess internally for quite a while. At one point the CEO said he saw them more as a lifestyle brand than a guitar brand, like how Harley Davidson tries to position itself in motorcycles (I don’t know anything about motorcycles so maybe I’m wrong but that was the comparison going around). The best thing that Gibson has done recently has been to unify the Epiphone (their budget brand) line up with their lineup, and Epiphone’s quality has been a lot better since then in my experience. Now you can buy a relatively cheap Epiphone, slap some good aftermarket pickups in it, and have a really great Gibson-style guitar for a lot less than a Gibson.
  - shams93 3y ago
    Yup there's another example of what I think of as the "hedge fund" approach. Sweetwater started as a neighborhood music store, now its owned by a hedge fund, guys who may not even like music. Bob Moog and Roger Linn loved music and it showed in their product. But just like these other examples this isn't the end of the Moog sound, especially since they also now own all the moog software synthesis products you can expect moog to land into the akai mpc line.
irjustin 3y ago
> has accused O'Donnell of failing to pay him royalties after acquiring Akai, repeatedly calling him unscrupulous and a "bastard" in interviews. This seems extremely straight forward to sue against? Basically the claim is either never paid for specific sales (very easy to win) or stated number of sales is lower than expected (requires lots of disclosure). OR, maybe he did win in court and they simply ignored the court order?
- arethuza 3y ago
  Perhaps they use the "Hollywood Accounting" trick of promising payments based on profits then arranging things so that no profits are actually made?
  - dylan604 3y ago
    I know this is the saying, but why is Hollywood given the dubious honors? Wouldn't it be just as accurate to say Business Accounting?
    - arethuza 3y ago
      Probably because they seem to have the most egregious examples based on works that seem to everyone else to be pretty successful? "the Tolkien estate sued New Line, claiming that their contract entitled them to 7.5% of the gross receipts of the $6 billion hit.[23] According to New Line's accounts, the trilogy made "horrendous losses" and no profit at all." I think most people would find it surprising that both Return of the Jedi and the Lord of the Rings movies failed to make a profit? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting
      - TheOtherHobbes 3y ago
        Points on the gross receipts are not points on the profits. The fact that the trilogy was supposedly unprofitable shouldn't be relevant.
nonstopdev 3y ago
I feel like if you are making it to the higher echelons of success, you typically have this type of track record. A lot of companies start small by people who like what they do. It’s the business leader or visionary who sees the future and how to apply it on the larger scale usually leaving the loyalty and honor behind and doing what’s best for them and their company.
- vngzs 3y ago
  See the movie Blackberry[0] for a dramatic telling of this. [0]: https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/blackberry https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/blackberry
  - nebula8804 3y ago
    Just keep in mind that the movie is supposedly quite unfactual and the characters are portrayed very differently than they were in real life. In fact the co-ceo: Mike Lazaridis seems to want nothing to do with the film. [1]: Interview with Jim Basille: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_VDXLJA8dA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_VDXLJA8dA [2]: ex-blackberry employee reviews film: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4yuqdr_1iRg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4yuqdr_1iRg
rtkwe 3y ago
Pretty much. Capitalism is one big funnel of extraction so to get ahead of competitors you need some big advantage and one of the easiest to get in the US is just not paying people who can't afford to fight you over it in court.
masklinn 3y ago
> Is it absolutely necessary to fuck people over to get to the top? It’s not necessary but it’s so much easier.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

by scns 3y ago

throw_m239339 3y ago

"Business is war"... there are very little ethical businessmen out there so you're swimming among sharks and think that it becomes a game of ripping off each others. I've seen some pretty nasty stuff done in order to maximize profit... I don't want to be negative but there is a reason why these jobs attract a certain... profile... or if you can't "adapt" quickly, you're done. Of course some small shops still exist when it comes to synths, especially in Europe where one manufacturer can make direct deals with European retailers, that's why the Eurorack module format is a thing. But these aren't "maximizing their profit". It's a scene that has loyal customers that are ready to pay a bit more for ethical purposes. Does the market tend to find "inefficient" areas and someone comes in and "maximize efficiency"? I think Behringer is trying to catch all revenue in that space... edit: changed some phrasing.

JodieBenitez 3y ago
> Does the market tend to find "inefficient" areas and someone comes in and "maximize efficiency"? I think Behringer is trying to vacuum all revenue in that space... Yes. Behringer, from the start, was always about copying other brands and offer products to a larger audience through low prices. They used to do so with results of questionable quality... but not anymore. Their output in the synthesizers department has been excellent: low prices, good quality, good sound. They still rip off other brands for 95% of their stuff though... there is absolutely no imagination there. They see what works well in the market, come with a much cheaper version with a different (or not so much) design and it's done. Latest release, a Moog rip-off: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5LADPPcaN0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5LADPPcaN0
- elihu 3y ago
  At least with Edge and Crave they changed the UI so someone wouldn't necessarily know it's a clone unless they were familiar with both synths. I kind of wonder if this was an intentional decision for Behringer or if Moog trademarked their interface and thus forced Behringer to do something different?
  - navane 3y ago
    the advantage of keeping the UI the same is that you don't have to relearn a new interface.
  - JodieBenitez 3y ago
    I don't know... but they didn't change much the UI for many older synths. Maybe some kind of patent expiration at play here ? I'm not into legal matters.
    - elihu 3y ago
      I suppose the interface might be covered by design patents, which are sort of like trademarks. I doubt it would be covered by a utility patent unless there was something really unusual about the interface. At any rate, patents expire after 20 years, and trademarks do not. Copyright could theoretically come into play, but I think the "look and feel" lawsuit pretty much established that it's pretty darned hard to enforce any kind of copyright on a user interface. Some of the very old synths that Behringer has been cloning were probably protected by utility patents that covered the electrical circuits, but those have long expired, and I think trademarks become unenforceable if your aren't actively selling a product that uses it anymore. I don't have any moral objection to cloning the old synths either -- our laws have mechanisms to grant inventors exclusive use of their ideas for a limited time, but when that expires it's part of the commons. That's a good thing. I do think it's gross though to clone a popular recent synth just because you can and because the original designer didn't file the right paperwork to stop other people from doing that. There's a continuous flamewar on /r/synthesizers between the people who think Behringer is a detestable parasite and the people who think they're making high-quality analog synthesizers available to the masses in a way that they never have before. I think both camps are right to a degree. I will defend Behringer's right to use the stuff that's clearly in the public domain, but I also think they have no class. They do things that damage their reputation even when it wouldn't have required much effort not to. (I'm not an IP lawyer, so don't take this as expert commentary.)
Dalewyn 3y ago
>"Business is war"... The one I heard (and love because it's true) is that business is the art of ripping someone off without pissing them off. And for the ones still naive to not really understand what I mean: "Costs of labor", "handling fees", and similar line items in an invoice are merely an inverse reflection of how generous the guy billing you feels at that moment.

tommiegannert 3y ago

Another possibility is that you become a target for more acts of attempted greed if you get to the top. I don't know anything about this particular case.

iamben 3y ago

Couple of relevant PG essays: http://www.paulgraham.com/mean.html http://www.paulgraham.com/mean.html http://www.paulgraham.com/safe.html http://www.paulgraham.com/safe.html

wahnfrieden 3y ago
Is that his essay that talks about how lisp knowledge can save future 9/11 attacks from happening? That’s a favorite of mine. Written right after the attacks. But I wonder why he delisted it while still hosting the essay to make it hard to find but still accessible
- tjr225 3y ago
  [dead]
- kazinator 3y ago
  You are almost certainly referring to this: https://www.paulgraham.com/hijack.html https://www.paulgraham.com/hijack.html Paul Graham compares the hijacking of an airplane to a buffer overflow attack. He doesn't claim that tools for writing more secure computer programs could prevent terrorists from hijacking a plane. He proposes the idea that some similar reasoning can be applied to preventing hijackings. It's not enough to monitor who gets on the airplane carrying what, but to separate the cockpit space from the passenger space.
  - wahnfrieden 3y ago
    I know, that’s what I said his essay was about: Lisp knowledge would have prevented 9/11 and can prevent future hijacking attacks. Thanks for providing additional details - it's a treat to re-read his thoughts on 9/11
    - kazinator 3y ago
      Likewise, knowledge of effective hijacking prevention techniques could be relevant in defensive program and system organization. I don't think his point is very good because array overruns in a heap can be exploitable. Lisps (and other kinds of run-times) don't necessarily separate code from data in their heaps.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

Doctor_Fegg 3y ago

Whether or not it's necessary, it's common in the music production business. There are several egregious examples, Gibson Guitar being perhaps the best known.

8bitsrule 3y ago
My opinion of Gibson was permanently formed when they bought Opcode and its brilliant Vision software (tens of thousands of customers) then just made sure that it died.
sireat 3y ago
Gibson took over an audio startup a relative of mine had co-founded. Gibson offered extremely promising terms - funding, keep creative freedom, just deliver cool products. The startup delivered the products and met the goals -just in time for Gibson to go bankrupt. Inside Gibson there was endless corporate infighting. - an executive that was championing the acquisition of the startup was fired - the support was basically nonexistant afterwards (no marketing, nothing)
- tnecniv 3y ago
  It’s been a pretty open secret that Gibson has been a hot mess internally for quite a while. At one point the CEO said he saw them more as a lifestyle brand than a guitar brand, like how Harley Davidson tries to position itself in motorcycles (I don’t know anything about motorcycles so maybe I’m wrong but that was the comparison going around). The best thing that Gibson has done recently has been to unify the Epiphone (their budget brand) line up with their lineup, and Epiphone’s quality has been a lot better since then in my experience. Now you can buy a relatively cheap Epiphone, slap some good aftermarket pickups in it, and have a really great Gibson-style guitar for a lot less than a Gibson.
- shams93 3y ago
  Yup there's another example of what I think of as the "hedge fund" approach. Sweetwater started as a neighborhood music store, now its owned by a hedge fund, guys who may not even like music. Bob Moog and Roger Linn loved music and it showed in their product. But just like these other examples this isn't the end of the Moog sound, especially since they also now own all the moog software synthesis products you can expect moog to land into the akai mpc line.

irjustin 3y ago

> has accused O'Donnell of failing to pay him royalties after acquiring Akai, repeatedly calling him unscrupulous and a "bastard" in interviews. This seems extremely straight forward to sue against? Basically the claim is either never paid for specific sales (very easy to win) or stated number of sales is lower than expected (requires lots of disclosure). OR, maybe he did win in court and they simply ignored the court order?

arethuza 3y ago
Perhaps they use the "Hollywood Accounting" trick of promising payments based on profits then arranging things so that no profits are actually made?
- dylan604 3y ago
  I know this is the saying, but why is Hollywood given the dubious honors? Wouldn't it be just as accurate to say Business Accounting?
  - arethuza 3y ago
    Probably because they seem to have the most egregious examples based on works that seem to everyone else to be pretty successful? "the Tolkien estate sued New Line, claiming that their contract entitled them to 7.5% of the gross receipts of the $6 billion hit.[23] According to New Line's accounts, the trilogy made "horrendous losses" and no profit at all." I think most people would find it surprising that both Return of the Jedi and the Lord of the Rings movies failed to make a profit? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hollywood_accounting
    - TheOtherHobbes 3y ago
      Points on the gross receipts are not points on the profits. The fact that the trilogy was supposedly unprofitable shouldn't be relevant.

nonstopdev 3y ago

I feel like if you are making it to the higher echelons of success, you typically have this type of track record. A lot of companies start small by people who like what they do. It’s the business leader or visionary who sees the future and how to apply it on the larger scale usually leaving the loyalty and honor behind and doing what’s best for them and their company.

vngzs 3y ago
See the movie Blackberry[0] for a dramatic telling of this. [0]: https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/blackberry https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/blackberry
- nebula8804 3y ago
  Just keep in mind that the movie is supposedly quite unfactual and the characters are portrayed very differently than they were in real life. In fact the co-ceo: Mike Lazaridis seems to want nothing to do with the film. [1]: Interview with Jim Basille: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_VDXLJA8dA https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_VDXLJA8dA [2]: ex-blackberry employee reviews film: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4yuqdr_1iRg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4yuqdr_1iRg

rtkwe 3y ago

Pretty much. Capitalism is one big funnel of extraction so to get ahead of competitors you need some big advantage and one of the easiest to get in the US is just not paying people who can't afford to fight you over it in court.

masklinn 3y ago

> Is it absolutely necessary to fuck people over to get to the top? It’s not necessary but it’s so much easier.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]