Don't read this as a defense of the company, but there hasn't really been a single, monolithic Sony for decades. Sony Music Entertainment, perpetrators of 2005's rootkit debacle, is pretty far removed from Sony Computer Entertainment, the division responsible for Playstation. Sony Electronics, makers of TVs, home theater systems, and Walkmans, is another silo, as is Sony Pictures.
Of course, every act of incompetence under the Sony name tarnishes that name, and in the marketplace, that's ultimately all that matters.
every act of incompetence under the Sony name tarnishes that name, and in the marketplace, that's ultimately all that matters
As it should. When these companies merge, buy other companies out, or execute reverse takeovers, there's always talk of "brand synergies" and all of the business advantages of having one set of products associated with another. There's absolutely no reason why that particular sword shouldn't have two edges to it.
There have been rumors that Sony Music/Pictures has "oh no, piracy!" veto power over the rest of Sony, though. Either that or every division of Sony happens to be really DRM-happy.
Sony Music's meddling is the reason Sony failed to make a successful Mp3 player, all the more remarkable because Sony created the individual portable music market and dominated it with the Walkman.
Not only that, but they're responsible for the Minidisc's failure. That could have been a really nice format, but they had to slap a bunch of restrictions on it.
Not only the DRM restrictions, but that they limited manufacturing licenses to other companies. MinkDiscs are the perfect size and a little more durable (scratch resistent) imo. It's a shame CD's won out.
Sigh. The CDs said "Sony." That means "Sony" is the party responsible for the rootkit. The goodwill (or lack thereof) accrues entirely to Sony.
As a consumer, I'm not the least bit interested in a detailed breakdown of the corporate structure. Sony pays brand managers very well to encourage me to think of it as a single monolithic company, and I'm happy to oblige.
You sigh too quickly. The CDs said "Sony BMG." The merger with BMG was in March of 2004 and the rootkit was in 2005. The reason you associate it with Sony corporate and not Bertelsmann (of Bertelsmann Music Group) is because reporters are lazy and shorten the name of the company to just Sony. Maybe Germans were boycotting magazines because that was the part of the name familiar to them. I don't recall that.
Its fair for you to say you're not interested. However, if you're going to try to boycott a company to punish them for their behavior, being aware of exactly who is responsible is a good place to start.
Bertelsmann was just as aggressive with music protection. They had to issue replacement CDs that had anti-rip software to annoyed customers in 2001 for instance. The executive in charge at the time of the fiasco came over to Sony BMG from Bertelsmann.
I worked closely with some of the people involved in it at Sony BMG. One lesson I took away from it all was that even though it was a 50-50 merger, Sony had way more name recognition and therefore more on the line. As you said, they benefit from the goodwill disproportionately and they also took the brunt of the PR damage.
Nothing much. In his defense, he's also been in charge as the industry has moved away from DRM. The music labels view computer technology as just a hammer in the toolbox. If they have a better option, they go to that.
Of course, every act of incompetence under the Sony name tarnishes that name, and in the marketplace, that's ultimately all that matters.