Allofmp3.com Wins Court Case

remove writes "Gizmodo is running a story from a reader tip that claims that the russian site Allofmp3.com, popular with slashdotters for their user selectable format which had been reported as being under investigation recently has been let off the hook by the Russian DA, becuase of a loophole in russian law which allows users create copies of songs by request. Basically, even though the courts have found their site operator's behavior to be illegal- they can't prosecute because the user dynamically creates copies of songs to be downloaded themselves."

Loophole?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not a loophole, it's the law.

This is only round one...

[WIAKywbfatw]

Expect a round two after that particular loophole in Russian copyright law has been closed. I don't see Allofmp3.com winning after that's happened, do you?

Re:Text from Gizmodo:

[akadruid]

I don't understand how it is possible for them to be 'theoretically illegal' AND 'the law can't be applied against them'. Surely if the law is not applicable, then they are legal (both theoretically and in practice)?

I will be interested to follow this case since I do not see any reason so far not to use this service from the UK. IANAL, but this does look legal so far, despite the apparent low cost. Is it possible that the RIAA and BPI (as representatives of The Big Four) have no power over this company?

Re:If it's illegal...

[BigDumbAnimal]

Why not use MP3 on an iPod? It works just fine. There isn't much of a reason to pick AAC over MP3 assuming no difference in the original source.

Re:Payment methods

[doofusclam]

I've bought loads of albums from allofmp3 without a problem. Don't think they're dodgy just because English isn't their mother tongue.

And as stated before, if only the *other* legal services had their level of service - they allow you to download unencrypted files in any format/bitrate you like, from mp3 to mpc. That makes them worth using in my opinion.

Re:Text from Gizmodo:

[swv3752]

Simple, from the DA's point of view, they are violating the spirit of the law. As they have not violated the actual letter of the law, they are ok.

At least until a new law is made.

Re:Text from Gizmodo:

[Drakin]

It's a spiritual vs letter of the law issue.

It trounces all over the spirit, but, it abides by the letter of the law.

Sure...

[Anita Coney]

You get to download great music in lossless formats at low prices... BUT... you also have to give your credit information to someone in Russia.

Is ANY song worth that?!

Mmm, Justice in Action

[jandrese]

It sounds to me like the site operators of Allofmp3 did a pretty good job of bribing whoever they needed to get the case thrown out of court.

Re:Sure...

[Anita Coney]

Heck, I'd give out my credit information to someone in Russia rather than to deal with Paypal. Those guys are REAL criminals!!!

www.paypalsucks.com

Re:Text from Gizmodo:

[Tony Hoyle]

It trounces all over the spirit, but, it abides by the letter of the law.

Ahh, so the russians have learnt western-style capitlism then :)

It's not 'theoretically illegal'. It's legal, until they change the law.

Re:good publicity...

[Laurentiu]

Dear Mr. Flamebait,
We walked down that "stealing from the artist" path before, haven't we? Hear this:

You definitely can record songs off the radio or TV (whether to a cassette or any other medium) for your personal use. This was settled aages ago by a legal case that defined such personal use of broadcast material as being ok under (U.S.) copyright law. This is not considered stealing. Furthermore, this is, as far as I can tell, the famous "loophole".

As far as I know, Internet is a broadcast medium. The question is not wheter I, as the "downloader", am "stealing" from whoever. It's the "broadcaster" - in our case AllOfMP3 - that should take care of the royalties (if any). And that only if they're applicable under russian law, because that's where the company and their ISP is located.

That being said, it should also be noted that the operation cost in Russia is bound to be lower than in U.S. Don't believe bandwidth is expensive just because you pay an overpriced bill at home.

Sincerely etc etc.

Re:Text from Gizmodo:

[JeffTL]

On the other hand it could also be viewed as requesting a copy and having it sent to you by the sharer -- which is what happens at a technical level (GET, not cp, so it's someone else's program on someone else's computer making the copy). But on the other hand, I use Amazon and iTunes. Musicians who deserve to be listened to also generally deserve their nickel. Same goes for audio engineers, producers, and anyone else involved....yes, including the executives at the record company. They have a mortgage to pay and food to buy. Record companies lose a lot of money on flops; they owe it to their investors to break even.

"Wins" Court Case?

[TheDawgLives]

It seems to me that allofmp3.com didn't win anything. The district attorney simply decided not to prosecute because he didn't think the law covered digital copies. Now at any time a new district attorney could interpret the law differently and decide to prosecute. So until allofmp3.com actually does win a court case, they aren't really safe.

Re:And this is good because?

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, it IS good because it demonstrates to the riaa that users are willing to pay for downloads and it puts pressure on them to provide a similar service for similar cost... or else lose out completely.

I personally think we should boycott all movie and music purchases until they realize that p2p distribution is something the PEOPLE want and the laws are supposed to reflect the PEOPLE's desires, not corporations (which are supposed to be accountable to the people).

Re:And this is good because? Hogwash!

[turnstyle]

"Actually, it IS good because it demonstrates to the riaa that users are willing to pay for downloads and it puts pressure on them to provide a similar service for similar cost... or else lose out completely."

Totally off-whack. The Russian site is not paying the musicians. How is a licensed service that *also* pays musicians a reasonable amount supposed provide a similar service at a similar cost? Hint: 1 + 1 <> 3

"I personally think we should boycott all movie and music purchases until they realize that p2p distribution is something the PEOPLE want and the laws are supposed to reflect the PEOPLE's desires, not corporations (which are supposed to be accountable to the people)."

Boycott is a great and reasonable reaction, provided that isn't "boycott + still download whatever I want."

Additionally, it's useless to say that you would prefer to legalize what is now unauthorized filesharing *without* also saying something about how it should work.

Do you actually want the government to install monitoring software at ISPs, which would then collect your Internet usage data, and pass it on to the entertainment industry? Because that's what it'll be like.

Does that really sound better to you?

Re:And this is good because?

[Anonymous Coward]

so it is better to pay someone, anyone, something to relieve the guilt of stealign music?

Re:It's an easy choice..

[Anonymous Coward]

I simply won't buy music from this website.

I want to support inexpensive and LEGAL channels to buy the music I want.

Has the RIAA propaganda of "Downloading music is stealing" actually worked so well that you think think this site is illegal despite what the actual legal authorities say?

Re:ID3 Tags?

[Horrortaxi]

Yes, the tags are complete and accurate. No artwork, but that's not such a hassle. Why would you have to "drop" $30 to find out if they have tags? You can pre-pay any amount you want and they even give you 20 cents credit when you sign up. Don't laugh--at 2 cents per MB 20 cents actually goes pretty far.

Re:Oh the irony

[Reality Master 101]

An awful lot of the financial build-up of the US was based on disregarding intellectual property law

Yep, the mighty economic machnine that is now the US was built on a bedrock of... sheet music.

(rolls eyes)

Re:It's an easy choice..

[poptones]

Sure the RIAA sucks and Apple is maximizing their profit. Buying tunes from an overseas source that isn't authorized to sell them doesn't help solve anything.

Neither does handing over money to the parasites who will use that money to lobby washington to erode the liberties of the citizens of this country.

You are allowing unethical laws to define your expectations of morality. That sure as hell isn't going to "help solve the problem."

Re:And this is good because?

[Overzeetop]

No, you pay for good, clean rips in the format of your choice, from an easily searchable catalog on servers with a fat pipe. FWIW, a .wav may cost you as much as the original CD in many cases.

As I understand it, they are required to pay a fee to the artist/label for each download, but most (labels/artists) are too lazy/stubburn/poor to register with the Russians. (Hint: when dealing with Russia, hire a Russian lawyer).

Re:And this is good because? Hogwash!

[compro01]

How is a licensed service that *also* pays musicians a reasonable amount supposed provide a similar service at a similar cost?

i've got a few ideas on that.

1. use P2P for the music download. it would work like bittorrent. extremely cheap, as there would be little in the way of bandwidth costs.

2. get people in charge that don't demand millions a year. cut that to maybe a few hundred grand a year.

Re:And this is good because?

[Anonymous Coward]

Are you daft man,

The artist is too lazy?

So if I all the sudden start selling software to others for pennies then tell people that if they just register with me I will give them a small cut it is their fault they are not getting paid?

Is this really what you said? I hope I misunderstood your post.

Re:good publicity...

[jkabbe]

The thing is though, that you could DOUBLE the price paid on AllOfMp3.com and give the rest to the artist. That would result in the artist getting paid about as much as they do now and the price would still be a tiny fraction of what you pay for the song on any US service.

Re:Text from Gizmodo:

[grahamm]

You want to bet on that? I think at least one website got stopped from selling cheaper foreign import CDs in the EU - CDWow.com?

This is one area of IP law which I think is in urgent need of revision. IMHO Once a copyright owner has authorised the creation of a (physical) copy (eg a CD or DVD) and it has been shipped to a retailer, then the copyright owner should have no further control of the disposition of that physical copy. If it is cheaper for a consumer (in whatever country) to pay the retail price in another country plus pay the international shipping charges and any customs duty/taxes than to buy it from a local retailer then this should be a hint to the local distribution chain that it should lower its charges. Corporations outsource their manufacture and (increasingly now also) their support to countries with cheaper labour costs, so why should the consumer not be also allowed to minimise costs by buying from cheaper sources?

Re:And this is good because?

[Shawn Parr]

And luckily musicians are mystical beasts that require no food to survive, or homes to survive in.

I am very much anti-RIAA politics, however there are very easy ways for totally independant artists to publish music via legit online services, and actually get paid for it.

Things like this are totally a slap in the face to real musicians who try to publish music independantly and give as good a product as possible in an affordable way.

I hear many complaints on /. about why should the RIAA get so much money when the artists are screwed. Then something like this comes along and much of the community is happy aboutit even though the artists are still being screwed.

I guess we really just want to take the middle man out of screwing artists when it comes down to it...

Re:Text from Gizmodo:

[cpt kangarooski]

You've missed something.

First, importation is a red herring. Importation refers to the moving across national boundaries of copies, where copies are defined as tangible objects.

If allofmp3 sent you a CD via FedEx, that would fall under the import regulations. But downloading would not. And downloading absolutely touches upon reproduction, which 602 has no bearing on (since importation is a subset of distribution, not reproduction).

Second, even if it did apply, you have -- like so many others that fail to read the whole law they cite -- found an exception to the prohibition on imports in 17 USC 602(a). The prohibition in 602(b) still applies, and you haven't cited an exception for it!

But that's all academic. Like I said, there is no importing when you download.

Re:And this is good because?

[d34thm0nk3y]

So if I all the sudden start selling software to others for pennies then tell people that if they just register with me I will give them a small cut it is their fault they are not getting paid?

Replace selling software with playing music and you have just described how radio works.