Sidebar Sidebar
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

Noneofmp3.com

nbs2

nbs2

macrumors 68030
Original poster
Mar 31, 2004
2,720
491
A geographical oddity
In a move that will likely boost sales at the iTMS (and increase pirating), Russia has agreed to shut down Allofmp3.

I'm not sure how I feel about this. If the Russian rights-holding group was indeed not authorized to distribute the copyrighted American works, then I could understand the pressure to cease that distribution. But, they also sell Russian music - which I would presume is being distributed legally. While Putin's government interfering in the free market is not surprising, it is disconcerting. Also bothersome is that the RIAA has enough clout to have set Russian policy just so that Moscow can get into the WTO.
 
nbs2 said:
In a move that will likely boost sales at the iTMS (and increase pirating), Russia has agreed to shut down Allofmp3.

But, they also sell Russian music - which I would presume is being distributed legally. While Putin's government interfering in the free market is not surprising, it is disconcerting. Also bothersome is that the RIAA has enough clout to have set Russian policy just so that Moscow can get into the WTO.
Click to expand...

Why would you presume that the lying scum were paying the Russian artists honorably?

They operated like a gangland protection scheme. "I'll steal your TV and sell it to someone else for $ 15.00. But, you can come and get the money for it, just sign a contract saying that you agree to me steaking as many of your TVs as I can, and I'll pay you $7.00 for each TV I 'sell' for you." and then "Well, if they never came around and agreed to the contract, I can hardly be blamed for keeping the money, then. See, it's all legal here, just waiting for them to sign."

The other analogy would be your boss coming to you at the end of the month and saying: "Well, I had to give the customer a deal on the work you did last month. I gave them 90% off. So instead of your paycheque for the month, I'm giving you 10% of your paycheque."

A contract cannot be imposed unilaterally.
 
CanadaRAM said:
A contract cannot be imposed unilaterally.
Click to expand...
You're right. I just would expect Putin to be a bit more ironfisted in protecting Russian artists - which would be somewhat out of character. I just would expect Moscow would have come down on the site earlier if it affected national as well as international. Also, I suppose the gangland style operation would preclude commentary, but I haven't heard any local artists complain.

That being said, this is Russia - all bets are off.
 
nbs2 said:
Also bothersome is that the RIAA has enough clout to have set Russian policy just so that Moscow can get into the WTO.
Click to expand...

It's not like the RIAA lobbied the Feds to do something that they normally wouldn't have. The US gov (and other governments that have agreed upon IP protection) spends lots of time and money combating piracy/counterfiting and part of that is using political leverage to get countries like China and Russia to clean up their acts.

I saw a really good 60 Minutes segment a couple of years ago talking about piracy/IP theft in China. The central focus of the story was on Calloway golf clubs. A company rep said that about a week after they release a new club you can find Chinese knock-off's being sold on eBay as genuine Calloway clubs. The knock-offs were so good even the rep from Calloway had a hard time telling the real club from the Chinese one.

IIRC it's almost a daily occurrence that shipping containers full of counterfeit goods get seized at the ports in LA.

Allofmp3.com is/was just another problem to be fixed. The RIAA might have lobbied to get Allofmp3.com dealt with faster than it normally would have, but they didn't get the Feds to do anything the Feds don't already do.

Anyway, I'm not gonna feel for a company who's business model it is to not pay the people who created the products the company sells.

Bets on how soon this thread turns into a flame war and gets tossed into the political section or wastelanded?


Lethal
 
Supposedly it was legit under Russian law.

As for unilaterally applied contracts, c.f. mechanical license. Additionally IP is a social construct. Its not like me playing music is stopping you from playing it.

Technology broke the model that record companies were using.

All of MP3 had the right model. Their payments to artists perhaps could have been better, but...

On topic we might see them relocate to Aruba. Aruba has a case in front of the WTO about unfair trade practices and there is a chance that they may be allowed to disregard US IP laws.
 
MongoTheGeek said:
Supposedly it was legit under Russian law.
Click to expand...
IIRC, the argument that Allofmp3 made was since they don't distribute a physical product but "broadcast" over the internet they should fall under the same guidelines that b'casters (like radio stations) do. There is grey area in the Russian law and that's where Allofmp3 was hiding.


Lethal
 
LethalWolfe said:
IIRC, the argument that Allofmp3 made was since they don't distribute a physical product but "broadcast" over the internet they should fall under the same guidelines that b'casters (like radio stations) do. There is grey area in the Russian law and that's where Allofmp3 was hiding.


Lethal
Click to expand...

Reading their webpage, they seem to be using the Russian version of a compulsory mechanical license. A quick google suggests that the rates for which in the US are the greater of 9.1 Cents per track or 1.75 cents per minute. AllOfMP3 pays the licensing company 15% of the gross not sure what that works out to.
 
MongoTheGeek said:
Reading their webpage, they seem to be using the Russian version of a compulsory mechanical license. A quick google suggests that the rates for which in the US are the greater of 9.1 Cents per track or 1.75 cents per minute. AllOfMP3 pays the licensing company 15% of the gross not sure what that works out to.
Click to expand...
Although I don't think the best place to get a straight answer is from the company's own site I did browse their FAQ briefly. There are so many instances of "in our view", "in our interpretation", and "we believe" that, in my interpretation, they are full of sh*t, know they are full of sh*t, and are doing a great job weaseling thru grey and ambiguous areas of national and international law to try and keep their business from going to sh*t.;)


Lethal
 
LethalWolfe said:
Although I don't think the best place to get a straight answer is from the company's own site I did browse their FAQ briefly. There are so many instances of "in our view", "in our interpretation", and "we believe" that, in my interpretation, they are full of sh*t, know they are full of sh*t, and are doing a great job weaseling thru grey and ambiguous areas of national and international law to try and keep their business from going to sh*t.;)


Lethal
Click to expand...

I would guess that the "in our view" is backed by legal opinion. It is/was a substantial enough operation. I'm sure they could afford lawyers. Lawyers weasel through grey and ambiguous areas - I know this. I'm training to be one. It's playing with the law, but the argument is pretty cogent and it's clear enough that it is legal in Russia. As to whether it's legal in the US is debatable, but the importation argument is possibly enough.

It will be interesting if Russia joins the EU, because then everyone in the EU will have the right by law to avail of the service.
 
MongoTheGeek said:
Reading their webpage, they seem to be using the Russian version of a compulsory mechanical license. A quick google suggests that the rates for which in the US are the greater of 9.1 Cents per track or 1.75 cents per minute. AllOfMP3 pays the licensing company 15% of the gross not sure what that works out to.
Click to expand...

Since they were advertising tracks as little as 3 cents each, that would be a little under half a penny for the copyright holder.

Compulsary mechanical licensing only exists where there is a legal structure for it, and statutory rates. You can't argue it both ways, that they could operate because of an absence of Russian laws, yet they can compel a unilateral contract under a particular US law.

HOWEVER: The whole argument is non functional, because the mechanical license applies only to the composition, not the performance. The theives were NOT recording their own cover versions.

" any other party may "cover" or re-record the same musical composition by obtaining a compulsory mechanical license"

They were stealing the recorded performance of the performing artist, as well as the copyrighted lyrics and musical composition. So compulsary licensing doesn't pertain.

Their deal was that Performing Rights Organizations in each country collect royalties on behalf of copyright holders and performers. So they set up their own PRO, decided on the royalty rate that they would charge themselves (15% of nearly nothing), proceeded to steal music and sell it, and then said : "Oh no, the artists and songwriters' shares are being collected by the Russian Performing Rights organization XYZ and being held for them. All the copyright holders have to do is sign a binding agreement with XYZ and collect their royalties. All legal under Russian law". Of course no publishing company in their right mind would sign and legitimize this.

It's about as legal as you or I buying a photo-radar gun, putting up a 15 MPH sign along a stretch of highway, and demanding payment from every car that goes through.
 
j26 said:
It was mooted a couple of years ago. I can see it happening at some stage, albeit not in the near future.
Click to expand...

I can't see it happening ever. Maybe in 50-100 years. And mooted by who? I know it's been discussed by journalists and think-tank types, but I don't think any governments have supported the idea.

And I'm not a lawyer, so I don't know anything about the legal specifics, but when I lived in Russia I don't remember seeing anything for sale that wasn't pirated.
 
Great the allofmp3 owners are "gangsters" the point behind all this is what they are doing is legal under Russian law (if it wasn't there has been plenty of time to take them to court) so how's Putin going to shut them down,change the law or do it by force,let me guess.If anyone's acting like gangsters here it's the **AA,the credit card companies and the US government.
 
CanadaRAM said:
Since they were advertising tracks as little as 3 cents each, that would be a little under half a penny for the copyright holder.

Compulsary mechanical licensing only exists where there is a legal structure for it, and statutory rates. You can't argue it both ways, that they could operate because of an absence of Russian laws, yet they can compel a unilateral contract under a particular US law.
Click to expand...

I was drawing a parallel to the US Compulsory license. They claim there is a Russian framework for it, and despite what spammers think, I don't speak Russian, so I have to take their word for it that the law exists.

CanadaRAM said:
HOWEVER: The whole argument is non functional, because the mechanical license applies only to the composition, not the performance. The theives were NOT recording their own cover versions.

" any other party may "cover" or re-record the same musical composition by obtaining a compulsory mechanical license"


They were stealing the recorded performance of the performing artist, as well as the copyrighted lyrics and musical composition. So compulsary licensing doesn't pertain.
Click to expand...

Okay. I wasn't aware that it didn't pertain to performances, only the music itself. I was wondering why Apple was paying 10x the statutory rates. Such a law could be made though.

CanadaRAM said:
Their deal was that Performing Rights Organizations in each country collect royalties on behalf of copyright holders and performers. So they set up their own PRO, decided on the royalty rate that they would charge themselves (15% of nearly nothing), proceeded to steal music and sell it, and then said : "Oh no, the artists and songwriters' shares are being collected by the Russian Performing Rights organization XYZ and being held for them. All the copyright holders have to do is sign a binding agreement with XYZ and collect their royalties. All legal under Russian law". Of course no publishing company in their right mind would sign and legitimize this.
Click to expand...

But their PRO was sanctioned by the Russian government. Not saying they aren't gangsters, that they didn't pay off the Russian government, or that the Russian government isn't gangsters but its kosher with Russian laws.

CanadaRAM said:
It's about as legal as you or I buying a photo-radar gun, putting up a 15 MPH sign along a stretch of highway, and demanding payment from every car that goes through.
Click to expand...

Hey, if the mayor would give me permission I would set up a speed camera in front of my house.

/whats the symptoms of polonium poisoning again?
//even at 15% I'll rake in money with the camera.
 
j26 said:
I would guess that the "in our view" is backed by legal opinion. It is/was a substantial enough operation. I'm sure they could afford lawyers.
Click to expand...
Oh yeah, the FAQ on their site was totally written by a legal team. No normal human being could write that w/o getting a brain cramp. ;)

Peterkro said:
Great the allofmp3 owners are "gangsters" the point behind all this is what they are doing is legal under Russian law (if it wasn't there has been plenty of time to take them to court) so how's Putin going to shut them down,change the law or do it by force,let me guess.If anyone's acting like gangsters here it's the **AA,the credit card companies and the US government.
Click to expand...
The RIAA/record labels rip off the artists and are bad. Allofmp3.com rips off the artists and is good.:confused:
Hmm.

Makes me wonder if some people really care about the artists at all or just care about their own wallets.


Lethal
 
"Artists" being a very odd word for the people who are multi-millionaires on the back of huge PR teams.If you want to support artists I should think supporting the UK Musicians Union "keep music live" campaign would be the way to go (or the similar organisations around the world).If giving money to the Music Mafia is supporting artists count me out.
 
LethalWolfe said:
Oh yeah, the FAQ on their site was totally written by a legal team. No normal human being could write that w/o getting a brain cramp. ;)...
Click to expand...

It's a pretty sophisticated analysis of English language statutes for Russian speakers, you have to admit. Their English schools must be excellent :rolleyes:
 
nbs2 said:
In a move that will likely boost sales at the iTMS (and increase pirating), Russia has agreed to shut down Allofmp3.

I'm not sure how I feel about this. If the Russian rights-holding group was indeed not authorized to distribute the copyrighted American works, then I could understand the pressure to cease that distribution. But, they also sell Russian music - which I would presume is being distributed legally. While Putin's government interfering in the free market is not surprising, it is disconcerting. Also bothersome is that the RIAA has enough clout to have set Russian policy just so that Moscow can get into the WTO.
Click to expand...

About time,
 
Peterkro said:
"Artists" being a very odd word for the people who are multi-millionaires on the back of huge PR teams.
Click to expand...
Because everyone signed to a major label is a multi-millionare riding on the back of a huge PR team.:rolleyes:

If you want to support artists I should think supporting the UK Musicians Union "keep music live" campaign would be the way to go (or the similar organisations around the world).
Click to expand...
I support artists big and small by buying their CDs, going to their shows, telling my friends about them, and picking up a t-shirt or two. When possible I also try and use unsigned bands in projects I work on (not that that's a huge boon for them or anything, but it does get help get their music heard by more people).

If giving money to the Music Mafia is supporting artists count me out.
Click to expand...
Funny. I feel the same way about acquiring music in ways that negatively impact the people that create the music I love to listen to.


Lethal
 
mannix87 said:
wow. the RIAA is really working overtime. I wonder though if theyre doing this for the artists or the big record labels
Click to expand...

They (and the governments that are signatories to the international conventions on copyright) are doing this to protect the people and companies who have the legal ownership of the property.

You may as well say sarcastically that the courts are only out to protect the big corporations when they convict a thief of shoplifting from 7-11.

Or when Customs intercepts a containerload of fake iPods.
 
Peterkro said:
"Artists" being a very odd word for the people who are multi-millionaires on the back of huge PR teams.If you want to support artists I should think supporting the UK Musicians Union "keep music live" campaign would be the way to go (or the similar organisations around the world).If giving money to the Music Mafia is supporting artists count me out.
Click to expand...

"Artists" being an odd word for the people who create original art??

Enough already with the "They're so stinkin' rich that..." arguments. Protecting copyright also protects every songwriter and band that writes and records music. Including the vast majority of those who are just getting by and trying to make a living while recording and playing. And whose ability to do so is damaged with every unlicensed logo T-Shirt that is hawked, and with every person who downloads a unlicensed MP3 instead of buying the CD.

Yes, support live musicians, and stop pretending there is a divide between your favorite band and your least favorite successful star, when it comes to defending their rights.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.
Top Bottom
Back