Facebook   Twitter    YouTube    RSS Feed    Android App    iPhone and iPad App     BlackBerry App    
Subscribe to Newsletter



Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 12 3 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 45

Thread: Russian music download site sends defiant message to US

  1. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BobJones View Post
    Your claims of piracy are unfounded.
    The site claims to operate under current legitimate Russian law, and under license.
    Prove me wrong then. Show me how they're complying with the current copyright law and how it has any legal basis in SA. Remember, the law changed back in Sept.
    Quote Originally Posted by BobJones View Post
    Its very different from trawling a newserver or torrent site.
    No malware
    No archived password click scams
    No hiss, crackle or pop
    CD quality downloads or better
    Download manager with resume
    Support desk (with people not autoresponders)
    I've never had a corrupt or otherwise infected file from a news server.
    "Le mieux est l'ennemi du bien." FM Arouet
    "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." Edmund Burke
    "Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience" Unknown
    Ron White was right

  2. #17

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JStrike View Post
    simple_simon : If I take a copy of Adobe Photoshop and starts making millions of copies and start selling them at R10 a copy and offer to give Adobe R2 a copy, it is still pirating. The people buying it are just stupid enough to pay for pirated software.
    The artists and record companies have categorically not given them permission to do this and if they start accepting allodmp3's pittance of a "royalty" then it adds legitimacy. So that it why they do not accept the token amount.
    Make no mistake, you are paying for pirated music.
    Not so...

    allofmp3 has a license to distribute music. There is a dispute between the issuers of that license and the site as to what the license allows them to do.

    AFAIK they are using a license that is normally used to license broadcasters (radio stations). The law in Russia apperently does not prohibit them from using that license to resell the music, hence the dispute. And the court cases.
    So far allofmp3 have won the court cases, but obviously the RIAA and others are still not happy and are lobbying the US government to protect their revenues.
    If they accept the royalties from allofmp3 they will weaken their case.

    Happy downloading.

  3. #18

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bwana v.19 View Post
    Prove me wrong then. Show me how they're complying with the current copyright law and how it has any legal basis in SA.
    I'm sorry... the onus is on *you* to prove me wrong. There is the little matter of the constituitional right of the presumption of innocence.

    Quote Originally Posted by bwana v.19 View Post
    Remember, the law changed back in Sept. I've never had a corrupt or otherwise infected file from a news server.
    And I don't have random shutdown syndrome on my mac. But some people do.

    Anything else?

  4. #19

    Default

    BobJones : Just because you live in a country that allows you to make unlimited copies of Photoshop and then sell them for R10, doesn't mean it is not piracy or unethical. It just makes it legal in russia, but still unethical as it amounts to stealing. It is pirated music. They have no permission from the artists or the lables representing the artists to sell their music. Hence all the lawsuits

  5. #20

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JStrike View Post
    BobJones : Just because you live in a country that allows you to make unlimited copies of Photoshop and then sell them for R10, doesn't mean it is not piracy or unethical. It just makes it legal in russia, but still unethical as it amounts to stealing. It is pirated music. They have no permission from the artists or the lables representing the artists to sell their music. Hence all the lawsuits
    No... they have a license. They have a dispute with the license issuer. In fact they were busy renegotiating the terms of the licenses recently... apparently it did not go well.
    You make think it is unethical, but it really just business. The license holders made a bad deal, and now they want to get out of it, and name calling is one of the ways they want to help them to do that.

    Are you really saying that if I go to a hash coffee shop in Amsterdam, have a joint and come back to SA, I should feel bad 'cuz I acted unethically, since it is illegal here?

  6. #21

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BobJones View Post
    I'm sorry... the onus is on *you* to prove me wrong. There is the little matter of the constituitional right of the presumption of innocence.
    From their site
    The user bears sole responsibility for any use and distribution of all materials received from AllOFMP3.com. This responsibility is dependent on the national legislation in each user's country of residence. The Administration of AllOFMP3.com does not possess information on the laws of each particular country and is not responsible for the actions of foreign users.
    So thats pretty clear - the law as applicable in SA - as far as the RISA is concerned
    What is Piracy?

    The official definition is the unauthorised recording of a piece of music without the authority of the copyright owner.
    Do you possess a recording as authorised by the copyright owner?

    I'm not siding with the RIAA or anyone like that - they're the biggest crooks of them all - I just think it is stupid to pay for pirated music.
    Quote Originally Posted by BobJones View Post
    Are you really saying that if I go to a hash coffee shop in Amsterdam, have a joint and come back to SA, I should feel bad 'cuz I acted unethically, since it is illegal here?
    No - the question is would you bring it back and smoke it here? After all you're listening to the music here - not there.

    BTW - the onus is on you not to break the law in the first place regardless of the presumption of innocence. Ignorance of the law is not a defence.
    Last edited by bwana; 18-10-2006 at 01:36 PM.
    "Le mieux est l'ennemi du bien." FM Arouet
    "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing." Edmund Burke
    "Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level, then beat you with experience" Unknown
    Ron White was right

  7. #22

    Default

    Bwana:

    RISA is entitled to their position. But so am I.

    For the purposes of argument - I made a transaction in a foreign jurisdiction for a product purported to be legal, and imported it to SA.
    *IF* it is proven to be extra-legal in that jurisdiction at some date in the future, I still acted as a reasonable man would - by accepting the assurances of the seller.
    Notwithstanding - the seller knows there is a risk that it could loose the legal battles and so is indemnifying itself from claims I my make at a later date.

    So *if* all of this comes to pass, I'll take the chance of being hunted down by rabid copyright crusaders looking to punish me for daring to challenge their tyranny - and that will be my bag.

    In the mean time I rest easy with the notion that the SONY/EMI/BMG executives, Madonna and Nelly Furtado will not be starving to death anytime soon as I pull down another crystal clear and *cheap* legal download.

  8. #23

    Default

    They have a licence with a sudo organisation that is not recognised by the owners of the music (the artists) or by the owners of the recording (the label). The licence they hold is a farce.

    If SA law gives me the right to give licences to software I do not own such as Adobe Photoshop, and then I give you a licence to go and make millions of copies and sell them and R10 a piece and give me R2 a sales, it might be legal in SA, but it is still highly unethical and is blatent piracy

  9. #24

    Default

    Whatever. If you want to pay for music where not a cent goes to the Artist or Label, then go ahead

  10. #25
    Super Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Afreek du Zuid - KZN - Ramsgate.
    Posts
    10,531

    Default

    JStrike ... did you even read the article ?
    They pay loyalties to R.O.M.S.
    ROMS has tried to pay the publishers their royalites, and the publishers have refused to accept the payments from ROMS.

    Obviously if the publishers do accept the payment, then they are endorsing the sale of MP3's online by this company, which they don't want to do cos they are greedy bastardoez, and the company is "undercharging".

    So .. now what ?

  11. #26

    Talking

    I BobJones, having unilateral and absolute domain over all Bobdom, revoke your right to exist and all claims to Bobosity, and demand you worship at the alter of my greatness (and pay me royalty fees based on the depth and duration of each kowtow, and for all kowtowing -present past and future - that you may have made to any other false image of Bob that does not meet my unique and changeable measure of Bobbyness!)
    Go forth and pay you heathen!
    Last edited by BobJones; 18-10-2006 at 02:04 PM. Reason: oops

  12. #27
    Super Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Cambridge
    Posts
    13,424

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bwana v.19 View Post
    The world needs russia and all of its oil.

    Anyway - if your stupid enough to actually pay for pirated music then good for you.
    Just as pirated as buying from any online service not within your own country.

    "ROMS has offered to pay the record companies the royalties they collected but has been rebuffed.... As we see it, the record companies really have an issue with ROMS and perhaps the Russian government,"
    If this is true, and it probably is - given that the major labels aren't aquainted with honesty I'd doubt anything they say - it is very likely those to whom they are attempting to make payments are refusing those payments so they can claim their right to payment has been prejudiced.

    It is up to organization that collects the fees to then disburse these to the relevant musicians and songwriters.

    The music site has a ready market outside Russia as well as at home, offering music tracks for as little as a third of a dollar and entire albums for two dollars, which compares with 99 US cents per track from iTunes
    They're charging reasonable prices where iTunes is ripping off their customers. For the extra money you get DRM and you're locked into their limited audio formats.

    AllofMp3 is doing exactly what needs to be done, they're charging fair prices, giving customers choice and not crippling the music.

    Ultimately music is now in oversupply. It is cheap and easy to make. Cheap and easy to promote and distribute.

    Quote Originally Posted by bwana v.19 View Post
    I just think it is stupid to pay for pirated music
    People using the site would be paying for convenience. They're willing to pay a fee for the convenience of choice.

    Quote Originally Posted by JStrike View Post
    Whatever. If you want to pay for music where not a cent goes to the Artist or Label, then go ahead
    No, I prefer not to buy major label music anymore, download or CD.

    They are concerned with making money for themselves not the artists. In our opinion, we and the artists are better off dealing directly with each other. In fact we believe it is the future of the music industry
    The major music labels to do not care at all about the musicians. They'd cut their heads off and put them on stakes outside their offices if it would make them more money.

  13. #28

    Default

    stoke : I did read the article. ROMS isn't recognised by any labels or artists

    The artists and labels dont get a cent. And before you say that it is their choice, as the owners of the music (the artists) and the owners of the recording (the label), they get to choose where, how and at what price their work is sold (licenced). Because of a stupid flaw in the russion legal system, they dont get to do this. It is wrong
    But luckily the law has been changed, so this should rectify itself soon

  14. #29

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by noxibox View Post
    No, I prefer not to buy major label music anymore, download or CD.
    Fair enough, There are some great online stores where your money goes to the artist and independent label. www.emusic.com being quite popular. iTunes actually supports indie artists as well via cdbaby

    Quote Originally Posted by noxibox View Post
    They're charging reasonable prices where iTunes is ripping off their customers. For the extra money you get DRM and you're locked into their limited audio formats.

    AllofMp3 is doing exactly what needs to be done, they're charging fair prices, giving customers choice and not crippling the music.
    That is a downright lie. People seem to be happy with the price, so they are not ripping us off. And the artists can choose whether to go idie or large label. There are large benefits to the big labels. But their risk is much higher and as such, their prices are higher. And they can charge what they damn well want for their own work.
    If you do not support their actions or prices, don't but from them. But Indie. But you dont get to circumvent the wishes of the owners of the recording by going with allofmp3
    If you want a BMW but cannot afford it, buy a Toyota. Dont go and steal the BMW and claim moral superiority because the price was too high for you.

    If you want to pirate music (which allofmp3 is) then do so. We are not given many options in SA. But do not try justify if morally
    Last edited by JStrike; 18-10-2006 at 02:41 PM.

  15. #30
    Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    TK & CPT CBD
    Posts
    3,281
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    What i cannot understand is how artists side with records companies - they are the oes responsible for the state of the MI. 12% od a cd to an artist and thats if you have made it rest to stores, distributors and production.

    I have zero sympathy for record companies - they were offered a brand new uber cheap distribution channel and instead of embracing they protected a bottom line so out of sync with the industry.
    When everyone has a public voice, we see how many people just don't have anything interesting to communicate
    Sportslinks

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 12 3 LastLast

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •