backtop

Print E-mail del.icio.us 92 comment(s) - last by Spartan Niner.. on Jan 4 at 11:24 PM
AllofMP3.com continues to feel the squeeze

One week after the Recording Industry Association of America filed a $1.65 trillion dollar lawsuit against Mediaservices -- AllofMP3.com's parent company -- an official blog from the company announced the following:
An attempt by the major record labels to use a U.S. court to as part of its campaign against AllofMP3.com is imprudent.
 
AllofMP3 understands that several US record label companies filed a lawsuit against Mediaservices in New York. This suit is unjustified as AllofMP3.com does not operate in New York. Certainly the labels are free to file any suit they wish, despite knowing full well that AllofMP3.com operates legally in Russia.

In the mean time, AllofMP3.com plans to continue to operate legally and comply with all Russian laws.
The lawsuit claims that royalties from music sold on the AllofMP3.com site have never been paid to American labels.  The suit specifically claims "the Defendant's entire business ... amounts to nothing more than a massive infringement of plaintiffs' exclusive rights under the Copyright Act and New York law."  According to Mediaservices counsel, Mediaservices and AllofMP3.com operate solely as Russian enterprises and New York laws do not apply to the company.

AllofMP3.com has been a hot topic for politicians as well.  The site was recently singled out as a specific infraction preventing Russia from entering the World Trade Organization. Soon after, The Bilateral Negotiations on Russia's Accession to the World Trade Organization outlined that pirate music websites within Russia will be taken down by June 2007 -- specifically mentioning AllofMP3.com.

Mediaservices counsel, which operates in the U.S., contended the company adheres to Russian laws and pays royalties to the Russian Organization for Multimedia and Digital Systems, the Russian equivalent of the U.S. Soundexchange. John Kheit, an intellectual property attorney representing Mediaservices, added that no U.S. labels have ever attempted to claim royalties even though said royalties are earmarked and balanced if labels come forward and request them.

Even if such royalties are maintained, the fact that no U.S. company has come forward to claim royalties seems intuitive: it would give AllofMP3 justification for operating in the country.  AllofMP3 also has a profit-sharing model with artists but claims that U.S. artists attempting to claim such profits have also had a difficult time producing documentation proving the rightful ownership of the music.

Earlier this year both Visa and Mastercard pulled credit card portals for the website.  Users now must purchase credits through a proxy such as Xrost and then purchase music using the credits.

The Mediaservices website was not functioning at the time of this publication.

Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled
Down with the RIAA!!!!
By tfk11 on 12/28/2006 1:43:43 PM , Rating: 5
Who's with me?




RE: Down with the RIAA!!!!
By Sulphademus on 12/28/2006 1:52:21 PM , Rating: 5
There's no justice like angry mob justice!


RE: Down with the RIAA!!!!
By Scabies on 12/28/2006 2:01:40 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah but the angry mob is the lawyers and hollywood, the deep pockets, not the masses (who, for once, are in the right)


RE: Down with the RIAA!!!!
By masher2 (blog) on 12/28/06, Rating: -1
RE: Down with the RIAA!!!!
By peldor on 12/28/2006 2:31:32 PM , Rating: 5
Every time it's ever been backed with superior force.


RE: Down with the RIAA!!!!
By BladeVenom on 12/28/2006 5:18:32 PM , Rating: 4
The music and movie industry are the biggest thieves on the planet: stealing fair use, stealing public domain, payola, price fixing, collusion, tape and CD taxes, ripping off artists, etc.


RE: Down with the RIAA!!!!
By cochy on 12/28/2006 7:10:46 PM , Rating: 4
...And trying to force feed Paris Hilton down our throats.

Not really thievery but...c'mon leave us be! Please!! ;)


RE: Down with the RIAA!!!!
By Lord Evermore on 12/29/2006 8:56:51 AM , Rating: 2
Somebody should force feed Paris. Besides in a night-vision video.


RE: Down with the RIAA!!!!
By oTAL (blog) on 12/31/2006 1:08:56 AM , Rating: 2
Dude, that was the funniest thing I read all weak! =D
Good one =)
Thanks.

P.S. I have noticed that every time I make a subtle joke I never end up with high rates... and I believe yours may qualify... I guess most people around here prefer the in-your-face obvious humour that dowsn't need any brain power...


RE: Down with the RIAA!!!!
By glennpratt on 1/4/2007 11:55:55 AM , Rating: 2
I don't know, that was about as subtle as a brick to the face. And I've never even seen the thing.


RE: Down with the RIAA!!!!
By iNGEN on 12/29/2006 6:03:17 PM , Rating: 3
When it is not theft, but a libelous, false, claim of theft.


RE: Down with the RIAA!!!!
By Christopher1 on 12/29/2006 12:39:02 AM , Rating: 2
Sorry, but they are not in the right this time. AllOfMP3 has tried NUMEROUS times to pay royalties to the RIAA. The RIAA keeps on saying "No, you are operating illegally by UNITED STATES laws, therefore we won't take your money!", blatently ignoring that Russian law has precidence in Russia and AllOfMP3 is in Russia.

It's time for the RIAA to bite their pride, take the money that AllOfMP3 is willing to give them, and shut up!


RE: Down with the RIAA!!!!
By masher2 (blog) on 12/30/2006 4:15:19 AM , Rating: 2
> "AllOfMP3 has tried NUMEROUS times to pay royalties to the RIAA..."

The money they're trying to pay is a tiny, tiny fraction of the actual value of the songs, however. They're trying to use the fee schedule for Russian radio broadcast, on the basis that, if they pay this fee once, they have a right to transmit the song to as many buyers as they wish, in any and all nations of the world.

The notion that this is even remotely close to a fair deal is utter nonsense...even forgetting the fact that a buyer cannot dictate terms to the owner wishing to sell.


RE: Down with the RIAA!!!!
By Misty Dingos on 12/28/06, Rating: -1
RE: Down with the RIAA!!!!
By lufoxe on 12/28/2006 2:42:42 PM , Rating: 5
but if you notice, it says that the RIAA never filed the paperwork to get royalties. Mistake on thier part. as for this:
quote:
Let's get some eye patches and parrots and go plunder all the artists works! They can't stop us! Let's go get all the movies and all the TV shows ever made and give to the people! Yea! To the people......
it's not so much as that, it's more of... "let me work my butt of making this music, you rip me off to produce it, it sells well... you rip me off of the profits, you rip me off on the royalties." Yeah.. . and then you wonder why people hate you? cmon, they were lobbying to get a bigger cut (see http://gear.ign.com/articles/749/749883p1.html ) because GASP! maybe the artists are starting to get the money. We all know the RIAA is in the wrong for this, (they're hardly ever in the right) but are most likely going to win, the pressure on the russian government is too much. If it's just this one company that needs to go down for russia to progress... then guess what, bye allofmp3 it was nice knowing you, because no matter what the defense, law makers can always make new laws.


RE: Down with the RIAA!!!!
By Misty Dingos on 12/28/06, Rating: -1
RE: Down with the RIAA!!!!
By bbomb on 12/28/2006 7:44:29 PM , Rating: 1
Did you read the article retard? All the companies have to do is show proof of copyright ownership to allofmp3 and they will be paid the royalties they claim arent being paid. Imm willing to bet that the RIAA CANT prove ownership as they were asked to do in that one court case then suddenly dropped it.


RE: Down with the RIAA!!!!
By Spartan Niner on 1/4/2007 11:24:07 PM , Rating: 2
How infantile . Come up with a better insult than "retard" and you just might be respected, maybe.

First, understand the role of the RIAA. Second, understand that usage of allofmp3 is legal under Russian law, but is illegal/borderline under many other countries' laws. Third, understand that the true thieves in this matter are the RIAA, who have been responsible for more racketeering and intimidation than the mob.

The reason the RIAA isn't knocking at ROMS' door for royalties is because their acceptance of said royalties would make allofmp3 legitimate, and the RIAA's price-fixing/DRM correspondingly illegitimate . They can't stomach the thought of .10c a song being the true worth of crap.


RE: Down with the RIAA!!!!
By FITCamaro on 12/28/2006 3:44:22 PM , Rating: 2
No offense, but a child could come up with most of the crappy music thats out there today.

Hell, in 15 minutes I made a techno track with Acid Pro 4 that convinced my at the time roommate (who liked that crap) that it was from an up and coming artist (I forget what we called the group as part of the joke). I have some musical background though so I do have an ear for what sounds good but it was mostly just "What do drunk, stupid people at clubs like...".

As far as the RIAA goes, they're greedy bastards who instead of getting up with the times just sues everyone. I don't see them selling off their mansions or anything so I don't see what they're complaining about. Oh god no they made only $6 billion instead of 7. I guess they're gonna go broke.

This brings to mind the South Park episode on this topic. "As long as people download music, music artists will have to live a life of semi luxury."


RE: Down with the RIAA!!!!
By thebrown13 on 12/28/06, Rating: 0
RE: Down with the RIAA!!!!
By masher2 (blog) on 12/28/06, Rating: -1
RE: Down with the RIAA!!!!
By shilala on 12/28/2006 7:01:27 PM , Rating: 5
Let's take your line of thinking a step further...
Why should I have to pay for it when it sucks?
I stop by the store and buy a cd. It totally sucks. Why is it that I can't return it? The only reason I've ever been able to come up with is that music producers are above any sort of "fairness".
How about when I exit the movie theater after sitting through an absolutely painful film that was touted on trailers and commercials as being "The Funniest Movie of the Year!!!" Try asking for your money back and see what happens.

I love watching pirates even the score.
The day when those greedy scumbags start treating their customers fairly and justly, I'll be the first person in line to champion their cause.
Until then, I consider it their just desserts.


RE: Down with the RIAA!!!!
By masher2 (blog) on 12/28/06, Rating: -1
RE: Down with the RIAA!!!!
By Christopher1 on 12/29/2006 12:41:39 AM , Rating: 2
Yes, but it isn't KNOWING agreement to the deal that "Hey, the music might suck and it might not, therefore you are stuck with it!"

The RIAA, MPAA and others keep on saying "We don't make ANYTHING that sucks!" and refuse to allow someone to return something to get a refund when they are not satisified with it.

That is in contrast to the laws on computers, computer hardware, and most other electronics and gadgets where the law SPECIFICALLY says if you are not satisfied with it, you have 15 days to return it and get your money back.


RE: Down with the RIAA!!!!
By masher2 (blog) on 12/29/06, Rating: -1
RE: Down with the RIAA!!!!
By rushfan2006 on 12/29/2006 11:03:24 AM , Rating: 2
LMAO....I love the arguments we always see when it comes to anything to do with buying music and movies especially. It is so clear cut plain as daylight, open and shut case obvious to me that it boggles my mind the excuses made. I have to say I fully 100% agree with Masher on this issue.

I think possibly that it might be a sign of the different generations...though its kind of odd since I'm only in my early 30's myself. Anyway I think the early 20 somethings and teens today just have this "World owes me everything" mentality and/or "Its my *right* for everything".

People justify pirating..."its not stealing if..." There is no if's that's what you folks don't ever grasp in your meager little brains....the only "if" goes like this....*IF* you do NOT pay for a copyrighted product through a VALID and LEGAL "store" (here I use store as any authorized reseller/cheannel for said product) then you are STEALING. There is nothing else, there is no excuse. There is no justification.

Amazing how people think because they CAN that its "ok"...or because you personally don't think the RIAA is an ethical or just company...well that's ok.

The law is NOT UP TO YOU!!! The law is the law and the law says if you don't pay for your merchandise from a "store" you are stealing. What is so difficult for folks to understand here?

I just don't get it.

As an aside I do agree most music today hardly deserves to bestowed the title of "music" -- how rappers are hailed as creative icon's or whatever....well let's just say I have a better chance of building a successful time machine than understanding what's so creative and artistic about rap.







RE: Down with the RIAA!!!!
By hubajube on 12/29/2006 1:32:45 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
The law is NOT UP TO YOU!!!
Actually, in the US, the law IS up to us. We can have these laws changed. On topic, I agree that downloading music that hasn't been paid for is stealing. We all need to realize this. But I won't side with the way the RIAA is handling this. I suppose they have to do what they have do but there's got to be another way to do this besides mass law suits and DRMing the hell out of the paying customers.


RE: Down with the RIAA!!!!
By Christopher1 on 12/30/2006 5:47:34 AM , Rating: 2
There is a better way: lowering prices (so that the NUMBER #1 reason for pirating goes away), making better music (no more Britney Spears 'churned out like bad cheese' music), putting burning kiosks where you can choose the files to put on your DVD or CD standard in record stores and making DRM-free MP3 files the standard.

Were they to do these four things, they would see more sales, with less transportation costs, which amounts to more profit!


By thecoolnessrune on 1/1/2007 1:40:57 AM , Rating: 2
Id rather have .wavs or if anything full quality MP4s.


RE: Down with the RIAA!!!!
By maximal on 12/28/2006 2:38:49 PM , Rating: 1
The way I see it is: US's AllofMP3.com excuse for blocking Russia's entrance into WTO accomplishes one thing and one thing only: nuclear Iran.

If you are having trouble connecting these two events then just google what happened at the UN Security Council last week.

P.S:
Hate to get political here of all the places, but this is the reality of the situation.


RE: Down with the RIAA!!!!
By masher2 (blog) on 12/28/06, Rating: 0
RE: Down with the RIAA!!!!
By maximal on 12/28/2006 11:58:47 PM , Rating: 2
Well WTO status would open a lot of financial doors for Russia, so wouldn't it be much more inclided to let one close?


RE: Down with the RIAA!!!!
By Christopher1 on 12/29/2006 12:43:42 AM , Rating: 2
You have a point there. If Russia and other countries were able to compete on an EQUAL FOOTING with the United States, they wouldn't have any reason to sell weapons to terrorists or rogue countries, because they could make money in other totally legal ways.


RE: Down with the RIAA!!!!
By mino on 12/29/2006 6:09:55 AM , Rating: 3
As far as the "rogue countries" in the meaning "doing_bad_stuff" go ... well, the most rougue country in the past 20yrs is the one this site is based in ...

Also in international trade, NO agreement is "fair" in a traditional sense of that word.

You have a point here however. The single moment any country does or tries to act like equal, it is blanked "rogue" and uncooperative, its leaders/regime dictatorial/authoritarian. No matter what the political situation in a country really is. Or what the trend set by its gov on the peace/war front is.

I can say, I live in such a "democratic"-"undemocratic"-"democratic"-"undemocrt ic" country.
The title fluctuates based on the course our administration takes.
When they privatise staten property to "western" companies, we are "democratic".
When they privatise to locals/not_privatise, we are "undemocratic".

I remember clearly 7 govs that _ALL_ came from fair elections (AFAIK far more fair than the US ones!). And yes, we still use purely paper ballots for the simple reason of their security. The communists came to power by screwed elections back then, no one wants to repeat that experience...

But end politics. This is an IT/tech site and it should remain such for its own good.

At last, no illusions, democracy in its true meaning "the rule of the people" left Earth long ago with the ancient Greek city states.


RE: Down with the RIAA!!!!
By masher2 (blog) on 12/29/2006 8:36:05 AM , Rating: 1
> " If Russia and other countries were able to compete on an EQUAL FOOTING with the United States, they wouldn't have any reason to sell weapons to terrorists or rogue countries"

Wrong again. China has had WTO status for several years...and they are a worse offender than is Russia. They're also against Iranian nuclear sanctions as well.


RE: Down with the RIAA!!!!
By MrBungle123 on 12/28/2006 4:36:31 PM , Rating: 3
Maybe the RIAA should take a hint from the success AllofMP3 and sell DRM free mp3 files.


RE: Down with the RIAA!!!!
By Emryse on 12/31/2006 6:08:02 PM , Rating: 2
Boy, do I wish I submitted a comment earlier; before 1.65 trillion other people did, that is... ;-P
So sorry to make this a long one, but it’s overdue and I just can’t hold my peace.

Now, as for the cute remark concerning (and I’m summarizing out of pity to help this poor, dim-witted fellow articulate the point, which I will momentarily hack off at the knees) music industry being a fair marketplace should they grant the purchaser an option to return said music when experiencing dissatisfaction with the quality of said music.

If I buy a CAR, and then drive it off the lot, and make use of the car for say, 5 days. I drive it for a certain period of time, and then return it to the dealer, stating my dissatisfaction.

Now, upon what basis am I dissatisfied? Is it because the car started only once out of every 5 times I tried to drive it? Is it because the features afforded me in the car aren't work properly? Is there a safety issue? Or is it because I don’t like the way I look in it when I wear the color red in my attire? Well, whatever the reason, I can’t just simply be “dissatisfied”. I need to be able to cite my reasons as to “WHY”.

Now, has the car I purchased done everything that the car dealership / manufacturer said my car would do? If the answer is “Yes”, then I have no reason whatsoever to base my claim. Even assuming that I was indeed “dissatisfied”, that is in no way the fault of the dealership / manufacturer, but is due to my own idiocy in not understanding what I wanted in the first place when I was looking to buy a car.

Let’s walk away from the analogy. What does the music industry guarantee my purchased music will do for me? They assure me the CD will PLAY in my CD player, and will function. They warn me if there is a possibility that it may not work in some types of CD players. They guarantee that a certain number of songs, with a certain length of time will be available to me. And these guarantees will vary, depending on whether you purchase through Apple, or Zune, or whatever. And guess what? If your CD doesn’t work and is broken, they’ll replace it with one that does!!!

But what if I took my car back to the dealership to return it, stating I was dissatisfied, but just before doing so I had used a “sooper-dooper CLONE MACHINE” to replicate the car, because secretly I actually like the car very much, but don’t want to spend 40k plus to drive one? So essentially, they could never prove that I had ACTUALLY RETURNED the PRODUCT, and would no longer be using it, now COULD THEY? Well, gee, Bright Star, that sure makes you think, doesn’t it? (And if you don’t get it, your combination of “Codec”, “CD-R/DVD-R”, “Ripper tool”, “mp3 player”, “blank digital media / storage” is the metaphorical device to which I refer.)

Nowhere do they guarantee that you will “LIKE” or be “SATISFIED” with your purchase of the music, based on your “artistic” (highly doubtful) tastes. If you can’t understand this, just stop listening to music altogether! You are not purchasing “insurance of enjoyment of artistic quality of music product”. You are purchasing the right to listen to the music product – PERIOD.

YOU DON’T HAVE TO BUY IT!!! YOU DON’T HAVE TO LISTEN TO IT!!! You are the banishers of our freedoms through your crooked logic, devoid of responsibility for your actions, and while your sad state boosts my self-esteem, it also makes me sick. I am saddened the most, in that there are some to which this post will still not have made any great amount of sense. To whom this last sentiment applies: you should not be posting in this forum, as it does nothing but waste time and space for yourself and us all.


RE: Down with the RIAA!!!!
By Beckett on 1/2/2007 3:30:47 PM , Rating: 2
So your argument here is that if you have a machine that can make cars for you you shouldn't be allowed to drive said car? I get your analogy, don't get me wrong, but in the case of a car, you had to pay for all the raw materials, not to mention the "cloning machine" itself, so therefore anything you build with it is yours. Now, as to the point that you shouldn't be able to return the original car you copied, I fully agree. But you wouldn't be USING the returned car anymore, you'd be using your copy of it that you generated.

How does this apply to music? It really doesn't. A car is a physical object requiring raw materials and a factory to make. A digital song is an intangible thing requiring no resources save hard drive space and no specialized equipment to make. The car analogy really does not and never will apply to music piracy, there is a fundamental difference in the products being discussed.


$1.65T?
By v3rt1g0 on 12/28/2006 1:48:17 PM , Rating: 3
What a complete joke.




RE: $1.65T?
By chiguy2891 on 12/28/2006 1:57:43 PM , Rating: 3
(insert Dr. Evil laugh)

i wonder how they arrived at that number.


RE: $1.65T?
By Ralph The Magician on 12/28/2006 7:56:30 PM , Rating: 3
The RIAA values every song at $150,000. I don't know why, or how they arrived at that number, but they did. They then estimated the amount of songs sold by AllOfMP3.com in just the last six months [if I remember correctly] to arrive at the $1.65 trillion number. That comes out to around 1.8M songs per month, which is also ridiculous, because I highly doubt that site does that much business. Who knows though.

Really, the question is how the hell the RIAA every came to the conclusion that a single song was worth $150,000. I mean, if there was only a single copy of Michael Jackson's Thriller left in the entire world on a single record...well then maybe.

That means that an average pirated CD has a value of around $2 million. WTF?


RE: $1.65T?
By masher2 (blog) on 12/28/06, Rating: -1
RE: $1.65T?
By Christopher1 on 12/29/2006 12:45:56 AM , Rating: 2
Yeah, and that's why I say that the copyright laws need retooled to ONLY take into account the amount of money they lost from the PIRATER not buying the thing in question.


RE: $1.65T?
By masher2 (blog) on 12/29/06, Rating: -1
RE: $1.65T?
By hubajube on 12/29/2006 1:37:43 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
That'll really help to stamp out petty theft!
It hasn't worked so far has it now? People keep stealing. You are now starting to sound like the "I'm not stealing" people here on this forum.


RE: $1.65T?
By masher2 (blog) on 12/29/06, Rating: 0
RE: $1.65T?
By cochy on 12/28/2006 3:13:20 PM , Rating: 2
Ummm sorry all I've got to say about this is:

Seriously WTF!? O.o


(More often than not, lawyers are becoming funnier than Jerry Seinfeld)


RE: $1.65T?
By hubajube on 12/28/2006 7:01:04 PM , Rating: 2
I don't see how how anyone could say this in front of a judge with a straight face. Do they really expect anywhere near 1.65 trillion?


RE: $1.65T?
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 12/29/2006 8:59:49 AM , Rating: 2
Theyre just trying to bankrupt them and freeze their assets. Standard legal practice.


RE: $1.65T?
By rushfan2006 on 12/29/2006 11:11:15 AM , Rating: 2
Agreed. Though it is shocking and actually funny at first reading...what people dont' realize is in most (if not all) big cases like this the legal teams aren't seriously thinking that's the amount they'll be awarded its all legal tactics that's all.

Like the other poster stated earlier they do this to freeze assets and ensure the operation is shut down. They right well know the award isn't going to be 1.65t.

Along those same lines...why do lawyers go for "300 years" for a criminal conviction. Do you now anyone capable of living 300 years? They do this because of the appeals process...more techniques for lawyers to keep the sickest of criminals behind bars.



RE: $1.65T?
By glennpratt on 1/4/2007 12:00:35 PM , Rating: 2
Did you ever think that in both cases, they added up the damages and presented a number? When a convict gets 300 years, it's because the sum of his crimes adds up to that penalty. Likewise, lawyers hear probably made and estimate as to the number of songs downloaded from AllOfMP3, multiplied by $1, then added damages.

Sure, they know they won't get that, but they didn't pull the number out of a hat. (FYI, I don't support the RIAA, so don't think I'm arguing for a side.)


RE: $1.65T?
By Master Kenobi (blog) on 12/29/2006 8:59:52 AM , Rating: 2
Theyre just trying to bankrupt them and freeze their assets. Standard legal practice.


Hmmm...
By JWalk on 12/28/2006 1:54:15 PM , Rating: 3
I won't comment on whether or not AllofMP3.com is operating legally in this situation.

But, what I do find interesting, is the fact that this was cited as a major reason that Russia wasn't allowed in the World Trade Organization. That gives you a good idea of how much influence the RIAA and the major media/record companies have. Wow.




RE: Hmmm...
By feelingshorter on 12/28/2006 6:32:43 PM , Rating: 2
Remember the dailytech article on Motorola having their cell phones seized and then DESTROYED by the Russians? Millions of dollars I'm sure. Something about how local police is higher than any written law, and its all who you know. Well, Russia seems somewhat lawless, perhaps thats why they cannot get into the WTO. Lets not talk about written laws though. Lets talk common sense. This is worse than P2P because they are making a lot of $ off of someone else's work. Even the music industry pay artists, allmp3 pays the artists nothing at all. Russia needs to revise their "laws" before any company would risk operating in Russia, thats why they aren't in the WTO probably.


RE: Hmmm...
By hubajube on 12/28/2006 7:06:58 PM , Rating: 2
You have a point but remember that Allofmp3 said they have money earmarked for the RIAA. So there is money that can be claimed it's just that the RIAA doesn't want to claim it. My guess is that the amount of money is not enough or Allofmp3 didn't "negotiate" with the RIAA on the amount of money.


RE: Hmmm...
By feelingshorter on 12/29/2006 12:01:06 AM , Rating: 2
What would be smart is to earmark money to individual artists. The music industry only pays an artist 1 million (or more depending on who you are) for an album for the rights to it, then the RIAA makes massive profits off of that. What would be a good idea is to give a percentage of $ to the artist so the better the music, the more money the artist gets. But thats going to be a very hard sell. Maby somebody like Apple's iTunes can do that. Just sponsor the artist to make music, and say he gets a % of the $.


RE: Hmmm...
By Einy0 on 12/28/2006 9:22:27 PM , Rating: 2
When you own a bunch of congressmen, doors just seem to open up for you. It's amazing how that works. The RIAA is a legal american music cartel. Artists don't wanna have anything to do with them. If they don't, they will get no radio play or anything. All the major radio stations are paid off by the RIAA to play the songs they want played. Maybe before people start taking the RIAA's side they should read up on what really goes on. The record companies they represent are no better. Rarely artists who have one or two hits make any money from record sales. The record companies are sure to charge them for advertising and promotional fees until they owe more for thier hits than the record sales pay them for. The only way they make a dime is on live performances.


RE: Hmmm...
By masher2 (blog) on 12/28/06, Rating: -1
Whaaaaaaaaaaa?
By encryptkeeper on 12/28/2006 2:16:22 PM , Rating: 2
I'm sorry, 1.65 trillion dollars? Isn't that just a bit insane?




RE: Whaaaaaaaaaaa?
By Symmetriad on 12/28/2006 2:35:27 PM , Rating: 2
Considering that amount actually exceeds the current Russian GDP of ~1.5 trillion US dollars, it does indeed strike me as insane, even as a statement rather than an expected collection of damages.


RE: Whaaaaaaaaaaa?
By cochy on 12/28/2006 3:17:11 PM , Rating: 2
Honestly. They are making yet another joke of the legal system. It's stuff like this that make me root for the defendants, hoping a judge will throw such silliness out the front door.


RE: Whaaaaaaaaaaa?
By encryptkeeper on 12/28/2006 4:17:55 PM , Rating: 1
I just like getting shit for free that I would otherwise have to pay for.


RE: Whaaaaaaaaaaa?
By masher2 (blog) on 12/29/06, Rating: -1
By shabby on 12/28/2006 5:32:02 PM , Rating: 2
What would they do with it, give it back to the artists?




By Einy0 on 12/28/2006 9:29:19 PM , Rating: 2
I bet whatever they win the artists get $0.00. They'll find a way to make it happen. I say they win because the rich always win in court. There is no such thing as justice anymore. If your pockets are deep enough you can do as you like and sue as you like.


By glennpratt on 1/4/2007 12:16:27 PM , Rating: 2
Oh please. Have any evidence to back that up?

Companies get sued all the time by the little guy, and lose a lot. Medium sized businesses are brought down by lawsuits quite frequently. A company I work for finds itself suing or being sued quite frequently over disputes with customers. They don't want to be there any more then the customer.


Me too
By thejez on 12/28/2006 2:00:00 PM , Rating: 5
This seems like the right time to annouce this; I am also filing a lawsuit. I am suing the RIAA in the Molvanian court for not giving me royalties for my Molvan invention of "the process of expressing music through sound waves". The lawsuit is in the amount of 900 zillion trillion billion quadrillion dollars.





silly
By Murst on 12/28/2006 3:20:19 PM , Rating: 3
Even if it does go through, there is no way to enforce it.

You cannot affect policy in one country by going through the courts in another. For example, Iran could convict Bush and sentance him to death, but do you think the USA would hand him over? Just as Iranian courts have no effect in the USA, USA courts have no jurisdiction whatsoever over what happens in Russia. Unless there is a treaty signed between the 2 countries, this is useless.

Probably most people in the world realize that what allofmp3.com is doing is wrong. However, going through the USA civil courts to fix the situation is rather silly




RE: silly
By glennpratt on 1/4/2007 12:19:43 PM , Rating: 2
Yes, it's mostly an action to get a result from Russian lawmakers, trying to get into the WTO. But it's probably not silly, and I'd rather the RIAA go after this then individual file sharers. They don't make any money after all.


Riddle me this.....
By SkyBum on 12/29/2006 12:16:44 AM , Rating: 3
Considering that most song downloads cost .99 each, $1.65T worth of downloads would equal 166,666,666,666,666 songs downloaded (thats 166.6 trillion downloads). BUT the music industry does not get ALL of that .99 per song, the provider also gets a slice. Many people have estimated that Apple gets a 33% peice of the pie for the songs it sells. Lets be conservative here and allow a 25% cut for the provider.

166,666,666,666,666 downloads x 1.25% = 208,333,333,333,333

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong here (I'm a welder not a mathematician) but the 1.65 trillian they are claiming in their lawsuit would amount to 208.3 trillian downloads given a 75/25 split between the parties.

Who are they farkin' kidding here?





RE: Riddle me this.....
By glennpratt on 1/4/2007 12:12:24 PM , Rating: 2
Oh dear, where did you learn math. $1.65 T / $0.99 per download != 166.6 T downloads in this universe. Try 1.66 T downloads.

Now if your wondering where the amount came from, I'd guess estimated number of downloads * ~$1, plus a large sum of money PER infringement.

As for splitting with the provider, thats silly in a lawsuit. If you stole my car and sold it for $1000, I wouldn't sue you for $750 and leave you with a 25% cut. I would sue you for the fair market value of the car plus damages. I don't care what you sold it for or what your margins should be, were you a reputable dealer.


No Its not Insane
By TheRequiem on 12/28/2006 2:26:53 PM , Rating: 2
The U.S. lawyers are pending a 1.65 trillion dollar lawsuit to make a statement, obviously. The fact is that the U.S. music labels' legal rights have been violated and no amount has been paid in royalties to American labels. Since they are "American Labels" they have every right to sue from an "American" court, otherwise, they obviously would not have been able to file the lawsuit. The suit will go through and will definately mark the end of Allofmp3.com.

It's already done, just will take time now.





RE: No Its not Insane
By Aesir on 12/29/2006 7:34:31 AM , Rating: 2
I guarantee, this frivolous suit won't have any effect, its just for "show". What will probably be the eventual downfall of allofmp3 is hardening of Russian law (or making payment methods even more difficult).


Owned
By phatboye on 12/28/2006 2:48:02 PM , Rating: 2
I think one word sums up everything quite nicely :o




RE: Owned
By inthell on 12/29/2006 12:04:01 PM , Rating: 2
indeed


*rolls his eyes*
By Giaour on 12/28/2006 3:51:21 PM , Rating: 2
Wow ... good luck getting even 0.01% of that after paying for lawyers




RE: *rolls his eyes*
By Giaour on 12/28/2006 3:53:53 PM , Rating: 2
Doh! ... forgot a couple of zeros ... meant to say 0.0006% (nearly 10 million US)


$1.6tn WTF???
By Cuboid on 12/29/2006 5:59:20 PM , Rating: 2
Not even Microsoft can come up with THAT amount of money!!




RE: $1.6tn WTF???
By wrack on 12/29/2006 6:28:03 PM , Rating: 2
Yeah I wonder who comes up with crazy amounts..! RIAA must me stupid...


Need more good music
By Avalon on 12/28/2006 3:22:23 PM , Rating: 2
When the music industry actually produces a good band or a good album in any musical genre, wake me up. I have a feeling I'll be sleeping for a long time.

All the best music is underground and free for the most part.




By Hydrofirex on 12/28/2006 3:24:40 PM , Rating: 2
I hate the RIAA, and the MPAA while we're at it, however: allofMP3.com is a lot different than individuals sharing content with each other. They're making money from other peoples work, and that I disagree with.

It's one thing for art and culture to be freely accessible by everyone, and then it's another for me to go and make lots of money by selling things I don't have a right to sell.

Even as someone who believes in file sharing I can agree with the RIAA on this one.

HfX






OMFG
By DonkeyRhubarb on 12/28/2006 6:53:21 PM , Rating: 2
1.65 trillion!!!!!!!!!!!! That is absoloutly rediculous.!!!! Not millions, not billions, TRILLIONS!!!! Holy s**t!!!




I know what the money's for...
By starvoyager on 12/28/2006 7:47:39 PM , Rating: 2
The RIAA is looking to buy a new aircraft carrier, the "U.S.S. R.I.A.A.". They need the trillion dollars to purchase the ship [$4B], the 60 planes [$9B], pay the crew [$1B], the lawyer [$900B], and the IRS taxes [$86B].

This ship will sail the seas of earth and cyberspace hunting pirates. Might explain the RIAA offices in SF and San Diego.

{To RIAA: this is original work above, and I'm not an American.}




By feraltoad on 12/29/2006 12:52:33 AM , Rating: 2
Afterall, didn't the whole island of Manhattan cost about twelve bucks and change? The RIAA might get what it deserves there.




Priorities
By crystal clear on 12/30/2006 10:46:53 AM , Rating: 2
"The site was recently singled out as a specific infraction preventing Russia from entering the World Trade Organization. Soon after, The Bilateral Negotiations on Russia's Accession to the World Trade Organization outlined that pirate music websites within Russia will be taken down by June 2007 -- specifically mentioning AllofMP3.com."

Unquote-
AllofMP3.com-why only this site-why not a whole list of sites
"that are catergorized as Hacker site & other similar sites."
These sites create havoc all over the world-
I recently made a post-
From Russia with Love..........................
By crystal clear on 12/27/06, Rating: 2
By crystal clear on 12/27/2006 8:06:50 AM , Rating: 2
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=5470

So lets not concentrate only on music-there are other more important issues than music that need to attended to.
Stop those Hackers,Virus authors,on line piracy & fraud etc





By shilala on 12/28/2006 7:09:31 PM , Rating: 3
Umm, did you actually read the article?
Maybe you skimmed the part where allofmp3 has escrowed and maintained all royalties for the content they've provided, and that it's awaiting claimants?
Yes, I realize that's quite possibly bs, but it's a very reasonable position that's constantly ignored. It also hasn't been tried.
I find it borderline retarded for someone to say "give me my money" and refuse to take it.
No, wait, not borderline.


By KristopherKubicki (blog) on 12/29/2006 1:36:19 AM , Rating: 2
There's a couple things I'd like to add.

The royalties AllofMP3 has paid are paid to ROMS, the Russian equivalent of the RIAA. However, ROMS has significantly different royalty structures than say, Apple iTunes would pay the record label in the US. I do not know the exact numbers, but I do know the royalties paid out to the NFP organizations are less than that of their U.S. counterparts.

I don't think the RIAA contests that it could get the royalties in escrow in Russia right now. However, if a label does claim such royalties, it sort of gives AllofMP3 the green light to continue to charge at the rates they already do.

There's a lot of reading between the lines for both sides here. However, don't be confused though if what happens at the end of this story ends up setting a lot of presedence -- Don't think that other business models like this won't shop up in BRIC countries before the end of the decade.


By KristopherKubicki (blog) on 12/29/2006 10:11:09 AM , Rating: 2
quote:
Russian law clearly states that ROMS needs the permission of the rights holders to license the works

That was not true until September 1, 2006 -- where Russian law expressly stated that online distribution of copyrighted works were *not* covered by Russian copyright laws.

Since then, ROMS and AllofMP3 have stood by a stature that claims copyright owners have the right to demand retribution for sales of copyrighted material or request to have such sales halted.

quote:
Finally, as far as I know, ROMS is *not* holding any escrowed monies.

Mediaservices counsel has told me otherwise on more than one occasion. However, they fairly open about the fact that they do not particularly follow up with what happens to anything they give to ROMS other than funds "should be maintained."


"If they're going to pirate somebody, we want it to be us rather than somebody else." -- Microsoft Business Group President Jeff Raikes