Download Music for $0.2 per Kb and it's legal ?!? - Page 2 - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

connyosis · 05-06-2005, 05:53 AM

"All the materials in the MediaServices projects are available for distribution through Internet according to license # LS-3М-05-03 of the Russian Multimedia and Internet Society. Under the license terms, MediaServices pays license fees for all the materials subject to the Law of the Russian Federation "On Copyright and Related Rights". All the materials are available solely for personal use and must not be used for further distribution, resale or broadcasting."

Well, according to allofmp3 themselves they do pay all fees they have to, and thus making their business legal. Whether this is actually true, or whether it also is legal in your country is a different matter.

Dawson70 · 05-07-2005, 08:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hardknock

And spare me the taking money out of artists pockets bullshit. Cause I don't want to hear how they had to sell their Bentley for a tricked out Denali.

This whole misconception about artists raking the huge dollars and laughing at us while we buy their CD's is getting so frickin old.
The truth is they work very very hard to get where they are today. I can only imagine how you would feel if your paycheck was suddenly smaller because someone was stealing it from you. I doubt you would stand still and take it. The word theif comes to mind and that is exactly what illegal sharing is.......stealing. No different if you were stealing from your family, the corner store, Walmart or neighbor. You can try to justify it any way you want, but it is stealing and that makes you or anyone else a thief.

SecretMethod70 · 05-07-2005, 08:49 PM

Actually, first of all, copyright infringement is not theft. I've already pointed this out, and it is still true. Second, you're right - most artists aren't raking in the dough. However, when it comes to the major labels, the truth is they're rarely EVER raking in any dough from album sales. Most ARTISTS earn their money from touring, merchandise, etc. The majority of the money from CD sales goes to the labels. Artists of major record labels get very little from album sales - even with acts like TLC, who get huge success, if the contract signed is not a good one - and theirs wasn't, they earned about $1 per album sold - the artist makes very little money. TLC was forced to declare bankruptcy. Third, if the logic were as simple as you make it out to be, there wouldn't be a huge number of artists who support file sharing as well. Clearly, many of the artists do not feel cheated or stolen from - at least not by the consumer. The people most artists feel are doing the cheating - indeed, the people that ARE doing the cheating - are the major labels. The very major labels that are trying to stop file sharing "to protect the artists." The very major labels that know almost all that money goes to THEM and not the artist and refuse to make it any different. The very major labels who, when they attempt to sign new artists, almost always start out with a contract that basically amounts to owning all the artist's creative work for the rest of their life. Hence the rule for recording contracts - NEVER sign the first version.

pattycakes · 05-10-2005, 02:31 PM

didnt you people read my posts at all?

robbdn · 05-10-2005, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pattycakes

didnt you people read my posts at all?

I read it... very interesting stuff... It would seem that this is also the reason anime fans are able to import and fansub japanese animation (up until the point a US distribution deal is made).

I also wanted to make a comment on the download legal/illegal debate...

Fortunately, in the US, downloading is a protected activity, and when I say protected, I mean that it is protected by privacy laws. In this sense, the US is an interesting place to live. With the DMCA we have some of the strictest and most rigidly enforced digital copyright laws, but we also have strict privacy laws preventing big brother or the RIAA from coming after all the little guys who download stuff in our spare time.

For example, let's say I download some copyrighted material off of a private server with SFTP. Before the RIAA or the FBI can subpeona the download logs of the private server and come after me, they must show to a judge sufficient evidence to convince the judge it's worth invading my privacy. How likely is it that they will be able to prove I downloaded from that server, and convince a judge to write a court order to invade my privacy? It's much easier for them to prove that the server operators were hosting illegal material and go after them.

Why P2P networks are bad: RIAA and FBI can lurk P2P networks without needing a court order, if they catch you downloading, they can easily prove that you were downloading illegal material and come after you. But, networks like usenet are protected by supreme court precedent to be free speech. What does this mean for the rest of us? Is federal protection of right to online privacy an implied consent to download copyrighted material?

Of course not. It is definitely illegal to have copyrighted material that you have not purchased in your home or on your computer. But, lawmakers realize that it's also important not to live in a totalitarian state where the police raid your house and computer every other week to make sure you're following the rules. Downloading from networks like usenet is NOT illegal, no matter what you're downloading, but once you assemble the content and have a complete song on your harddrive you are infringing somebody's copyright, and that's against the law. But it's also against the law for RIAA to violate your privacy without a court order...

It's a stalemate then, and very delicately balanced, so if you choose to infringe copyrights make sure you know what you're doing, and what you're up against.

Hardknock · 05-11-2005, 02:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dawson70

This whole misconception about artists raking the huge dollars and laughing at us while we buy their CD's is getting so frickin old.
The truth is they work very very hard to get where they are today. I can only imagine how you would feel if your paycheck was suddenly smaller because someone was stealing it from you. I doubt you would stand still and take it. The word theif comes to mind and that is exactly what illegal sharing is.......stealing. No different if you were stealing from your family, the corner store, Walmart or neighbor. You can try to justify it any way you want, but it is stealing and that makes you or anyone else a thief.

Apples and oranges, man. Apples and oranges. "They work hard to get where they are today."

That's the best piece of bullshit I've heard today. You mean to tell me that "fiddy," "shady" "p-diddy" and the like all have MBA's from harvard or something? You think that they actually went to school to write rhymes? Give me a break.

I'll tell you what, when the debut video of the newest rapper doesn't feature him/her showing off all their shit (houses, bentley's, bling, bitches and ho's) and they actually rap about something that touches all of us in one way or another, (think Public Enemy) then I'll think about purchasing their album and supporting them. 'Till then, I'm a downloading thief as far as you're concerned. Fuck the RIAA, fuck this backward ass government that supports them and fuck these fake ass wannabe "rappers."

Dawson70 · 05-13-2005, 12:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hardknock

Apples and oranges, man. Apples and oranges. "They work hard to get where they are today."

That's the best piece of bullshit I've heard today. You mean to tell me that "fiddy," "shady" "p-diddy" and the like all have MBA's from harvard or something? You think that they actually went to school to write rhymes? Give me a break.

I'll tell you what, when the debut video of the newest rapper doesn't feature him/her showing off all their shit (houses, bentley's, bling, bitches and ho's) and they actually rap about something that touches all of us in one way or another, (think Public Enemy) then I'll think about purchasing their album and supporting them. 'Till then, I'm a downloading thief as far as you're concerned. Fuck the RIAA, fuck this backward ass government that supports them and fuck these fake ass wannabe "rappers."

Are you really comparing one genre of music to the entire industry? What about all the artists that work the smokey little bar rooms for years on end. Trying to figure out how they are going to pay their band or put gas in their car to get to the next venue? I see this every day in LA. Bands pouring thier hearts and souls into what they believe in and trying to make a living. What about the bands working with Independent Labels and producing albums for 5K or less? It's like this, if a farmer plants a seed and tends his crops for months his success is based on many factors. The weather, his ability to tend, his equipment....will all effect his yield. Bands are no differnt in this sense. They work against the elements of the industry to try to succeed. Would you steal the farmers crops, only because you can? Would you help yourself to his harvest and then tell him he is too successful and he deserves the loss? I know I would not. Just a thought.

05-06-2005, 05:53 AM	#41 (permalink)
connyosis Psycho Location: Sweden - Land of the sodomite damned	"All the materials in the MediaServices projects are available for distribution through Internet according to license # LS-3М-05-03 of the Russian Multimedia and Internet Society. Under the license terms, MediaServices pays license fees for all the materials subject to the Law of the Russian Federation "On Copyright and Related Rights". All the materials are available solely for personal use and must not be used for further distribution, resale or broadcasting." Well, according to allofmp3 themselves they do pay all fees they have to, and thus making their business legal. Whether this is actually true, or whether it also is legal in your country is a different matter. __________________ If atheism is a religion, then not collecting stamps is a hobby.

05-07-2005, 08:49 PM	#43 (permalink)
SecretMethod70 Human Administrator Location: Chicago	Actually, first of all, copyright infringement is not theft. I've already pointed this out, and it is still true. Second, you're right - most artists aren't raking in the dough. However, when it comes to the major labels, the truth is they're rarely EVER raking in any dough from album sales. Most ARTISTS earn their money from touring, merchandise, etc. The majority of the money from CD sales goes to the labels. Artists of major record labels get very little from album sales - even with acts like TLC, who get huge success, if the contract signed is not a good one - and theirs wasn't, they earned about $1 per album sold - the artist makes very little money. TLC was forced to declare bankruptcy. Third, if the logic were as simple as you make it out to be, there wouldn't be a huge number of artists who support file sharing as well. Clearly, many of the artists do not feel cheated or stolen from - at least not by the consumer. The people most artists feel are doing the cheating - indeed, the people that ARE doing the cheating - are the major labels. The very major labels that are trying to stop file sharing "to protect the artists." The very major labels that know almost all that money goes to THEM and not the artist and refuse to make it any different. The very major labels who, when they attempt to sign new artists, almost always start out with a contract that basically amounts to owning all the artist's creative work for the rest of their life. Hence the rule for recording contracts - NEVER sign the first version. __________________ Le temps détruit tout "Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling Last edited by SecretMethod70; 05-13-2005 at 05:23 AM..