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

labob · 02-23-2005, 12:38 AM

I stumbled across this site...

www.allofmp3.com

Is this too good to be true? From what I've read/heard, there's a loophole in Russian copyright law that allows them to do this legally <i>(insert grain of salt here)</i>

I've read thru the legal disclaimers on the site and it looks ok, but I'm not an attorney.

Before I jump in with a DSL line, empty HD and a Visa card I wanted to see what the rest of you think.

Thanks & I look forward to your thoughts & input.

-labob

Silvy · 02-23-2005, 01:05 AM

I haven't looked at the site, but I hope that is $0,2 per MB not KB....
Otherwise that will be some very expensive downloading

itch vaccine · 02-23-2005, 02:25 AM

ditto Silvy,

$0.2 per KB would make a regular 3MB song, well

$600?

wow..haahah

T.U.B. · 02-23-2005, 03:15 AM

It is 0.02 USD/Mb

Quote:

The price of the files that you download is determined by the quality of the file you choose to download. The price is determined by the file size and type.

The price of 1 Mb of the files marked as VIP or Online Encoding is 0.02 USD.

The price of 1 Mb of the files marked as Online Encoding Exclusive is 0.02 USD.

You will not be charged for previewing tracks are for the encoding process itself.

Note: All media that is available with OEEX are also available for download in regular encoding format.

they systematicly use Mb: Megabits, that is...
so 8 Mb = 1 MB (MegaByte),
1 MB = 0,16 USD.
bit tricky isn't it?

SecretMethod70 · 02-23-2005, 03:24 AM

Maybe it *IS* too good to be true:
http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?s...tid=141&tid=17

Quote:

Music Site AllofMP3 Under Investigation
Nick Irelan writes "AllofMP3.com, a Russian music site that is famous due to its low prices, has been accused of copyright infringment. Although the site said it bought licenses, some record companies are claiming that the documents it purchased aren't valid. The Moscow Police Computer Crimes Division has investigated AllofMP3 and the Moscow Prosecuter's office must decide what it will do by March 7th."

Wingless · 02-23-2005, 08:04 AM

Download from em while you can... those Russian download sites are sure to fall eventually, just like Napster did back in the good ol' days.

the_marq · 02-23-2005, 08:23 AM

I'd be more worried about giving my credit card number to some shady off-shore music trading site.

P-Naughty · 02-23-2005, 08:30 AM

Go ahead and download from them if you want to get sent to a federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison. These operations are usually fly by night schemes, but this one has stayed around for some time. Still, they would keep a record of any transaction and if the MP3s aren't legal, you can expect a call from the RIAA.

bendsley · 02-23-2005, 08:51 AM

This site has been around for a while. I've used it before and they have extremely fast transfer rates. I would be downloading maybe 15 songs at a time and all coming in at least 60k+.

They have you download their software. Just for easy browsing of songs and whatnot. You can download the songs in a variety of formats and bitrates.

When I was using this site, I found it to be quite nice. Never had any issues to speak of.

I quit using the site because I was getting too many MP3's on my computer, didn't want to burn them to cd. I need to go get another hdd me thinks.

vinaur · 02-23-2005, 08:51 AM

Isn't downloading legal, no matter how or where you get the music, soft., etc. It's the uploading part that illegal. So you shouldn't be afraid.

bendsley · 02-23-2005, 08:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vinaur

Isn't downloading legal, no matter how or where you get the music, soft., etc. It's the uploading part that illegal. So you shouldn't be afraid.

The downloading is illegal from places such as Kazaa, BitTorrent sites, etc. because you now posess copyrighted works without paying for them.

Pragma · 02-23-2005, 09:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by P-Naughty

Go ahead and download from them if you want to get sent to a federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison.

Just to nitpick: copyright infringement is not a federal crime, so you won't get sent to a prison. You would be sued in a civil court by the RIAA and then have to pay them X amount of money (where X > "a shitload").

vinaur · 02-23-2005, 10:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bendsley

The downloading is illegal from places such as Kazaa, BitTorrent sites, etc. because you now posess copyrighted works without paying for them.

Yeah, but you don't really know if they are copyrighted or not.

Slavakion · 02-23-2005, 12:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vinaur

Yeah, but you don't really know if they are copyrighted or not.

If it's a song recorded by somebody other than your neighborhood garage band, it's copyrighted. If it's a program not written by Edgar in his mom's basement, it's copyrighted. And so on... You might as well assume that it's copyrighted, because it... is.

SecretMethod70 · 02-23-2005, 06:58 PM

Actually, all work is copyrighted automatically, whether or not it is officially registered or not. So, the downloading of the local garage band's music off the internet without their permission is ALSO copyright infringement.

Saying you don't know whether or not it's copyrighted is an absolutely bogus argument. Ignoring the fact that ALL creative works are AUTOMATICALLY protected by copyright, the fact is you'd have to be a moron to not be aware that the latest U2 album is copyrighted and that you're supposed to be paying something for it.

Slavakion · 02-23-2005, 07:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SecretMethod70

Actually, all work is copyrighted automatically, whether or not it is officially registered or not. So, the downloading of the local garage band's music off the internet without their permission is ALSO copyright infringement.

That's interesting. So a registered copyright is just formal proof of the creator? I had never thought of it that way before.

Hardknock · 02-23-2005, 07:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vinaur

Isn't downloading legal, no matter how or where you get the music, soft., etc. It's the uploading part that illegal. So you shouldn't be afraid.

Ding, ding ding!!

We have a winner. I download all the time. It's when you UPLOAD that gets you into trouble.

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.

vinaur · 02-24-2005, 06:00 AM

I liked his logic (taken from techspot):

Quote:

If you share files, you know if they would be illegal.
But if I download music, there is no way for me to tell if that piece of music is illegal or not. It could be something released to public domain by the author or perhaps an advertising mix for a new album. You download stuff in good faith. (I know none of you reading this download music off the net in good faith but there are plenty of people who do and there is a legal concept called presumption of innocence)

If you buy a CD from a store, you do not ask the owner to show you the shipping papers and the licence to sell you this piece of music just to make sure you don't get arrested after exiting the shop.

Better example:
If you are in a shop (christmas shopping and all) you are listening to the music. But how do you know the storeowner has paid for the right to play you this music. How would you feel if you got arrested for listening to pirated music?

Slavakion · 02-24-2005, 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hardknock

Ding, ding ding!!

We have a winner. I download all the time. It's when you UPLOAD that gets you into trouble.

No, uploading gets you in more trouble with the *AA because you're distributing your one illegal copy to anywhere from 10-5000 other people depending on the protocol and how long it's been shared. Saying that downloading is legal but uploading isn't is the same as saying that it's fine for me to steal your laptop while you're taking a piss, but I can't give it to someone else or sell it.

Quote:

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.

What about startup bands?

You people are rationalizing breaking the law. At least go with something better, like "Oh, the CDs only have 1 good song on them" or "Music is too expensive". Don't tell me stealing is legal. I admit what I'm doing is wrong. You should, too.

SecretMethod70 · 02-24-2005, 12:05 PM

Anyone who says downloading is "legal" is simply ignorant of the law; I'm sorry. Now, if you want to make an argument that downloading is not morally reprehensible, I'll be more than happy to join you in agreement. I'll even agree that the law should reflect what we think is and is not morally reprehensible. But, the simple fact of the matter is that it does not, and downloading is most certainly copyright infringment (when not done so through means approved by the copyright holder).

The idea that you are downloading "in good faith" is absolutely ludicrous. You know full well that the person sharing the file on Kazaa or whatever other network did not pay some exorbinant fee for the right (which no music publisher would give out) to distribute it freely. I can buy the good faith argument for sites like allofmp3.com but not at all for networks such as FastTrack (Kazaa) or bittorrent or whatever else.

If you want to win the debate over file sharing, it must be done with honesty. Creating strenuous loopholes in logic simply doesn't work and won't be effective in the long-run.

vinaur · 02-24-2005, 02:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slavakion

Saying that downloading is legal but uploading isn't is the same as saying that it's fine for me to steal your laptop while you're taking a piss, but I can't give it to someone else or sell it.

No, downloading is not stealing. It's just taking whatever is offered to you. If someone would offer you a laptop, you would probably take it without even asking if it was stolen. It's the same with music.

ratbastid · 02-24-2005, 03:18 PM

Here's the thing, though: allofmp3.com is hosted in Russia. Evidently, the US laws governing import of artistic works is very specific about this: even if the work is stolen abroad, it can be legally imported.

Slavakion · 02-24-2005, 03:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vinaur

No, downloading is not stealing. It's just taking whatever is offered to you. If someone would offer you a laptop, you would probably take it without even asking if it was stolen. It's the same with music.

If downloading = taking what's offered to you, then uploading = offering what you have to others? Sounds innocent to me. Except, wait, you're still in possession of stolen property. You could say that technically there's no stealing, since person number one made a copy of the data and freely gave it to other people. But you're obscuring the point with semantics. Downloading music (or any other data) off of the internet without either paying for it or getting the author's permission is illegal.

Maybe I just don't understand your argument, but it seems to me that if you are freely offered an illegal substance, it's still illegal.

tspikes51 · 02-24-2005, 03:46 PM

Do I still have license to back up all of my cd's on my HDD???

I know back in the day that all software was licensed for one backup copy of the data per copy sold. Is it still that way???

Slavakion · 02-24-2005, 04:57 PM

Ah, that's a whole new problem. A consumer's fair use rights allows him to make a backup of any data. Too bad 99% of EULAs say "Screw you, no backups". There's probably enough fuel for a whole 'nother thread in that debate.

spindles · 02-24-2005, 06:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pragma

Just to nitpick: copyright infringement is not a federal crime, so you won't get sent to a prison. You would be sued in a civil court by the RIAA and then have to pay them X amount of money (where X > "a shitload").

Not sure how it works in the US, but my understanding is that in Australia the damages awarded in a civil case such as this are limited in that you are compensating them for their losses, meaning if I download 3 songs worth $2 each, they can sue me for 6 dollars + court costs if I lose. Their losses are obviously much greater IF I am allowing others to upload the three songs I have downloaded. Why should I compensate them greater than the loss they have incurred?

This may be one reason why they target those hosting this stuff - it may not be worth their time to sue every single downloader.

SecretMethod70 · 02-24-2005, 07:29 PM

One thing said here is very correct (but for the wrong reasons): downloading is not stealing. It is copyright infringement. They are two VERY different things. Of course, the public campaign is to associate downloading with stealing so that people get behind the *AAs when they sue people into bankruptcy. If the people being punished are thieves then it's not likely that others will feel bad for them. But, copyright infringement is not theft - not yet at least. They're working on manipulating the law to change that.

spindles, I'm not sure about the limitations regarding what kind of damages they can sue for. That may very well be why they go after people they can prove uploaded. The problem, though, is that all they have to do is prove that you had SOMETHING available for upload and it can then be assumed all of it was available for upload. Copyright infringement goes into civil court (not criminal court), where the requirement is not beyond a reasonable doubt but, rather, a preponderance of evidence. This allows the *AAs to make a convincing argument of losses due to uploading so long as they can show uploading took place. They don't have to prove that the monetary value of losses they claim is true, you have to prove, as the defendant, that it's more than likely not true. And if they can show that you were uploading, even a little bit (which, if you use most of the newer, better file sharing methods, you can't help but upload) then it's easy for them to convince a judge or jury, beyond 50% of evidence, that they're right. You can't argue that you didn't upload, because once they can show you did that's pretty much out of the question (remember, they don't have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, so arguments about proxies, etc are pretty irrelevant) and if you try to argue that you were responsible for less damages than they say you were, good luck winning that. It's simply easier for them to reach the threshhold required than it is for you, and that's why so many people just settle.

pattycakes · 02-26-2005, 10:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by the_marq

I'd be more worried about giving my credit card number to some shady off-shore music trading site.

you can send money through paypal :-D
or you could thats how i did it

pattycakes · 02-26-2005, 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by P-Naughty

Go ahead and download from them if you want to get sent to a federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison. These operations are usually fly by night schemes, but this one has stayed around for some time. Still, they would keep a record of any transaction and if the MP3s aren't legal, you can expect a call from the RIAA.

if the riaa wants me to remove these whichi i purchased then can refunt my 20 bucks to me not allofmp3

pattycakes · 02-26-2005, 10:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by http://www.museekster.com/allofmp3faq.htm

No other Music Service raises this much questions, because it just seems to good to be true.

Here are some answers on frequently asked questions.

Is Allofmp3 legal?

Is using Allofmp3 legal in my country?

How can Allofmp3 be this cheap?

Is it safe to pay by credit card?

How can Allofmp3 legally offer Beatles and Metallica music?

Will the RIAA or the IFPI have Allofmp3 closed down in the near future?

Is Allofmp3 legal?
The most frequently asked question. We have thoroughly investigated this.

You will not find Allofmp3 in the list of legal music services supported by the IFPI at www.pro-music.org.

Organizations like IFPI and the RIAA are doing their best to avoid any publicity when it comes to the legal services in Russia. There is a loophole in the Russian copyright legislation that makes services like Allofmp3 possible. Apparently this loophole cannot be closed easily. Read more >>

The legal status of Allofmp3

Russian copyright legislation allows phonograms to be performed publicly without the authorization of the copyright owner for broadcasting and cable transmission. (Article 39) The Internet could be deemed to fall under this exemption. The copyrights involved have to be paid to a collecting society. This is the 'loophole' that is referred to in several articles on Allofmp3.

An English translation of the Russian copyright legislation can be found at www.copyrighter.ru

Allofmp3 has signed agreements for this with Russian Organization for Multimedia & Digital Systems (ROMS). According to license № ЛС-ЗМ-02-36 the Internet-project www.allofmp3.com, has the right to use musical compositions by providing downloads. Under the license agreement Allofmp3 pays out fees to ROMS for downloaded materials that are subject to the Russian Federation Copyright And Related Rights Law.

ROMS is a member of CISAC (www.cisac.org) - the International confederation of authors and composers societies. ROMS manages intellectual rights in the Russian Federation. All third party distributors licensed by ROMS are required to pay a portion of the revenue to the ROMS. ROMS in turn, is obligated to pay most of that money (aside from small portion it needs for operating expenses) to artists. Both Russian and foreign.

We have received this confirmation from ROMS:

I can confirm the legality of allofmp3.com You can legally buy/download mp3-songs from this site if it does not breaks the law the national legislation of the country in which you will be during that moment Sorry for my english.
Yours faithfully, the assistant to the lawyer of the Russian society on multimedia and to digital networks (ROMS) www.roms.ru.

Bahanets Roman Igorevich

Interview with Allofmp3

We have interviewed the content manager of Allofmp3, Vadim Medved'ev. He provided us with some useful information. Read the interview.

Interview with ROMS

Roman Bahanets of ROMS has answered our questions with regard to ROMS and the Russian Legal Music Services. He clearly states that Allofmp3 is a fully legal operation. Read our interview.

Press release

We recently received this press release from ROMS that's explains more on how ROMS operates.

The Music Industry's point of view

The Music Industry claims that Allofmp3 is illegal. Their opinion is that recorded music has three sets of rights. The songwriter has the copyright to the song, the artist his own rights in it, and the record label and producers a third set. Allofmp3 is paying the songwriters, via the collection agency ROMS, but they are acting without the permission of the other copyright holders.

Alan Dixon, general counsel of the IFPI explains their position in an article on Guardian.co.uk

We have asked Andy Mincov, a Russian lawyer and webmaster of www.copyrighter.ru, to comment on Alan Dixon's statement. This is what he replied:
"As for the comment on Alan Dixon, I'm not sure what he meant my a Copyright Code during the Soviet era, because there has not been any such document". The Music Industry has not taken any legal action against Allofmp3 or ROMS. IFPI Russia's legal adviser, Vladimir Dragunov, has admitted that legal actions don't have much chance of succeeding. read more

We are doing our best to follow all discussions and publications about Allofmp3 so we can provide accurate and up to date information.

We would appreciate an email when you have found interesting information regarding Allofmp3.

Is using Allofmp3 legal?

In the User Agreement Allofmp3 states that you may not use the service if it is in conflict with the legislation of your country. Allofmp3 has added this as a kind of disclaimer of course.

Every country has its own rules. There is no such thing as a set minimum of international intellectual property standards. That makes it impossible to answer this question in general.

Let's take a closer look at the law in a country with very liberal copyright legislation and a country with strict copyright laws.

Liberal copyright legislation
A country that has very liberal copyright rules is The Netherlands.

Downloading copyrighted material for personal use is legal in this country. Even when the downloader knows the supplier is acting against the law (like uploading with P2Pprograms), this does not make him a copyright infringer. In this perspective it seems highly unlikely that downloading from a licensed supplier like Allofmp3 will be declared illegal.

It is safe to say that Dutch citizens can legally use the Russian music services.

Strict copyright legislation

Now for the country that may well have the strictest rules on copyrights, the USA. A thread in the Fatwallet forums brings some light in his confusing subject. We will not bother you with all the details. Here is a concise version of the interesting parts:

*

“MP3's, OGG's, etc are not illegal in the USA and therefore can be imported. There is also no law against importing music from other countries (including Russia). Because you are buying this legally in Russia and then importing to the USA, this should be 100% legit. For example, assuming that Russian Vodka is illegal to buy in the USA on Sunday, but you buy the Russian Vodka in Moscow on Sunday, then you import it into the USA, you have done nothing wrong. Again, this assumes that 1) it is illegal to buy Russian Vodka on Sunday in the USA 2) it is legal in Moscow and 3) it is legal to import Russian Vodka.”

Title 17 Chapter 6 Sec. 602 of the U.S. Code covers “Infringing importation of copies or phonorecords”. You can find this title here

Subsection (a) tells us:

*

“Importation into the United States, without the authority of the owner of copyright under this title, of copies or phonorecords of a work that have been acquired outside the United States is an infringement of the exclusive right to distribute copies or phonorecords under section 106, actionable under section 501.”

So it's illegal you may think. But take a close look at sub (a)(2):

*

“This subsection does not apply to importation, for the private use of the importer and not for distribution, by any person with respect to no more than one copy or phonorecord of any one work at any one time, or by any person arriving from outside the United States with respect to copies or phonorecords forming part of such person's personal baggage;”

If MP3’s, OGG’s etc are in fact considered phonorecords, U.S. citizens can legally buy these as long if they are for private use and not for distribution. If MP3s, OGG’s etc. are not considered phonorecords, no import laws apply. The sections of digital audio recording and sound recording have no mention of importation.

So in layman's terms the bottom line of this discussion is:

*

Downloading from Allofmp3 is legal for U.S. Citizens, as long as the files are for private use and not for distribution.

Please note – This is in no way a legal advice. -- please see our disclaimer.

This is what a more law educated person like the Tech Law Advisor has published regarding this issue:

* Additionally, assuming they have legitimate licenses to distribute the music, they probably are restricted to a certain geographic are via their distribution license. The end user wouldn't be violating any laws but the distributor would. If they don't have legitimate distribution licenses then they obviously have no right to distribute at any price. If they claim to have the licenses the end user might be seen as an innocent infringer if not on notice.

Some interesting discussions about Allofmp3 and the legal issue:

TechIMO forum

Mixtape forums

Avsforum

Fatwallet forums

G4techTVforum

CDFreaks forum

Meet other Allofmp3 users at mp3talks.com

How can Allofmp3 be this cheap?
Copyright organizations in Russia, unlike most of their colleagues abroad, are willing to close favorable deals with online music services.

For one thing copyrights for downloads in Russia are more or less equal to the rights radio stations have to pay for broadcasting music.

But the most important factor is that one US dollar is worth lots of rubles. In Russia CDs cost about 100 rubles ($3). So to Russians Allofmp3 is in fact almost as expensive as iTunes to Americans.

Is it safe to pay by credit card?

"I am not going to let my credit card number fall into the hands of Russian mafia". This phrase will appear in almost any discussion about Allofmp3.

Credit card payments are processed by Cyberplat a third party payment processor in Russia that has an excellent reputation, earned the trust of Diners Club as a qualified processor, and operates completely securely.

We have been in contact with lots of users. No one has ever reported credit card abuse as a result of payments made to Allofmp3. You are quite safe using your credit card with this company.

This review clearly describes how the payment process works.

How can Allofmp3 legally offer Beatles and Metallica music?

The Beatles and Metallica have not authorized their music to be sold online for anyone. Yet Allofmp3 offers about any Beatles and Metallica album ever released.

There are two reasons:

* Foreign works released before 1973 are not protected in Russia. Russia signed the Berne Convention without the retrospective protection.
* The second reason is that under Russian law a collecting society like ROMS automatically has the right to license ANY intellectual property to Russian distributors, even if the author is not subject to Russian law.

This explains why Allofmp3 can offer music that is not licensed for downloading in the US and Europe, like music by The Beatles or Metallica.

Will the RIAA or the IFPI have Allofmp3 closed down in the near future?

In an article published by the Register IFPI Russia's legal adviser, Vladimir Dragunov, admits:

* "Because of these loopholes we don't have much chance of succeeding if we attack these companies who are using music files on the Internet under current Russian laws."

Chances that the loophole will be closed on short term are low. New copyright legislation is in the offing but it's a painfully slow process. "We have very great resistance to this new law in Russia," says IFPI's Dragunov.

Vadim Mamotin, CIO of Allofmp3 told TechNewsWorld:

* The RIAA didn't address us directly. As far as we know, several legal owners' organizations contacted ROMS -- the equivalent of the RIAA here in Russia -- wishing to obtain more specific information on our service and its legality. No suit was brought against us.

The RIAA and the IFPI were unusually silent so far, but things have changed recently. After long-standing complaints by copyright holders, the Moscow City Police Computer Crimes division has completed an investigation.

Tuesday 22nd February 2005 The Register reported:

*

Moscow prosecutors are considering whether to proceed with a criminal case against Allofmp3.com after Moscow City Police turned over results of a preliminary investigation on 8 February.

In a move calculated to add extra pressure, the London-based International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI) submitted a formal complaint to the prosecutor’s office on behalf of its members alleging "large-scale copyright infringement". Moscow City Prosecutor’s office has until 10 March to decide whether to proceed with a criminal prosecution.

taken from http://www.museekster.com/allofmp3faq.htm

sob · 02-26-2005, 11:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vinaur

No, downloading is not stealing. It's just taking whatever is offered to you. If someone would offer you a laptop, you would probably take it without even asking if it was stolen. It's the same with music.

Maybe YOU would. but I think most people wouldn't. Besides, (although as Secret said, copyright infringement isn't defined as stealing yet) if you want to use the laptop analogy for music, one person is offering you someone ELSE's laptop.

Personally, if I encountered someone in a parking lot who offered me a car, or a laptop, or jewelry for free, I'd be wary.

pattycakes · 02-26-2005, 11:20 AM

Quote:

KCTL uses AllofMP3.com
After checking with the RIAA and other licensing agencies, KCTL Kansas City; the radio station for KCTalk.com; has switched from paying $1.00 per song with Napster, to using the "pay per meg" service at allofmp3.com.

After the RIAA confirmed in an email that the service is in fact legal, just under a different contract due to the site being located in Russia, the switch was made immediately. All downloaded music from the site was quote "able to be used in a full broadcast and media capacity".

KCTalk.com just wanted to pass this information on to others that have been searching for a real site to download stuff from without paying arms and legs. Thank you to Dies Irae for pointing out this service.

Furthermore, KCTL has started replacing thier songs that were previously encoded at 128k, with the cheaper, yet better sounding, 192k that allofmp3.com provides. We have downloaded 9 songs, and have not quite used $0.75 yet. Great service!

taken from a google cache
http://216.239.57.104/search?q=cache...+%2BRIAA&hl=en

SecretMethod70 · 02-26-2005, 12:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sob

Maybe YOU would. but I think most people wouldn't. Besides, (although as Secret said, copyright infringement isn't defined as stealing yet) if you want to use the laptop analogy for music, one person is offering you someone ELSE's laptop.

Personally, if I encountered someone in a parking lot who offered me a car, or a laptop, or jewelry for free, I'd be wary.

Interestingly enough, that HAS happened to me...sort of. I was in a parking lot going into a pizza place, and a white van pulled in and two young people got out (probably around their 20s) and said "hey!" or something like that. I talked to them (it was a very open parking lot in broad daylight and there were other people around) and they told me some story about them working for a company but they got too much inventory of these "really good speakers" so they had to get rid of this extra speaker set. They offered to sell me these "really good speakers" for $400 - a REALLY cheap price for them according to the (probably fake) invoice that showed them as being ear $1000 PER SPEAKER. Of course, I didn't have $400 to give them even if I wanted to, so I made the easy response and told them that rather than getting into the obvious illegitimacy of the deal. They asked if my bank was around there and even offered to go with me to my bank....cause it was such a great deal and they had to get rid of this extra inventory. Obviously, I didn't do this because it was clear something was fishy.

I talked to one of my friends later that day about it and it turns out that this is a relatively common thing (at least insofar as he had heard of it beforehand). It was awhile ago, so I forget the logistics behind it all, but the point is they were definitely "hot" or something. Could I have gotten what appeared (on the surface) to be a really awesome deal on some sweet professional speakers? Yeah (ignoring the fact they probably weren't anyway). Did I want to do it involving obviously "hot" merchandise (if they're truly great speakers) or potential crap I know nothing about? No way.

ScottKuma · 02-27-2005, 06:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slavakion

Ah, that's a whole new problem. A consumer's fair use rights allows him to make a backup of any data. Too bad 99% of EULAs say "Screw you, no backups". There's probably enough fuel for a whole 'nother thread in that debate.

There is a big question as to whether these EULAs are enforceable, or whether they can over-ride US Federal fair use statutes.

Arroe · 04-20-2005, 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SecretMethod70

Interestingly enough, that HAS happened to me...sort of. I was in a parking lot going into a pizza place, and a white van pulled in and two young people got out (probably around their 20s) and said "hey!" or something like that. I talked to them (it was a very open parking lot in broad daylight and there were other people around) and they told me some story about them working for a company but they got too much inventory of these "really good speakers" so they had to get rid of this extra speaker set. They offered to sell me these "really good speakers" for $400 - a REALLY cheap price for them according to the (probably fake) invoice that showed them as being ear $1000 PER SPEAKER. Of course, I didn't have $400 to give them even if I wanted to, so I made the easy response and told them that rather than getting into the obvious illegitimacy of the deal. They asked if my bank was around there and even offered to go with me to my bank....cause it was such a great deal and they had to get rid of this extra inventory. Obviously, I didn't do this because it was clear something was fishy.

I talked to one of my friends later that day about it and it turns out that this is a relatively common thing (at least insofar as he had heard of it beforehand). It was awhile ago, so I forget the logistics behind it all, but the point is they were definitely "hot" or something. Could I have gotten what appeared (on the surface) to be a really awesome deal on some sweet professional speakers? Yeah (ignoring the fact they probably weren't anyway). Did I want to do it involving obviously "hot" merchandise (if they're truly great speakers) or potential crap I know nothing about? No way.

the SAME exact thing happened to me once two summers ago outside of a Best Buy. Was wierd, I was only 17 then I probably would have bought them if I had the cash, haha.

kofspades · 04-20-2005, 03:53 PM

Yeah, and you'd be stupid to as well.

http://www.snopes.com/crime/fraud/emptybox.asp

Hardknock · 04-29-2005, 11:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slavakion

What about startup bands?

You people are rationalizing breaking the law. At least go with something better, like "Oh, the CDs only have 1 good song on them" or "Music is too expensive". Don't tell me stealing is legal. I admit what I'm doing is wrong. You should, too.

Last I heard, startups love the file sharing. It equals free advertising. Try getting that from Sony.

soccerchamp76 · 04-30-2005, 12:22 AM

When people say downloading isn't illegal, just uploading, they are wrong. The big difference is that the RIAA does not go after downloaders, only uploaders. The same concept for the drug war. Why arrest one druggie, when you can get the dealer? The uploader is the dealer and if you take out the dealers, the supply goes down and so do the amount of songs. Take off of uploading, and the RIAA won't file a million-dollar lawsuit against a kid that downloads 1-15 songs a week.

connyosis · 04-30-2005, 05:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by soccerchamp76

When people say downloading isn't illegal, just uploading, they are wrong. The big difference is that the RIAA does not go after downloaders, only uploaders....

It all depends on where you live. Here in Sweden downloading is perfectly legal. (Though that is about to change apparently) Only uploading is illegal.

aarchaon · 05-05-2005, 10:58 PM

So logically I could just pay a friend $0.10 a song, and it wouldn't be illegal because I'm paying for it?

Downloading from iTunes is legal because they give money to the recording industries. I somehow doubt allofmp3.com does the same thing.

02-23-2005, 12:38 AM	#1 (permalink)
labob Tilted Location: Orange County, CA	Download Music for $0.2 per Mb and it's legal ?!? I stumbled across this site... www.allofmp3.com Is this too good to be true? From what I've read/heard, there's a loophole in Russian copyright law that allows them to do this legally <i>(insert grain of salt here)</i> I've read thru the legal disclaimers on the site and it looks ok, but I'm not an attorney. Before I jump in with a DSL line, empty HD and a Visa card I wanted to see what the rest of you think. Thanks & I look forward to your thoughts & input. -labob __________________ "A man's only as old as the woman he feels" -Groucho Marx Last edited by labob; 02-23-2005 at 08:07 AM.. Reason: Changed Kb to Mb

02-23-2005, 01:05 AM	#2 (permalink)
Silvy paranoid Location: The Netherlands	I haven't looked at the site, but I hope that is $0,2 per MB not KB.... Otherwise that will be some very expensive downloading __________________ "Do not kill. Do not rape. Do not steal. These are principles which every man of every faith can embrace. " - Murphy MacManus (Boondock Saints)

02-23-2005, 02:25 AM	#3 (permalink)
itch vaccine Psycho Location: on my spinning computer chair	ditto Silvy, $0.2 per KB would make a regular 3MB song, well $600? wow..haahah __________________ "When you sit with a nice girl for two hours, it seems like two minutes. When you sit on a hot stove for two minutes, it seems like two hours. That's relativity." - Albert Einstein

02-23-2005, 08:04 AM	#6 (permalink)
Wingless Psycho Location: Metro Detroit, Mich, USA	Download from em while you can... those Russian download sites are sure to fall eventually, just like Napster did back in the good ol' days. __________________ Tommy Nibs is a funny word. So here I am, above palm trees, so straight and tall... You are, smaller getting smaller, but I still see... you. Jimmy Eat World - Goodbye Sky Harbor

02-23-2005, 08:23 AM	#7 (permalink)
the_marq All hail the Mountain King Location: Black Mesa	I'd be more worried about giving my credit card number to some shady off-shore music trading site. __________________ The Truth: Johnny Cash could have kicked Bruce Lee's ass if he wanted to. #3 in a series

02-23-2005, 08:30 AM	#8 (permalink)
P-Naughty Crazy Location: Georgia Southern University	Go ahead and download from them if you want to get sent to a federal pound-me-in-the-ass prison. These operations are usually fly by night schemes, but this one has stayed around for some time. Still, they would keep a record of any transaction and if the MP3s aren't legal, you can expect a call from the RIAA. __________________ I will not walk so that a child may live! - Master Shake

02-23-2005, 08:51 AM	#9 (permalink)
bendsley Professional Loafer Location: texas	This site has been around for a while. I've used it before and they have extremely fast transfer rates. I would be downloading maybe 15 songs at a time and all coming in at least 60k+. They have you download their software. Just for easy browsing of songs and whatnot. You can download the songs in a variety of formats and bitrates. When I was using this site, I found it to be quite nice. Never had any issues to speak of. I quit using the site because I was getting too many MP3's on my computer, didn't want to burn them to cd. I need to go get another hdd me thinks. __________________ "You hear the one about the fella who died, went to the pearly gates? St. Peter let him in. Sees a guy in a suit making a closing argument. Says, "Who's that?" St. Peter says, "Oh, that's God. Thinks he's Denny Crane." Last edited by bendsley; 02-23-2005 at 08:53 AM..

02-23-2005, 08:51 AM	#10 (permalink)
vinaur Insane	Isn't downloading legal, no matter how or where you get the music, soft., etc. It's the uploading part that illegal. So you shouldn't be afraid.

02-23-2005, 06:58 PM	#15 (permalink)
SecretMethod70 Human Administrator Location: Chicago	Actually, all work is copyrighted automatically, whether or not it is officially registered or not. So, the downloading of the local garage band's music off the internet without their permission is ALSO copyright infringement. Saying you don't know whether or not it's copyrighted is an absolutely bogus argument. Ignoring the fact that ALL creative works are AUTOMATICALLY protected by copyright, the fact is you'd have to be a moron to not be aware that the latest U2 album is copyrighted and that you're supposed to be paying something for it. __________________ Le temps détruit tout "Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

02-24-2005, 12:05 PM	#20 (permalink)
SecretMethod70 Human Administrator Location: Chicago	Anyone who says downloading is "legal" is simply ignorant of the law; I'm sorry. Now, if you want to make an argument that downloading is not morally reprehensible, I'll be more than happy to join you in agreement. I'll even agree that the law should reflect what we think is and is not morally reprehensible. But, the simple fact of the matter is that it does not, and downloading is most certainly copyright infringment (when not done so through means approved by the copyright holder). The idea that you are downloading "in good faith" is absolutely ludicrous. You know full well that the person sharing the file on Kazaa or whatever other network did not pay some exorbinant fee for the right (which no music publisher would give out) to distribute it freely. I can buy the good faith argument for sites like allofmp3.com but not at all for networks such as FastTrack (Kazaa) or bittorrent or whatever else. If you want to win the debate over file sharing, it must be done with honesty. Creating strenuous loopholes in logic simply doesn't work and won't be effective in the long-run. __________________ Le temps détruit tout "Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

02-24-2005, 03:18 PM	#22 (permalink)
ratbastid Darth Papa Location: Yonder	Here's the thing, though: allofmp3.com is hosted in Russia. Evidently, the US laws governing import of artistic works is very specific about this: even if the work is stolen abroad, it can be legally imported.

02-24-2005, 03:46 PM	#24 (permalink)
tspikes51 Fuckin' A Location: Lex Vegas	Do I still have license to back up all of my cd's on my HDD??? I know back in the day that all software was licensed for one backup copy of the data per copy sold. Is it still that way??? __________________ "I'm telling you, we need to get rid of a few people or a million." -Maddox

02-24-2005, 04:57 PM	#25 (permalink)
Slavakion Mjollnir Incarnate Location: Lost in thought	Ah, that's a whole new problem. A consumer's fair use rights allows him to make a backup of any data. Too bad 99% of EULAs say "Screw you, no backups". There's probably enough fuel for a whole 'nother thread in that debate.

02-24-2005, 07:29 PM	#27 (permalink)
SecretMethod70 Human Administrator Location: Chicago	One thing said here is very correct (but for the wrong reasons): downloading is not stealing. It is copyright infringement. They are two VERY different things. Of course, the public campaign is to associate downloading with stealing so that people get behind the AAs when they sue people into bankruptcy. If the people being punished are thieves* then it's not likely that others will feel bad for them. But, copyright infringement is not theft - not yet at least. They're working on manipulating the law to change that. spindles, I'm not sure about the limitations regarding what kind of damages they can sue for. That may very well be why they go after people they can prove uploaded. The problem, though, is that all they have to do is prove that you had SOMETHING available for upload and it can then be assumed all of it was available for upload. Copyright infringement goes into civil court (not criminal court), where the requirement is not beyond a reasonable doubt but, rather, a preponderance of evidence. This allows the *AAs to make a convincing argument of losses due to uploading so long as they can show uploading took place. They don't have to prove that the monetary value of losses they claim is true, you have to prove, as the defendant, that it's more than likely not true. And if they can show that you were uploading, even a little bit (which, if you use most of the newer, better file sharing methods, you can't help but upload) then it's easy for them to convince a judge or jury, beyond 50% of evidence, that they're right. You can't argue that you didn't upload, because once they can show you did that's pretty much out of the question (remember, they don't have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt, so arguments about proxies, etc are pretty irrelevant) and if you try to argue that you were responsible for less damages than they say you were, good luck winning that. It's simply easier for them to reach the threshhold required than it is for you, and that's why so many people just settle. __________________ Le temps détruit tout "Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

04-20-2005, 03:53 PM	#36 (permalink)
kofspades Crazy	Yeah, and you'd be stupid to as well. http://www.snopes.com/crime/fraud/emptybox.asp __________________ Even if you stop the clock, it gives the right time twice a day. Once we get out of the eighties, the nineties are going to make the sixties look like the fifties.

04-30-2005, 12:22 AM	#38 (permalink)
soccerchamp76 Go Cardinals Location: St. Louis/Cincinnati	When people say downloading isn't illegal, just uploading, they are wrong. The big difference is that the RIAA does not go after downloaders, only uploaders. The same concept for the drug war. Why arrest one druggie, when you can get the dealer? The uploader is the dealer and if you take out the dealers, the supply goes down and so do the amount of songs. Take off of uploading, and the RIAA won't file a million-dollar lawsuit against a kid that downloads 1-15 songs a week. __________________ Brian Griffin: Ah, if my memory serves me, this is the physics department. Chris Griffin: That would explain all the gravity.

05-05-2005, 10:58 PM	#40 (permalink)
aarchaon Insane	So logically I could just pay a friend $0.10 a song, and it wouldn't be illegal because I'm paying for it? Downloading from iTunes is legal because they give money to the recording industries. I somehow doubt allofmp3.com does the same thing. __________________ Green. Yellow. Blue.