Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Obtaining Legal MP3s Outside of the U.S.?

Posted by Cliff on from the there's-a-whole-music-lovin'-world-out-there dept.

frankkubiak asks: "I recently bought the new iPod with 40GB. I understand the arguments of the record industry, that I should buy the music I want to hear. Alright. So I don't want to get MP3 files by file-sharing. But here is my problem: I live outside the U.S., in Germany to be exact. iTunes only offers service to those inside the U.S. (see this related Slashdot article). I don't want a CD, vinyl record, tape or minidisc. I simply want to listen to the music. Even if I decide to buy a legacy audio CD, it is often copy-protected and won't load in my PC. So, strictly speaking, it is not even an audio-CD. Heise keeps a database of those un-CDs (German language. English speakers can use this fish-translated page). It sounds incredible, but even after hours of research on the web, I don't see a legal way to use this device with new songs. The only way I see to use this device is to buy a CD, and if I can't rip it, I'll have to [break the law and] download the MP3-file via file-sharing. I believe there are more people like me out there who want to listen to their music, without feeling guilty. Why is there no one meeting this demand? How does Slashdot feel about this?" Before you mention Napster, let's note that it has similar restrictions (see the "International Considerations" section). So where can non-U.S. internet users go to download the legal MP3s that they want?

61 of 623 comments (clear)

  1. This may sound stupid but.... by commo1 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You could buy the CD, download an MP3 from a site and play it. You own a legal copy, you're not technically stealing.

    1. Re:This may sound stupid but.... by RexHowland · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That is theoretically true in America, but IP and fair-use laws are different in Europe. It's a pretty bad situation to be in, but hopefully somebody here will know how to handle it.

    2. Re:This may sound stupid but.... by Lucky+Tony · · Score: 5, Informative

      In a place like Australia, is considered stealing even if you own a copy.

    3. Re:This may sound stupid but.... by nocomment · · Score: 4, Informative

      Could you use an american proxy server to make your connection appear to come from here?

      http://www.atomintersoft.com/products/alive-prox y/proxy-list/

      --
      /* oops I accidentally made a comment, sorry */
      /* http://allyourbasearebelongto.us */
    4. Re:This may sound stupid but.... by Daniel_Staal · · Score: 5, Insightful
      You could buy the CD, download an MP3 from a site and play it. You own a legal copy, you're not technically stealing.

      No. Don't. I don't care if it is legal in your area, but don't do this. This has two effects: You give money to the record label, and you bump up their 'piracy' rate. Given their unlogic on the issue, that will just make them put DRM on more of their CDs.

      It sounds like your best bet is to check with that list before you buy the CD. (And sorry, you'll have to buy the CDs.) If there is a CD on the list that you want, sorry. Send the record label a copy of your question, and tell them it is why you didn't buy the CD.

      If this is too much work, or you just can't get enough music to be worth it, sell the iPod (or return it if you can...), and tell Apple why. At that point you are an unsatisfied customer, who will tell others, for something that is not their fault. They may have the influence to fix it, even if you don't.

      Just don't hurt yourself. Support those who support you; the labels and artists who let you do what you want. Tell the rest why you don't support them. Maybe they'll listen. After all, it is their profit you're talking about.

      --
      'Sensible' is a curse word.
    5. Re:This may sound stupid but.... by zuzulo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Internationally rights to songs are an interesting issue. On the bright side, before the internet many US companies sold the rights to thier song libraries for international distribution quite cheaply, so now there are various organizations in other countries that have legal rights to thier back catalogs. One good example is

      www.allofmp3.com

      which is a russian site. high variable bit rate encoding of songs from quite a large catalog for about .90 US a CD. Read the FAQ to look at their legal position.

      --
      "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
    6. Re:This may sound stupid but.... by pclminion · · Score: 4, Insightful
      And if I burned 10,000 copies onto CDR media and started handing them out in Times Square, that wouldn't be stealing either.

      I can't believe the propensity of people here to equate "copyright infringement" with "stealing," considering they aren't even in the same class of crimes, carry significantly differently penalties, are prosecuted at different levels of the court system, etc...

    7. Re:This may sound stupid but.... by Abjifyicious · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I may be misinterepereting things, but my impression was that the problem was one of guilt rather than one of legality. The laws are different, but does that change the morality of the issue?

    8. Re:This may sound stupid but.... by wfberg · · Score: 5, Informative

      Actually, in the US it does make a difference what the source of the copy is, as mp3.com found out the hard way.

      Here in The Netherlands, anything you download as a private person is legal; how about that for fair use? (Putting stuff up to be downloaded is a different game; that's where the dues should be paid (and they make it hard enough))

      --
      SCO employee? Check out the bounty
    9. Re:This may sound stupid but.... by HuguesT · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Repeat after me: copyright infringement. Also I don't think the police will be going after you if you rip your own CDs, they have bigger fish to fry. Finally the minute the copyright holders try to go after this practice which is *very* widespread certainly in Australia, the minute the law will get changed.

      So you should rip your own stuff, and see if "they" care.

    10. Re:This may sound stupid but.... by gfxguy · · Score: 4, Informative

      Just to clarify, while mp3.com required you to have a copy of the CD you were downloading mp3s for, and while you are allowed to make copies of your CD, the court ruled that YOU are allowed to make copies of YOUR CD, but are not entitled to copies from someone elses CD.

      This is why the law is so stupid.

      But believe me, I have downloaded many things I own in one format or another, and feel no guilt.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    11. Re:This may sound stupid but.... by kfg · · Score: 3, Informative

      However, unlike downloading a few songs, handing out 10,000 copies would be criminal infringement under the current definition.

    12. Re:This may sound stupid but.... by niko9 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Would this also apply to vinyl? I have lot's of rock on the dead wax, but I don't have the CD.

      Would I be breaking any laws for downloading and MP3 of a song I have on vinyl?

      If you think about it, vinyl is superior to both the CD and the MP3, so downloading the lossy MP3 should not be a problem.

      Comments?

      --

    13. Re:This may sound stupid but.... by Roman_(ajvvs) · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Although I'd agree ripping your own stuff is a very low-risk activity in australia, I doubt that laws will change for the interests of the individual any time soon around here.

      Currently with the Free Trade Agreement negotiated with (or forced on us by) the U.S., australia is set to introduce the "mickey mouse" clause into copyright and bring the whole place more in line with ill-considered U.S. laws. The Sharman networks raid caught me by surprise, but there has been very little said about it in official political circles. It's an election year here too and Australian political parties aren't really known for their tech-saviness at the best of times. It will be extremely difficult for the current government politically if the FTA isn't accepted.

      As far as copyright goes, there's a reason it was sacrificed on the altar of free trade: it's expend- extendable..

      --
      click-clack, front and back. I'm not moving this car otherwise.
    14. Re:This may sound stupid but.... by k98sven · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That is theoretically true in America, but IP and fair-use laws are different in Europe. It's a pretty bad situation to be in, but hopefully somebody here will know how to handle it.

      Please explain, how are they significantly different? All countries have signed the Berne treaty.
      In my (humble) experience, most european have broader definitions of 'fair-use' than the US.

      Can you name a European copyright legislation which is stricter? I certainly can't.

    15. Re:This may sound stupid but.... by One+Louder · · Score: 4, Informative
      Even though it's legal to make such backup copies, the publisher is not legally required to make it easy or even possible for you to do so.

      This came up during the one of the DMCA cases - the court asked about what happens when the protected content enters the public domain if it's illegal to distribute a mechanism to circumvent the protection. Under the current law, even if you have every right to the content, it's apparently illegal to take the necessary steps to get access to it.

      This effectively gives the publisher an infinitely long copyright.

    16. Re:This may sound stupid but.... by gfxguy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Because it's two separate things. Fair use allows you to make personel copies. There's no requirement that the companies make it easy for you.

      In fact, thanks to the DMCA (thanks Bill Clinton, Fritz Hollings (D-Disney), and others), it became illegal to try and circumvent copy protection.

      Yes, some claimed that DMCA infringes on fair use, but the fair use says you are allowed to do something... it doesn't require companies to willingly allow you to do it.

      What's worse, of course, is that part of the price of CDs and DVDs is the copy protection. In other words, the people paying the penalty are the ones who buy their content legally, and they are more restricted in it's use. It's really backwards.

      I'll go off on a tangent here and compare current copy prevention mechanisms to the software copy prevention mechanisms from the eighties. Who remembers things like "off disk copy protection", or disks that were purposely damaged to as to be uncopyable? Every game like that I bought I immediately went online, found the hex codes to change, and "fixed" the software. I was saavy about it, but most people weren't, and had to put up with looking up codes in manuals or long load times (because of drives choking on bad sectors). There was a backlash, and now you don't see that anymore - what you see are games where companies go way beyond simply providing you with a game to make it valuable to purchase the product legally. They might include a huge manual, maps, minatures, etc.

      The music and movie industry amazingly manage to make money despite themselves. Everytime a more versatile format comes out (cassettes, VHS/Beta, CDs, DVDs, mp3s and other various file formats that can be delivered over the internet) the industry whines and complains and goes running to the governemt for protection.

      They claimed, for example, VHS would destroy the industry, and then it actually revived it and opened new revenue streams.

      Cassette tapes made listening to music more convenient, so people bought MORE MUSIC. Go figure.

      CDs brought us amazing quality for very cheap prices, and the industry was worried that cassette copies would be of very high quality. When the discman came out, that became a moot point. Again, people bought MORE music because they were getting better quality with more convenience (skipping tracks, for example, or creating a program as compared to listening to a tape or record) with great quality. People bought MORE music!

      DVDs accomplished the same thing for the movie industry. Given a format that doesn't wear out and degrade after many viewings, great quality output, less space than VHS tapes, no rewinding - and now we have things like multi disc players, not to mention the sound options with DVDs (hey, I don't care about Spanish or French, but sometimes I do get portuguese, which is great for me).

      Now we have MP3s. Good quality can be had (excellent quality can be had, really), in a solid state form that's easy to store and recall, gives us many hours of music in relatively little space, easy to manage a whole collection of music - it literally takes no extra space in your house. Again we have ability to program from lists of possibly hundreds or thousands of songs. And the industry wants to make it difficult to listen to music the way you want to listen to it. They are not making friends.

      I'm not going to be ignorant about the problem of piracy by claiming it's not a problem at all, it's the methods of preventing it I question... the current methods only hurt the honest consumers, not the pirates, and it's the honest consumers that ultimately have to pay for the copy prevention that is keeping them from listening to music or watching movies the way they want to. It's just so stupid. And it IS counter to fair use, but there's no laws requiring content providers to make fair use easy. And now the DMCA makes attempts at fair use illegal.

      --
      Stupid sexy Flanders.
    17. Re:This may sound stupid but.... by gcaseye6677 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I would really like to know who has hearing that is so good that they would instantly know when a CD is being played and say "That sounds like crap, its not vinyl". And then there's the fact that vinyl is only better when you are playing a perfectly preserved album on an excellent turntable with a top quality stylus. One spec of dust or one little scar will make it sound like a scratchy old record.

    18. Re:This may sound stupid but.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Your use of "untrained ear" is amusing.

      The bogeyman of "infinite resolution" with regard to vinyl is just that; it isn't true, and it really oversimplifies what's going on. "Sampling of discrete values" makes it sound as if you're only getting a summary of the information contained in an original waveform, which isn't true.

      Yes, the data on a CD is made up of samples. These *represent* the waveform, but are not *the* waveform. The DA step converts these samples back into the original waveform. There is no continuity "lost" in this process, depending on the frequency response and SNR of the original signal.

      For example, say you have an analogue tape that has data of up to 16kHz. By Nyquist, 44.1kHz is more than enough room to encompass *all* of that data, and the 16bits gives (going by memory, so I'm likely wrong on this figure) 96dB of dynamic range; far more, in other words, than vinyl ever had.

      I'd really like to find an audiophile someday who'll admit to liking the inherent analogue distortion in records. It's pleasing! Great. It isn't enough to elevate audio *above* science, somehow.

      Check out sites like Maple Shade Records for prime voodoo. As the same people who believe that analogue is always inherently superior to digital believe that a glorified hatrack "improves soundstage, makes highs livelier, and sounds like a blanket has been removed from your speakers"...I can't say I have much to do with them.

    19. Re:This may sound stupid but.... by gothzilla · · Score: 3, Informative

      When people say vinyl has better quality than cd's, they are speaking strictly about quality, not performance. For an extreme example, humans can hear up to around 22kHz. A 22kHz sine wave converted to 44kHz digital then back to 22kHz sine wave becomes horribly distorted. The distortion becomes less as the frequencies drop.
      People who say they can hear the difference are primarily speaking about analog music, like classical. I personally have heard the difference between a perfect quality vinyl and a cd in some classical music. With music thats digitally created and never really becomes analog you most likely won't be able to hear any difference at all.
      This difference in quality also was much more apparent when cd's first came out since AD/DA converters were not the quality they are now. If you can find a perfect vinyl record of classical music, a high end turntable, high quality amp and speakers and compare it to one of the first cd players that ever came out playing the same music, you could hear the difference quite easily.
      Performance comes into play when you start talking about scratched records and cd's. Cd's hold on to their quality much better than vinyl.

      When the cd format was first being worked on, one of the rules was that Beethoven's 9th had to fit on a single disc since it was 74 minutes long. The engineers found that for a disc to hold beethoven's 9th and have the quality of vinyl, it had to be sampled at 16 bit and was 12cm in diameter. This was too big to make portable cd players realistic so its size and sampling rate were decreased, resulting in lesser quality than vinyl. (http://www.urbanlegends.com/misc/cd/cd_length_ske ptical.html)

    20. Re:This may sound stupid but.... by jwlidtnet · · Score: 4, Informative

      No, "sound fidelity" is still wrong, and hopelessly vague.

      Once again: it isn't a 16-bit interpretation. Sampling does not involve taking "pieces" of music and then throwing them back, hoping it's going by too fast for you to hear. Sampling involves getting a collection of samples that, when converted back into analogue, represents the input waveform (up 'til the threshold your current sampling specification allows) almost exactly.

      As for digital recording, 24bit is used precisely because DSP is so popular. 24bit does give you a greater dynamic range (although popular music doesn't tend to use it), but it also removes the amount of dithering you have to do on a signal, as you have many extra bits being used for various digital process computations.

      Sampling rate is another story entirely. Nyquist states that 44.1kHz should be adequate, but I understand the idea of leaving room for error; consequently, 96kHz is certainly appropriate. Anything higher than that, though, and studies show you're probably actually degrading the signal.

  2. simple answer: you don't. by MORTAR_COMBAT! · · Score: 4, Insightful

    the music is owned by its copyright holder. if they don't want to offer it to you, you can't get it legally.

    them's the ropes, and our just desserts for allowing the hegemony of major labels to monopolise music for so long.

    --
    MORTAR COMBAT!
    1. Re:simple answer: you don't. by MAXOMENOS · · Score: 3, Insightful
      the music is owned by its copyright holder. if they don't want to offer it to you, you can't get it legally.

      This is exactly right. There's no "electronic" fair use in most nations. If you want to listen to this music electronically, return your iPod to the store and find a music player that's WMA compatible. Or, just buy a CD player.

      Alternatively, create a business where European consumers can purchase electronic music.

      --
      Finding God in a Dog
    2. Re:simple answer: you don't. by pavon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Absolutely.

      I have been pretty lukewarm about boycotting the RIAA, mainly because prior to the internet, there really wasn't a viable alternative, and there are a lot of good non-mainstream bands that managed to get contracts. Most of the music I listen to falls into this catagory, and I never felt like I should boycott a musician because he took the best opportunity he could get. That, and I don't want to stop listening to all my favorite bands :) So instead, I have just become more proactive in discovering what indepentant music is out there, and supporting them in addition to the musicians I already know.

      On the other hand, it has always boggled my mind how eager consumers are to adopt these online music services formats which are more restrictive, lower quality, and have a smaller selection than the existing standard. No thanks, I will stick to CD. I had no idea copy restriction on CD's was getting so bad in some places, but if the day ever comes that I cannot buy music from an artist in a non-drm'd format, then that will be the day I stop listening to them. That's my limit - if they don't want me to listen to their music then I won't.

  3. Is it illegal? by patdabiker · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Is it illegal to download [and not share] the mp3's of an album if you own that album?

    1. Re:Is it illegal? by Tim+C · · Score: 4, Informative

      Indeed it is - without explicit permission from the copyright holder, we UKians do not have the right to make any copy. That includes format shifting, backups, etc.

      Kinda sucks, really - I guess that 260GBP iRiver I bought is just a nice USB hard-drive with built-in mic and FM tuner, as I certainly can't buy electronic versions of the music I like (ebm, goth, etc). Hell, some of the stuff I like is hard enough to get on CD...

      On the plus side, the law is effectively unenforceable - I don't know a single person who doesn't have some sort of audio device, be it cassette, mp3 player, minidisc, or whatever. I suspect that the vast majority of people in the UK have broken this particular law at some point, most likely right now.

      On the minus side, that really means that, should they want to investigate you for some reason, that's another line of attack they can take. Remember, they *wanted* Al Capone because he was a gangster. They *got* him for tax evasion...

      Paranoia aside, it damages the Law as a whole to have unenforced/unenforceable laws on the books. I don't see it changing any time soon, though - in fact, in light of recent events (the EU "super-DMCA"), I can only see it getting worse.

      --
      It's official. Most of you are morons.
    2. Re:Is it illegal? by flacco · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Paranoia aside, it damages the Law as a whole to have unenforced/unenforceable laws on the books. I don't see it changing any time soon, though - in fact, in light of recent events (the EU "super-DMCA"), I can only see it getting worse.

      it's actually a clever way to get near police-state powers. simply make something illegal that everyone does, and then selectively enforce it should you want to nail someone, for whatever reason.

      --
      pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
  4. I gave up and ripped my CDs by PktLoss · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I have the same issue living in Canada, Puretracks has a small selection, but I haven't found anything I want there yet, and my discman only plays MP3s not WMV.

    I gave up and resorted to buying CDs, ripping them, then burning them. Most CD ripping software seems to be capable of working around the 'copy protection' on the CDs I have had experiance with. Its horrible because I live in tiny student housing and generally end up leaving the jewel cases and discs at my parents to save space and clutter.

    The music industry's grim determination to stop me from listening to music I have paid for has yet to cease amazing me.

    --
    paul reinheimer
    1. Re:I gave up and ripped my CDs by SheldonYoung · · Score: 4, Interesting
      If you live in Canada this is a non-issue for you as you can download freely from almost any source. This is due to the levy paid on blank media and the sanity of the Canadian Copyright Board.

      From http://neil.eton.ca/copylevy.shtml:
      However, unless the legislation is changed or the courts interpret matters differently, it appears that making a private copy for your own use of a musical work downloaded in any manner from the internet is not an infringement of copyright. In their decision, the Copyright Board states:

      The regime does not address the source of the material copied. There is no requirement in Part VIII that the source copy be a non-infringing copy. Hence, it is not relevant whether the source of the track is a pre-owned recording, a borrowed CD, or a track downloaded from the Internet.
      The more complex answer to the question posed above is you cannot post a song on the internet in any manner, but you can make a private copy of any songs you find on the net.

  5. And the music industry... by archevis · · Score: 4, Insightful

    ... wonders why people are drawn to illegal file sharing...

    1. Re:And the music industry... by zurab · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I don't think they wonder, they know. The submitter asks a valid question:

      Why is there no one meeting this demand?

      The answer is because RIAA and similar organizations within other countries/regions operate a cartel. This means that in order to more efficiently control the market, among other things, they divide it in regions among themselves, sign or enforce non-compete agreements, enforce trade restrictions, engage in price-fixing, deceptive accounting practices, acquire or eliminate any competition, and purchase favorable laws to gain even more control over their markets. The main objective is to minimize competition through the above means while having the ultimate control over revenues.

      Meeting customer demands, coming up with new types of products, delivery methods, competition, and these types of things are not very high on their list. Operating cartels is illegal in many European countries, but nobody cares about it. People only see black and white, just like the U.S. elections.

  6. How does Slashdot feel about this? by caston · · Score: 3, Funny
    How does Slashdot feel about this?

    Slashdot has feelings? Next I am expected to give her flowers, say nice things and nibble her ear...

    --
    Beings aspergers AND pulling chicks... I enjoy the challenge!
    1. Re:How does Slashdot feel about this? by rocjoe71 · · Score: 3, Funny
      ...how predictable!

      Try saying nice things about ears and nibble on the flowers instead.

      --
      Height: 38U, Weight: 0 Newtons, Eyes: #0000FF, OS: Gray Matter 1.0 (Alpha)
  7. Situations like this... by Pidder · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Situations like this is why you shouldn't feel guilty about downloading "illegal" music.

  8. Record off the radio... by LostCluster · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Last I checked, recording songs that are played off the radio is still fair use. Just hook any headset radio to the Line-in port of your sound card...

  9. Opsound by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    You get them at http://opsound.org !

    Licenced under Creative Commons licence...

  10. www.allofmp3.com by budmur · · Score: 5, Informative

    The fine folks over at Allofmp3.com will sell you MP3s for a wide variety of artists. They don't seem to care what country your're in. As far as being legit, they say that they're registered with the Russian copyright authority and that they're authorized to sell what they're offering. I haven't heard about any independant verification of that, though.

    1. Re:www.allofmp3.com by pbox · · Score: 4, Informative

      According to them, when you purchase those songs you legally own them in Russia. Buying it from outside of Russia means that you are importing those songs. Usually laws differ for importing it commercially or for personal use (not for resale). The US law says that you can import music legally for personal use, as long as you don't import multiple copies of the same music piece (even on multiple trips). However it is clear from the text of the law that it was written with the intention of regulating physical importation of the music on media. (See amazon.com, where US residens can buy legally imported foreign CDs). However importing it via the Internet, the law might or might not apply. We would not know until after it has been tested in a court of law... It is clear that it is in the best interest of RIAA to shut down this kind of importation (they have tried to sue allofmp3 in Russia, however got nowhere, since it is all according to the laws of the land). They will probably try to A) sue allofmp3 users if they see a chance of winning (might even do it without the chance of winning, just to inflict pain and fear and confusion, they can spend the money, end users are not in the same disposable income category, ie. $100-$500 mil) B) coerce Internet gateways to block intercontinental access to these sites (there is always workaround for that, ie. proxy)

      This is all my opinion, and based on my own shoddy research, take it with a grain of salt, on the rocks, shaken and mashed...

      --
      Code poet, espresso fiend, starter upper.
  11. I use the following.... by Kenja · · Score: 5, Informative

    I use mp3search.ru. They have a deal with the Russian equivalent of the RIAA, so these downloads SHOULD be legal where ever you are. They tend to have the CDs we in the US pay more for because there "imports". Lots of B side selections and remixes. Downloads are around 10 cents a song.

    --

    "Have you ever thought about just turning off the TV, sitting down with your kids, and hitting them?"
    1. Re:I use the following.... by MyFourthAccount · · Score: 3, Interesting

      They do though, so no using mp3search.ru is not legal. Stop fooling yourself into thinking it is.

      Interesting thing: I've just spent the last hour tooling around on mp3search.ru. Spent 20 bucks to download a bunch of old stuff that I hadn't heard for years or never heard before.

      Guess what? I just realized I have to go out and buy the original CDs for the stuff I downloaded, because I want higher quality.

      Why does it take a 'dubious' Russian website to accomplish this?

      I think it's safe to say that I have no respect for the RIAA. Nor do I for lazy artists that bitch about their music being 'stolen' after selling their sole to the devil because they had $$ signs in their eyes.

      Legal or not, we are at a state of flux and as far as I am concerned, the RIAA can go fuck themselves. When all this is sorted THEN we'll see what's illegal and what's not.

  12. This is the problem by Rexz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Any answer there is to this question will be at the best unobvious and at the worst massively convoluted. If the average consumer wants to use their digital technology effectively, they have no choice but to break the law. The lack of insight that has brought about this situation is the primary reason that the music industry is seeing such a massive downturn: it's the financial results of a cultural backlash against narrow-minded profiteering.

  13. Shouldn't you ask the Apple people? by Vo0k · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I seriously wonder what they would say.

    You have a device and nothing to fill it with. You ask them for songs and they tell you...what? Encourage you to break the law?

    --
    Anagram("United States of America") == "Dine out, taste a Mac, fries"
  14. Re:Why is there no one meeting this demand? by MikeXpop · · Score: 5, Informative

    Some record companies have no problem with it.

    Audio Luncbox also allows you to have unrestricted mp3 or aac. Enjoy!

    --
    Etiquette is etiquette. He kills his mother but he can't wear grey trousers.
  15. Not Exactly a Solution, But... by Flamingcheeze · · Score: 3, Insightful
    ... I've succesfully (and legally) avoided spending any money on music for months, while downloading hundreds of new artists and songs. I've just been scouring for free downloads from artists' websites, etc.

    One of my favorite sites is Epitonic.com. I've found so many great artists there...

    --
    The Philosophy of Liberty | lewrockwell.com
  16. allofmp3.com by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Simple - allofmp3.com - they're located in Russia, where the royalty laws for downloading music work similarly to those for radio airplay in North America. Because of this, they are able to offer a HUGE selection of music without having to hammer out deals with the major labels.

    How much does all this cost? How about $0.01 US/megabyte downloaded? What if I told you that the vast majority of their catalogue was available in high quality formats, that you can encode to your file format of choice (including LAME with --alt-presets, or OGG)? Would that sweeten the deal?

    Frankly, I don't know why these guys havn't taken off in North America, aside from a lack of publicity. I suppose there is some fear of giving your credit card to a Russian company, but their processor is highly reputable, and they now also accept PayPal.

    Here's some reviews and FAQs about their setup and its legitimacy:

    http://www.techimo.com/newsapp/i9599.html

    http://www.techimo.com/newsapp/i9599.html

  17. CD... Baby, ermm. by igrp · · Score: 4, Informative
    There's always CDBaby which has a an awesome collection, at least, as far as I am concerned and does kick back a good percentage of its profits to the artists themselves (and not their labels). As far as I know, international users are just as free to purchase songs as domestic users.

    Looks like Apple's itunes won't be available in Europe anytime soon (apparently Napster seems to want to come back in Europe though).

  18. Re:Wrong! RIAA already got someone for doing this. by ZorinLynx · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Considering the fact that MP3 compression is lossy and you can't get the original data back, how did they compare checksums? Of course the data is going to be different.

    Sounds like BS to me. }:)

  19. Weblisten by paugq · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It's in Spain, it's legal and their site is both in English and in Spanish: Weblisten.

  20. Re:Wrong! RIAA already got someone for doing this. by eean · · Score: 4, Informative

    No I don't remember.

    That sounds bogus, if ship ripped MP3's you can't check checksums. MP3 is a lossy format.

    Doesn't mean they can't figure out in some manner, not via checksums.

  21. WWJD by slash-tard · · Score: 5, Funny

    In these situations I always ask myself What Would Jesus Do?

    I think he would buy the the cd, rip it with audio hijack, and then load them up onto his iPod.

    1. Re:WWJD by pavon · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, no, no.

      He would start his own touring band, and let anyone bootleg it. When the lawyers and businesmen cornered him and asked if people should pay for copywritten music, he would answer "Give unto the laywers what is the lawyers, but live your life for others, for it is not your own but God's". After that the RIAA left outraged because he had not fallen into their trap.

      hmm, that started out as a joke :)

    2. Re:WWJD by RevAaron · · Score: 5, Funny
      That's interesting. In these situations I have a pretty similar routine... I guess you could call it WWJD, but instead I ask myself
      WHAT WOULD JEHOVAH DO?
      And, of course, there is only one answer to that: SMITE THEE!

      Man, I should get a tshirt with that.
      --

      Working toward a usable PDA environment in the spirit of Newton OS: Dynapad
    3. Re:WWJD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Actually Jesus was crucified for copying a bunch of fish and bread. He really learned his lesson on copyright infringement.

  22. OD2 biggest in europe by arkhan_jg · · Score: 3, Informative
    OD2 are the largest european online distributer, with at least some tracks from all the 'big 4' labels. They sell in germany through a number of resellers, or branded versions.

    They're primarily a WMP9 shop, but I believe at least some of the resellers use mp3's, which should work on your ipod.

    iTunes itself is coming to europe, in theory the first half of this year; but it's anyone's guess as to when they'll actually launch.

    Personally speaking, I prefer to still buy CD's, as I get to choose the rip quality (high quality ogg's for my PC, 128vbr mp3 for my flash mp3 player).

    I just refuse to buy the corrupt disks, and stick to the smaller labels, especially the indie's. If you do want to import (cheap) CD's, I can personally recommend CDBaby for non-label music, and cd-wow are insanely cheap for more well known artists.

    --
    Remember kids, it's all fun and games until someone commits wholesale galactic genocide.
  23. Re:Wrong! RIAA already got someone for doing this. by homer_ca · · Score: 3, Informative

    They ran checksums on the MP3 files, not the audio CD. MP3 compression is lossy and files will be different depending on encoder and options, but once ripped the MP3 files that are traded will be identical byte for byte. There's not that many different rips of the same song being traded so the RIAA has SHA or MD5 sums of the song files being traded online. If the woman's files were identical to the ones on Kazaa, then she must have downloaded them from Kazaa or (less likely) ripped them from her CD with the exact same encoder, bitrate and options as the person who first uploaded it.

  24. Bleep! by Blic · · Score: 3, Informative
    Warp Records' Bleep has unencrypted MP3s and it's good music too! Well, at least to me it is... =)

    Studio K7 has some limited offerings in MP3 as well.

    I think both sell internationally - Warp is in the UK and K7 is in Germany.

  25. Ethics vs. Legality by arrianus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There is a difference between ethics and legality. You cannot legally use MP3s in your country. You've been conditioned to think of copyright as "intellectual property," rather than a social contract between creator of content and the consumer, which associates concepts like stealing and piracy with what is, in the end, not theft but copyright violation. This brings with it the feeling of guilt. You've also been conditioned, probably by the German society, that laws were meant to be followed and that ethical people follow laws.

    The reality is quite different. Laws are, at best, an attempt to codify and enforce ethics by committee. The committee is usually right, but does, on occasion, make errors. In those cases, there is sometimes no compelling reason to follow the laws. Worse, as in the case of Eastern Europe under Communism, the committee maybe corrupt, in which case, the ethical thing to do is often civil disobedience, and intentionally breaking laws. To me, this feels like one of those cases.

    You should strive to follow ethics, not laws. I would argue that there is a compelling ethical argument not to give money to record companies, so they can better buy off governments to pass acts like the DMCA mandating DRM, and destroy your right to write free software capable of interacting with the mainstream world (you cannot, right now, write free legal DVD players, or players for DRMed CDs, even if they have zero uses for copying content). If this is allowed to continue, in short time, GNU/Linux computers will no longer be able to legally access music and video, followed by books and electronic texts, and eventually, mainstream documents. Once this happens, GNU/Linux and free software will have been effectively legally banned from any sort of desktop use (and quite possibly, eventually, server use).

    I would sidestep the issue of benefiting personally from illegal action by making sure you do not benefit. Donate the money you would have spent on CDs to either the artists, or organizations like the FSF, the EFF and similar. Make sure you donate at least as much as you have in illegal content. Then, gather the content illegally, and use it as you see fit. I believe this is the second most ethical course of action (the most ethical being that you only boycott all mainstream music, and listen only to independent labels uninvolved in the push for DRM).

  26. Tens of Thousands of Legal Music Downloads by MichaelCrawford · · Score: 4, Informative
    You need to read my article Links to Tens of Thousands of Legal Music Downloads. It has been the #1 hit at Google for the query legal music downloads for several months.

    From the introduction:

    You don't need to worry about getting sued by the Recording Industry Assocation of America or arrested by the FBI if you download legal music. Many independent and unsigned musicians offer downloads of their music in hopes of attracting more fans. Here's some music from my friends Oliver Brown and Rick Walker's Loop.pooL.

    If everyone started downloading legal music instead of violating copyright with the file sharing programs, we would make short work of the RIAA, because people would start buying CDs directly from the artists and seeing their shows instead of enriching the major labels by buying CDs from the bands the labels have chosen for us to listen to. The RIAA would also have no cause to complain - these music downloads do not infringe copyright because the artists give you permission to download them.

    In particular, you should be listening to iRATE radio. It downloads and plays those legal MP3s that the artists have on their websites, so you don't have to go hunting for them. If you've already tried out iRATE, note that version 0.3 was just released, so get the update if you don't already have it.

    --
    Request your free CD of my piano music.
  27. Just break the law by Saint+Stephen · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Like you, I once (recently) set out on this Quixotic quest to discover a set of self-consistent rules within society, whereby one can function adequately. My conclusion that, while "society" says one thing, in reality it conspires to produce "law-breakers". Societies do not care so much about producing law-abiding citizens, their primary purpose is to produce law-breakers, who they will then punish.

    Since "society" cannot realize this about itself, it often leaves most criminals unpunished. Therefore it is better to be a criminal.

    You'll go insane the other way.

  28. Ripping services... by turnstyle · · Score: 4, Informative

    Perhaps not a solution for the original post, but some reading this thread may be interested in RipDigital. You mail them your collection of CDs and they mail back your CDs along with ripped MP3s on a data DVD they burn for you...

    --
    Here's what I do: Bitty Browser & Andromeda
  29. Borrow a CD and copy it, its legal in Canada by Shiifty · · Score: 3, Interesting
    In Canada, I can borrow a CD (from a friend or the library), copy it and return the CD, and keep the copy for myself. This is legal and is what we pay levy fees for. However, you cannot have someone else copy it for you, and you cannot copy a copy. You must make the copy yourself from an original.

    Other countries have a similar law in place, you should check it out.