Slashdot Mirror


Allofmp3.com Wins Court Case

remove writes "Gizmodo is running a story from a reader tip that claims that the russian site Allofmp3.com, popular with slashdotters for their user selectable format which had been reported as being under investigation recently has been let off the hook by the Russian DA, becuase of a loophole in russian law which allows users create copies of songs by request. Basically, even though the courts have found their site operator's behavior to be illegal- they can't prosecute because the user dynamically creates copies of songs to be downloaded themselves."

2 of 437 comments (clear)

  1. Re:RIAA Dream Team Lawyers Fail? by reifchen · · Score: 5, Informative
    Whilst (like most /.'rs) I haven't done a full investigation, I don't think that the RIAA was directly behind this.

    Instead, try the IIPA, (which the RIAA is a member of), which has requested that the US govt place trade restrictions on certain countries due to copyright infringement issues.

    This is, unfortunately, one of those times where the sheer size of the US of A economy can, through the careful applications of trade sanctions, have dramatic effects on the economys of other countries.

    Hence, it is not surprising that if trade sanctions are insinuated, countries may well roll over and go after entities that aren't abiding by US (copyright) law (but are abiding by that country's laws), or alter their (copyright) laws to be more closely conforming with US (copyright) law.

  2. Re:Text from Gizmodo: by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 5, Informative
    Could you show me the exact text of US law that says it's illegal to download a Britney Spears MP3?

    Odd request, but okay.

    17 USC 501(a):
    Anyone who violates any of the exclusive rights of the copyright owner as provided by sections 106 through 122 or of the author as provided in section 106A (a), or who imports copies or phonorecords into the United States in violation of section 602, is an infringer of the copyright or right of the author, as the case may be.


    17 USC 106:
    Subject to sections 107 through 122, the owner of copyright under this title has the exclusive rights to do and to authorize [the reproduction of] the copyrighted work in copies or phonorecords....


    17 USC 101:
    "Copies" are material objects, other than phonorecords, in which a work is fixed by any method now known or later developed, and from which the work can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device.

    "Phonorecords" are material objects in which sounds, other than those accompanying a motion picture or other audiovisual work, are fixed by any method now known or later developed, and from which the sounds can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device.


    Distribution is another one of the rights in 106, but reproducing a work into a copy is infringing regardless of whether or not you distribute it later.

    You're right that it is not infringement to buy a copy (though some forms of obtaining a copy may be infringing), but that only covers buying. Reproduction that occurs in the process is still potentially infringing.
    --
    -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.