UK Recording Industry Wants Allofmp3 An Issue at G8

alveraan writes "According to a the BBC, 'the UK recording industry is urging the foreign secretary to raise the issue of Russian bargain music download website allofmp3.com at the G8 summit'. British Phonographic Industry (BPI) chairman Peter Jamieson wants Margaret Beckett to 'urge the Russian government to take action against the operators of the site by insisting that it is removed from the internet'. Allofmp3 has insisted in the past that it is operating in compliance with Russian copyright laws."

Comments

Be Ashamed

[SB_SamuraiSam]

Seriously. Even wanting to bitch about piracy there and now is disgraceful when there are more important things at hand.

Re:Be Ashamed

[A Dafa Disciple]

Oh, you know how it is with all these political types. It's not about what's "important"; Importance is only relative anyways.

You know what makes an issue seem important? Voices. Voices create the feeling of presence. And surely, if there is presence on behalf of a particular issue, then that issue seems important. Unfortunately for the masses, a small number of rich people can buy voices and create presence, thus promoting their own ideologies as important.

I kind of feel that this post should be moderated as "Well duh," but perhaps a reminder never hurts.

Re:Be Ashamed

[TubeSteak]

Not to detract from your point, but the U.N. Security Council already has an emergency meeting planned.

It isn't like most of the G8 countries aren't dealing with those issues.

P.S. The international community can deal with more than one thing at a time. Economic issues represent 50% of the G8's mission statement.

Re:Be Ashamed

[pete6677]

In the end, it won't really change anything. The UN Security Council will continue to do what they do best: nothing. It will take a good 3 weeks for them to even agree on exactly what problem they're supposed to be discussing. After much debate from 3rd world dictatorships, they'll pass some meaningless resolutions that most of the world will ignore. Same shit, different day. Could the UN possibly be any less relevant?

Re:Be Ashamed

[ArGeRuS]

And add to that list the genocide taking place in Chechnya!
More than 200000 people of the ca 1100000 who lived there are DEAD, including 40000 children.

Thank you SB_SamuraiSam for saying what I thought to myself when I read the summary.

Some people have their priorities f*cked up.

Re:Be Ashamed

[zanidor]

Even wanting to bitch about piracy there and now is disgraceful when there are more important things at hand.

Exactly. Like how "The British Phonographic Industry" always looks like "The British Pornographic Industry" at first glance. IMO, this is a huge image/credibility issue with the BPI that must be addressed ASAP.

Re:Be Ashamed

[turnipsatemybaby]

That is true, but the economics issues discussed are also high level discussions. Those discussions don't get to that fine level of detail, such as one specific music company in Russia, unless that detail is critical to a given nation's well being.

The day that mp3s have the same level of importance as genocide or nuclear holocaust, is the day.... I can't come up with a metaphore to truely express how utterly pathetic and hopless we would be as a human race.

Re:Be Ashamed

[init100]

Like how "The British Phonographic Industry" always looks like "The British Pornographic Industry" at first glance.

This could work for IFPI too, the International Federation of the Pornographic Industry.

Re:Be Ashamed

[Anonymous Coward]

Oh, you know how it is with all these political types. It's not about what's "important"; Importance is only relative anyways.

You know what makes an issue seem important? Voices.

Close, but not quite. Most politicians have learned to ignore voices pretty damn well. What makes an issue seem important is how much money, power, and/or fame they can use the issue to obtain, or how much money, power, and/or fame they stand to lose if they ignore the issue. For most politicians, unless you can promise them that listening to you will bring them one of those three things, they couldn't care less what you have to say.

Re:Be Ashamed

[joeljkp]

Oh give me a break. It's the recording industry, not the all the important issues in the world industry. Of course they're going to want this an issue at one of the biggest international summits on the planet - it's their job, it's what they were created and are paid to do.

Of course, you could argue that whole premise, but then you'd be getting into "why are you posting on Slashdot when you could be feeding a hungry child" territory.

Re:Be Ashamed

[gowen]

Sure. But Israel is not exactly well known for bowing to international pressure to restrain its more aggressive instincts. If a stack of UN resolutions a mile high didn't accelerate the withdrawal from Gaza, I don't think a few words from G8 are going to make any difference.

Re:Be Ashamed

[ch-chuck]

Another bogus argument - just because one problem isn't solved does not mean everybody has to drop everything and focus full attention on it. Good grief, surely you don't think that if this gaggle of politicians would only focus and squeeze hard enough, they could solve a 2k yo religious war?

Just because someone robbed a bank doesn't mean the police should stop arresting kids for stealing candy.

Re:Be Ashamed

[A Dafa Disciple]

Close, but not quite. Most politicians have learned to ignore voices pretty damn well. What makes an issue seem important is how much money, power, and/or fame they can use the issue to obtain, or how much money, power, and/or fame they stand to lose if they ignore the issue. For most politicians, unless you can promise them that listening to you will bring them one of those three things, they couldn't care less what you have to say.

I definitely agree with you, 110%. I think an addendum to that would be that there are in fact times when politicians don't have an opportunity to pursue their self-serving interests, when the opposing pressure is too great and the spotlight is too bright; basically, a politician is only as honest as the people keep him.

Re:Be Ashamed

[OldeTimeGeek]

The UN is irrelevant because the member countries prefer it that way.

Do you honestly think that any one of the larger members would tolerate the UN telling them what to do about an internal issue? Would the US allow Peacekeepers at Guantanamo Bay? The Russians in Chechnya? The Chinese in Tibet? If the UN had agreed with the Argentine government about the Falklands and stationed troops there after the invasion to keep the British away, how would that have gone over?

The UN was, is, and always will be a debating society because nations with veto power in the General Assembly will never allow it to be anthing else.

Re:Be Ashamed

[Apotekaren]

It's sad really that the UN has been belittled to such a unuseful role.
People wonder why none of the dictatorships are being intimidated by the supposed power of the UN. The answer is simple. If the wester countries ignore the UN, so can they. *cough*War in Iraq*cough*.
If the US can just trample UN resolutions without any sanctions, do you think the dictators have any reason to belive the UN can have any power over THEM?

Re:Be Ashamed

[Afrosheen]

You make a good point which was underscored by the UN losing all credibility during the Iraqi invasion. The UN offices were abandoned faster than a French military outpost at the first sight of shelling and unrest in the streets. After all, the thin veil of authority the UN held over the Middle East was promptly yanked when the first US bombs fell from the sky. If the UN says stop, but everyone rolls in, it's obvious they have no power whatsoever.

  It's really a shame for them because the UN actually used to keep alot of shit from erupting just by BEING in an unstable territory. Those days are over.

Re:Be Ashamed

[rainman_bc]

In the end, it won't really change anything. The UN Security Council will continue to do what they do best: nothing.

You can thank all the nations that have permanent Vetos for that one.

There is no doubt that a body overseeing decisions made by the UN is hugely important, but to give any country a permanent veto is just a recipe for dysfunction - China and the US are both guilty of that.

Re:Be Ashamed

[Eternauta3k]

I swear to fucking god I thought it was the pornographic industry until I read this post. Guessed it was the UK's RIAA

Re:Be Ashamed

[gowen]

If the UN says stop, but everyone rolls in, it's obvious they have no power whatsoever.

For small values of "Everyone". A few rogue states like the USA and the UK (don't forget Poland) don't constitute "everyone", regardless of what US network TV tells you.

Re:Be Ashamed

[exp(pi*sqrt(163))]

Whatever. Life doesn't stop in one part of the world just because a bunch of people in another part of the world decide they'd rather kick the sh*t out of each other.

Re:Be Ashamed

[Quikah]

Really, what can they do? The only possible solution that I can even fathom is for a UN force to occupy Israel, Palestine, Lebanon and disarm the entire region. That is not going to happen, no side would allow it. The people there just hate each other too much and are too stubborn to compormise for their to be any reasonable solution.

Re:Be Ashamed

[Afrosheen]

The US, France, Germany, Poland, Japan, Canada..the who's who of world politics. That pretty much constitutes everybody from an influential standpoint.

Re:Be Ashamed

[Goose In Orbit]

I feel an "Aliens" quote coming on...

Re:Be Ashamed

[gowen]

Err. No. The only countries to supply troops for the invasion of Iraq were the US, the UK, Spain, Poland, Australia and Japan. And Spain withdrew very early on, and Poland and Australia did not actually send very many troops. And the Japanese constitution restricts their involvement to the extent that they're prevented from actually fighting.

But thanks for playing.

Re:Be Ashamed

[shenanigans]

Rather, it won't change anything because the US (you know, that _first_ world dictatorship?) HAS A FUCKING VETO that has ALWAYS been used in favour of Israel. Try looking up some facts before spewing your crap. The latest such veto was two days ago.

The US is already dead set on attacking Iran, this is just the first step. The plan is to provoke a reaction from Iran (or one that they will blame on Iran), and then the US enters in full force. This could happen as soon as within a week or two.

Re:Be Ashamed

[maniaku]

Most of you guys are so fu..in hypocrite. Why the hell do you think you can afford everything you have when a big part of the world doesn't even have access to water? Do you think it happened because of morality in business practices? Some of the wealth and privileges you have is because the rest of the world is paying 99 cents a song and drinks coca cola. Guess where that money is going? The companies you are rating about here pay taxes in your country that you than enjoy by having better highways,jobs etc. So are you ready to give up some of your privileges for better business practices and international politics? NO? THAN SHUT THE F>>> UP! YOU MAKE ME SICK!

Re:Be Ashamed

[pete6677]

And this would be a bad thing why? I was saying since before the Iraq war that we were attacking the wrong country. We should have gone into Iran in the first place, since they are the epicenter of world terrorism. Where do you think all of the financial and military backing of Islamist groups comes from? Deny it all you want but the problem of fundamentalist Islam won't go away by ignoring or appeasing it.

Re:Be Ashamed

[stunt_penguin]

It's the only way to be sure.

Re:Be Ashamed

[comp.sci]

Wow, how did that post got moderated up?

The UN was in Iraq on a humanitarian and diplomatic mission, not to keep control and order! What you are thinking of is the UN involvment in other countries, such as in the Kosovo, where there is an actual MILITARY presence that keeps control and order.

So you say the UN loses all credibility when a bunch of people who hand out food and do logistics leave the country when their lives start being in danger? Remember: the UN was AGAINST an invasion.
I think it's a shame that you complain about people who put their lives at danger in order to help others.

Re:Be Ashamed

[Afrosheen]

My apologies if the tone offended you, but the angle I was looking at was the UN as a peacekeeping force, not a humanitarian one. However, the UN only began giving humanitarian aid after the sanctions were lifted after the dismal Oil for Food program was implemented. Ironically the crises Iraq faced during the sanctions weren't self inflicted.... Its like giving your little brother candy after you punch him in the face. He never needed help until you hurt him.

  Please don't try to portray the UN in an angelic light. For all the good they've done in the past, under Kofi Annan they've done plenty of evil.

Re:Be Ashamed

[terrymr]

But we wrote the Japanese constitution - so it's not like it's their fault.

Re:Be Ashamed

[Petrushka]

I agree in principle, but it's kind of difficult to just dismiss the one person in the room who's saying "no", if you notice s/he's brandishing thousands upon thousands of nukes at you at the same time.

Re:Be Ashamed

[Anonymous Coward]

Where did you get all that BS?

Oh, wait, you must be watching only the official propaganda.
Remember, Iraq was too sold as the source world-wide evil - they provided the 9/11 attackers, then they had WMD, then they had oil and we need it.

Re:Be Ashamed

[Knuckles]

doesn't mean the police should stop arresting kids for stealing candy

The police should stop doing that in any case, and I find it horrific having to live under a jurisdiction that allows it in the first place.

Re:Be Ashamed

[1u3hr]

I was saying since before the Iraq war that we were attacking the wrong country. We should have gone into Iran in the first place, since they are the epicenter of world terrorism

The epicenter? 16 of the 19 WTC hijackers were Saudi, as is Osama.

The US has been fucking around with Iran for over 60 years. They removed their democratically elected Prime Minister Mohammed Mossadegh in 1953 and replaced him with the Shah. Finally the people revolted against this dictator propped up by the US and went to a Islamic government. Then the US encouraged and financed Saddam to go to war with them for 10 years. Nevertheless, more moderate leaders are popular, but are undercut by the extremists who can play the American card every time.

You've literally created your own nemesis. Short of nuking the whole country, you can't stop terrorism by military action. (And if you did nuke Iran, you'd radicalise every muslim nation in the world.) Try to wean yourself off cheap oil if you want to make the world, and America, safer.

Re:Be Ashamed

[mpe]

The UN Security Council will continue to do what they do best: nothing.

Kind of difficult for them to do anything which any of the 5 permenent members don't like. This includes the current Middle East situation, since the US will veto anything which even identifies the primary trouble maker here.

Re:Be Ashamed

[mpe]

Really, what can they do? The only possible solution that I can even fathom is for a UN force to occupy Israel, Palestine, Lebanon and disarm the entire region. That is not going to happen, no side would allow it.

Even if you could cut off external support it would be rather difficult for any force to occupy Israel. For one thing where would you get the soldiers from? They certainly could not come from the US or anywhere else strongly involved. You'd also undoubtely need nuclear weapons placed under UN control to deter Israel from using its own. (Whilst New York may be safe, Geneva isn't.)

Re:Be Ashamed

[Anonymous Coward]

And this would be a bad thing why? I was saying since before the Iraq war that we were attacking the wrong country. We should have gone into Iran in the first place, since they are the epicenter of world terrorism.

Actually quite a bit of terrorism traces back to the USA. The US could do a lot by stopping supporting terrorism and training terrorists.

Re:Be Ashamed

[Anonymous Coward]

But Israel is not exactly well known for bowing to international pressure to restrain its more aggressive instincts. If a stack of UN resolutions a mile high didn't accelerate the withdrawal from Gaza, I don't think a few words from G8 are going to make any difference.

When has Israel actually faced international pressure? The US always stands ready to protect Israel, with UN vetos, money and weapons. (Even when Israel attacked the USS Liberty.)
About the only thing which might make Israel take notice would be a missile fired at Tel Aviv.

Re:Be Ashamed

[dfjghsk]

the dictators were there before the iraq invasion. they weren't afraid of the UN then either.

What makes the UN a joke is that a country *cough*Iraq*cough* can repeatedly violate UN resolutions, and yet the UN still won't authorize force.

UN: STOP, or I'll ask you again!

Re:Be Ashamed

[Anonymous Coward]

What you are essentially doing is blaming the UN for being ignored by you. Twisted.

Re:Be Ashamed

[Afrosheen]

Regardless of the roles each country played, they were still present and lending support and assistance. You don't have to supply troops to count. Canada was there in a support role as well, with engineers and repair crews on the battlefield and behind the lines.

  But thanks for playing.

Re:Be Ashamed

[Anonymous Coward]

What makes the UN a joke is that a country *cough*Iraq*cough* can repeatedly violate UN resolutions, and yet the UN still won't authorize force.

... but when it comes to Israel we're fully ok with the US vetoing everything again and again?

The Fascist States of America is _not_ the world police we want ...

Re:Be Ashamed

[Anonymous Coward]

Canada was there in a support role as well, with engineers and repair crews on the battlefield and behind the lines.

Citations please? I have looked, and I can find no references to Canadians on the battlefield in Iraq.

Canada, like other NATO countries, has soldier exchange programs, so there have been Canadian soldiers with the US forces in Iraq, as part of the US forces. Likewise, as part of the British forces. I have not heard of any these soldiers being involved in actual fighting, but it is possible. If so, they were doing so as part of the US or British force, not as part of a Canadian force.

To the best that I can find, the Canadian military engineers and repair crews went to Iraq after the war was "over" and have not been on a battlefield during fighting.

Peter

Re:Be Ashamed

[coolGuyZak]

If the US can just trample UN resolutions without any sanctions, do you think the dictators have any reason to belive the UN can have any power over THEM?

In a certain light, this statement is true. However, I feel that you left something out. The UN suffers from the same problems that the original Confederacy of the US did. (The one before we became a pluralist republic). In short: the UN not only doesn't have teeth, it never did. The power of the UN derives itself solely from the power of the most influential sovereign state(s) that comprise it. (Traditionally, the US and, before 1992, the USSR. China appears to be a contender, but I digress). Since the most powerful member of the UN (the US) assumed a unilateral agenda, the UN lost the power to put her back in line--and even this reasoning assumes that the UN wasn't a mere pawn of US diplomats to begin with.

Compare this to the US' federal government: it has the means necessary to coerce states to abide by federal law. Because of this, those states have been kept in line, so to speak.

Would a centralized, powerful UN be a good thing? That's arguable. However, it would have averted the dilemma we find ourselves in today.

Full disclosure: I am a citizen of the US.

Re:Be Ashamed

[Gingernads]

If this is a diplomatic mission, where is the ambassador? Take her away.

Still up

[bfmorgan]

I'm down loading now.

International Influence

[A Dafa Disciple]

I can see the RIAA drooling over this event.

With the UKRI pushing their agenda in allofmp3.com's backyard, at a conference of international powers, this becomes an international issue.

Whatever happens there is likely to serve as some sort of moral precedence and influence legislators in the US as well.

Re:International Influence

[TheRaven64]

And the more they push it, the more people will hear about allofmp3.com. Some of them may visit the site, and see how cheap it is to distribute music online. They may start to realise that it's possible to distribute that 99 iTunes track for 10, cover all distribution costs, and still make a profit. They may start wondering if the recording industry really deserves to be getting 90/track for music that was recorded decades ago by people who are now dead, of if they deserve a 900% profit margin.

Re:International Influence

[shark72]

"And the more they push it, the more people will hear about allofmp3.com. Some of them may visit the site, and see how cheap it is to distribute music online. They may start to realise that it's possible to distribute that 99 iTunes track for 10, cover all distribution costs, and still make a profit."

I was at Best Buy the other day, looking at large flat panel monitors. They were nice, but I just couldn't justify buying one for $1,000. Then when I was in the parking lot, a scruffy looking kid called me over to his car. His trunk was open, and he had some monitors that had "fallen off the truck". And they were only $100! This guy has really shown Best Buy that it's possible to sell a $1,000 monitor for $100, cover all distribution costs, and still make a profit.

"They may start wondering if the recording industry really deserves to be getting 90/track for music that was recorded decades ago by people who are now dead, of if they deserve a 900% profit margin."

It is not mathematically possible to have a profit margin of more than 100%. ITYM "900% markup." But is your issue that record companies charge the same price for music by dead people as they do by people who have not yet shed this mortal coil? If so, do you only pirate music by dead people? A related question: Magnatune allows you to download a CD's worth of music for as low as $5. That's still several X the price of music on the Russian sites. Do you think that this makes Magnatune greedy? At least the traditional record companies will front the artists the production money; Magnatune does no such thing. Do you think they deserve to charge so much?

Smart people -- on both sides of the piracy debate -- know that the record industry is hugely competitive and highly speculative, and that the reality is that net profit margins are actually quite low. With the exception of the big media conglomerates that happen to have recording company arms (and you shouldn't be buying music from them anyway), it's exceedlingly rare to find a record company in the Fortune 500, and the reality is that most record companies are like Magnatune -- they have very small staffs and everybody is generally over-worked and under-paid. This is why there's an inherent issue with flying the "the record companies are greedy" flag when making the choice to pirate or use the Russian sites. At the least, there's the karma issue: it's easy for us to declare that somebody is greedy or makes too much money by some arbitrarily standard when considering whether we're going to violate their rights. But no matter how much money we make, somebody with less money than us just might make that same arbitrary decision about us.

Re:International Influence

[cyber-vandal]

At least the traditional record companies will front the artists the production money; Magnatune does no such thing. Do you think they deserve to charge so much?

I largely agree with your argument apart from this bit. Firstly Magnatune doesn't have a crapload of money to do this like the big companies do and secondly the big record companies don't hand the artists free money, they have to pay that loan back out of their royalties, which, given how much a CD sells for is a relative pittance.

Re:International Influence

[Anonymous Coward]

His trunk was open, and he had some monitors that had "fallen off the truck".

Strange that you confuse copied music and actual theft. It has been the aim of the *AA and the BPI to do this in the publics mind and that is why they coined the term 'pirate'. To an intelligent person there is no similarity between copying and permanently depriving someone of something they own, so copying is not theft by any true definition of the word but the *AA want people to see copying as a crime so they put the concept of theft into the minds of people. How would they do that? With stupid little imaginary anecdotes etc. and advertising campaigns at the cinema etc. 'You wouldn't steal a ...., would you'.

You cute little anecdote seems to be contrived and I think you are a plant. Smart people know that the record industry is not competitive so why do you say that? They are protectionist and their business model has dried up so they use the Microsoft type tactic of using lawyers when they lack innovation. MP3 sites are the future that blows their business model out of the water. In the future a band can go from touring to famous without needing to involve the record industry and that scares them. This is not about copyright, it is a dying dog lashing out at all around as he fight the inevitable. Their staff are underpaid because they are too greedy to share their wealth with those that help them gain it. That is real greed and your apparent blindness to what you are saying makes me even more sure that you are a plant.

Re:International Influence

[shark72]

To be clear, I think the guys who run Magnatune are great. They're trying what many Slashdotters would believe is the ideal business model for a record company: charge a sliding sale, allow the music to be copied, and don't apply DRM. And as that billboard on the 101 in Palo Alto will attest, it looks like it's starting to work for them.

But consider this: a traditional record company sells a CD to distributors for $10. The money they make from that sale must cover the rather significant cash investment they've made. Magnatune, however, invests no money into artist development and thus has ultra-low operating costs compared to record companies. Yet they charge $8 to $18 per CD.

The GGP stated that record companies don't "deserve" to make above a certain profit margin, and I was asking if Magnatune is on his good side or his bad side, since their net margin per sale is likely much, much higher than that of a typical record company. As you can probably guess, I think the entire issue of whether somebody "deserves" to make a certain profit margin is complete and utter bullshit; Magnatune or iTMS or BMG or whatever have the right to charge whatever the market will bear. And in the case of Magnatune, if they can make a million bucks by adopting the high-margin model of not investing into artists, then more power to them!

Re:International Influence

[TheVelvetFlamebait]

Look, I know that Slashdotters get offended if they don't get their goods at distribution cost price, but there are other costs involved. Costs in paying the artist fairly (ie not just giving them a couple of cents per sale), costs in production, costs in marketing, and then, only then, costs in distribution. This may not justify the price tag, but I don't think they are grossly overcharging for music.

Re:International Influence

[kehren77]

Come to think of it, why haven't we heard more from the RIAA on this topic? I would think they would want allofmp3.com shutdown just as much as the BPI.

I still don't undertand why the music industry doesn't start their own $1/CD download site. That way they could get their piece of the pie and not get the bad PR for once. Besides, these sites help the music industry get play. the more play you get the greater the odds of selling t-shirts, concert tickets, etc.... That's where the true money is.

Re:International Influence

[megaditto]

You might like to know the likely reason allofmp3's bandwidth costs are so low: the Russian ISPs will charge $0 cost, or even PAY for customer upload to outside of Russia.

Why? It's the way the Internet is setup in Europe: very few backbones, but a lot more direct peering agreements. What that means is that ISPs pay for data downloaded by their customers, and get credit for data uploaded from the customers.

That's not the case in the US; the ISPs have to pay both ways to the back-boners because of the deregulation legislation in the 1990's under Clinton ;(

Re:International Influence

[1u3hr]

some monitors that had "fallen off the truck". And they were only $100! This guy has really shown Best Buy that it's possible to sell a $1,000 monitor for $100, cover all distribution costs, and still make a profit

You seem to be saying AllofMP3 are thieves. They pay licence fees under Russian law, basically operating under the compulsory licensing model as used for radio broadcasters in many countries. The various foreign music companies could get their cut, admittedly not as much as they'd like, if they filled out a few forms. As for the profit margin, obviously Allof MP3 is covering their costs with their very low prices. So that implies the bulk of iTunes, et al., fees for similar services are pure profit.

Re:International Influence

[Anonymous Coward]

To correct few errors about Magnatune.

a traditional record company sells a CD to distributors for $10. The money they make from that sale must cover the rather significant cash investment they've made. Magnatune, however, invests no money into artist development and thus has ultra-low operating costs compared to record companies.

Why do you assume that Magnatune has ultra-low operating costs? Have you ever stopped to think about their services for a few minutes, if not here's a quick tour.

• all accepted artists must be previewed first, that means someone has to listen the songs and then propose artist to be included into Magnatune listings and make the paper work. This is not an automated system at all.
• all the licenses what they offer must be carefully examined (maybe even by a lawyer) and inserted into the system, just think about how long it takes to implement this system and to test it. Not a simple task, so we could assume there's webmasters/programmers involved
• storing all the data in several formats probably totaling up to few terabytes atleast + backups
• bandwidth costs are probably rather huge because of people listening to the music for free either by downloading MP3s or listening the streams (Magnatune even had few stations at Shoutcast.com but due to costs compared to sales this wasn't a good plan).
• traditional promotion

So yes, in respect to old record companies they don't hand out loans, provide limos etc. instead they do what the artists really cannot do effectively by themselves and that is distribution. Take a look at their Business Model. All this comes with an price that must be covered by the only major income source and that is sales which of they get 50%. Compare that 50% to old record labels. How much did artist get from a CD sale again?

Yet they charge $8 to $18 per CD.

Which of 50% go ALWAYS to the artist and you can CHOOSE how much of $5 to $18 you want to pay. Did it occur that the more you pay the more the artist gets? Of course Magnatune gets more too but isn't that good too, maybe then in the future they could offer even more services for both artists and consumers. And again, it's a lot more per sale than other record labels offer.

Re:International Influence

[Intrinsic]

This is why there's an inherent issue with flying the "the record companies are greedy" flag when making the choice to pirate or use the Russian sites. At the least, there's the karma issue: it's easy for us to declare that somebody is greedy or makes too much money by some arbitrarily standard when considering whether we're going to violate their rights. But no matter how much money we make, somebody with less money than us just might make that same arbitrary decision about us.

Here is the problem I have with this analogy. This all comes down to energy. (you might think im insane, thats to bad for you) But the world is really goverened by one thing if you want to have peace with people around you and reap profits. Have a mindset of giving without expecting anything in return. Spend more time figuring out ways to make peoples lives better and in turn you're life will be come more wealthy than you can possibly imagine. This mind set creates a vacum (space) in your life for things to flow in, and it can be applied to any situation. Its completeley counter-inutitive, which is why many people belive that if they can just hold on to what the got they wont loose it, but you dont have any control over that, things come ago, one day you could be rich and powerful and the next day you could have nothing but the shirt on your back. When you remove your attachment to that outcome all that shit that you think really matters goes away, Life is more than just the sum of what you accomplish.

This is why what the music industry, or any corporation that is driven soley by profits, and not by first having a desire to give to others is ultimatley flawed. Customers of any product will allways be loyal to who the business who has their best intersts at heart. When you give to someone with out asking for something in return, you create a space for them to give back. Having said that if the music industry was more giving, meaning that were not so concered with what they think they are loosing, they wouldnt be in this situation. They're so concered with this supposed loss that doesnt exist that they are creating their own deimse. When you have a fear of loss you create that loss ten fold, they fight against people who distrubte music, and those people or others who feel they are wronged fight back harder, in becomes and endless cycle of resistance that has no puropose but to harm. when you have compassion for people with a sense that no matter what you do, everything is going to be ok you are not focused anymore on a specific outcome, and your problems go away without any real doing on your part, and then things that you need can come to you with out any struggeling .
Anyway just my thoughts on the subject, sorry for the spelling my spelling sucks and my checker is not working.

Re:International Influence

[sm62704]

"rather significant cash investment?" How signifigant is a couple thousand bucks???? I have friends in indie bands who publish their own music; there are inexpensive but very good recording studios even in a small city like Springfield (100k people).

You're talking about an investment or the price of a few good musical instruments, with an 80% profit margin; in lots of 5,000 CDs it costs about $2, most bands here charge ten bucks. We're talking about factory "pressed", labeled, and packaged CDs.

This is what I've been buying the last few years, with an occasional used CD at Recycled Records.

Most of these bands give their MP3s away. The reason the established labels want to kill P2P (off topic, sorry; you won't find Posamist or The Station or the Oohs or Mr Oppornockity or Inspected By Twelve at allofmp3.com, I looked) is because they control radio (where you get music for free, and can "tape" it wil a computer even easier than with a tape deck) but they can't control the internet.

This is about crushing the competetion - and the competetion happens to be friends of mine.

So it's personal with me.

Re:International Influence

[sm62704]

Smart people -- on both sides of the piracy debate -- know that the record industry is hugely competitive and highly speculative, and that the reality is that net profit margins are actually quite low.

It's neither my fault nor my problem that your employer's business model is out of date. Your employer competes with my friends, who are indie musicians. Most of them record CDs in recording studios and have them professionally published and packaged, usually in lots of 5,000.

They pay around $2 per CD and most sell them for $10, a few ofr $5. Even $5 is more than a 50% markup.

I was at Best Buy the other day, looking at large flat panel monitors. They were nice, but I just couldn't justify buying one for $1,000. Then when I was in the parking lot, a scruffy looking kid with taped glasses and a pocket protector called me over to his car. His trunk was open, and he had some monitors that he had "cobbled together from spare parts". And they were only $100! This guy has really shown Best Buy that it's possible to sell a $1,000 monitor for $100, cover all distribution costs, and still make a profit.

Doubtful

[rkhalloran]

Somehow I think this is a little too low-level to come up at a summit like this.

But I'm sure it makes great press for the British recording association to push at their membership to show why they're paying them dues...

Re:Doubtful

[celardore]

What's more important to an organisation like the recording industry folks? Education, fighting disease, global energy security? - or profits? They'd like to get there name in those lights, sure, but I agree.

Re:Doubtful

[mobby_6kl]

To me, it seems reasonably appropriate for the G8 to look at it. It's actually a rather serious conflict of copyright laws we're seeing here. Currently it's ok for Allofmp3 to unlimitedly export the music, and since their costs are minimal, they can easily undercut any other service. Fine, this would force the competition to lower prices, but with AMP3's costs consist of a few servers and bandwidth, compared to the recording, publishing, promoting, etc. costs of music labels, the latter would find themselves with no income if AMP3 expands further.

BPI's motives are possibly simply "whaaa, they're taking our money!!1", but IMO there's a real issue here. What if Russia's copyright laws allowed GPL software to be unconditionally used as parts of commercial applications?

Re:Doubtful

[init100]

To me, it seems reasonably appropriate for the G8 to look at it.

But what can they use to put pressure on the Russians? Mr Putin has threatened to turn off the gas before, and he might do it again if he don't like being pushed around by the MAFIAA.

Re:Doubtful

[arivanov]

What if Russia's copyright laws allowed GPL software to be unconditionally used as parts of commercial applications?

More interesting question is what if they allowed AllofSoftware.com.

I do not think they do, but the question is worth asking.

Re:Doubtful

[Anonymous Coward]

More interesting question is what if they allowed AllofSoftware.com.

If they sold only lossy encoded versions of software, I doubt it would bother anyone in the free or commercial software business very much.

Copyright Holders

[gid13]

Yes, this is why our leaders have summit meetings these days. To protect the interests of the rich bastards that finance their campaigns. Somebody hurry up and get a Pirate Party up and running. Oh right, there's no such thing as proportional representation in most places. Wonderful.

Re:Copyright Holders

[Anonymous Coward]

maybe if you worked in the entertainment industry and saw some dodgy russian criminals making a living from your hard work and not paying a penny to you or your representatives, youd give a shit.
But no, youd rather bitch about how you want those peoples efforts for less money, whilst simulatneously bitching about cheap indian workers taking your jobs.
grow up.

Re:Copyright Holders

[1000101]

"...of the rich bastards..."

Ahh, your true colors are shining through. There is nothing inherently wrong with being rich. If you were rich, I seriously doubt you would mind. The problem is the individual, not the money.

Re:Copyright Holders

[gid13]

1. I'm in a band. I don't bitch about people sharing my music.
2. Most "big" bands also don't bitch about people sharing their music.
3. I don't bitch about wanting those peoples efforts for less money, most recorded music is shit, and I either buy or download the rest depending on various factors.
4. I don't bitch about outsourcing either.

Re:Copyright Holders

[gid13]

"There is nothing inherently wrong with being rich."
Actually, distribution of wealth is a major problem. An even bigger problem is the fact that money apparently buys the rich the ability to push a political agenda that will make them more money and worsen the already problematic distribution of wealth.

Re:Copyright Holders

[zifferent]

"...of the rich bastards..."

Ahh, your true colors are shining through. There is nothing inherently wrong with being rich. If you were rich, I seriously doubt you would mind. The problem is the individual, not the money.

No, if he said those rich people he would be lumping them all together. He said "rich bastards" of which a person would have to belong to both the rich group AND the bastards group. He obviously has not issues with rich nice people.

Re:Copyright Holders

[toneslook]

I'm honestly not that old, but I remember 10 years before tinternet hit my backward little town; eulogising that the WWW would enable free distribution of data, and the artist could sell to the punter! Imagine that - Metallicaz new album being beamed from Hetfields home ;) G8 discussions are about the richest nations protecting their riches and EMI etc are very rich.

Re:Copyright Holders

[Anonymous Coward]

Perhaps you already know this, but in case you don't, there actually is a Pirate Party.

Re:Copyright Holders

[eviltypeguy]

I know many people that would be considered "rich," -- that is six figure income or much higher at the very least. Not one of them are people that push political agendas (from what I've seen) and if anything are philanthropists that benefit their communities greatly.

I myself am not "rich" -- at least I'm not a six figure or higher income person. Most people in the US would consider me "middle class."

The real problem is not being "rich." The real problem is that money actually allows people to change the decisions of politicians that are supposed to be representing the people. There will always be money, favors, or some other type of "currency." Getting rid of it won't stop the problem, so getting rid of the corrupt politicians would be the solution.

Re:Copyright Holders

[Anonymous Coward]

yeah, and you live of your bands efforts?
thought not.
I dont see a bunch of amateurs making the next lord of the rings movie.

you may now resume the slashdot "piracy is cool" groupthink bullshit.

Re:Copyright Holders

[sm62704]

Joe only sings and plays guitar. I think Jeff has a day job, not sure.

Re:Copyright Holders

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly why I tell people Im poor.

The Music industry needs to get some perspective

[LiquidCoooled]

The G8 summit is gathering of the worlds most powerful leaders to discuss important topics.

From the agenda page:


This year, we plan to urge our partners to redouble efforts to ensure global energy security. We believe that today, it is crucial to find a solution to a problem which directly influences the social and economic development of all countries, without exception.

I am convinced that our efforts towards attaining this goal should be comprehensive and must stimulate stabilization of the global energy markets, development of innovation technologies, use of renewable energy sources and protection of the environment. We believe that today, we must think very seriously about ways to bridge the gap between energy-sufficient and energy-lacking countries.

The spread of all kinds of epidemics in the world emphasizes the need to step up the fight against infectious diseases. We are convinced that the creation of a global system to monitor dangerous diseases, the development of regular interaction between experts from different states, and broader exchange of research information about dangerous viruses will have a major positive influence on the solution of these serious problems.

In addition to the current agenda, we also plan to raise the issue of education in the G8. In our opinion, the time has come to focus on ways to improve the quality and effectiveness of national education systems and professional training. We must find tools for encouraging the international business community to increase investment into this sector.

Other major international issues we will concentrate on during Russia's Presidency are counterterrorism and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, the settlement of regional conflicts, the development of the global economy, finance and trade, as well as protection of the environment.

This is about saving lives and fixing major things wrong with the world and should not be bothering about some fucking music website.

Who cares about poverty in Africa?

[T_ConX]

Recording Executives ^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H Artists are being robbed by blood thursty pirates!

Re:Who cares about poverty in Africa?

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude, your terminal type is wrong - fix it.

Re:Who cares about poverty in Africa?

[Alsee]

Maybe the RIAA should hire some African Recording Executives. Then they can use TrickleDownVoodoonomics to blame African starvation on those theiving pirates taking food out of childrens' mouths when they download perfectly legal MP3s in Russia.

-

In Soviet Russia

[Anonymous Coward]

In Soviet Russia copyright laws screw you, rather than teh British Pr0nographic Industry

Global economy/government?

[rts008]

Where does the madness stop?
I know that a "global economy/gov't. is coming, but who is to say we (western/NATO) is right?
This is interfering in RUSSIAN gov't., WTF?!?!

Re:Global economy/government?

[fish_in_the_c]

Not like we haven't done it before.

As I recall there was a Russian programmer arrested in the united states from violating the DMCA when he was in RUSSIA under the direction of his employer for the actual purpose of COMPLYING with RUSSIAN law.
( although I suppose arguably he was arrested for telling people about it on U.S. soil)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dmitry_Sklyarov

If I'm not mistaken we also went into a small country called Panama and arrested it's dictator( read the guy who made the laws in that country and couldn't be accused of breaking his own laws) for trafficking Drugs in the country HE ran. We then took said president, ran him through a trial for crimes he DID NOT COMMIT ON US SOIL OR US JERISTICTION and he is now permanently in Jail for drug trafficking.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manuel_Noriega

Ever heard of the Roosevelt corollary to the Monroe doctrine.
The U.S. has been disrespecting autonomy of other nations for years.

Re:Global economy/government?

[DoctaWojo]

Not to be a pedant, but your own link points out that Noriega actually wasn't President of Panama.

Ok, so that was being pedantic.

Re:Global economy/government?

[rts008]

I read you loud and clear, as I headed a Secial Forces team in that Panama f*skup.

I'm just getting fed-up with our (USA) gov't. upholding big business at the detriment of individuals, and wondering where to apply the oath I took (and seriously took to heart-I cnsider myself a patriot) to defend the USA Constition against enemies foriegn and DOMESTIC.
It has become really stressful for me at a personal level. I can't decide where to draw the line, but am afraid that my indecision is already PAST the line. I just don't know anymore, and this dismays me.

To me, it seems a fine line between protecting your country's existance and keeping same nose out of other country's existance, I am afraid we are rushing across that fine line with a veangeance at the behest of some of our powerful corp.'s/lobbyists...and that disgusts and angers me.

I dunno, something has to give, I'm just afraid of just what gives anymore.

Re:Global economy/government?

[kfg]

The U.S. has been disrespecting autonomy of other nations for years.

How can you say that when that Panama guy was our boy in a country we had stolen^H^H^H^H^H^Hbought^H^H^H^H^H^Hliberated from Columbia fair and square?

KFG

Re:Global economy/government?

[Anonymous Coward]

No, no I headed a Special Forces team in that Panama fuck up. Impostor.

Re:Global economy/government?

[fish_in_the_c]

didn't say he was president, dictator. He was a military dictator in control at the time.

Re:Global economy/government?

[fish_in_the_c]

Ok went back and reread. should have said MEANT dictator.
I used dictator in one place and president in the other.

the point is still stands regardless. sorry for the confusion.

Re:Global economy/government?

[Zaphod2016]

You sir are a hero. If you do not have children yet, here's hoping you raise a dozen new patriots all your own.

Note: above comment is not sarcastic or disgenuine in any way.

Re:Global economy/government?

[delirium of disorder]

You might be interested in Smedley Butler, if you haven't already learned about the most decorated marine in history. He understood the interested behind US foreign intervention.

I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested.

He spoke to the U.S. Congress in 1934 to reveal and thwart a fascist takeover of the government that had been plotted by wealthy industrialists. I wish a heroes from the military would have the courage today to stop the neo-conservative fascist (backed by wealthy industrialists) takeover of the US government.

Re:Global economy/government?

[rts008]

I am well familiar with Maj Gen Butler, a true American military hero, and a man of respected character.

Thank you for the heads up, though, I understand.

Re:Global economy/government?

[Zemran]

I supported the first Gulf war when we had the clear objective of liberating Kuwait even though I was directly involved in military support for Iraq (they were our ally prior to that war). I had helped with Bosnia and felt that was worthy cause. When I was asked to help again in the Gulf I publicly stated my concerns (within the base where I worked) about the fact that we 'knew' that there were no WMD (the then stated reason for the second war). I had seen the documents... I was soon told that there was no longer a place for me in the services and I was given a sum of money and a contract that said that I am not to discuss anything that I know. I had beleived that I had a job for life but no one said that I could only have that job for as long as I echoed the propaganda.

Re:Global economy/government?

[sm62704]

The fox is in the henhouse. Our "two party" system has become a plutocracy. The reason is simple; it is legal for me to contribute a hundred million dollars to both McCain and whoever runs againt him, and should whoever wins vote against my wishes, I can crush him; all I have to do is give the entire amount to his opponent, rather than splitting it.

This despite the fact that I can't vote for or against Senator McCain.

The problem would be somewhat mitigated by laws outlawing a contribution to anyone you are not eligible to vote for (no more union or corporate money) and outlawing contributions to more than one candidate in any given race; clearly, that is simply a bribe.

Considering where we are now, I have little hope of things getting better. I'm not voting for any more Republicrats; both are bought. I'm splitting my vote between the Greens and the Libertarians, the closest to a "none of the above" we have on the ballot.

You voted them in office. Stop that!

An Issue at G8?

[tornsaq]

That's pretty scary.

bigger issues

[pintomp3]

forget about the thousands dying in the middle east or the north korean bombs. mp3s, now that is issue that must be dealt with forthwith. my neighbors dog keeps barking all night too, maybe that can tackle that one too.

Re:bigger issues

[ToxikFetus]

forget about the thousands dying in the middle east or the north korean bombs. mp3s, now that is issue that must be dealt with forthwith. my neighbors dog keeps barking all night too, maybe that can tackle that one too.

The G8 is an *economic* summit. They don't directly dictate political or military policy. Granted, mp3 "piracy" isn't a pressing issue when compared to 3rd World debt or China's artifical monetary valuation, but it's at least relevant.

Re:bigger issues

[Anonymous Coward]

Ever heard of oil?

Re:bigger issues

[Anonymous Coward]

No.

They have no shame.

[SatanicPuppy]

Come on, if they had some shame, they'd couldn't live with themselves. Their whole business model is basically to leech as much cash as they can off the works of people who are more creative than they could dream of being, and if this involves exploiting those same people and removing their rights to their own creations, they have no problems with that. They'd screw their grandmothers for an extra nickle.

As far as they're concerned this is one of the most important things in the world...someone is impinging on their leeching! Their blind, rapacious greed is the overriding impulse in their miserable lives.

Nothing would suprise me, coming from them. I literally can't imagine a depth that they wouldn't sink to, given the opportunity.

Re:They have no shame.

[dlim]

By "They", do you mean the RIAA/BPI or allofmp3.com?

Re:They have no shame.

[mOdQuArK!]

allofmp3.com is at least providing a service that people are willing to pay for.

The RIAA & its ilk have to use the power of the government to _force_ people to pay them.

Any true capitalist would know that this is not a viable free-market business model.

Re:They have no shame.

[Score Whore]

allofmp3.com would not have a service anyone would pay for if it wasn't for copyright and the general lack of an automatic "everything goes into the public domain at the moment of creation" situation.

Re:They have no shame.

[Petrushka]

You know, I disagree with you completely. Allofmp3.com provides a valuable service which is far, far better than was ever available by making illegal use of a p2p network. It's quite unique. Even if we didn't have copyright in my country, I'd probably still be paying for allofmp3.com's service.

Re:They have no shame.

[Vadim Makarov]

allofmp3.com would not have a service anyone would pay for if it wasn't for copyright and the general lack of an automatic "everything goes into the public domain at the moment of creation" situation.

No they would have a service. Exactly the same as it is now. Somebody has to run a storage and download service for recordings, and they are doing it well (no matter public domain or not; in fact some older Russian recordings allofmp3 offers are in public domain).

Re:They have no shame.

[Rutulian]

Don't be so sure. Simple convenience features like fast servers, good bandwidth, quality encodings, choice of encodings, easy searching, etc...can go a long way, and people will pay for it even if they could get the same thing for free (see just about every commercial linux distribution). They wouldn't be able to get away with charging $1/song without copyright/drm, but a lot of people (me included) are willing to pay $0.20/song or so, or maybe even a flat fee of $10/month.

Re:They have no shame.

[TheVelvetFlamebait]

My patience with the RIAA has worn very thin lately, but I still recognise that they do help the music marktet.

Their whole business model is basically to leech as much cash as they can off the works of people who are more creative than they could dream of being

It's not their sole purpose to furfill a deep-seeded psychological need to feel creative (they're a faceless corporation , remember?). They are there to provide a financial leap pad to gain maximum market exposure.

if this involves exploiting those same people and removing their rights to their own creations, they have no problems with that

"Exploiting" is hardly the term I'd use. They help artists. They put a small portion of their assets on the line to help people achieve something that they could not do on their own. It gives them connections to other artists, to big promotions, and helps avoid all the confusion of distributing to a fickle market.
That said, they have completely fucked up their attempts at securing their IP. Every time I hear anything about the RIAA, I hate them more and more. Even the public releases (read propoganda) that they produce themselves makes me hate them more and more.

Come on, if they had some shame, they'd couldn't live with themselves...They'd screw their grandmothers for an extra nickle...Their blind, rapacious greed is the overriding impulse in their miserable lives...I literally can't imagine a depth that they wouldn't sink to, given the opportunity

It's these statements that add no benefit to your argument (read flamebait) that should have sunk your post. As disturbing as their war tactics are, they are, in some ways, charitable. Don't forget it

Re:They have no shame.

[mpe]

allofmp3.com would not have a service anyone would pay for if it wasn't for copyright and the general lack of an automatic "everything goes into the public domain at the moment of creation" situation.

Copyright is actually irrelevent to the kind of service allofmp3.com are providing. Even if all of their material was public domain they would still be providing a service.

Re:They have no shame.

[Phisbut]

allofmp3.com is at least providing a service that people are willing to pay for.

Providing a service that people are willing to pay for doesn't make it any more legal or moral. Hired killers also provide a service that people are willing to pay for, is their business any more legitimate because of that?

I know the analogy is terrible, and that "copyright infringment isn't theft and it isn't a crime", but nonetheless, it is still breaking the law. You have the right to not agree with the law, but you must still abide by it. You can also go the "civil disobedience" way, breaking the law to make a point, but "civil disobedience" also means accepting the consquences, which include to get fined and sued.

Or you can just admit that you are selfish and want everything for free right now and deserve to get whatever you want by whatever means necessary. True, people are actually paying allofmp3.com, but allofmp3.com has no right to sell you what you buy from them, and you know it. Similar to paying someone to go steal a car, since you paid, you bought it, right?

Remember. The RIAA is not forcing anyone to pay them. Nobody forces you to buy CD's, nobody forces you to buy music. If you don't like the RIAA or don't agree with the price they put on CD's, the alternative you have is to not buy the music, not to go and infringe copyright.

That's how the market works. They have something you want (copyrighted music) and you have something they want (money). Either you agree with the terms of the exchange (X amount of money in exchange for the right to own one copy of the song, and use it according to laws, including fair use but also copyright), or you don't. If the deal can't be agreed upon, one of 3 scenarios should happen : They want your money badly enough, so they lower the asking price ; You want their music badly enough so you fork the money they ask ; Neither of you care wants what the other has badly enough, so you don't give them your money, but you don't get the music.

Re:They have no shame.

[mOdQuArK!]

You know, your argument would have a little more "oomph" behind it if allofmp3.com was actually breaking the law - in Russia, where they are located. Since they're satisfying their home country's laws & being good entrepreneurs by providing a _legal_ service that people are willing to pay for, then you're happy with them, right? Or are you just a hypocrite willing to use any means to rationalise sacrificing private property rights in the name of IP?

"Intellectual Property" is _socialism_, not free market. It's an artificial restriction placed on private property rights to support a social experiment (supposedly encouraging creativity and innovation), although many people seem to have accepted it as dogma & a "right" rather than actually verifying that it is doing what it was supposed to do.

Re:They have no shame.

[Score Whore]

Never said they wouldn't have a service. I said that they wouldn't have a service that anyone would pay for. All four of the responders missed the multiple reasons why no one would go to allofmp3.com if there were no copyright protection.

1) there'd be less material in general.
2) but for the material that there was, why would I go to a foreign site if I could go to a local site that would be better connected for me?
3) why would I spend my money internationally when I can spend it domestically?
4) why would I give up billing information to a company in a foreign country where if there was a data breach I would have zero recourse?

In a copyright free world, I could use ITMS for the same price that you get at allofmp3.com.

What's more is that eventually some semi-creative programmer who is living on the college welfare program would get to thinking how great it would be to be able to save even the thirteen cents it costs to get the latest POS album. He'd slap something together, tell his buddies, and suddenly you'd have this great network of well connected gits who are spending their student loans and parent's money on music pooling their resources into the biggest, fastest music service on the planet. All for "free" (that is, zero cost to the users.)

And the final point I have to make is that even with allofmp3.com sitting out there selling music without the permission of the rights holders, people still go on p2p networks to get it for free.

What'll be funny is when the various music organizations eventually get fed up and dump some cash on some Russian politician and the next day all of allofmp3.com's servers and logs are seized and then you'll see some lawsuits against the customers. (Because even allofmp3.com admits that in general it's not legal for people outside of Russia to buy music from them.)

Re:They have no shame.

[maxume]

IP is intended to encourage sharing. The hope is that the sharing will increase the rate of innovation.

Re:They have no shame.

[Stu331]

So,the record companies (who are, after all, who these organisations represent) are "leeching"? They exploit their own artists by removing their right to their own creations? With all due respect, you appear to know nothing of how the industry works. Sure, the record companies make a lot of money. However, they also have to spend a lot. First, they have to spend money searching for new acts. Then, they have to get those acts launched. This costs money (and can cost a lot). They also have to buy studio time, and staff to produce albums/singles. Again, this isn't cheap. Inevitably in today's times, they also need to pay for a video, and these cost tens of thousands of pounds as well. Now, bear in mind that most new acts initially fail, so may well have to be reformed or relaunched. All of a sudden, you could potentially have millions of pounds being spent with little or no return. I personally don't agree with the way the Record Industry is acting, put simply, I don't think Piracy is the major problem.

Re:They have no shame.

[mOdQuArK!]

Unfortunately, there hasn't been any formal studies showing that IP in general does or doesn't encourage "sharing", much less whether or not the current implementation does so. Certainly there is much anecdotal "evidence" being thrown about by both sides for & against whether IP promotes sharing. My personal feeling is that it is very difficult to promote sharing by using a mechanism which, by its very definition, inherently prevents sharing.

If society _truly_ wanted to promote sharing, then it would be much simpler & more direct for there to be some kind of institutional method to simply pay people to release their ideas into the public domain. Taxpayer-subsidized basic research & development is one form of this idea, where the scientists are paid to "discover" new ideas which might be too expensive or "far-out" for the private sector to justify pursuing. Once the basic ideas have been uncovered, however, entrepreuneurs are _very_ good at taking those ideas & running with them.

Of course, many people don't trust this form of idea-generation, since such institutionalized funding tends to attract corruption & complacency. Another possible idea, which might sidestep some of the problems with the former, is to simply allow people to choose where their tax monies will be spent, e.g., the taxpayer could pick which research programs or artists they thought were worth funding & direct the mandated % of their tax payment toward those people. The government's role in this kind of scenario would be simply to detect & prevent fraud.

Frankly though, I don't think that the people running the government would like that kind of setup - they have a vested interest in being able to control where the taxpayer money goes, so I'm sure they'd fight such a scheme.

Re:They have no shame.

[Doc Ruby]

Practically all of the recordings I enjoy were produced over a generation ago. Many were produced 2-5 generations ago.

The musicians didn't produce them because copyright protected them. They produced them because, bless their pointed little heads, they're compulsive communicators, like most artists. The record companies that produced them had absolutely no expectations of selling them more than 20 years later, almost no expectations of selling them a year later. In fact, my favorites were recorded live by people who paid for a ticket, the only compensation any of the producers expected. Which then combined with the work of recorders, archivists and distributors who expected at most a transaction fee the first time they released their product. And which are typically enjoyed by people who spend many thousands of dollars in their lives on official releases and appearances of the artists. And who turn those recordings into the folk music that gets licensed as jingles to sell products.

Everyone I know (and there are dozens) who has a brain in Hollywood, who is honest with me, tells me that they don't think selling recorded content is a business with a future. Giving away recordings for free to promote merchandise, ticket sales and licensed jingles is where all the survivors are going. The smartest wish they were already there - selling to the people who still buy is a hassle, and keeps the industry from just taking over the advertising industry, where the real easy money is at.

Anyone demanding these permanent copyrights to ensure we get art from artists is just singing themselves a lullabye.

I'm a allofmp3/alltunes user

[Anonymous Coward]

..and I love it. I spend more money on music now than I've ever done. After seeing some music at allofmp3.com I even ordered the real cd from play.com.

I haven't been a user for long but so far noone has abused my credit card and the service has been just excellent. The free software, alltunes, is ok for browsing/searching artists, browsing their albums, previewing songs and buying seperate songs or the entire CD. Usually I end up buying whole albums instead of just the one song I wanted, since it's so cheap.

I can certainly see how the recording industry is scared of allofmp3 but they CAN register with russian copyright and get their share of the money I pay for the tracks. :-)

I still buy CDs for some of the artists I love, and I still go to concerts. As a matter of fact I'm going to a Sting concert in Stockholm next week.

Re:I'm a allofmp3/alltunes user

[badmammajamma]

I buy from allofmp3 simply because they offer me what I want. Price has nothing to do with it. As soon as another site allows me to set what encoding I want and what bitrate with no DRM, they will get my business. Unfortunately the music industry doesn't understand any of this.

Re:I'm a allofmp3/alltunes user

[shark72]

"As soon as another site allows me to set what encoding I want and what bitrate with no DRM, they will get my business. Unfortunately the music industry doesn't understand any of this."

The worst mistake you can make is to underestimate your enemy.

They likely understand just fine that there's a certain set of people who'll go to the Russian sites or P2P if they want DRM-free versions of major label releases; the fact is that they simply do not want you as a customer. The cost of releasing material in non-DRM form is not worth the incremental business from you and like-minded people.

Bully for you if it's really DRM, and not the fantastically low price that makes you an AllOfMP3 customer, but I doubt that's the primary driver for most consumers. If the public at large really considered DRM to be an issue, then emusic, magnatunes and other DRM-free stores would be the kings of the hill, and the iTMS would be struggling. The reality is that the iTMS DRM is lax enough that most customers won't even notice that it's there. For the small subset of customers who indeed find the iTMS prohibitive, and who have the requisite moral compass, then P2P and the Russian sites will serve their needs. But, I think that Apple and the record companies know that there are just some people who will never buy music from legitimate channels.

By the way, if you'd like DRM-free music at any bitrate you like, old-fashioned audio CDs are still a good choice. There are some with easily-defeatble DRM, but most are DRM-free.

Re:I'm a allofmp3/alltunes user

[Anonymous Coward]

You typed your name and credit card details into a Russian website??

Re:I'm a allofmp3/alltunes user

[Anonymous Coward]

Upside of "A La Carte": You get the songs you WANT and no filler (about 1~3 good songs on a CD)

Asian Software Piracy

[IflyRC]

I see the RIAA cares nothing about the software piracy occuring in Asian countries that gets spread out through different channels. The whole reason MS put those little holographic certificate "Genuine Windows" stickers on their products was because of that.

If AllOfMp3.com IS following Russian copyright law, not a thing they can do. The RIAA has been making knee jerk reactions over the last few years and you would think there would be some backlash...maybe that backlash is responsible for their reported sales figure decline? I'd have hoped for a much stronger showing in opposition of them though when they started filing law suits against grandmothers.

Granted, there are more important things in the world than the RIAA ledger. This is not a world problem issue, this is something minor in the face of whats going on right now.

Re:Asian Software Piracy

[RpiMatty]

I see the RIAA cares nothing about the software piracy occuring in Asian countries that gets spread out through different channels.

Why would the Recording Industry Association of America care about software piracy at all?

Re:Asian Software Piracy

[IflyRC]

Software piracy and forged CD piracy sort of go hand in hand. I wonder how many actual physical pirated CDs move out of Asia that the labels and artists never get paid for? Its one thing to download music from the internet but to have people making a large profit off of physical sales of pirated music (and software) is in my opinion a larger threat.

Re:Asian Software Piracy

[smitingpurpleemu]

The RIAA will never blame the public opinion backlash for declining sales; they'll blame iTunes for selling cheap music and pirates for distributing it for free. This will cause them to mess with iTunes, and more aggressively go after pirates. I think the only things that will make them stop are more court rulings like the recent one that completely shot down the RIAA's prosecution of some random person, and Apple resisting the RIAA's pressure to jack up their prices.

Re:Asian Software Piracy

[QRDeNameland]

I wonder how many actual physical pirated CDs move out of Asia that the labels and artists never get paid for?

Better question: how many "pressing overrun" CDs were made and surreptitiously shipped by record labels off the books that never showed up on artists' royalty statements? This is one of classic ways in which labels have ripped off artists over the years, and one of the reasons why so many have so little love lost for the major labels and their cartels.

Many have suspected this one reason the labels have been so slow to embrace digital download services like iTunes, because under that model control over of the accounting slips out of their grubby little hands.

Re:Asian Software Piracy

[IflyRC]

I live in Nashville, interned at a record label. I do not work in the industry however (was too slimy once I got in) but think about this...

Payola. A few of the labels settled due to payola scandels. Now, payola actually entices or pays a radio station to put songs in more rotations and play more often by gifts, money, etc. BMI, ASCAP and SESAC receive payments from radio stations to allow them to play the songs. They track how many plays a song/artist get, etc and divvy out royalties for airplay. Its one big circular racket.

If the label has included "promotion expenses" as part of the advance the artists receive for the contract they are making money back from royalties to pay off promotions with the same money. Someone is sitting around skimming off of the top here - ie, record labels and people like J-Lo get their heads ballooned with ideas they have talent.

All this Hypocrisy

[Anonymous Coward]

When eastern Europe, India and China provide replaceable bodies for cheap labor, big business is first in line to hail globalization and boost their profits.

But when the same countries come up with innovative ideas and start beating the same business giants at their own game, they suddenly scream bloody murder and plea to their governments for protection from "unfair" competition.

Re:All this Hypocrisy

[sunspot42]

Exactly. American corporations have no problem with outsourcing jobs to 3rd world sweatshops, taking advantage of people who have few of the freedoms the executives of those companies enjoy. But heaven forbid the American consumer outsources their shopping to countries with copyright laws more favorable to consumers. Oh no, can't have that. They'll squeal like stuck pigs all the way to the G8 (which is exactly what these clowns are - pigs).

It's the same reason why we aren't allowed to import pharmaceuticals from Canada into the US - might erode big pharma's profit margins. Can't have that. Corporations can outsource jobs, but you can't outsource your shopping.

It's a crock.

Victory lap for Putin

[amightywind]

Yes, this is why our leaders have summit meetings these days. To protect the interests of the rich bastards that finance their campaigns. Somebody hurry up and get a Pirate Party up and running. Oh right, there's no such thing as proportional representation in most places. Wonderful.

The purpose of this meeting seems to be to give the gangster Putin a victory lap. He liked Yukos so much he made it a country and got it into the G8. To think Putin and his cronies will be making champaign toasts while Khordokhovski rots in jail makes me sick. Russia leading the G8 democracies. What irony!

Re:Victory lap for Putin

[dunkelfalke]

hordokovski is right where he belongs to. he is a criminal all right. the only problem is, the other oligarchs are still free.

Sweet!

[Luscious868]

We've potentially got World War III brewing in the Middle East but let's go ahead and spend some time discussing allofmp3.com. Jesus H. Christ on a bicycle the world has it's priorities screwed up.

Re:Sweet!

[TubeSteak]

World War 3?

This is nothing more than a flareup of the same conflict that has been going on for the last 60 years.

Clinton spent a lot of time & effort cooling off tensions in the Middle East & I'm not sure what G.W. Bush could have done to avoid the current situation.

A lot of people (the Vatican, various U.S. allies) are saying that Israel is overreacting & making the situation worse than it started out.

Re:Sweet!

[Anonymous Coward]

yes, and a lot of other people are saying hizbullah and hamas are idiots for not just leaving well enough alone.

Israel pulled out, and what did they do? Kept sending them rockets on over.
Then Hizbullah sends one into the 3rd largest city in Israel to demonstrate their continued threat.

Real smart.

Re:Sweet!

[Splab]

Yeah except US et al is running around in Iraq, and the crazy maniac that got "voted" in as president is gunning for Iran too - on top of that we got a lunatic sitting in North Korea seriously considering going into war with just about anyone...

I'm seriously thinking about figureing out where the nearest bombshelter is even though I'm some 3000km from the nearest war.

Re:Sweet!

[Anonymous Coward]

That's because muslims are all idiots. People in the west need to wake up, muslims are not looking for compromise or a fair deal, they want world domination. Any non-muslim is their enemy and they have proven their willingness to follow through on this philosophy time and time again but we still have fucked up idiots in the west calling for tolerance. The only reason the muslims want tolerance is to gain time to regroup to attack again.

Hopefully Isreal puts many muslims in their graves.

Re:Sweet!

[Kjella]

World War 3?

This is nothing more than a flareup of the same conflict that has been going on for the last 60 years.

Try the last 2000 years, give or take. But the relationship between the arab/muslim world and the western/christian world hasn't been all that great since 2001, I'm sure you know what I'm referring to. Israel and Hizbollah start a little pissing contest, the arab nations get involved (hint: they've been at war with Israel several times since WW2), US troops in Iraq gets pulled into this shit, Iran decides to make a move... It doesn't take much imagination to see how this could be the start of WW3 with USA/Israel against the middle east, or even the big war between the western world and the arab world. Five years ago I would have considered that to be scaremongering and completely unrealistic. I still don't think it's a very probable outcome, but it is certainly not to be taken lightly.

Re:Sweet!

[Anonymous Coward]

We've potentially got World War III brewing in the Middle East but let's go ahead and spend some time discussing allofmp3.com. Jesus H. Christ on a bicycle the world has it's priorities screwed up.

Tell me about it... I said the same thing two days ago in the obligatory google-story, and got modded "-1, Troll" for my trouble.

Re:Sweet!

[mpe]

Clinton spent a lot of time & effort cooling off tensions in the Middle East & I'm not sure what G.W. Bush could have done to avoid the current situation.

Cutting off the supply of US money and weapons into the area would have been a good start.

Re:Sweet!

[mpe]

Yeah except US et al is running around in Iraq, and the crazy maniac that got "voted" in as president is gunning for Iran too - on top of that we got a lunatic sitting in North Korea seriously considering going into war with just about anyone...

Of the two the US is rather more dangerous North Korea dosn't have the armed forces to attack anywhere (or the logistics to get them there) whereas the US does. Even if North Korea does have nuclear weapons they certainly don't have sufficent to wipe out everywhere which could counter attack. The US could mount a "first strike" and still have sufficent weapons to deter an attack.

Re:Sweet!

[magetoo]

Israel and Hizbollah start a little pissing contest, the arab nations get involved (hint: they've been at war with Israel several times since WW2), US troops in Iraq gets pulled into this shit, Iran decides to make a move...

And that (emphasised) is why you guys in the US should care. Having Israel bombing the crap out of Lebanon isn't exactly going to make people in Iraq think happy warm thoughts about the one country that could interfere and stop it, but chooses not to. People are going to die over this, and not just those thirteen-a-dozen arabs that nobody cares about.

It just might be time to let a resolution condemning Israel's actions pass in the UN, this one time. You can always patch up relations later, when you don't have people being blown up in that part of the world.

(steps off soapbox)

Re:Sweet!

[Anonymous Coward]

Niven's Law: there's no cause so right that you can't find an idiot following it.

Idiot. And that goes double for whoever modded this idiot Informative.

except that

[TheAxeMaster]

We already have some of the most draconian copyright laws around.
 
I'm still hoping that two things will happen: 1)Bands will distribute their own music digitally (creating the need for more small recording studios), bypassing the need for a contract with a label, and 2)radio stations get their balls back and start actually doing their jobs. And by their jobs, I mean sampling as much music that is out there that they can and playing what they think is best, not just what they get handed by the corporations.

Re:except that

[badmammajamma]

Sorry but that's not going to happen in country where almost all of the radio stations are owned by four companies. Thank God for deregulation! It's just great, ain't it?

Re:except that

[cayenne8]

"2)radio stations get their balls back and start actually doing their jobs. And by their jobs, I mean sampling as much music that is out there that they can and playing what they think is best, not just what they get handed by the corporations."

Trouble is...most radio stations in the US are OWNED by two major corporations. Those stations don't have a choice in what they play...that is dictated from way above.

I think that is actually a large problem for music today. I remember listening to one station...it was slanted more towards rock, yes, but, the music varied..and music wasn't as splintered into so many niche areas as today, I dunno if that is the fault of radio today or what, but, they used to play a wide variety back in the day. On the same popular radio station, you'd hear Zeppelin, an AC/DC tune...a one hit wonder or two (undercover angel, still the one, cover of the rollng stone...etc), and such. They'd play from John Denver to the Stones...and often, they DJ's were local, live and did have some freedom to play different things. You'd travel around the nation, and hear some songs that were popular in places, that weren't in others (like Zebra in LA and AR, but, not in NH)...

I agree with you...we miss the radio as a centralized point to hear diverse and new music....but, since it is mostly owned by 2 congolomerations, and the $$ to start a radio station on your own...I don't see it happening soon...

:-(

Re:except that

[rts008]

Interesting points you made!
I can remember listening to some "underground stations" (yes, on AM) back in the mid and later '60's out of Detroit and various cities in Ohio that would play all kinds of stuff you couldn't even find in the "record stores".
It wasn't until the early '70's that I caught on to the fact that the Beatles were popular- I had been listeniong to the likes of "Fat Mattress"(their bass player later joined Jimi Hendrix as part of the Jimi Hendrix Experience), Whitew Rhino, MC5, and Ted Nugent and the Amboy Dukes.
My point I guess is this:
By the time the "Pop" or top 40 was prevelent, I had already turned my back on that "pop" format in favor of more freedom of choice that was presented by the "underground" stations/music. This attitude has stuck with me, and now has made me a firm adversary to the RIAA and their pap they try to shovel down the public's collective throats.

I know seek out a lot of so-called "indy" music just on principle, as the payolla (sp?) and "top 40" formats espuosed by most stations and lables just smack too much as being force-fed to the public.

I admit, it could be just my rebellious nature, but it could also just be my personal tastes, or could be irrelevant....I just know what I don't like, and am always eager to find new stuff that I may or may not like.

On that note, I will quit ranting, but only abiding by the RIAA's rules and shovel-feed, you will never know what else is out there, and will miss out on a LOT of good stuff!

Re:except that

[cayenne8]

"I know seek out a lot of so-called "indy" music..."

I guess that is my problem...I guess a combination of lazy and busy...I miss the days when I could find the latest music and it was also pretty diverse just by listening to the radio. I just don't find the time to go out and actively search through tons of websites to download and listen through tons of crap to find the 'gems' that I'm sure are out there.

Would be much better to be able to listen in the car on the way to work, and catch new and decent stuff...but, the consolidation of the radio stations largely killed that....what they didn't kill..I guess the recording studios finished off.

Re:except that

[Seraphim_72]

Ask and ye shall be given

Re:except that

[maxume]

The problem is that bland sells. The only concieveable reason that McDonalds is as big as it is is that people feel safe when the go there. It's the same with music on the radio, no one seems to even want to be challenged, they just want safe safe safe.

is is is?
max

Am I the only one...

[sootman]

...who reads that as "British Pornographic Institute" every time I see an article about them? Say what you will about the RIAA, at least their name is clearer. Damn anachronistic Brits. Who the hell says "phonograph" any more? :-)

Re:Am I the only one...

[Ramble]

You're not the only one, we British also have sick disgusting minds.

Re:Am I the only one...

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm glad I'm not the only one... I think the internet has warped my fragile little mind :/

Re:Am I the only one...

[init100]

Say what you will about the RIAA, at least their name is clearer.

I think the name MAFIAA is even clearer. :)

Re:Am I the only one...

[Trailer Trash]

Who the hell says "phonograph" any more? :-)

Apparently the same people who are scared to death of the internet.

Re:Am I the only one...

[slavitos]

No, you're not the only one. I think it's one of the most unfortunate names for a lobbying group. Makes it sound like they are a bunch of old perverts.

Re:Am I the only one...

[TheRaven64]

Personally, I prefer the BPI's name. At least they're up-front about being obsolete...

Re:Am I the only one...

[Anonymous Coward]

I think the perverts are us who actually read it as pr0n and not what it actually is since all that is on our mind is... pr0n :)

Re:Am I the only one...

[Anonymous Coward]

And someone should get on AT&T's case while they're at it. Who the hell uses a telegraph anymore?

Re:Am I the only one...

[shark72]

"...who reads that as "British Pornographic Institute" every time I see an article about them? Say what you will about the RIAA, at least their name is clearer."

Not hardly; each time the BPI is mentioned, somebody does the "phonographic / pornographic" joke.

"Damn anachronistic Brits. Who the hell says "phonograph" any more? :-)"

If you want to be modded up again, the next time somebody mentions AT&T, you can point out that nobody says "telegraph" any more. And if the NAACP should happen to come up, you can point out that "colored" is also an archaic phrase; in fact, in the wrong context it's offensive. If the ACM has a chapter on your campus, you can point it out to them that "computing machinery" is rather old-fashioned. No mod points for real-life corrections, though.

Re:Am I the only one...

[T_ConX]

Who the hell says "phonograph" any more?

People still trapped in the 19th Century. Duh!

Re:Am I the only one...

[skingers6894]

I hear they are looking at the "Inter-Net" to provide "Digital Phonography".

Re:Am I the only one...

[Alsee]

I don't understand why anyone would se so scared to death of a bunch of tangled tubes. It's not like some big scary truck.

-

Having solved other problems...

[RyoShin]

Yeah. This should definately be a priority at the summit.

Because, you know, there aren't third world countries with rampant militants who will shoot anything, and children going hungry, and human rights violations, and the middle east isn't breaking out in all hell.

I mean, since we have all those big problems taken care of, now we can get down to the little petty issues. Right?

Right?

Re:Having solved other problems...

[Anonymous Coward]

Right.

Maybe you have failed to catch up with the news, but your government has been bought and paid for, as have everybody else's. Big money calls the shots, and there's nothing you can do about it.

Step in line.

Bush has a plan!

[Luscious868]

Seriously. Even wanting to bitch about piracy there and now is disgraceful when there are more important things at hand.

Fear not my friend for our fearless leader George W. Bush has the solution: ...... Cut taxes!

Re:Bush has a plan!

[turnipsatemybaby]

But only for those of us who make more than $1,000,000 a year.....

Net.

Re:Bush has a plan!

[cayenne8]

"But only for those of us who make more than $1,000,000 a year....."

You know...I keep hearing people say that, but, I make WAY less than that...and I did see my fed. taxes drop.

Now..if they could just get me out of that damned ponzi scheme they call social security, I'd be all over that. I'd sign over my rights to everything I've contributed so far, just to get out of the program, and take what I'd normally contribute to my own retirmement investment plan...

But, that's another debate entirely.

Re:Bush has a plan!

[Anonymous Coward]

Call it what you want, but social security isn't a ponzi scheme. It's run exactly how private insurance companies are run; we're just slowly reaching a point in time where there are more claims than $ coming in. It will suck, yes. But hysterics are helpful to nobody.

Hey, I want something too

[Shihar]

I would like the G8 summit to address the lack of good sci-fi TV shows (with the exception being BSG). Somehow though, I think global health, poverty, and energy is going to get what I want pushed to the bottom of the list, right next to discussions about AllOfMyMP3.com.

This isn't news. This is a PR stunt. If they actually do discuss this at the G8 summit (they wont), I would call this news worthy. At best, the US might make a quick speech about curbing piracy in the context of improving global trade and then sit down.

The music industry can want and wish all it wants. As the old saying goes though, wish in one hand and shit in the other. See which hand fills up first.

Re:Hey, I want something too

[Joe The Dragon]

lack of good shows I know of good ones star gate sg1 and sga are good also check out the 4400

Pay no attention to world hunger

[MECC]

Or AIDS, flu pandemic, nuclear proliferation, or climate change. Just give us other people's money for free.

Greedy shitheads.

Re:Pay no attention to world hunger

[Anonymous Coward]

No, i think you mean, "give us customers money in exchange for music that we recorded". You are confusing this with YOUR argument which is "give me all the enertainment industries output for free because I cant be fucked to pay for it"

Re:Pay no attention to world hunger

[Anonymous Coward]

If these things matter to you so much why aren't YOU doing something about it instead of trolling slashdot? I love how much you want others to take these matters into their hands but you won't do jack shit. Fucking asshole.

Re:Pay no attention to world hunger

[MECC]

No, i think you mean, "give us customers money in exchange for music that we recorded"

The UK recording industry doesn't record music - they're just an organization to protect the existing channels of distribution, and exist exclusively for the benefit of those channels of distribution, not music creators or consumers.

Besides, this should be the last thing for world leaders to be bothered with - ever.

Re:Pay no attention to world hunger

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, cos artists are making tons of cash from pirating. Get your head out of your ass. Besides, this isn't your decision to make. If the industry makes a product you won't support with your money that doesn't give you the right to simply take it. If it's too expensive for you to buy learn to live without.

Re:Pay no attention to world hunger

[MECC]

The original point is that music 'piracy' should rightfully be the last thing on the minds of world leaders, which is correct. Its a trivial problem when compared to something like world hunger. If you don't think so, try starving yourself and see how important it is to make sure record labels can continue to screw music listeners over and sue infants and dead people for no reason. Try to excercise enough thinking ability to stay on some kind of coherent topic.

But is AllOfMP3.com really legit?

[jbarr]

Maybe this has been brought up before, but it seems like there's lots of posturing in the media, but no difinitive answers.

Is AllOfMP3.com legit (in the USA, or for sake of the article, the UK) or not?

Do artists get paid or not?

Are customers liable if they purchase and download?

Re:But is AllOfMP3.com really legit?

[joe 155]

in Russia it is legal under # 006/3M-05 of the Rightholders Federation for Collective Copyright Management of Works Used Interactively and legal in England under Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (c. 48) - section 22... on 1st September they might change the law in Russia (so I'm going to spend all my credit there before then).

You can find info about it, and links to the acts, on wikipedia.

Re:But is AllOfMP3.com really legit?

[TheRaven64]

I don't know, and that's why I'm glad the BPI are taking them to court. The thing is, if the BPI lose then there will be a legal judgement I can cite showing that allofmp3.com is legal. If this is the case, then I will be more than happy to purchase music from them, for the first time in a year or so[1].

Whether they win or lose, I am glad they are increasing awareness of allofmp3.com. Legality aside, allofmp3.com shows one thing very clearly; the operating costs of a music store. It is possible for them to sell tracks at 10 each and still make enough to cover their operating costs and make a profit on top. This shows the average consumer exactly how much profit the labels are making on a 99 iTunes track (or a $1.45 iTunes track if you buy it from the UK music store).

[1] No, I don't pirate music, I've been happy to go without new music for some time now, although there are things that I would buy if they were available in a DRM-free format for a reasonable cost.

Re:But is AllOfMP3.com really legit?

[shark72]

"Legality aside, allofmp3.com shows one thing very clearly; the operating costs of a music store. It is possible for them to sell tracks at 10 each and still make enough to cover their operating costs and make a profit on top. This shows the average consumer exactly how much profit the labels are making on a 99 iTunes track (or a $1.45 iTunes track if you buy it from the UK music store)."

Are you of the understanding that once the payment to the record company is subtracted, Apple's operating costs are similar to that of allofmp3.com? Do you believe that Apple pays its staff similar to those earned by Russian workers, and do you believe that it's as cheap to build and maintain data servers in the US as it is in Russia?

No doubt about it -- it's probably a lot more efficient to locate your online business in Russia if you want to save on salaries and operating costs. But don't try to imply that the delta between iTMS and AllOfMP3 costs goes entirely to the record companies, let alone imply that this is "profit."

I love hearty debates about the issues surrounding piracy, but at least do the math.

Re:But is AllOfMP3.com really legit?

[Anonymous Coward]

Whether they win or lose, I am glad they are increasing awareness of allofmp3.com. Legality aside, allofmp3.com shows one thing very clearly; the operating costs of a music store. It is possible for them to sell tracks at 10 each and still make enough to cover their operating costs and make a profit on top. This shows the average consumer exactly how much profit the labels are making on a 99 iTunes track (or a $1.45 iTunes track if you buy it from the UK music store).

Seriously? Well, yeah, you can definitely charge less if you don't pay the artists anything. What's your point? If your not worried about the artists getting paid you can distribute tracks for free on p2p networks.

Re:But is AllOfMP3.com really legit?

[TaoPhoenix]

Wikipedia says it's not, in the US. That on the download side the user is violating the new laws. Whether it's enforceable, is something else.

Y'all are right, the site appears to be in the black doing "something" right. (It's not clear what they actually pay out, or whether that's site-BS.)

Songs won't be 99 cents forever, like computer technology, someone has to burst their bubble, and once burst, it won't go back. I earmarked 25 cents as my magic figure to let the cash begin flowing.

Re:But is AllOfMP3.com really legit?

[pimpimpim]

on http://www.slyck.com/news.php?story=1212 you can read more about the 1 september rule:

5. On September 1, 2006 the changes to the Russian copyright legislation will come into force. Since January 2006 the site has been making direct agreements with rightholders and authors at the same time increasing the price of the music compositions and transferring the royalties directly to the artists and record companies. The aim of AllofMP3.com is to agree with all rightholders on the prices and royalties amounts by September 1, 2006.

If I understand this correctly, they will slowly adjust their prices/policy towards complying with the 1 september ruling. Time will tell if allofmp3 will still be as profitable a place to download music by that time. I guess it might get more expensive (will offer drm'd music?), but still a better alternative than itunes, as the price competition within russia will be pretty tough.

Re:But is AllOfMP3.com really legit?

[Vadim Makarov]

do you believe that it's as cheap to build and maintain data servers in the US as it is in Russia?

Internet connectivity and bandwidth (for servers in a datacenter) in Russia is several times more expensive than in the U.S.

What's funny is

[StarKruzr]

That would usually be the END of one of those sentences, not the beginning.

i.e. "The day that ........ is the day mp3s will have the same importance as genocide or nuclear holocaust."

Gotta love it.

All the things she said, erm, USED to say

[tepples]

If AllOfMp3.com IS following Russian copyright law, not a thing [the MAFIAA] can do.

Other than not ship to Russia? What about dropping all Russian artists (such as tATu)? What about threatening to restructure the record companies to pay less tax to the United States (and more to foreign countries) if the US Department of State (and foreign counterparts) do not act to persuade Russian governments to recognize MAFIAA copyrights more thoroughly? Do you intend to underestimate record industry think tanks?

Re:All the things she said, erm, USED to say

[init100]

Other than not ship to Russia?

Oh, that's easy to counter. Mr Putin just has to threaten to turn off the gas, or double the prices. He did it before and can do it again.

G8? Saving lives?

[Kunta Kinte]

This is about saving lives and fixing major things wrong with the world and should not be bothering about some fucking music website.

Offtopic, I know, but since you brought it up...

These are the guys who've been having third world countries to open their markets using loans as bait, whilst protecting ( and hence dumping ) agricultural exports from theirs.

From Agricultural Policy...

"Consider a farmer in Ghana who used to be able to make a living growing rice. Several years ago, Ghana was able to feed and export their surplus. Now, it imports rice. From where? Developed countries. Why? Because it's cheaper. Even if it costs the rice producer in the developed world much more to produce the rice, he doesn't have to make a profit from his crop. The government pays him to grow it, so he can sell it more cheaply to Ghana than the farmer in Ghana can. And that farmer in Ghana? He can't feed his family anymore."(Lyle Vanclief, Canadian Minister of Agriculture)

Somehow I don't think those guys are too interested in saving lives.

Re:G8? Saving lives?

[arivanov]

Not all G8 countries are behind agricultural subsidies.

You have a whole spectrum of opinions on this. You start with France which is furthermost on the "pro subsidy" and "screw the africans, oh god they will flood us". On the other side you have UK and Germany which would like to see the subsidies abolished because they do not produce a lot, but provide Uncle Jacque with financial means for screwing the aftricans via their contributions to EU Common Agricultural Policy. Then you have the Russians, Canadians and the Americans which would like to see these abolished for a completely different reason. They think that they can outcompete everybody else on sheer scale and industrial methods in the absence of subsidies.

So on, so fourth. G8 is definitely not uniform on this. If it was it would have reached to an agreement on agricultural issues very long ago. That is not the case. They are on the agenda every time. Both in G8 and in the EU budget hearings.

Anyway, if you have objections to this, France is the right country to bitch about. They are clearly the worst as far as subsidies are concerned.

Re:G8? Saving lives?

[jez9999]

So on, so fourth.

What happens fifth?

I don't get it

[Jakhel]

Why doesn't the BPI take a page out of the RIAA's playbook and simply pay off a few russiangovernment officials who will make this "issue" a priority, thus inspiring a host of bullshit legislation regarding digital media? Cut out the middle man, the british foreign secretary, and go straight to the offending country's government officials.

It's working here in the home of the (decreasingly) free, land of the (usually) brave.

Re:I don't get it

[RoboRay]

AllofMP3 has already paid them off.

Reminds me of that frat girl complaint you hear

[Weaselmancer]

"I demand my nude picture be removed from the internet immediately!"

Well. Good luck with that.

This is pretty much greed at this point

[pembo13]

I hadly doubt these guys made it to the top being "good". Yet they seem to pull out all the stops to stop someone else making a buck. I hadly think these guys are struggling to pay their bills. Maybe they should take a chill pill or something.

Someone to speak for me

[Nom du Keyboard]

Can I insist that the RIAA be brought up at the summit for Extortion and Crimes Against Humanity as well? After all, I should have equal rights to anyone else submitting agenda items.

Re:Someone to speak for me

[chad.koehler]

Unfortunately, I don't think your "rights" are the issue. ($$$$$)

Re:Someone to speak for me

[Anonymous Coward]

hows it it 'extortion'. are you FORCED to buy the new Britney spears album?
this is music, not food or housing. Get some perspective FFS.

Oh the Howwuh... (said like Elmer Fudd)

[eno2001]

The poor music business is feeling the crunch of the idiots who like to download pirated music. That means they'll only clear a few billion this year instead of the extra hundred million or so that never makes it to the hands of the people who matter most in all this: the artists themselves. The most important people in the music business are the composers and musicians who write and perform the music and the producers and engineers who put it all together. Beyond that, screw the business end. They're redundant. If the artists and their crew stuck out on their own and sold their goods at reasonable prices online, they'd be richer for it. Come on... be honest. For those of you out there who like say... Nelly Furtado, if she put her songs online at her own site for legal download at $.25 a track, she'd be a very rich woman. About the only thing that I can agree with allofmp3.com on is the pricing. At least their prices are realistic for digitally distributed lossy recordings. And for all you fucking nimrods who think it's your right to access anything you want without actually paying for it, go stick a hot soldering iron in your assholes on my behalf. Thanks...

Re:Oh the Howwuh... (said like Elmer Fudd)

[shark72]

"That means they'll only clear a few billion this year instead of the extra hundred million or so that never makes it to the hands of the people who matter most in all this: the artists themselves. The most important people in the music business are the composers and musicians who write and perform the music and the producers and engineers who put it all together."

Allofmp3.com does not help this situation. I find it highly doubtful that allofmp3.com is paying them anything close to what's fair. And they are most certainly not paying the producers or engineers; those people are salaried or contractors and the record company pays them whether the record makes money or not. Buying from allofmp3.com ensures that a couple of Russian guys get money (which I suppose is a good thing), but it leaves the record company to foot the bill for making the music a reality. Or, in other words, "payback."

"For those of you out there who like say... Nelly Furtado, if she put her songs online at her own site for legal download at $.25 a track, she'd be a very rich woman."

This is a very common claim. Slashdotters are often quite full of advice for people in the recording industry. While there are certainly plenty of examples of musicians who've managed to eke out a living selling their music without a recording contract, and instances of bands releasing stuff on their own after their contract is up or they're dropped from their label (TMBG is one example), the fact is that there are still many, many more people who want recording contracts than actually get them. Why haven't Nelly and countless others done the right and proper thing? Broadly speaking, one of three possibilities is correct:

1. Slashdotters are smarter than musicians about the best way to make money in the industry. If only they'd listen to us!
2. Perhaps they know something we don't,
3. ...or perhaps they are simply not interested in coming up with the money to produce, record, engineer, market and sell their own music.

Re:Oh the Howwuh... (said like Elmer Fudd)

[Quizo69]

"Why haven't Nelly and countless others done the right and proper thing?"

4. Indentured servitude thanks to their contracts?

Not a chance.

[Conor Turton]

THey've not got a hope in hell. THe UK Govt have got far more important things to worry about such as gas supplies from Russia.

When are people gonna realize

[Anonymous Coward]

that music just isnt that important. It honestly is a small industry yet they pull politicians to make it sound important.

It is such a small industry it is almost insignificant in the scheme of things, bubble gum is about 10 times the size. You dont see the world giving them much attention, why should any politician spend more than 1 hour a year on the troubles of the music industry.

G8 is not for something as trivial as music piracy. And that is what that issue is, TRIVIAL.

I wish some of the leaders would have the balls to simply tell the music companies to fuck off and learn to cope.

Russian September

[Doc Ruby]

AllOfMP3.com says they're going to stop being so controversial "after Russian copyright law changes in September". What is that change they're referring to?

Re:Russian September

[RLiegh]

It's referring to the fact you won't be able to download from allofmp3.com after sept 1st.

Re:Russian September

[wamatt]

err thats a prety big story right there.. care to back it up?

How is it different now?

[zogger]

Really? What government law enforcement agency is auditing closed source companies' code looking for GPL violations? I'd bet a lot more than a nickle that there is quite a bit of purloined code floating around inside closed source commercial software.....

    And how come despite generations-not just decades but now generations of the music industry engaging in illegal activity like payola that none of them have just been shut down, perhaps under the RICO act? Allofsoftware.com might fly over there, over here they would use SWAT teams and machine guns and teargas, then sic the lawyers on them.

and I am only half joking there....

In the US this situation is easy to quantify, those with the most cash in the largest sacks get "law engforcement" action and favorable legislation. Everyone else gets taxed to pay for that, sort of a double-screw-U.

The system is totally corrupt, IMO, it's not even fixable at this point, not with the same old Ds and Rs "in charge" it isn't.

Re:How is it different now?

[mpe]

What government law enforcement agency is auditing closed source companies' code looking for GPL violations? I'd bet a lot more than a nickle that there is quite a bit of purloined code floating around inside closed source commercial software.....

No doubt quite a bit of it is someone else's proprietary code.
Anyway it's ment to be for copyright holders to look for such violations.

idiots

[Anonymous Coward]

Do these idiots not relise there are about 20-30 sites almost identical to this one, with 10 cent mp3s, and albums alittle over a $1.00 USD? I bet they are just trying to get anything they can out of these sumits, and what not. Whats next, irc channels, and usenet, where music is free, and of the same quality, if not better sometimes. **AA needs to drop its current business models, and listen to the consumers, and start over from the consumers wants, and needs, not the **AA's executives wants, and needs. Crappy music, and movies are not worth paying the outrageous prices, make something descent at a descent price, and the people might start buying again, otherwise your going to lose money, and the higher your prices the more your going to lose.

They'll never get to it at G8

[Animats]

The G8 summit is refocusing on the latest war, Israel vs Hezbollah, Lebanon, Syria, etc., and the resulting disruption to oil supplies. Nobody at that level has time for the music industry right now.

Allofmp3 must honor the Berne Convention

[solprovider]

Copyright law before the collapse of the Soviet Union:
- All copyrights created in the Soviet Union are owned by the government.
- All other copyrights are owned by the government in the Soviet Union.
- These laws do not apply to Tetris.

Copyright law since the collapse:
- All copyrights are owned by whomever can find them in the files of the bureaucracy formerly known as the government of the Soviet Union.
- This law does not apply to Tetris.

===
Beyond the humor, does anybody know anything about Russian copyright laws? Do they have any? If so, how do they handle copyrighted material from other countries? If they have escaped the Berne Convention by dissolving their government, can they stay free? Can we (the U.S.) use the same method to escape? Even if Russia signs/has signed the Berne Convention, can they apply for the "Developing Country" exemption clauses?

[Please wait for research...]

Unfortunately, Russia surrendered to the Berne Convention in March, 1995. The U.S surrendered in 1988 (effective in 1989). Brunei is the latest victim; they are not afflicted with the terms of the Berne Convention until August.

OT: Any country may denounce the Berne Convention 5 years after it is in force, with the expiration of force taking effect 1 year after the official denounciation. Can I send the notification on behalf of the U.S.?

I could not find a list of countries taking advantage of the "Developing Country" clauses, but the clauses seem to have expired on Jan 1, 2006.

Applying this to the discussion, Russian copyright law must include the awful terms of the Berne Convention, so Allofmp3 must respect the copyrights of creators in the United Kingdom (founding member, 1887). From the article, Allofmp3 states it complies by paying royalties to 2 Russian organizations. The issue is those organization do not have the right to license works from other countries, and are not paying any royalties outside Russia.

Re:Allofmp3 must honor the Berne Convention

[Vadim Makarov]

does anybody know anything about Russian copyright laws? Do they have any?

Russian original | English translation.

The legal basis for allofmp3.com's operation is mostly buried at the end of the law, in the articles on "collective administration of economic rights".

The USSR signed the Berne convention in 1973, but specifically mentioned the convention was not to be applied retroactively. So all foreign works created before the joining date (some day in 1973, I don't remember) are in the public domain in Russia (who legally inherited the treaties the USSR made).

Reminder

[Lunchbox777]

Luckily they reminded me or I would have forgotten to download crappy UK music from allofmp3!

HAHAHAHAHA....

[infosec_spaz]

OMG...Look here... They are a Russian company making money...LET'S Go Gettem'!! What a bunch of douchebags. Leave my music store alone, and go fuck with iTunes, They are the real fucking pirates!

Re:HAHAHAHAHA....

[Anonymous Coward]

one word: iPirates

They're related

[Anonymous Coward]

"The British Phonographic Industry" always looks like "The British Pornographic Industry" at first glance. IMO, this is a huge image/credibility issue with the BPI that must be addressed ASAP

Since both are primarily the purveyors loud grunting and other crude and tasteless noises, one could argue that they might in fact be the same entity.

Good to see priorities are straight

[Barbarian]

What with the current middle east problems, this shouldn't even be on the radar. Then again, this is the same industry that tried to have anti-piracy measures tacked onto the PATRIOT act. If that isn't treason, I don't know what is.

Wrong use of time

[nurb432]

The G8 summit should be about *REALLY IMPORTANT THINGS* , not about attacking some company down the road beacuse you dont like them.

There are much bigger issues in the world then this... Or did all our world problems get fixed last weekend and missed the press release?

Re:Wrong use of time

[Anonymous Coward]

This is a really important thing for them. This is about control over information flow, and that's how the scummy G8 fucks maintain their power.

why waste time

[Spaham]

Right, why waste time on non important things like what's currently happening in Lebanon and Israel and let's talk about serious things like Majors bypassing...
Do those pirates buy legal CDs anyway ?

Take it off the internet? Wrong response.

[soliptic]

Just make sure it pays the Russian equivalent of the PRS, as they claim to, and that the Russian PRS duly pass on royalties to the UK PRS as appropriate.

Duh.

BPI contact details

[OfNoAccount]

BPI contact details. If you feel strongly about this, how about writing to them to let them know? Try and keep it polite though, as I suspect that flames aren't likely to flow up the org-chart ;)

pricing economics

[Anonymous Coward]

All politics aside, when the price goes down to $0.10 per song, I would buy music by the song (and actually do, quite legitimately, using eMusic.com; okay, okay, so I actually pay about $0.18 per song). At $0.99 per song, I buy used CDs instead. There is a lesson in the economics of pricing here...

Media has incentive not to answer that question

[Anonymous Coward]

Media keeps muddying the water because old school media is losing its profits to sharing, too, and they're on the side of those who lie and propagandize about the extent to which we individuals have rights.

Copyright inherent in the creator of the work is a very, very limited right, and "consumers" of those works have overall greater rights. But try finding mainstream media clarifying that accurately for people.

(BTW, disagree with me? Here's one example - court decisions make crystal clear that the instances of fair use rights described in federal copyright statute are EXAMPLES and do not cover the whole spectrum of fair use rights. But watch how most media disingenously describes fair use, as though it is limited to only the few examples in statute).

they are correct

[zx-15]

I'm no fan of RIAA, MPAA or DRM. However in this case I agree with them. The stuff that allofmp3 is doing is worst than the regular piracy, at least when you are sharing a torrent you don't get money off it. But these people are basically profit of other people's work, by making music piracy convenient (you have to get to some trouble to install torrent or edonkey or whatever...). Sort of a chop shop of intellectual property. So whoever is using this service is either a dumbass who can't even install a torrent client, and too cheap to use apple iTunes, or someone who thinks that paying anything for music will make any difference, at least for one's conscience. So I thing RIAA has a right to lobby the effort to shutdown allofmp3, and as for the argument that people at G8 summit should be discussing more important questions has the same validity as the one, that how can anyone read slashdot when people in Africa starving.

just my $0.02

The Jordan river ALWAYS has bodies floatin'

[Ungrounded Lightning]

We've potentially got World War III brewing in the Middle East but let's go ahead and spend some time discussing allofmp3.com. Jesus H. Christ on a bicycle the world has it's priorities screwed up.

Oh, dear. We have another crisis in the Middle East that might lead to WW III. Again.

Let's drop everything else, run around in circles, and freeze and starve in the dark.

Stop the World, I Want to get OFF!

Baloney.

There are enough bureaucrats, politicians, legislative staffers, corporate executives, military and police officers, ambassadors, and other officials to handle war, anti-poverty and development uplift programs, economic aid, law enforcement, legislation, food production, and the latest maybe-here-comes-WW-III all at once. Most of them with authoirity in one of these speres have none in the others - and the ones that DO overlap are also in authority over so much that their specialty is really delegation.

The world isn't going to just stop unless, and until, something stops it. Maybe that will be WW III, currently getting starting over this latest Israel/other-guys shootout. Maybe not. Until it happens, the world is still running, so let's get on with it.

We have a significant issue here with G8, RIAA, and Allofmp3. Lets deal with it. (G8 and the RIAA are, after all.) This IS "News for Nerds, Stuff that Matters."

Maybe you think WW III matters more? Go discuss it in an article where's it's on-topic. Complaints about people continuing to do their jobs despite yet another fracus that is somebody ELSE's job are OFF topic here.

Medieval Age again

[linuxhansl]

I just read an article about how the nature of law and the severity of punishment for certain crimes changed over time.
As it turns out: In times when a small class of people owned most of the land and goods, theft was punished the most severly. Apparent the rich could not bear to change any or their wealth.

Money wrote the law books then, it still does, and humanity never learns it seems. It will be a same all over again with small class of information owners that "writes" the laws and large "consuming" class without rights.
Already copying copyrighted content via P2P carries penalties in the same ballpark as rape, something more severe.

I'm sure the G8 have no more pressing topics to cover like maybe health, poverty, wars, etc.

Re:Medieval Age again

[Anonymous Coward]

Money wrote the law books then, it still does, and humanity never learns it seems.

Why should it change? It happens that the only thing that really matters it the economy. Money is the most important thing. Deal with it.

Stop being soo greedy and make more than ever!!!

[lordperditor]

I love allofmp3.com If RIAA and other industry groups adopted their model/pricing most people would just pay and download per song as it should be. The number of paying customers would multiply by millions and they recording indutry despite the lower prices would make more money than they ever have. They are blind fools.

Except it's legal in Russia..

[plasmacutter]

It is not piracy in russia.

They pay their license fees just like radio stations and music retailers do in the states..

just because the price for their compulsory license fees is much lower, and the PBI/RIAA is greedy, doesnt mean it's illegal or wrong.

The should keep it quiet

[bunbuntheminilop]

because I'm going to be downloading from Allofmp3 all weekend now if its end is nigh!

Beat the BPI with VAT

[DrStrangeLug]

I know how we can beat these guys !

Buy some albums off allofmp3, then contact your local tax office and pay the 17.5% VAT on the items you've just bought. (Assuming these downloads are legal then you should do this anyway but I doubt anybody ever does)

Give it a month or two, then take the VAT office to the small claims court to get the tax back. Say you've heard from BPI press releases that allofmp3 is not legal and as a good law abiding citizen you've deleted all the music you bought . Since the music was not legal you did not have to pay the tax and you want it back.

If the VAT office wins the case ( and do you really think you can beat the tax man in court? ) that sets the legal precedent of allofmp3 as a legal service. The beauty of this is that it puts the tax office in a position of wanting to prove allofmp3 is a legal way to buy music from abroad.

BTW, IANAL.

It's walt-tastic, folks.

[Anonymous Coward]

Come pay us a visit sometime.

Snail mail

[philipmather]

Mr. Peter Jamieson,
BPI,
Riverside Building,
County Hall,
Westminster Bridge Road,
London,
England,
SE1 7JA.

Dear Sir,
      If you weren't so blinded by your own comical rhetoric you might have actually recognized allofmp3.com as viable business model (which is arguably an independent matter from its legality) rather than someone else to persecute with your myopic naivety. May I take this opportunity to suggest you invest some time in realizing how market based, capitalist democracies operate upon those whose market is shrinking and who still refuse to focus their efforts on innovating and progressing there offerings?

Regards,
      Mr. P A. Mather

Opposite of US

[AnyThingButWindows]

In Soviet Russia the mp3s will pirate you.

One world

[sm62704]

One plutocracy. While the rich decry class warfare, they wage it.

The boogie man of copyright

[Monkeyboy4]

Alright. I'm fed up with copyright advocates saying that there would be 'less material produced' if there was no copyright. Bull. there would be less corporate-planned and marketed, low-entertainment/high revenue crap, yes. But art would not suffer froma lack of copyright. Artists do not create in order to get more revenue. Artists create because of an internal drive.

one of the biggest lies told to us by the RIAA et al. is that artists and media companies are the same. Its a horrible lie. Media companies exploit artists, and then they try to take audiences and make them consumers. The idea that those that listen or watch are consuming media is as fundamentally flawed as the idea that artists are primarily motivated to make a buck

I realize that artists do enjoy making money, and that people are willing to pay a fair rate for the convenience of accessing art. But the big issue I have with all the xIAA bullshit is that ity is an attempt to make art a business. Art doesn't need to be a business, and when art is managed with economic concerns as the first concern, then art suffers, and diminishes.

Art would be fine with no copyright. IT would be differnet, and not overwhelmed by poor coprorate philosophies.

Re:The boogie man of copyright

[Score Whore]

Alright. I'm fed up with copyright advocates saying that there would be 'less material produced' if there was no copyright. Bull. there would be less corporate-planned and marketed, low-entertainment/high revenue crap, yes. But art would not suffer froma lack of copyright. Artists do not create in order to get more revenue. Artists create because of an internal drive.

You can be as fed as you please. You might as well throw some indignation in there too. Maybe some self righteousness on the side. The fundamental proof that I am right and you are wrong is to compare the amount of content produced that is immediately sent to the public domain (content that is created purely for the love of the art) and the amount that is protected under copyright (commercially produced art.) It's orders of magnitude in favor of protected art.

Art of all kinds, paintings, photographs, music, literature, would continue to get created on a small scale. And if you happened to have a personal relationship with an artist you might be able to work out some kind of individual transaction that would get you a recording to listen to or a picture to hang on the wall. On the other hand the people who refine the art, editors, framers, decorators, producers, all would basically get out of the business. Because what they do isn't the creative fire. Working all day in the studio with an artist to create a recording with an even sound. This sort of thing takes time and people need to eat. They need shelter. And they aren't going to be able to get the standard of living that goes along with the level of work that they see themselves doing to polish up the product. So they'd move on to something else.

The idea that those that listen or watch are consuming media is as fundamentally flawed as the idea that artists are primarily motivated to make a buck.

The idea that artists are all obsessively driven to produce art for the sake of art is the fundamentally what is fundamentally flawed. Most people who create the art that you consume are just people who have a talent for it. They are using the available market dynamics to maximize their gain. If that market wasn't available to them, then they would turn around and go work in some other field and do their art on the side. They will probably produce some works on the side, but generally they will not spend day after day working on creating a highly polished, refined work.

So in conclusion, I'm right. You are wrong. If you want to convince anyone differently then show the world all this free art that is being created for the pure love of the art. Where can I get a piece of high art for the cost of materials? Where is the Great American Novel that I can download off the net and print out? Where is the Mozart level talent that is producing new symphonies? How about plays? How about movies? The complete lack of a glut of available content is a pretty fucking clear indicator that you're argument is full of shit.

Re:The boogie man of copyright

[diablomonic]

erm... right.. You ask where the uncopyrighted material is, forgetting (I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume it wasnt just dishonesty) that COPYRIGHT IS APPLIED BY DEFAULT....

So what you are saying is: where are all the artists going out of their way to un-copyright their music.. when most musicians are a lot more worried about just eating. (since payola and riaa bullshit has made widespread success purely on your musical merits a difficult proposition)