Slashdot Mirror


Visa Cuts Off AllOfMp3.com

denebian devil writes "On the heals of allofmp3.com's press conference trying to clean up its image, Visa has suspended its credit card service to allofmp3.com. From the article "[Allofmp3 is] no longer permitted to accept Visa cards," said Simon Barker, a Visa International spokesman. "The action we've taken is in line with legislation passed in Russia and international copyright law." Almost simultaneously, allofmp3.com has announced that it is shifting over to an ad-supported model. For those who don't want to (or can't) buy allofmp3's DRM-free music, they are providing DRM-laden music that can be played only within a restricted player provided by the website."

394 comments

  1. For everything you want to buy... by MoOsEb0y · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...there's Mastercard.

    1. Re:For everything you want to buy... by igny · · Score: 5, Informative

      Mastercard cut off AllofMP3 as well.

      --
      In theory there is no difference between theory and practice. In practice there is. - Yogi Berra
    2. Re:For everything you want to buy... by SScorpio · · Score: 1

      But do they take American Express? Oh wait... let's see there is Costco, and... umm...

    3. Re:For everything you want to buy... by NetDanzr · · Score: 4, Informative

      That's where paying through third parties comes in. I've been using XROST for over a year when recharging my Allofmp3 account, and that method has been always working well. Similar system has been working with sports betting sites for a while, and given how easy it is to reroute money I don't think non-US based businesses will have to shut down anytime soon.

    4. Re:For everything you want to buy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      Strange, because my Mastercard payment just went through AOK.

    5. Re:For everything you want to buy... by chill · · Score: 4, Informative

      Mastercard cut off AllofMP3 as well.

      No, they didn't. Mastercard is the only credit/debit option that works, as of 5 minutes ago.

      --
      Learning HOW to think is more important than learning WHAT to think.
    6. Re:For everything you want to buy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Looks like Visa is not "Everywhere I want to be".

    7. Re:For everything you want to buy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just use XROST prepaid cards with Visa. I got a $10 prepaid, and put 100% of it towards allofmp3. Worked great... but I used an IBS Shopsafe number just in case the XROST guys go fee crazy.

    8. Re:For everything you want to buy... by Zarniwoop_Editor · · Score: 1

      I don't know what the big deal is. MasterCard and Visa cut *ME* off a long long time ago.. ;-)

      In truth there are so many payment options now that it probably won't make much difference to them anyway.

      --
      - F1 NEWS
    9. Re:For everything you want to buy... by Balthisar · · Score: 4, Informative

      Just tried my Mastercard, and then I stopped. It looks like payments are now being outsourced to some place called www.e-centru.com, which is in Moldova. I don't remember ever being redirected to another payment site in the past, although it's showing that I last recharged my account on March 17th, 2005 (I don't buy a lot of music [or pirate it for that matter]). Anyone else ever been directed to this company to accept payments? It *is* showing just Mastercard as an option.

      Well... here goes. That's what fraud protection is good for.

      Well, it worked. Now I've got to figure out $25.25 worth of music that I want. I wish they had audiobooks.

      --
      --Jim (me)
    10. Re:For everything you want to buy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, I used to work for Visa. Visa processes more MasterCard (or Evil O's, as they call them their) transactions than MasterCard. Same thing for AMEX, I think. I'm guessing the ban is a brand thing rather than an processing network thing though, so I suppose your MasterCard would still work.

    11. Re:For everything you want to buy... by dmitrygr · · Score: 5, Informative

      Actually, if you go to alltunes.com, and register there, the balanace is shared with allOfMp3 (you can refill it at alltunes, and use at allofmp3), AND alltunes STILL works with visa (as they use a 3-rd party processor "CHRONOPAY")

      --
      -------
      1. Enjoy your job
      2. Make lots of money
      3. Work within the law

      Choose any two.
    12. Re:For everything you want to buy... by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      I just tried - my MC card was not taken ;(

      BUT - the xrost system DID work. I was able to use my visa (ha ha!) to buy xrost credits and then use THAT to pay the ruskies ;)

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    13. Re:For everything you want to buy... by shmert · · Score: 1

      I kind of wish I'd done something like that XROST thing. I tried out allofmp3.com a while ago, bought 2 albums, but didn't like all the hassle of downloading them. However, the one-time email I gave to them started being inundated with spam shortly thereafter. Makes me wonder about their scruples, and how long before my credit card info follows my email address.

      I guess that's an obvious lesson about doing business with shady companies. Cover thine arse.

      --
      You drank my drink, you drunk!
    14. Re:For everything you want to buy... by senatorpjt · · Score: 1

      The same thing happened to me. I run my own mail server on a private domain, and give one-time addresses to companies. There is no possible way for these addresses to receive spam by chance.

      I started receiving these spam messages on Sept 26, 2006, ten days after using Chronopay. The account had been longstanding at allofmp3, which leads me to believe that Chronopay is selling the email addresses. In the (almost) month since they started appearing, I have received 334 spam sent to allofmp3@(my server).

    15. Re:For everything you want to buy... by jargoone · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I wish they had audiobooks.

      Why limit yourself to allofmp3.com? Surely there are other places you can steal audiobooks...

    16. Re:For everything you want to buy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      That sudden www.e-centru.com worried me as well (did YOU write down the SHA1 fingerprint
      of allofmp3's certificate?) :-).

      I tried to verify the name at the Moldova central bank website but I couldn't find a list of bona-fide banks there.
      They showed an address in Chisinau's main street but for all I know this could
      be a post address :-) This address was very close to some kind of reputable agro-business bank
      so I thought what the hell I'll risk $50 anyway.

      Well, FWIW my payment went through flawlessly, I got an e-mail receipt from payment@e-centru.com,
      and I haven't seen any plunderings of my credit card
      after a month or so (yet).

      Who knows, maybe for a russian customer a Moldovan e-bank account is posh
      and trustworthy :-) I trust them now for up to $100, say.

    17. Re:For everything you want to buy... by OverlordQ · · Score: 2, Informative

      BZZZZZT! WRONG!

      Chronopay only takes:
      Mastercard
      Diners
      JCB
      Maestro / Solo / Switch / STB

      No VISA

      --
      Your hair look like poop, Bob! - Wanker.
    18. Re:For everything you want to buy... by guet · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Tell me, why do you go through all this hassle, when you could just steal the music in one step, without paying a middle-man?

      Do you actually believe that some of this money gets back to the bands/producers?

    19. Re:For everything you want to buy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you are cautious, you can create one of those single-use fixed-amount credit cards at your Mastercard site.
      THAT WAY, your real credit card number isn't exposed. Even if the billing site seems legitimate, you have no idea how secure their network and database are. Sure, you are making TWO transfers, but why take chances, especially when it's so easy to "charge up" alltunes?

    20. Re:For everything you want to buy... by babycakes · · Score: 1

      Watch out for Chronopay though - selling email address on to pr0n spammers isn't my idea of the most "secure" payment service... and yes, this has happened to me in the past 3 months since I started using them to charge my allofmp3 account.

    21. Re:For everything you want to buy... by sustik · · Score: 2, Informative

      I made a payment yesterday and bought some songs using those credits. I can understand that some are vary about paying on russian or non-us operated websites. But let me point out that it would be very foolish for allofmp3.com engage in any fraudulent activity, since appearently they are under heavy scrutiny.

      Though you may say that I am pretty ignorant about the accusations against them, I keep an eye on any *official* news regarding their legality. I find their service of good quality (ogg encoding anywhere else?) and value, I need more than accusations to stop using their service.

      Newer songs and/or smaller bands are not always avialable on allofmp3.com. I recently bought a CD online from a local band. I made sure of course that the label in question is NOT an RIAA member (wikipedia has a list).

    22. Re:For everything you want to buy... by MHolmesIV · · Score: 2, Insightful

      probably about the same amount as when you buy a CD from the store. And twice as much as when you buy a used CD.

    23. Re:For everything you want to buy... by jZnat · · Score: 1

      Yeah, go steal them from stores and stuff; less legal issues to worry about if you get caught.

      --
      'Yes, firefox is indeed greater than women. Can women block pops up for you? No. Can Firefox show you naked women? Yes.'
    24. Re:For everything you want to buy... by kimvette · · Score: 1

      Aren't Visa and Mastercard two brands of the same company?

      --
      The Christian Right is Neither (Christian nor right). See: Matthew 23, Matthew 25, Ezekiel 16:48-50
    25. Re:For everything you want to buy... by kujanomiko · · Score: 1

      After my Visa card was rejected there last week, my Mastercard went through, so if it doesn't work, it is a recent development.

    26. Re:For everything you want to buy... by gshutt · · Score: 1

      Chronopay sold the email addresses. I just started getting a freakin ton of spam to chronopay@(my server) but none to allofmp3@(my server). The spam flood started on 9/26/2006 and I haven't used Chronopay/Allofmp3 in about 5-6 months.

    27. Re:For everything you want to buy... by syousef · · Score: 1

      Hasta la Visa!

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    28. Re:For everything you want to buy... by jasonwea · · Score: 1

      I can confirm this. As of 2006-09-26 I started receiving spam to both my mp3spy and Chronopay aliases. I blocked them shortly after.

      Interestingly though, very few spam to these aliases was from machines already listed in the common DNSBLs. Unlike all the other spam I receive of which almost all is listed.

  2. AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by eldavojohn · · Score: 5, Informative
    This whole time AllOfMp3 has been operating, it has been under a clause in the Russian government's legislation (from their site):
    The availability over the Internet of the ALLOFMP3.com materials is authorized by the license # LS-3?-05-03 of the Russian Multimedia and Internet Society (ROMS) and license # 006/3M-05 of the Rightholders Federation for Collective Copyright Management of Works Used Interactively (FAIR). In accordance to the licenses' terms MediaServices pays license fees for all materials downloaded from the site subject to the Law of the Russian Federation "On Copyright and Related Rights". All these materials are solely for personal use. Any further distribution, resale or broadcasting are prohibited.

    The works available from ALLOFMP3.com are protected by the Law of the Russian Federation "On Copyright and Related Rights" and are for personal use of a buyer. Commercial use of such material is prohibited. Recording, copying, distribution on any media is possible only upon special consent of a Rightholder.

    The user bears sole responsibility for any use and distribution of all materials received from AllOFMP3.com. This responsibility is dependent on the national legislation in each user's country of residence. The Administration of AllOFMP3.com does not possess information on the laws of each particular country and is not responsible for the actions of foreign users.
    Read that last paragraph, if you've been in the United States & using AllOfMp3.com, they've been shifting legality issues to you. Visa has now chosen to recognize this issue and not be party to breaking the law.

    So, to recap, it seems that media in Russia is still somewhat regarded as belonging to the people. However, this is not true in many other countries.

    I cannot say I blame them with the gustapo **AA about.
    --
    My work here is dung.
    1. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by Aladrin · · Score: 2, Interesting

      What's amazing is that Visa ever allowed it in the first place.

      --
      "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
    2. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by k_187 · · Score: 1

      My guess they didn't know/care enough to check. Notice they got dropped 1 day after Allofmp3's first press conference.

      --
      11 was a racehorse
      12 was 12
      1111 Race
      12112
    3. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by VitrosChemistryAnaly · · Score: 2, Insightful
      What's amazing is that Visa ever allowed it in the first place.
      How's that amazing? Visa makes money off of every transaction. I'd say that they only quit because someone put pressure on them, not because they want to stop making money on those transactions.

      They want money just like every other corporation. I'm sure that they don't entirely care where the money came from. I'm pretty sure that you can still use Visa to pay for pornographic content that may be illegal in your particular region of the country (sodomy anyone?).
      --
      "It's a tarp!" -- Dyslexic Admiral Ackbar
    4. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by z0idberg · · Score: 1

      So if you live in Russia and have a VISA card can you still not use your VISA card at allofmp3 even though it is legal for you to use that site?

      Is there such a thing as a VISA card in Russia? I mean if you live there can you get a VISA card? I would guess yes but don't know for sure.

      If the legality depends on your location does it depend on where you live? the billing address of your VISA card? the location of the Bank which you have your VISA card through? or the Head office of VISA?

      Or does it just matter who leans on VISA hard enough to get what they want?

    5. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by minus9 · · Score: 5, Funny

      "(sodomy anyone?)."

      Not for me thanks.

    6. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by MartinG · · Score: 1

      Visa has now chosen to recognize this issue and not be party to breaking the law.

      Two questions:

      1) In which jusrisdiction(s) was the law being broken?

      2) Which law(s) in that jurisdiction(s) was/were being broken?

      --
      -- MartinG To mail me: echo kewyjlcxyzvjfxbqwh | tr bcefhjklqvwxyz .@adgimnoprstu
    7. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by Pofy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      >Read that last paragraph, if you've been in the United States & using AllOfMp3.com, they've
      >been shifting legality issues to you.

      What responsability? There is no responsability for a purchaser of music that is applicable. A buyer is for example not distributing the material. Use in it self is not a copyright issue. So what specifically are you thinking of?

      >Visa has now chosen to recognize this issue and not be party to breaking the law.

      What law are you as a buyer breaking? None.

      >However, this is not true in many other countries.

      So? You are buying the music in Russia. Russian law applies. You are following them. There is no additional law applicable or of relevance to you in this case.

    8. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by Pofy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      >So if you live in Russia and have a VISA card can you still not use your VISA card at
      >allofmp3 even though it is legal for you to use that site?

      What does were you live have to do with it? What law makes it illegal for you to buy the music from Russia if you live in another country? Or are you claiming that USE, Turkey, Japan, South Africa (or whatever other non Russian country you might prefer) have some law forbiding you to purchase from another country? And what would that have to do with copyright who for sure doesn't have such limitations (we are talking of purchase of single number of copies of each song and for personal use, just like if you have bought the CD while in Russia and bring it home with it, just mentioning it so that you don't have to claim anything about import and I have to reply to tell about what is covered by the import part in copyright law and what is not).

    9. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by Kjella · · Score: 1

      From what I've understood it,
      1) US
      2) Import laws (goes something like "copies that couldn't legally have been made in the US, can't be imported to the US". Since the Russian law doesn't apply in the US, you can't import copies made under that law.

      It is certainly not legal for commercial use, I don't recall seeing an exception for consumers but there might be. I think there's some similar rules on counterfeit goods, you can be fined for importing it even if you have bought it as a private consumer. Of course the enforcement is completely lost since we're talking about a few bits over an Internet connection, but I think the law got it covered.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    10. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by Pofy · · Score: 4, Informative

      >2) Import laws (goes something like "copies that couldn't
      >legally have been made in the US, can't be imported to the
      >US". Since the Russian law doesn't apply in the US, you
      >can't import copies made under that law.

      Why do people who don't know the law, insists on making up their own version of it? Here is a link to the relevant law you probably think you are telling about:

      http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/us c_sec_17_00000602----000-.html

      Note the exceptions (2), which would be applicable to anyone buying music over the net in single quantities of each work. Thus, it doesn't count as importation and the restrictions you refer to are not applicable and irrellevant.

    11. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by networkBoy · · Score: 1

      *psst*
      They didn't want you to point out that bit.

      Kinda like the C&D I got from Farmers, they quoted a whole lot of crap from Title 15, but when you look there are two halves and they were quoting from the commercial half. The other half says: comparitive/critical/commentary/educational/etc. uses are exempt.

      The entire C&D with annotated commentary is available here:
      http://farmersreallysucks.com/cgi-bin/QAD_CMS.pl?p age=E1_First_Takedown.html Basically the same concept, just a different reason.
      -nB

      --
      whois gawk date unzip strip find touch finger mount join nice man top fsck grep eject more yes exit umount sleep dump
    12. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by djdavetrouble · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What's amazing is that Visa ever allowed it in the first place.

      (picking myself up off the floor)
      Its amazing that a soulless multinational mega corporation took money ?
      They only fall in line when the lawyers deem the risk larger than the reward.

      --
      music lover since 1969
    13. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by ErroneousBee · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'd say that they only quit because someone put pressure on them, not because they want to stop making money on those transactions.

      Possibly because Visa in the US is being floated on the stock exchange. I guess that is because the USA is moving in a rather insular direction, and they didnt want Visa in the rest of the world to be hit by legal problems in the USA. See the recent problems with online gambling for an example of the kind of exposures companies like Visa have if they wish to do business in the USA.

      Confirmation of this would be if the non_USA Visa goes back to servicing allofmp3.

      --
      **TODO** Steal someone elses sig.
    14. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by Pofy · · Score: 1

      >Or are you claiming that USE,

      Sigh, I meant USA of course.

    15. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by swillden · · Score: 5, Informative

      Visa makes money off of every transaction.

      "Visa" doesn't make money on transactions. The various organizations who own the Visa brand are banking consortia. Their job is to manage the brand name, define payment standards, validate implementations of those standards, and generally do whatever makes sense to facilitate their membership's ability to make money. The Visa organizations are primarily funded by dues paid by the member banks.

      When you make a Visa payment, the money passes through two or three sets of hands. It goes like this:

      1. The merchant submits the transaction to a bank the merchant has a relationship with. This bank is called the "merchant acquirer". Some of the big merchant acquirers don't do any retail or wholesale banking, but are just transaction processors. Nevertheless, they're banks. They have to be.
      2. The merchant acquirer submits the transaction either to a clearinghouse (which, with one notable exception, is not really related to any official Visa organization) or directly to the bank that issued your credit card (called the "issuer").
      3. The issuer validates the transaction and sends a notification back to the merchant acquirer (possibly via the clearinghouse).
      4. The merchant acquirer (eventually) puts money into the merchant's bank account.
      5. The issuer sends you a bill.

      The merchant acquirer and issuer both make money on the transaction, and the clearinghouse, if any, takes another small slice. The issuer obviously also makes money on finance charges if you don't pay your balance off right away.

      All of this just highlights the fact that none of these players have any interest at all in shutting off the flow of money to allofmp3. The acquirer that allofmp3 uses is a Russian bank, so they have no legal issues, and plenty of interest in taking a slice of allofmp3's business. The various issuing banks are individually anonymous in the situation, they figure their only responsibility is to make sure that the transactions are not fraudulent -- mainly because they don't want to end up potentially footing the bill for the fraud. The clearinghouses just want to push transactions from point A to point B.

      Each player can point to the others and say that it ought to be their decision as to whether or not payments from a certain merchant should be accepted. The most logical decisionmaker as to the legitimacy of the merchant is the acquirer -- and that's the Russian bank for whom there's no legal issue!

      I find it quite surprising that Visa International decided to step in and order their members (the organizations who pay them!) not to accept allofmp3.com payments.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    16. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by Threni · · Score: 1

      > What's amazing is that Visa ever allowed it in the first place.

      You're going to love finding out how much effort eBay takes to ensure crooks don't operate on its website. Notice the `report this item` link on every auction. You don't? Yeah, there's isn't one. Now poke around for half an hour looking for a way of alerting them to crooks. Sure, if someone is listing a banned item or whatever you'll not spend the full half hour, but if someone is describing, say, a Mini SD card as being compatible with the Nokia N70 and the seller doesn't respond to your emails, you're left filling in a general purpose report and never receiving more than a stock acknowledgement. You're supposed to do that for each of the hundreds of items listed? That's better than a `report this item` link on each item?

    17. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by slughead · · Score: 1

      The user bears sole responsibility for any use and distribution of all materials received from AllOFMP3.com. This responsibility is dependent on the national legislation in each user's country of residence. The Administration of AllOFMP3.com does not possess information on the laws of each particular country and is not responsible for the actions of foreign users.

      Read that last paragraph, if you've been in the United States & using AllOfMp3.com, they've been shifting legality issues to you. Visa has now chosen to recognize this issue and not be party to breaking the law.


      Yes, however, American law says that any copyrighted material legally purchased in other countries can be imported into the US without duty.

      With Allofmp3.com, you buy the song in Russia (legally), and import it into the US using the internet.

      Since it's legal, it's still theft, but not piracy.

    18. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You meant: Unilateral Stupid Assholes

    19. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by Aladrin · · Score: 1

      You know, that's funny... Because just this morning I -was- looking for that link. I thought maybe I had imagined it before. There was a logitech remote on there for $125 or so, and $70 shipping... $70 is obviously pushing the cost of the item over into the shipping. So I was going to report them. I gave up soon and just bought nothing.

      --
      "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
    20. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by aunticrist · · Score: 0

      *ahemcough*Sodomy is no longer illegal anywhere in the states.*cough*

    21. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by kinglink · · Score: 1

      The question then becomes where did the transaction take place? In america, In russia, in neither? The answer according to courts tends to be "where ever we want it to".

    22. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by yppiz · · Score: 4, Informative

      Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Visa (the corporate entity) also runs VisaNet, the network over which Visa transactions are sent, and charges a small fee per transaction.

      Also, here is an excerpt from the Wikipedia entry for Visa decribing Visa's complex corporate structure.

      *

      Legally, Visa comprises four non-stock, separately incorporated companies that employ 6000 people worldwide: Visa International Service Association ("VISA"), the worldwide parent entity; Visa U.S.A. Inc.; Visa Canada Association; and Visa Europe Ltd. The latter three separately incorporated regions have the status of group members of Visa International Service Association, whereas the unincorporated regions (Visa Latin America [LAC], Visa Asia Pacific and Visa Central and Eastern Europe, Middle East and Africa [CEMEA]) are divisions within VISA.

      --Pat

    23. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by swillden · · Score: 1

      As I understand it (I've dozed through more than a few presentations from Visa folks, so this is just what soaked through my eyelids), VisaNet is a partly-owned subsidiary of Visa USA. It's the one notable exception I mentioned to the rule that clearinghouses aren't associated with the Visa companies.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    24. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by z0idberg · · Score: 1

      That was my point. Visa apparently thinks it isn't legal to purchase from that site no matter where you are from due to "...legislation passed in Russia and international copyright law."

      So I was curious if they have cut it off for everyone or just people external to Russia. If it is only external to Russia then perhaps they think it is legal for Russians to use the service (and not anyone else - under what law I don't know). If the don't think it is legal for Russian citizens then how come it hasn't been shutdown yet seeing as it's illegal and all?

      Looks like its cutoff for everyone though so they don't care where you live so the point is moot.

      So VISA will obviously not make any more money on purchases made at AllOfMp3. Seeing as they are in the busines of making money the only reason I can think of for doing so would be:
      a) they think there is a risk they will somehow face legal actions if they keep servicing AllOfMp3 customers (and hence lose money overall)
      b) they have been paid a lot of money from some anonymous(*wink*wink*) party to make up for the money they now won't get
      c) they think it's morally the right thing to do (bwahahaha!).

    25. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by AdamWeeden · · Score: 1

      I see a "Report This Item" link near the bottom of every auction I see. Screenshot

      --
      I was quoted out of context in my autobiography...
    26. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by joabj · · Score: 1

      >What's amazing is that Visa ever allowed it in the first place.

      What's disturbing is that Visa is, in effect, dictating how its customers should spend their money. I have a Visa *debit* card. So I'm not crazy about Visa stepping in and being the moral arbitrator on what I should or should not buy.

      Of course, if working with AllofMP3 puts the company in some sort of financial risk, then I can see the point of cutting off payments. If this is not the case though, what is Visa's rationale behind the move? Visa's mission is *not* to enforce worldwide copyright treaties.

      I suspect this issue will come up again in greater force in other arenas (porn, online gambling, etc.) In the meantime, I think I'll switch to a bank that offers MasterCard.

      joab

    27. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by robinp · · Score: 1

      >With Allofmp3.com, you buy the song in Russia (legally), and import it into the US using the internet.

      >Since it's legal, it's still theft, but not piracy.

      Not true. Allofmp3 don't pay for a lot of the music that's on their site. i.e they've stolen it from the rights holders (many small independent record labels that struggle to survive anyway, I know a friend owns one of these labels).

      They're crooks and should be shut down. I mean thr RIAA will go after little kids for just dling from p2p (which I'm not necessarily saying is bad) even though they see no financial gain and there are these jokers making lots of money and they can't be shut down. The situation's rediculous.

    28. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by lantenon · · Score: 1

      How does (b) affect this?

      (b) In a case where the making of the copies or phonorecords would have constituted an infringement of copyright if this title had been applicable, their importation is prohibited. In a case where the copies or phonorecords were lawfully made, the United States Customs Service has no authority to prevent their importation unless the provisions of section 601 are applicable. In either case, the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized to prescribe, by regulation, a procedure under which any person claiming an interest in the copyright in a particular work may, upon payment of a specified fee, be entitled to notification by the Customs Service of the importation of articles that appear to be copies or phonorecords of the work.

      Doesn't this basically say, if the copy you made would have been illegal to make in the U.S., you can't import it, period? I'm not a lawyer, I'm just curious.

    29. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by metamatic · · Score: 1
      Since it's legal, it's still theft, but not piracy.

      No, it's not theft either. See Slashdot discussions passim ad nauseaum re: definition of "theft".

      --
      GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
    30. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Definately look illeagal in the UK:

      http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/entertainment/5051826.s tm

    31. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by rainman_bc · · Score: 1

      $70 is obviously pushing the cost of the item over into the shipping. So I was going to report them. I gave up soon and just bought nothing.

      Is openly advertising a stupid shipping price against ebay policy?

      (IMO it should be and is unethical, but just saying)

      I think people are just using loopholes. Some sucker will fall for it sometimes, most are smarter than that.

      --
      09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
    32. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by foniksonik · · Score: 1

      Visa International Service Association ("VISA")

      Hmmm I had no idea that VISA was an original recursive acronymn.... impressive.

      --
      A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
    33. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by Pofy · · Score: 1

      Well, the allofmp3 claims to indeed be licensed to sell the music in Russia which is what they do. Regarding the legal situation in Russia for a buyer of music were the seller was not licensed, well, I must say I don't know the law. The brittish law is of course completely irellevant.

      The "illegal in UK" can only be an issue of bringing in a copy of music you have bought abroad. There is no copying or selling or buying in UK (or anywere except Russia) so if you want to claim it is illegal in the UK, it has to be illegal to bring such music into UK, that is the only thing that takes place in UK. The articles claim of suing them in the UK is quite humnorous since allofmp3 is not doing anything in the UK nor are they present there so how can they possibly violate any UK law?

    34. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by Monsuco · · Score: 1
      Visa has now chosen to recognize this issue and not be party to breaking the law.
      As if iTunes and Napster are. Their DRM scheme pretty much only can exist through a loophole in the Fair Use laws. Fair Use says you can do certain things by right, but this DRM blocks you from those things because the loophole is that you have the right to do things, but DRM can block you. Then there is the RIAA itself. It is a cartel group designed to set prices and force all artist to join and pay a fee and give up their rights. It is only in existance due to a loophole in antitrust laws. Imagine if WalMart, Target, Shopco, and KMart all joined together to set prices and require any new stores to give them money to sell things in an area. They would be sued out of existance. Also, copyright infringment is a civil issue, not a criminal one, so Visa has no right to be involved.
    35. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by Pofy · · Score: 1

      >Doesn't this basically say, if the copy you made would have been illegal to make in the U.S., you can't import it, period?

      Yes, IF you import. However, as is mentioned in other part, it is not considered as import if a private person brings in single copies of works for personal use and so on. For such a case there is thus no import. Basically, the import is aimed at comercial type of import were someone bring multiple copies for reselling (for example), not for a private person bring a copy of music with him in and out of the country.

    36. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by denebian+devil · · Score: 1

      I'd say that they only quit because someone put pressure on them, not because they want to stop making money on those transactions

      Seems that you were right. The music industry pressured Visa to cut allofmp3

    37. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by LordVader717 · · Score: 1

      Wow, I haven't seen such an uninformed, but confident comment in a long while. The responsibility is copyright infringement. Merely posessing copyright infringing material is an offense in itself. It's not punished as severely as when you sell, but still. And if you know the copyright situation is dubious, theres no claiming you didn't know.

      And if you live in the US, US laws apply to everything you have and do. Simple.

    38. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by BobTheLawyer · · Score: 1

      It is a UK offence to cause an electronic copy to be made of an mp3 unless you are licensed to do so. Allofmp3.com does not have any UK licencing rights, and it follows that when you download from allofmp3.com, you and allofmp3.com are both breaking UK law.

      You may think it humourous that a country can apply its laws outside its borders, but the director of sportingbet.com and a trio of British bankers will disagree with you.

    39. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by dwandy · · Score: 1

      You would think that that simple fact would make it the official card of GNU ...

      --
      If you think imaginary property and real property are the same, when does your house become public domain?
    40. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 1

      What responsability?

      Making a new copy. As many courts in many cases (e.g. Napster, Grokster, Netcom) have pointed out, downloading copyrighted works without permission or an applicable exception in the law is infringing. Specifically that the downloader has necessarily, by the process of downloading, created a new copy, which is unlawful. Since copies are defined in the law as material objects, and material objects cannot be sent from one computer to another over a wire, downloading must be the creation of a new copy, in much the same way that when you fax a hardcopy document, the fax machine on the other end makes a printout which is not the same piece of paper as the original. Applicable statutes would include 17 USC 501, 106(1), and 101, for the cause of action, the right that is being infringed upon, and the important definition, respectively.

      The law doesn't care that the overall conduct crosses the border. A downloader in the US is subject to US law and cannot be protected by Russian law for what he does while physically in the US. If you want to use the site, you had better actually travel to Russia.

      The law doesn't care about the disposition of copies in Russia; what's illegal is making a new copy, regardless of whether another copy ends up getting deleted in the process. The actual numerical count doesn't matter.

      The law doesn't care about whether or not you thought it was legal. Copyright law is a strict liability law; any violation, no matter what you did or didn't know, is infringing. The best you can hope for is a slight reduction in penalties.

      The law doesn't treat this as importation (people invariably point to 602(a)(2), and are wrong to do so) because 1) that would require an actual copy (i.e. a material object) to physically cross the border, which is not what happens when you download, making the whole thing inapplicable 2) that would only protect against a distribution kind of infringement, not the reproduction kind of infringement, and 3) it's not good enough, since 602(b) would still apply and is not affected by the 602(a)(2) exception; you have to clear both hurdles.

      So altogether, the responsibility of people in the US to abide by US law, which prohibits this downloading.

      Frankly, I couldn't care less if people do this, and in fact I'd just as soon see noncommercial filesharing made completely legal. But I think it is really important for people to not be deluded as to what the current law actually is. If they don't understand it, or if they spread misinformation about it, then it'll be harder to get support for fixing it since people won't know just how bad things really are.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    41. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 1

      Merely posessing copyright infringing material is an offense in itself.

      No, it's not. Mere possession is not infringing. It is illegal to download from that site, however, but for completely different reasons that I get into in some of my other posts in this article.

      Like I said elsewhere, what I'm mainly opposed to is the misinformation regarding copyright issues (as well as bad copyright laws). I don't care much about AllOfMP3 or their users one way or the other, but it is important to me that people actually know the score, instead of trusting in the fairy tales that get spread around here all too often.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    42. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 1

      What law makes it illegal for you to buy the music from Russia if you live in another country?

      Actually, international trade is usually pretty heavily regulated. This scenario is no exception, and it's further complicated because of the precise events that go on and how copyright law treats them. It's not actually a case of importation at all; it's downloading, no different than if you had gotten it from Napster.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    43. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 1

      And why do people who don't know the law insist on citing the wrong parts of it, and screwing that up to boot?

      Section 602, at most, reduces the scope of the distribution right of copyright. It does not protect people who infringe in a different way, e.g. by making a new copy. A copy is defined in the law as a material object in which a work is fixed. RAM that an mp3 is loaded in is a copy. A hard drive that an mp3 is saved on is a copy. A download going through the Internet is not a copy, because there is no tangible object that was created at point A and which ends up being physically present at point B.

      It's a lot like a fax machine. When you fax a paper document, the recipient ends up with a new copy of that document, not the original.

      So 602 is totally inapplicable. This is copying. It's just like when you download from Napster, which the courts found to be illegal. This is illegal too, for just the same reason.

      (Also you screwed it up, because even if this were importation, which it is not, 602(a)(2) does not protect you against 602(b), which would still be in play. You would have had to deal with both.)

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    44. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by anagama · · Score: 1

      It's probably lucky that Visa only received pressure. How about this scenario:
      1. RIAA files John Doe Suits.
      2. Send Subpoena to VISA demanding names for cards used to purchase allofmp3 credits.
      3. Amend suit to reflect card owner's name.
      4. Profit.

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    45. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by anagama · · Score: 1

      By the same token, do you really want a record to exist linking you, your bank account, and illegal activity? If you are going to buy something that isn't legal (whether justly or unjustly), use cash (and if paranoid, never handle it with your bare hands / expose it residue containing your DNA etc. etc.).

      --
      What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
    46. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 1

      Sorry, but no.

      First, as I've pointed out elsewhere, importation is a red herring. Downloading isn't importation at all, and so the 602(a)(2) exception doesn't cover it.

      But second, you're misreading 602 terribly.

      602(a) says that importation is infringing, but then says that certain types of importation are not infringing. It never says that they aren't importation at all! Only that they're not covered when it says that it's infringing generally (which makes them non-infringing importation). In fact, it even says that those forms of importation are importation (e.g. "importation, for the private use of the importer...").

      So that doesn't prevent 602(b) from applying.

      But furthermore, the exceptions in 602(a) say specifically that they only apply to that subsection, i.e. to 602(a). 602(b) is a totally different subsection, and therefore is not affected at all by anything that happens in 602(a).

      This means that if an import is prohibited by 602(a) and 602(b), even if one of the 602(a) exceptions applies, 602(b) still prohibits the import.

      Still, this is a purely academic discussion since downloading from AllOfMP3 is not importation to begin with, and so nothing in 602 matters one little bit. If you got sued, invoking 602 would not help you one bit and would harm your defense by diverting your legal resources to unhelpful nonsense.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    47. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 1

      No, you're wrong. You are not importing at all when you download. You are making a new copy. And making new copies is illegal.

      The analogy I've come to like is that of a fax machine. When someone faxes you a document you end up with a second piece of paper that has the same information as the first. But the paper didn't itself cross the border while having that information printed on it. This is key, since the law defines a copy as a material object containing information, not as mere information by itself. Printing the fax (or storing it in memory) results in a new copy having been made in some tangible medium, and purely within the US, not importation of the original piece of paper that started out in the foreign country.

      So no, people in the US cannot legally use AllOfMP3 unless you can find a law that allows you to make more copies. In 99.44% of cases that would involve using AllOfMP3, there is no such law.

      And also, American law is not so accepting of actual imports as you seem to think it is. In fact, imports of works copyrighted in the US are all banned, with only a few exceptions.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    48. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by Pofy · · Score: 1

      >It is a UK offence to cause an electronic copy to be made of
      >an mp3 unless you are licensed to do so. Allofmp3.com does not
      >have any UK licencing rights,

      They don't need any since they are operating in Russia. The purchase is done in Russia. They don't need any license to sell their song in any other country since they sell it in Russia. In the same way, a mujsic store in London doesn't need to have a license for Russia to sell to someone from Russia.

      >and it follows that when you download from allofmp3.com,
      >you and allofmp3.com are both breaking UK law.

      They can't possibly break the law since they are not located in UK, nor are they selling in the UK. The person is buying in Russia, UK laws doesn't apply, Russian laws apply. At most, you would have to look at how the law handle taking a copy INTO UK. Typically, most countries doesn't regulate it as long as it is single copies for private use. That is, you can buy a CD or an mp3 file in Japan and bring it back to UK without any problems.

      Or are you sugesting that a store is bound by the laws of the country of the purchaser? So if Russian goes to a store in London (or anywere on the UK) and buy something, the store suddenly has to follow Russian law and can do something illegal because the purchaser was Russian? Interesting idea and concept, it just isn't how laws works. Laws applies to their own county only.

      >You may think it humourous that a country can apply its laws outside its borders,

      They can't. Or rather, they can calim they want, but nothing can really be done about it. Next you want to claim that you, going to your local shop can violate the law of basically any other country in the world. Again, interesting but not how it works.

      >but the director of sportingbet.com and a trio of British bankers will disagree with you.

      I really have no idea who those are. What good is it to toss out something without any information. I assume your example includes the British bankers doing something in the UK, breaking the law of another country and that the other countries laws applied? Or something similar, otherwise it is pointless. And what does bankers have to do with copyright?

    49. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by Pofy · · Score: 1

      >Actually, international trade is usually pretty heavily regulated.

      Actually it is the opposite, it is quite unregulated, at least on a consumer level which is what we are talking about here. It is not about import and export between countries. It is about a consumer buying something from another country and bringing that product home. Not much mroe different from you buying something on your holliday trip abroad. Doing so over the net is awlays more risky than actually going there physically since you can't apply your own countires law, you are doing the purchase under the other countries law. In this case, Russian law.

      >This scenario is no exception, and it's further
      >complicated because of the precise events that
      >go on and how copyright law treats them.

      Copyright law doesn't treat such much at all, it is not about trading, purchasing or selling, there are other laws for that. allofmp3 has the required (at least they say so and since they have come out clean from investigations in Russia it seems likely) license to sell the works (the only relevat copyright related issue) in Russia and since they are selling in Russia and operating in Russia, that is what matters.

      >It's not actually a case of importation at all; it's
      >downloading, no different than if you had gotten it from Napster.

      The difference is that with Napster the "uploader", the one distributing and making the work available to the public, did not have any license to do so (which is required by copyright law), allofmp3com has it. The downloaded and the purchaser is not required to have any such license. In some countries, the one making a copy might need it if the source of the copy was made availabel in an infringing way (which was the case with Napster). That is not the case with allofmp3, since they are making the music available with a license.

    50. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by BobTheLawyer · · Score: 1

      You may want to google "Peter Dicks" and "David Bermingham" before you claim that "laws apply to their country only". These are not isolated examples. If a country wishes to make a person's actions illegal - wherever they are - then it is free to do so. It may not be able to enforce unless the person visits there, or has property there, but that is a separate practical point.

    51. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by Pofy · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the points on 602. I was basically trying to point out that what the original poster wrote about import was not correct. And I still stand by the fact that the "import" (yes, the correct wording is that it is still an import just not dissallowed, sorry if as non english speaker I was not to precise in the language). In the case at hadn 602(b) would not apply either, since the copy was not an infringin one to start with, since allofmp3 has a licnese to sell the music to start with.

      >Still, this is a purely academic discussion since downloading from AllOfMP3 is not
      >importation to begin with

      So what is the definition of "import" since it isn't defined in the copyright law. In this case, you bought music in Russia and takes it to your home country? Still, even if it WAS considered as import, it would not be illegal since it was not an infirnging copy since allofmp3 does have a license for were they sell. If it is not an import, it is of course not a problem to start with.

    52. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by Pofy · · Score: 1

      >Section 602, at most, reduces the scope of the distribution right of copyright. It does not
      >protect people who infringe in a different way, e.g. by making a new copy.

      Have I calimed so? I was replying to someone commenting on IMPORT, nothing else. Read all relevant posts in a thread before replying.

      >So 602 is totally inapplicable. This is copying. It's just like when you download from
      >Napster, which the courts found to be illegal. This is illegal too, for just the same
      >reason.

      By your reasoning it would be IMPOSSIBLE to ever buy music over the net. Take iTunes, it is no different, you would need to go to the copyright holder to get a license to make a copy (this excludes all countries anc cases were such a copy would be allowed to be done without a license, such as permited copying for personal/private use, fair use and so on.

      >It's just like when you download from Napster, which the courts found to be illegal.

      No, they have as far as I know found the "uploading" and the act done by the uploader, making the song available to the public is infringement. Perhaps there is some case with a downloader, I am not aware of it. This is no problem here since allofmp3 has a license to sell their music in Russia, which is were they are selling it.
      >It's just like when you download from Napster, which the courts found to be illegal.

      >Also you screwed it up, because even if this were importation, which it is not, 602(a)(2)
      >does not protect you against 602(b), which would still be in play.

      Which again is not a problem either since the copy is not made in an infringing way since allofmp3 has a license. So there is not a problem with 602(b) either.

    53. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just for giggles I sometimes wonder how they legally decide that a copy received from a non-US location is actually an illegal copy.

      The non-US copy could well be the original with the entity claiming originality in the US actually being a copy of that. The non-US location is out of jurisdiction and there is no legal chain of evidence one way or another that the US claim of originality is correct and hence the US copyright is valid.

      Yes, I know in practise this means nothing but it is an example of the legal mess with originals and identical copies. Evidence of being the creator means little when cover bands are so common. And when a copy is identical there is no way of determining what is the original other than by unbroken provenance.

    54. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by Pofy · · Score: 1

      >Merely posessing copyright infringing material is an offense in itself.

      No it is not, find any relevant copyright law that has "possession" as an exclusive right of the copyright holder?

      Besides, it is not an infringing copy (I assume you mean a copy made in an infringing way). It is a highly legal copy made since allofmp3 has a license to sell the music.

      >And if you live in the US, US laws apply to everything you have and do. Simple.

      No, the copyright law (which would be the one you claim is applicable here) applies to everything you do in the US. Simple.

    55. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by Pofy · · Score: 1

      >Making a new copy.

      So? Just as when you buy from iTunes or visit websites. No difference.

      >As many courts in many cases (e.g. Napster, Grokster, Netcom)
      >have pointed out, downloading copyrighted works without
      >permission or an applicable exception in the law is infringing.

      No, those court cases was against the uploader (or actually the company making the software itself), not downloaders. The one making the work available is doing so without a license. allofmp3 HAS a license to sell their music. For the downloader, the usual requirement is that the original is made available in a non infringing way. Hence, downloading from a s ource made availabel in a non infringing way is legal (or in some countries, personal/private copies is legal no mater what). Here we have a case were you buy music from allofmp3 who has a license to sell to you, just as for example iTunes. The buyer doens't need a licens any more than if you go to a shop and buy or buys anything else over the net, that is downloaded to you. You don't need to get special permission from the copyright holder as a buyer. If you want to claim allofmp3 as illegal, you must claim iTunes and anyone else selling over then net as illegal too, they are the same. Similary, it owuld be illegal for any transfer over the net (even not buying) were you don't get a seperate permission from the copyright holder.

      >The law doesn't care about the disposition of
      >copies in Russia; what's illegal is making a
      >new copy, regardless of whether another copy
      >ends up getting deleted in the process. The actual
      >numerical count doesn't matter.

      Not true, since there are many cases were you can make a copy that that is non infringing. Of course, living by your own "rules" I assume you never move music files from, say, your computer to an mp3 player in a country other than were you originally bought your music. You seem to claim that only physically being in the country of the purchase allows you to make such a copy, right? Since you write:

      >If you want to use the site, you had better actually travel to Russia.

      Of course since you also claim:

      >The law doesn't care that the overall conduct crosses the border.

      It must mean that even inside the USA, you claim that no copy of music is ever allowed to be made by anyone (even if originally bought from a legal source) awithout geting a specific permission to make a copy. Since the original post I replied to was about US only, it is pointless to point out that in several, if not most countries in the world, but you claim that it is not allowed in USA, right? No copying of music is allowed, period, without specific permission, right? Do remember that your source in question IS legal (as oposed to your irellevant examples of Napster and such).

    56. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by Pofy · · Score: 1

      >No, you're wrong. You are not importing at all when you download.

      What makes you think that moving files over the net can not be an import (or export for that matter)?

      >You are making a new copy. And making new copies is illegal.

      No, making copies can in SOME case be infrigning, and in other cases not be infringing.

      >So no, people in the US cannot legally use AllOfMP3
      >unless you can find a law that allows you to make more copies.

      No, you can do copies unless there is a law that forbids that specific copying. Copyright law forbids some copying, but not all. That is why there exists this whole business and concept of online shoping of music (and movies, books, software and so on). Examples are iTunes and allofmp3.

    57. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      By your reasoning it would be IMPOSSIBLE to ever buy music over the net. Take iTunes, it is no different, you would need to go to the copyright holder to get a license to make a copy

      Yes, exactly. You need a license in order to legally download from iTunes. You are, in fact, granted such a license when you make your purchase. If you weren't, you'd be infringing.

      It is completely fucking irrelevant, btw, that allofmp3 operates in Russia. That fact in no way changes the legal consequences of downloading from them. That allofmp3 has a compulsory license at Russian law is totally irrelevant as far as US law is concerned. allofmp3 might as well be a guy on a P2P network. There's no distinction to draw, and being clever about it isn't actually going to get you anywhere.

      To avoid infringing when you make copies -- from any source whatsoever -- you have to be the copyright holder or have his permission or have some other legal exception.

      Let's say the copyright in some work X is held by person A in the United States and person B in Russia. The Russian copyright holder puts the work up on a website and grants everyone on Earth permission to copy it. If you, a person in the US, go to that website and make a copy of X, it's not relevant that person B authorized you to do so. You have to have permission from person A.

    58. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by Pofy · · Score: 1

      >Yes, exactly. You need a license in order to legally download from iTunes. You are, in
      >fact, granted such a license when you make your purchase. If you weren't, you'd be
      >infringing.

      You missed the point of my whole post which was basically the contrary to the part you quoted. No, you do not nessecarilly need a license to download music from iTuenes. There are many exceptions when you can create copies without having to get a license. Buying the music would be just that (remember, it is an authorized sale by allofmp3).

      >Let's say the copyright in some work X is held by person A in the United States and person
      >B in Russia.

      Actually there is basically one entity (or a gorup of persons if joint) that holds the copyright, they can then grant others right to, for example copy, sell, distribute or whatever. Those persons would not be copyright holders though. So if A creates the work he would hold the copyright in both US and Russia. Copyright are not hel per teritory (as patents or trademarks) you will get the copyright in basically the whole world automatically, at least those countries which have signed the Bern convention which is basically all countries in the world.

      Now, if he grants someone in Russia the permission to sell copies in Russia, then that person can do so in Russia. If someone buys them there, it doesn't mean they can't move the copies to some other place or bring them with them back home and so on.

    59. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by Aladrin · · Score: 1

      Um, not advertising it, but charging it, yes. They use that loophole to sucker people, yes, but I think it also affects how much they have to pay PayPal for the auction, so yeah, they care.

      --
      "If you make people think they're thinking, they'll love you; But if you really make them think, they'll hate you." - DM
    60. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 1
      So? Just as when you buy from iTunes or visit websites. No difference.

      The difference is that there, the US copyright holder has granted permission. This is why some songs are not available on iTunes; the copyright holders haven't given Apple permission to distribute copies nor to pass on permission to their paying customers to make copies.

      No, those court cases was against the uploader (or actually the company making the software itself), not downloaders.

      The court cases were against organizations that were involved but not the direct infringers, yes. But the law says that you cannot sue an indirect infringer unless you can prove that they were closely enough involved in a direct infringement. So you end up having to make the case against the users anyway, and the defendant still defends them since it will help them.

      In the Napster case, the court said this:
      We agree that plaintiffs have shown that Napster users infringe at least two of the copyright holders' exclusive rights: the rights of reproduction, 106(1); and distribution, 106(3). Napster users who upload file names to the search index for others to copy violate plaintiffs' distribution rights. Napster users who download files containing copyrighted music violate plaintiffs' reproduction rights.


      allofmp3 HAS a license to sell their music.

      Assuming this is true, such a license is still only valid within Russia, because it is a compulsory license created by Russian law. Even if it claims to be valid elsewhere, Russian law cannot override the law elsewhere, e.g. in the US.

      So the license is worthless as far as a US downloader is concerned. It does not protect him in any way whatsoever.

      For the downloader, the usual requirement is that the original is made available in a non infringing way. Hence, downloading from a s ource made availabel in a non infringing way is legal (or in some countries, personal/private copies is legal no mater what).

      Not in the US.

      The buyer doens't need a licens any more than if you go to a shop and buy or buys anything else over the net, that is downloaded to you.

      Buying a copy is not the same thing as making a new copy. Going to a store involves the former. Downloading involves the latter. The former is not against the law. The latter is.

      If you want to claim allofmp3 as illegal, you must claim iTunes and anyone else selling over then net as illegal too, they are the same.

      Wrong, because they have a license that is valid in the US. They are not the same. (This is also why they have only slowly expanded into certain foreign markets -- they had to negotiate for licenses in each of them)

      Not true, since there are many cases were you can make a copy that that is non infringing.

      Sure, but this is not one of them. Here, the work copied isn't in the public domain, you do not have permission from the US rightsholder, you do not have an exception under US law, so you're sunk. You need one of those things in the US if you want to make copies.
      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    61. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 1

      Actually it is the opposite, it is quite unregulated, at least on a consumer level which is what we are talking about here. It is not about import and export between countries. It is about a consumer buying something from another country and bringing that product home. Not much mroe different from you buying something on your holliday trip abroad.

      No, all of that is still quite regulated. You're confusing laxity in enforcement (which is actually also the case for commercial international trade) with laxity in regulation.

      In any event, importation is not happening here. Downloading is copying, not importation.

      Copyright law doesn't treat such much at all, it is not about trading, purchasing or selling, there are other laws for that.

      Actually those are all forms of distribution, and copyright law is very concerned about distribution.

      The downloaded and the purchaser is not required to have any such license.

      Absolutely wrong. In the US, downloading is against the law every bit as much as uploading is. If you download copyrighted music without permission from the US rightsholder or an exception of some type in US law (Russian law granting a compulsory license does not count) then you are infringing. The law is quite clear on this, the courts have said so on a number of occassions. You can't deny it, you can only lie about it.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    62. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 1

      No, you do not nessecarilly need a license to download music from iTuenes.

      Yes, you always do. It is part of the iTunes EULA, and Apple's ability to grant that license was given to them by the copyright holders, and is highly conditional.

      There are many exceptions when you can create copies without having to get a license.

      True. Not one of them applies in this case, however. Not one.

      Actually there is basically one entity (or a gorup of persons if joint) that holds the copyright, they can then grant others right to, for example copy, sell, distribute or whatever. Those persons would not be copyright holders though. So if A creates the work he would hold the copyright in both US and Russia. Copyright are not hel per teritory (as patents or trademarks) you will get the copyright in basically the whole world automatically, at least those countries which have signed the Bern convention which is basically all countries in the world.


      Completely wrong.

      Copyrights are not international in nature, they are national. A US copyright is not the same copyright as a Russian copyright. They are granted by different governments. Berne doesn't combine them. It only says that all Berne countries must each grant a copyright when the work is created. The copyrights only apply in the countries where they're granted. They differ somewhat in terms of their length (US copyrights last longer than most European copyrights, for example), in what they cover (databases are not copyrightable in the US, but usually are in Europe), etc.

      While they are usually granted to the same person initially, that person can dispose of the copyrights as they see fit. They can sell them or keep them. They can do so on any basis they like. If I write a book and decide to sell the UK copyright to a friend, I can do that. Or, I can break up the rights, and sell only the right to make movies based on the book, but for all the different countries at once, or any other variation.

      You really don't know crap about copyright law. Why are you even posting here?

      Now, if he grants someone in Russia the permission to sell copies in Russia, then that person can do so in Russia.

      He didn't. Russian law says that anyone has permission automatically. It's a compulsory license. In the US, we also have some compulsory licenses. But since these are not real licenses which are agreed to, but are in fact exceptions in the law, they have no weight outside of the border. A Russian law means nothing within the US, just as a US law means nothing within Russia.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    63. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 1

      So what is the definition of "import" since it isn't defined in the copyright law. In this case, you bought music in Russia and takes it to your home country?

      Well, you'd use an ordinary definition of import (e.g. 'bring goods into a country from abroad') and try to see if the statute provides further meaning. Here it does. 602 says that importation is a form of distribution, the 106(3) right, and that certain kinds of importation are not infringements of the 106(3) right.

      But here, it's the 106(1) right we're looking at. New copies are being made, rather than existing copies being brought in. This means that the definition of import used here could only pertain to copies being physically moved over borders, rather than new copies being made based on information that has intangibly moved over the border.

      In any event, AllOfMP3 doesn't really have a license as far as US law is concerned. It has a compulsory license, which is to say that Russian law says that anyone can make a copy, but they have to pay a certain amount in order to do so. No one can be turned away. We have a similar sort of thing at 17 USC 115. This means that they're piratical copies (since US law, had it applied, would not permit this), and would fall under 602(b) even if 602 was relevant at all.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    64. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 1

      What makes you think that moving files over the net can not be an import (or export for that matter)?

      The ordinary definition of the word, and also US copyright law, which I'm pretty damn familiar with.

      No, making copies can in SOME case be infrigning, and in other cases not be infringing.

      That's like assassinating someone, and then saying that sometimes you can kill in self-defense. You're right, but this is not one of those times. Here, it's infringing, unless you can point an applicable exception in the law. (hint: 602 is not applicable, since it doesn't permit copies to be made, only moved, and copies are never moved when you download, since copies are defined in the law as material objects)

      No, you can do copies unless there is a law that forbids that specific copying.

      Okay. 17 USC 106(1). It forbids all copying unless there is an exception elsewhere in the law that applies. Now you get to find one that does. Remember my hint to you just above.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    65. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by Pofy · · Score: 1

      >Yes, you always do. It is part of the iTunes EULA,

      The EULA is not the law. If the law doesn't forbid you to make a copy to start with it isn't removed by someone presenting you with a contract. They don't need to grant you an additional license for it if the law allready allows it.

      Again, remember that allofmp3 HAS the right to sell the music to start with as well.

      >True. Not one of them applies in this case, however. Not one.

      What makes you think that? What makes you think there is no possible exception, for example for fair use, that makes it not possible to make a copy of a the music you have bought?

      >Copyrights are not international in nature, they are national.

      Yes, that is what I said. However they are tied to a creator. The creator will get the copyright in all countries that have signed the Bern convention. You can't have different people gain the copyright to the same work in different countries. The way it works is that one country gives the same protection to work created outside it to those created in the country (which would be the one protected).

      >A US copyright is not the same copyright as a Russian copyright. They are granted by
      >different governments. Berne doesn't combine them.

      Yes it is, a copyright is basically certain rights given to a creator of a work. Some, but not all, of those rights can be transfered after they are granted to someone else. What the Bern convention do is basically that you get the copyright protection in all countries regardless of were you you are located and were the work was created. Of course, you can claim that each law grantsa "different" copyright but since they are tied in the way that this is automatic they are really one and the same. You can't have two different people been granted the same copyright in different countries and you automatically holds the copyright in all countries as soon as the work is created. But hey, if you like to call them different copyrights, fine, they are linked though in that the same person gets them in all countries.

      >While they are usually granted to the same person initially,
      >that person can dispose of the copyrights as they see fit.
      >They can sell them or keep them.

      Yes some of them, but not all, can be transfered, have I claimed different?

      >He didn't. Russian law says that anyone has permission
      >automatically. It's a compulsory license.

      I was commenting on your specific example of someone else in Russia having the copyright, gee, comment what I write and don't make up things I have not said.

      Geting a license or permission to do something not otherwise allowed from the copyright holder is not the same as geting and holding the copyright. Your example was about two different enteties having the copyright in different countries which is what I commented on.

      The example at hand is about someone in Russia (allofmp3), having the permission to sell music in Russia. Nothing prevents anyone buing such music to then move the copy bought to some other country without the permission from copyrighth holder (at least as long as it is for private/personal use and so on). A copyright holder in another country can't forbid that, nor is owning such a copy infringing in any way nor is the use of it. In the same way, making additional copies from it is not treated any different based on from were it came as long as it was not an infrining one to start with, which, it isn't since allofmp3 has the legal right to sell it to start with. The selling is legal, the purchase is legal, and you can do with that copy anything you can do with any other legal copy of a work that you own. Except for redistribution it is quite irellevant were a copy originally was sold (in this case Russia). One can create copies in USA in many instances that are not infringing, and that applies regardless of were the original came from.

    66. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by Pofy · · Score: 1

      >No, all of that is still quite regulated.

      If you as a consumer buys something directly from another country there is quite little regulated and it not at all that clear how, which and what laws to apply form which country for example.

      >In any event, importation is not happening here. Downloading is copying, not importation.

      As far as I know, the copyright law, for example doesn't define "download", nor does it have any concept of "downloading". It deals with some specific actions, such as copying and distribution. It also deals with import in that it restrict certain types of import.

      >Actually those are all forms of distribution, and copyright
      >law is very concerned about distribution.

      No, it deals with WHO can distribute. It doesn't regulate how sales, for example, are done. In addition, the right of distribution is consumed, meaning basically that after the first case of distribution, most forms are free to do (on a per copy basis) for the owner of the copy and the copyright holder can no longer control it and it is thus a non copyright issue.

      >Absolutely wrong. In the US, downloading is against the
      >law every bit as much as uploading is.

      No, neither "downloading" nor "uploading" is concepts of the copyright law. Creating copies is and distribution and other forms of making it available to the public is. However, there is many exceptions to the exclusivness. The exceptions of course vary with country and in some are not listed specifically but given in the form of the Fair Use as in USA. For example, creating copies needed to actually use something you bought can be such a right, which makes sense since you would not sell compies to anyone and not wanting him to be able to use it. So no, you can't claim a blanket against the law for downloading at all since it can be perfectly legal in many cases. There are of course many ways to copy that is not what one can put into "downloading". You seem to claim that one need a seperate license (one for each country presumably) to create a copy of music one have bought, how would you come to that conclusion, based on for example the rules for Fair Use? Of course, you seem to also neglect the difference of actually purchasing a copy from a legitimate source with creating a copy from a non legitimate source.

    67. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 1

      They don't need to grant you an additional license for it if the law allready allows it.

      Which is nice and all, but here the law does not allow it.

      Again, remember that allofmp3 HAS the right to sell the music to start with as well.

      Not in the US they don't. Russian law cannot override US law within the US. If US law says that the downloading is prohibited for people here, nothing in Russia can counter that. It's just like if the Russians said that Americans don't have to pay taxes, or can kill whoever they want. American law shuts that down here. It's the same with copyright issues.

      What makes you think that? What makes you think there is no possible exception, for example for fair use, that makes it not possible to make a copy of a the music you have bought?

      I'm an American copyright lawyer. I'm very familiar with our copyright laws. I know that there's no exception that applies. And fair use doesn't either, since all four factors in the fair use analysis are completely against the downloader. This is because we don't view buying from AllOfMP3 to be legitimate. It's piracy. It's not treated differently from downloading from any other pirate, except that the downloader was foolish enough to pay money to do it.

      Of course, you can claim that each law grantsa "different" copyright but since they are tied in the way that this is automatic they are really one and the same.

      No, they are different, they are in fact substantively different, and they are not tied together. They're just granted initially to the same person.

      Nothing prevents anyone buing such music to then move the copy bought to some other country without the permission from copyrighth holder (at least as long as it is for private/personal use and so on). A copyright holder in another country can't forbid that

      Actually, the law prevents this. Copyright holders forbid it routinely, and tend to win in the process. The law favors them greatly.

      In the same way, making additional copies from it is not treated any different based on from were it came as long as it was not an infrining one to start with, which, it isn't since allofmp3 has the legal right to sell it to start with.

      No, making more copies is always illegal unless there is permission from the US rightsholder -- which there isn't, here -- or an applicable exception -- which there isn't here -- and in any event, no copy was moved between countries, rather a new one was created in the US based upon a copy that never left Russia.

      You really need to learn when to quit.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    68. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 1

      Downloading is a kind of copying. You actually know this, since you've read and replied to some of my other posts where I quoted courts that actually said as much.

      At this point you're just lying, rather than simply being clueless, as I had thought earlier. While I don't like that -- since I want people to be well-informed so that they know when they are or aren't breaking the law (ignorance being no defense) -- you are so worthless to talk with, so unwilling to have an actual discussion, so attached to your unfounded lies, even in the face of cites to the actual law, quotes from actual court opinions, that I'm unwilling to waste my time on you further. I need to go off to work. You OTOH, are free to hang out in your parents' basement and lie to your heart's content.

      Given that one of us has a long history of posting accurate information about the law, particularly copyright law, and one of us is a lackwit without having earned a reputation for accuracy, I can only trust that the users here will be smart enough to accept the truth, or at least look into it without blindly and wrongly trusting you, even though your lies are more along the lines of what they'd like to hear.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    69. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by Pofy · · Score: 1

      >The court cases were against organizations that were involved but
      >not the direct infringers, yes. But the law says that you cannot
      >sue an indirect infringer unless you can prove that they were closely
      >enough involved in a direct infringement. So you end up having to
      >make the case against the users anyway, and the defendant
      >still defends them since it will help them.

      And there are two types of "users" the one making the copies available, and the ones creating copies.

      I have noticed that you and me are replying to basically the same arguments in multiple locations of this thread. Since it feels quite pointless retyping the same thing in multiple palces, I will skip commenting on parts I feel I have allready commented and replied to (multiple times) to you in other posts. I hope that is OK.

      >Assuming this is true, such a license is still only valid within
      >Russia, because it is a compulsory license created by Russian
      >law. Even if it claims to be valid elsewhere, Russian law cannot
      >override the law elsewhere, e.g. in the US.

      And they are selling in Russia, which is the point. They arn't climing to overrule some other countries law, they are doing sales in Russia with people. What people then do with the songs they buy is of course, not their problem. I think we can agree on that, no? Or are you claiming they violate laws in countries were they are not selling and existing in? If so, one can wonder why VISA takes action against them to start with since they do nothing wrong. The other aspect one can put on it, which you raise is that the BUYER is doing something illegal with the music they buy (which of course is not allofmp3 problem). You seem to claim that the law doesn't permit anyone in USA to buy music from another country at all and even if you could somehow bring it to USA, you can't use it. For example, buying a CD in Japan and bringing it to USA, it would according to you (or what you claim the law says) illegal to for example, play the music on a CD player in the USA (since in one form or another it would crete a copy). Right? You also seems to make a blanket claim that no copying at all of music you have bought is allowed unless each copying is specifically licensed to you by the copyright holder. Right?

      >Buying a copy is not the same thing as making a new copy.

      The copy has to be made no? Or you can't buy it.

      >>Hence, downloading from a s ource made availabel in a non
      >>infringing way is legal (or in some countries, personal/private
      >>copies is legal no mater what).
      >
      >Not in the US.

      So, it is thus completely impossible to surf a majority of websites on the net if you live in the USA unless you get a specific license first to do so? Any site were you can not get specific license first is basically a legal trap were they can sue you since you are downloading from those sites without a license.

      >>If you want to claim allofmp3 as illegal, you must claim iTunes and anyone else selling
      >>over then net as illegal too, they are the same.
      >
      >Wrong, because they have a license that is valid in the US. They are not the same.

      And allofmp3 has one for Russia which is were they sell it while iTunes might have one for USA, which is were they sell it. If the buyer then goes to another country or brings the copy to another country is irellevant from the purchase point of view.

      Again, your argument is against the consumer buying, not allofmop3, so how do you justify VISA going after allofmp3 instead of the consumers in USA?

      >Sure, but this is not one of them. Here, the work copied isn't in the public domain, you do
      >not have permission from the US rightsholder, you do not have an exception under US law, so
      >you're sunk. You need one of those things in the US if you want to make copies.

      Not true at all, you can have a whole bunch of different other situations were copying is still legal, for example under Fair Use. Chapter 1 lists several more that can or can not be applicable.

    70. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by Pofy · · Score: 1

      >Here, it's infringing, unless you can point an applicable exception in the law.

      The same reason you can play the CD you buy in a store on a computer or CD player, record a song from the radio and so on. Basically, you are using the the work you bought. You may feel free to apply the test for Fair Use yourself to see how it applies. Do remmeber that you have bought the music legally from an authorized source and we are looking at a case were you don't resell or use it for any comercial purposes and so no. You may apply the same to the CD you buy in a store and the copies that might be created of it when you listen to it.

    71. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by Pofy · · Score: 1

      If you prefer to sling mud instead, calling names, tell lies, fine.

    72. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by Pofy · · Score: 1

      >Which is nice and all, but here the law does not allow it.

      No, there are many uses invovling copying without a license which is not infringing.

      >>Again, remember that allofmp3 HAS the right to sell the music to start with as well.
      >
      >Not in the US they don't.

      They are not selling it in the US. gee, how hard is that to understand? Your own argument line is that the BUYER is bringing the copy into the US. So how is it ever relevant wether they have or not have a license to sell in US? I have not claimed they don't and they most surely doesn't, but that is a non issu since they are selling in Russia.

      >I'm an American copyright lawyer. I'm very familiar with our copyright laws. I know that
      >there's no exception that applies. And fair use doesn't either, since all four factors in
      >the fair use analysis are completely against the downloader. This is because we don't view
      >buying from AllOfMP3 to be legitimate. It's piracy.

      The Fair use is for the COPYING, not buying. Fair use is for cases of otherwise infringement. The buying from allofmp3 is done in Russia. Further, as you have yourself said, you are looking at the copying and you have, yourself, claimed that the source of it is irellevant. Hence it would be completely irellevant for the purpose of the copying being infringement or not, were the original comes from. And no, most factors would not be agianst purchaser and the owner of the music.

      >Actually, the law prevents this. Copyright holders forbid it routinely, and tend to win in
      >the process. The law favors them greatly.

      Taking a copy with you when you travel to another country (or even if you don't travell yourself) without changing the ownership of it is not something covered by copyright law and is not an exclusive right of the copyright holder. Unless given as an exlcusive right by the copyright holder to start with, he can't "forbid" anything. He can allow actions that are exlcusive to himself, he can't forbid other actions. Besdies, you yourself claimed the import law was specifically for copies only and it is clear that such a case I mentioned would be perfectly legal and not something a copyright holder can forbid. Notice that in such a case you would have to involve the law of the recieveing country.

      >No, making more copies is always illegal unless there is permission from the US
      >rightsholder

      Please tell were it says the source of the copy matters? You yourslef did even say it was irellevant in another post.

    73. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.

      I love this .sig, never trust a lawyer unless you're the one paying.

    74. Re:AllOfMp3.com's Legality (or lack of) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem with you is that you seem to thinking "buying" is relevant.

      When you download from allofmp3, you are not buying a copy, legitimate or otherwise. You're buying the chance to make your own copy, on your own computer, which is located in the US. That act (making a copy) can be authorized or not. If making your own copy is illegal, because it's unauthorized, then it's illegal, and it sucks for you that you paid money to do it.

      This is exactly the same thing as iTunes, in fact. When you buy a song from iTunes for $0.99, you are not buying a copy. It's not like going into a CD shop and buying an album (which is a sale of an already existing copy). You're buying the chance to make your own copy. This is exactly as infringing as allofmp3, except that Apple has permission from the copyright holder in the US, and allofmp3 doesn't.

      That allofmp3 is allowed to operate is beside the point, it has nothing to do with an analysis of the issue. You might as well forget about it, for all it's worth. You're hanging on facts that are unimportant and beside the point. Those facts simply don't matter.

  3. Thanks Visa! by Rosco+P.+Coltrane · · Score: 4, Insightful

    For those who don't want to (or can't) buy allofmp3's DRM-free music, they are providing DRM-laden music that can be played only within a restricted player provided by the website." ... that anybody can promply record/reencode DRM-free.

    --
    "A door is what a dog is perpetually on the wrong side of" - Ogden Nash
    1. Re:Thanks Visa! by Jugalator · · Score: 1

      Yeah, like you can with music from iTunes as well.

      I don't really see the point with that comment; recording+reencoding is applicable to most current DRM schemes anyway.

      --
      Beware: In C++, your friends can see your privates!
    2. Re:Thanks Visa! by ben+there... · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Did you miss the part where that would be free?

    3. Re:Thanks Visa! by Fordiman · · Score: 1

      I wonder if the Music / Movie industry realizes the racket DRM programmers have going.

      I mean, these guys deal with encryption, so the HAVE to know the fundamental flaw in DRM (ie: Bob==Carol). So why do DRM, rather than DCT-resistant steganography?

      Seriously. It only takes one guy clever enough to break the DRM and distribute his findings to the world.

      Simple: The programmers know the DRM *MUST* be broken, and usually in short order. It ensures continued incoming cash flow for the developers that make DRM systems. It's a primary concept of mercenary tactics: Get the job done, but make sure it needs done later.

      --
      110100 1101000 1101000 1100110 0 1101111 1101000 1100011 1
  4. Someone's Got... by berenixium · · Score: 1

    Powerful friends and in powerful places... MPAA in Bed with VISA...

    1. Re:Someone's Got... by suntac · · Score: 1

      It looks like it... I think the MPAA guys have hade a day of golf with the VISA guys and now they are all old friends... Maybe they even gone to the same university and shared a dorm room... old friends from university can come very handy.

      --
      Regards, Johan Louwers.
    2. Re:Someone's Got... by Mr.+Underbridge · · Score: 1

      Powerful friends and in powerful places... MPAA in Bed with VISA...

      Nothing new. In most western countries, people pay taxes either directly or indirectly (through recordable media taxes) to that nation's respective recording lobby, which then generally pockets the money. It's actually fairly interesting that the US has fairly lax laws on that, not requiring such on any data CDs, hard drives, etc.

    3. Re:Someone's Got... by MrDiablerie · · Score: 1

      How is it the MPAA? MPAA deals with movies, not music.

  5. think Visa lost money on that deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    silly lobbying and stuff

    -m10

  6. that was fun while it lasted... by ErnstKompressor · · Score: 0, Redundant

    allofmp3 is dead. Long live allofmp3...

    --
    We apologise for the fault in this post. Those responsible have been sacked. -- Signed RICHARD M. NIXON
    1. Re:that was fun while it lasted... by bl00d6789 · · Score: 1

      Dead? At the very worst, it's now a free iTunes, and think about how many people pay $1/song to Apple.

    2. Re:that was fun while it lasted... by Yvan256 · · Score: 1

      Because, of course, people can now carry a laptop with a Wi-Fi connection instead of an iPod. It may be free, but it's stuck in your browser. How is that better than iTunes+iPod?

      Steve Jobs was right with the 0.99$/track pricing. Unless you're a huge music consumer (and I do use consumer in the real sense, i.e. fast-food never-stop-eating-even-though-it's-crap sense), paying 0.99$ is less trouble than trying to find a good encode of a song you want, not to mention the morons who normalize their tunes before encoding and uploading on P2P networks, the bad metadata, the start/end song clipping, the badly scanned and/or low-res artwork (if any), etc.

    3. Re:that was fun while it lasted... by Alphager · · Score: 2, Informative

      Why is it dead? If you want to continue to use VISA, go to XROST, buy a XROST-giftcertificate, which you then redeem at allofmp3.com .

    4. Re:that was fun while it lasted... by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      However, I'd rather pay $12 (average for my CDs, some are cheaper than iTunes) for a CD than $10.99, and have a physical copy that isn't tied to a specific device, and is higher quality.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    5. Re:that was fun while it lasted... by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      Steve Jobs was right for people who make about double the national average income.

      Not many people have $10,000 to fill up an ipod.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    6. Re:that was fun while it lasted... by Znork · · Score: 1

      Then again, paying eMusic $0.25/track for high quality completely DRM free mp3's is even better. And as the majors dont release there, you're automatically saved the bother of making sure your money doesnt go to the fascists.

    7. Re:that was fun while it lasted... by lordofthechia · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'd rather buy my CD's used online for about $4 shipped. I can wait till they drop to that price and by then I'm sure I'm not contributing to the RIAA's pockets.

      --
      Georgia Tech, the leader in Chia(tm) technology.
    8. Re:that was fun while it lasted... by Maxwell · · Score: 1

      As of 11:00am eastern time in the US the only method of payment available to refill your blance is "credit card" or "gift certificate". Both are down with "sorry we cannot accept credit cards at this time" messages.

      I missed it, and I only have $4 left. :(

      How are you suppoed to use XROST when the site has no way to redeem it at allofmp3?

      JON

    9. Re:that was fun while it lasted... by bigberk · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Absolutely, used media - CD, DVD - is the best way to go. You get the same thing ; re-use the original materials instead of creating waste ; and trade with other individuals (transferring ownership of goods) without going back and paying the marketers (RIAA, MPAA)

    10. Re:that was fun while it lasted... by Yvan256 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      eMusic doesn't have the music that people want. Of course, what people wants depends on the marketing and airplay, but still. Saying that eMusic can replace the iTunes Store is like saying an Intellivision can replace a Wii.

      I'd rather go get free music on overclockedremix.org than 0.25$/tracks on eMusic.

    11. Re:that was fun while it lasted... by Yvan256 · · Score: 1

      Very funny. Like everyone fills his iPod with tracks bought on-line. I had over 60 CDs when I bought my iPod, that filled it up at least half-way (preferred tracks, etc). OverClocked Remix filled pretty much the rest of it, with the exception of about 25 tracks bought online via the iTunes Store (which I would have never bought if I had to buy the whole CD for those single tracks).

      Thanks for playing the "I''ll try to use the same 5-years old lame FUD about the iPod" game.

    12. Re:that was fun while it lasted... by Yvan256 · · Score: 1

      Well, you're right for full albums. As an example, the last album I bought was Straight Outta Lynwood by "Weird Al" Yankovic. At 17$CAD for the CD+DVD (though I just watched the DVD and was a bit dissapointed that "White and Nerdy" wasn't on it even though it's in the TV ad), I paid more for it but can rip in the format and bitrate of my choice. AAC is one of the best CODEC right now, but who knows what will replace it in 5 or 10 years? MP3, for example, is about a decade old now.

      But for single tracks the iTunes Store is great, especially for the "I want it now without even going out" impulse purchases. I bought about 25 tracks online and that "Weird Al" CD in two years. Without the iTunes Store it would only be that CD.

    13. Re:that was fun while it lasted... by Alphager · · Score: 1

      Hm, i can't see your problem. Do the following: 1. Go to xrost.biz . Register (it's free). Buy one of their certificates (called icard) with your Visa. 2. Note down the serial-number of the icard and the PIN of the icard. 3. Go to allofmp3.com and log into your account (or create a new one). 4. Click on "balance". Click on "refill balance". 5. Click on "Refill with XROST-ICARD" 6. Enter number and PIN from 2 7. PROFIT!!!!!

    14. Re:that was fun while it lasted... by Maxo-Texas · · Score: 1

      Hey that's great for you man. I just don't buy the iTUNE price as fair.

      Likewise- multiple friends have lost the use of their iTUNES songs now based on machine changes.

      I think a fair rate is more like .33 for a song.

      --
      She was like chocolate when she drank... semi-sweet at first and then increasingly bitter.
    15. Re:that was fun while it lasted... by Yvan256 · · Score: 1
      Likewise- multiple friends have lost the use of their iTUNES songs now based on machine changes.
      You can reset the list of allowed computers in your iTunes account. There's absolutely no good valid reason that your friends "lost" their iTunes-bought songs. They should contact Apple if they need help with this.

      I think a fair rate is more like .33 for a song.
      Just be glad that Steve Jobs is fighting for us, or else the labels would already be at 2$/track (or more, especially for new songs). You may think 0.99$/track is unfair, but then again an audio CD at 25$ for 12 tracks isn't fair either.

    16. Re:that was fun while it lasted... by jrockway · · Score: 1

      > You can reset the list of allowed computers in your iTunes account. There's absolutely no good valid reason that your friends "lost" their iTunes-bought songs. They should contact Apple if they need help with this.

      Really? I switched from OS X to OpenBSD, and now my iTunes music doesn't work. Can I have iTunes for OpenBSD/PPC, please?

      --
      My other car is first.
    17. Re:that was fun while it lasted... by Yvan256 · · Score: 1

      I don't know if you're trolling, but you certainly knew iTunes wasn't available for OpenBSD. You should've burned your tracks to an audio CD before removing OS X and installing OpenBSD.

    18. Re:that was fun while it lasted... by Real1tyCzech · · Score: 0

      Got a mobile phone? Alltunes, a client front-end that works with AllofMP3 can be used on quite a few smartphones.

    19. Re:that was fun while it lasted... by tehcyder · · Score: 1
      Absolutely, used media - CD, DVD - is the best way to go. You get the same thing ; re-use the original materials instead of creating waste ; and trade with other individuals (transferring ownership of goods) without going back and paying the marketers (RIAA, MPAA)
      You also don't contribute anything further to the artist.
      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  7. Priceless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Getting a MP3 Player $300, getting the music you like $0 dollars, Visa dumping allmp3.com...

  8. Beatport by GroovBird · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Not to worry.

    I never had any issues with paying for my music. I had issues with the DRM that was applied to that music. AllofMP3 offered that same music without DRM. If they turn out to be illegal (because the group they pay royalties to turns out not to have to license the music to AllOfMP3) then so be it.

    I found an alternative, that better suits my taste of music and is completely legit, but a lot more expensive.

    http://www.beatport.com/

    Dave

    1. Re:Beatport by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      I guess that's okay if you are looking for beat-heavy stuff... kind of a niche, though, and more expensive then the iTunes route. Kind of a neat flash interface. Very fast.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    2. Re:Beatport by jmc · · Score: 2, Insightful

      If you're into electronic music, you really can't do better than Beatport.com:

      1) No DRM.
      2) Legal (with no grey areas like AllOfMp3.com).
      3) Multiple high quality encoding options (192 AAC being my choice).
      4) Long, high quality previews.
      5) A genius Flash interface that lets you browse, preview a song, continue browsing while it's previewing, add to card, and checkout -- all without a single browser refresh.

      It IS usually twice as expensive as iTunes. But it's still a good deal, given most of the tracks are probably around twice as long, plus you get the better encoding and lack of DRM.

      In short, can't recommend them enough for fellow eletronic music junkies.

    3. Re:Beatport by teleporter · · Score: 1

      Beatport is a wonderful site for those interested in certain genres; namely electronic. It is a bit more expensive, but it's a great way to get the newest releases witout having to shell out 20+ dollars on a hard-to-find CD for one song.

      Between Beatport and iTunes, I have no need for CDs ever again.

    4. Re:Beatport by xtracto · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      I found an alternative, that better suits my taste of music and is completely legit, but a lot more expensive.

      Bah, I already have an alternative that has just started to be expensive, the site is this, the problem is that it *might* be also more expensive than allofmp3, this is, you might end having to pay $3,000 or something to the RIAA or the other copyright owners, but only when they ask you to do it.

      Mmmmm, didn't someone wrote about an insurance against RIAA lawsuits?, it might very well be useful in you choose this way of music distribution.

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    5. Re:Beatport by sustik · · Score: 1

      Ooops, needs flash 8...

    6. Re:Beatport by dwandy · · Score: 1

      Just in time... and I tried the page with my v.7 (didn't load) and tried it with the v.9 beta and it loaded (perfectly, ...well, AFAICT, since I've never seen it before, and don't have a WinBot to see what would have looked like under v.8)

      --
      If you think imaginary property and real property are the same, when does your house become public domain?
    7. Re:Beatport by AaronLawrence · · Score: 1

      A genius Flash interface

      "genius"? Almost unbearable because the text is so small. I can barely read it. (I'm not saying YOU can't read it, just me).
      And of course they made it too large for my screen, so it has to be scrolled a lot, yet the mouse wheel doesn't work for some reason.
      And it can't be resized at all.
      And I can't copy any of the text (like, y'know, an artist name?)
      It's one of the less-hideous flash interfaces, but like so many it just causes irritation if you don't agree with every single one of the designer's configurations.

      Yes, I know in theory all those things could be addressed within flash. But they never actually are.

      all without a single browser refresh.

      And yet, most of the time I click on something it spins a wheel for a while and then adjusts the screen. A lot like a browser refresh.

      --
      For every expert, there is an equal and opposite expert. - Arthur C. Clarke
  9. Someone call Jon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'd be excited about the possibility of cracking their DRM, if it wasn't so darn easy to get free music on the Internet anyway.

  10. "Heals" ~ "heels"? by OakDragon · · Score: 4, Funny
    "On the heals of allofmp3.com's press conference..."

    * groan *

    My inner grammar Nazi is involuntarily goose-stepping after reading that.

    1. Re:"Heals" ~ "heels"? by unwesen · · Score: 1, Redundant

      My favourite is when people write "bare with me". Get naked with me?

    2. Re:"Heals" ~ "heels"? by Grave_Rose · · Score: 1, Funny

      Is it possible that they used up all their Hi-Potions during the conference?

      --
      !ekoj on si aixelsyD
    3. Re:"Heals" ~ "heels"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      My favourite is when people write "bare with me". Get naked with me?
      Mine is when people write "favourite". Damn limey bastards...
    4. Re:"Heals" ~ "heels"? by denebian+devil · · Score: 1

      Gomen nasai! I actually realized the error after submission but couldn't do anything about it.

    5. Re:"Heals" ~ "heels"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What language are you replying in there? English? Sure, maybe watered-down _American_ English, for those that don't know how to use 'u' properly and think that 'z' is a valid replacement for 's', but English nevertheless...

    6. Re:"Heals" ~ "heels"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That was a spelling error, not a grammar error. FYI.

    7. Re:"Heals" ~ "heels"? by quarmar · · Score: 1

      Your point is mute.

    8. Re:"Heals" ~ "heels"? by ameline · · Score: 1

      So long as he's not shouting out "Sieg Heal" (sic) and saluting, it's not so bad :-)

      --
      Ian Ameline
    9. Re:"Heals" ~ "heels"? by nickos · · Score: 1

      No, that's how it's spelt in every English speaking country except the USA.

    10. Re:"Heals" ~ "heels"? by caudron · · Score: 1
      My inner grammar Nazi is ...
      ...is out of his jurisdiction. Using "heals" instead of "heels" is a vocabulary issue, not a grammar issue. So is using "grammar" to describe a "vocabulary" inaccuracy. Grammar deals mostly with syntax and morphology. It has only a secondary interest in semantics due to its interest in morphology.

      You can laugh now. It's a joke. ;-)

      Tom Caudron
      http://tom.digitalelite.com/
      --
      -Tom
    11. Re:"Heals" ~ "heels"? by Morphine007 · · Score: 1

      That shit happens... I think they were referring to the fact that an editor probably should've caught that one...

    12. Re:"Heals" ~ "heels"? by OakDragon · · Score: 1
      My inner grammar Nazi is ...
      ...is out of his jurisdiction.

      Well, you know how Nazis feel about borders.

      You can laugh now. It's a joke. ;-)

      Thank God! The irony of a highly detailed refutation of my nitpick was... overwhemling.

      Or should I say, the ironing is delicious? :)

    13. Re:"Heals" ~ "heels"? by caudron · · Score: 1
      the ironing is delicious

      Indubiously and for surely.

      Tom Caudron
      http://tom.digitalelite.com/

      P.S. The "heals" thing was *SO* bugging the crap outta me, too. :)
      --
      -Tom
    14. Re:"Heals" ~ "heels"? by oc255 · · Score: 1
    15. Re:"Heals" ~ "heels"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      That was a spelling error, not a grammar error. FYI.

      No, he spelled the word correctly, he just chose the incorrect form of the word. I don't know if that falls under the category of a grammar error, but it is definitely not a spelling error...
  11. pain by Ryan+Monster · · Score: 3, Funny

    My heels hurt from reading that summary. I hope they heal soon.

    --
    Change your name to Homer Junior! Your friends can call you Hoju
  12. Misread headline... by Donniedarkness · · Score: 0, Redundant
    Misread headline as "Vista cuts off allofmp3.com"

    I was ready to go on a rant :_( Oh well.

    For everything else, there's...oh, never mind.

    --
    Earn a % of cash back from Newegg, Tiger Direct, Walmart.com, and more: http://www.mrrebates.com?refid=458505
    1. Re:Misread headline... by Amouth · · Score: 0

      it took me like 5 times over to realize thatwas Visa.. and not Vista.. i was wondering hard as this is right on the "heels" of ie7 being out.. that mabey they added it to the restricted site list..

      --
      '...if only "Jumping to a Conclusion" was an event in the Olympics.'
    2. Re:Misread headline... by mei_mei_mei · · Score: 1

      I mesread as Vista too. What if MS started to block sites they didn't like? It'snot all that far-fetched.

  13. PayPal? by tecker · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Could allofmp3.com route such purchases through paypal?

    I realize it probably would not work but it is a posibility.

    --
    Procrastinating life a way at a rapid rate of speed.
    1. Re:PayPal? by VitrosChemistryAnaly · · Score: 1
      Could allofmp3.com route such purchases through paypal? I realize it probably would not work but it is a posibility.
      At a point in the past they did accept PayPal funds. Their site doesn't even mention Paypal anymore. Paypal probably wouldn't allow transfers to allofmp3 for similar reasons that Visa won't allow it now.
      --
      "It's a tarp!" -- Dyslexic Admiral Ackbar
    2. Re:PayPal? by Kadin2048 · · Score: 2, Informative
      As anyone who's used PayPal can probably attest to, they're extremely aggressive about closing accounts down over the slightest thing.

      I doubt AllOfMp3's accounts there lasted ten minutes.

      I think XROST is their way of getting around the financing problems of directly accepting credit cards or PayPal. You can (apparently?) buy XROST "cards" using either a credit card or PayPal, and then turn around and use that card at AllOfMp3 to load your account.

      I'm not sure whether this is a totally safe tactic; it seems like in time, governments will just pressure the banks to stop allowing payments to XROST, either, and PayPal will similarly close down and seize their accounts. Plus, there's always the change that if XROST is a U.S. corporation, they could be gone after more directly for their billing records.

      I did a WHOIS lookup against xrost.biz, and although the registrant is out of Belize, it's a suspiciously Russian-sounding name. Their registrar, however, is GoDaddy, so I wonder if the RIAA could go after them in the same way that the spammers went after SpamHaus -- ordering their domain closed down.
      Registrant Name: Pavel Korchagin
      Registrant Organization: OCENA RESOURCES CORPORATION
      Registrant Address1: JASMINE COURT
      Registrant Address2: 35A REGENT STREET
      Registrant City: BELIZE CITY
      Registrant State/Province: BELIZE CITY
      Registrant Postal Code: 177
      Registrant Country: Belize
      Registrant Country Code: BZ
      Registrant Phone Number: +501.37369147357
      Registrant Email: support@intercardservice.com
      Intercardservice.com is registered by a "DomainsByProxy.com" of Scottsdale, Arizona -- another U.S. based avenue of attack -- and I notice that their "Legal Issues" page contains the paragraph:
      Prohibitions: Domains By Proxy will not do business with you,
      nor protect your identity, if you:
                    Transmit spam, viruses or harmful computer programs;
        Violate the law or infringe a third party's trademark or copyright;
        Engage in morally objectionable activities, including but not limited to those which are child pornographic, defamatory, abusive, harassing, obscene, racist, or otherwise objectionable.
      All in all, probably safe enough to use right now, but I'm not sure how long it's going to stand up to the combined efforts of the RIAA and their pet politicos.
      --
      "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    3. Re:PayPal? by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      my MC charge was turned down. it worked yesterday, though!

      but the laughable irony is that there are so many other fronts for fronts, this is easily gotton around.

      I bought some 'credits' from xrost. just now. yup, using my visa card ([nelson]ha ha![/nelson]).

      I still am strongly thinking of cancelling all my VISA cards and telling them exactly why I am cancelling.

      economics is the only thing businesses listen to. so lets tell them what we think! don't just write a letter, cancel your visa and tell them WHY you are cancelling it. it won't be enough to really reach their radar but its all we can do, I'm afraid.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
  14. Aaaayyyyyy. by Rob+T+Firefly · · Score: 3, Funny
    For those who don't want to (or can't) buy allofmp3's DRM-free music, they are providing DRM-laden music that can be played only within a restricted player provided by the website."
    What's Russian for "jump the shark?"
    1. Re:Aaaayyyyyy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      Shark jumps you?

    2. Re:Aaaayyyyyy. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Nakrylsya mednym tazom", "Pizdets prishel"....

    3. Re:Aaaayyyyyy. by smoker2 · · Score: 2, Funny

      perestroika ?

  15. Back to piracy then... by bteeter · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No one wants DRM music. That was a primary reason everyone used AllofMP3.com. That and the price of course. Now instead of AllofMP3 customers paying a small fee for music, I bet a lof of them will hit Shareaza and the file share networks again.

    Great move RIAA...

    Take care,

    Brian

    1. Re:Back to piracy then... by Yvan256 · · Score: 1

      Everyone used AllOfMP3.com? Are you sure? How many people (outside of Slashdot) even knew it existed? And from those that knew it existed and used it, how many knew it wasn't legal even though they were paying for the songs?

      And you're right, nobody wants DRM music. Apple's iTunes Store proves this with only 1.5 billion songs downloaded so far.

      My guess is that this move by the RIAA won't increase the P2P traffic by more than 0.01%.

    2. Re:Back to piracy then... by 15Bit · · Score: 1
      And when you do hit the P2P networks again, you'll again be a clearly defined "thief", "pirate" or whatever else they want to call you. Currently it would be slightly tricky to sue you as you are technically buying the music, even if the legality of the site is questionable. More to the point, it would also attract adverse publicity, as you could quite reasonably use the defence that you were "trying to follow a legal route to obtain music". People would sympathise.

      But if you download illegally, you're a clear-cut, simple to define statistic and they can label you as a "thief", draining the resources of the honest hard-working record industry.

      So yes, it probably is a pretty good move for them. Nothing changes in terms of the money they receive, and they can criminalise you in a nice clear definable fashion and pursue their agenda accordingly.

    3. Re:Back to piracy then... by z0idberg · · Score: 1

      Nobody wants DRM music.

      1.5 billion songs downloaded from iTunes only means a lot of people just don't know it yet.

      They will find out when their PC crashes and they lose all the music on their hard drive, get a new computer, install iTunes then auto-sync their IPOD and lose all their music. Or when in a few years there is another cool non-apple media player on the market and they try to move their music to their new player and find they can't.

      Thats when people that already hate DRM and know a few of the tricks to get around it start to get a lot of phone calls. Eventually everyone will grow to hate it, it will just take a little time.

    4. Re:Back to piracy then... by rikkus-x · · Score: 1
    5. Re:Back to piracy then... by ericski · · Score: 1

      Awesome. This global warming trend sucks. The world needs more pirates.

      http://www.venganza.org/

    6. Re:Back to piracy then... by OldeTimeGeek · · Score: 1
      DRM has absolutely nothing to do with the iTunes service - making sure that your files are safely backed up is your problem, not theirs.

      They will find out when their PC crashes and they lose all the music on their hard drive, get a new computer, install iTunes then auto-sync their IPOD and lose all their music.

      Or they could just back up their music files and restore them on their new computer. iTunes has a utility that does this. All the user has to do once they've been restored is authorize the computer the first time that they play anything from iTunes. It's very easy to do - I've done it a couple of times and had absolutely no problems. And this is only required for stuff bought from the iTunes store - anything they rip from their own music or get from other sources doesn't require authorization to play.

      If they lose both their computer and their iPod, they can always restore the files, burn the iTunes one to CD/DVD and then import the music into whatever player they like. It's a bit of a pain, but not impossible.

    7. Re:Back to piracy then... by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      Bah why?

      I havent downloaded new music online for 2 years. Myself and a group of friends simply ship around a few USB hard drives. I just recieved 180gig of music I do not have from a friend in the best mp3 quality I can get and the id3 tags are all right. I wil lbe loading on about 20 gigs that another friend does not have and ship the drive along after I am done.

      Easier, faster, better quality and the RIAA cant detect it. PSP sucks... F2F is far better.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    8. Re:Back to piracy then... by Pofy · · Score: 1

      >And from those that knew it existed and used it,
      >how many knew it wasn't legal even though they
      >were paying for the songs?

      What was illegal about it? What law was being broken? How? And by whom?

    9. Re:Back to piracy then... by 2nd+Post! · · Score: 1

      In the one case AoM isn't paying the RIAA members, they are paying ROMS
      In the other case AoM loses customers who STILL don't pay the RIAA members, but no longer financing AoM or ROMS

      So it sounds like the "other" case is a net win for the RIAA.

    10. Re:Back to piracy then... by bs7rphb · · Score: 1

      Plenty of other sites you can buy un-DRMed music from. I use bleep.

    11. Re:Back to piracy then... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is the best way to go. I'd like to see the RIAA try to stop that.

    12. Re:Back to piracy then... by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      There are other sites that offer world-wide legit non-DRM music, such as magnatune.com and emusic.com, among others. Many of those other sites actually give a portion of what you pay to the people that made the music. AllofMP3 does not deal with pesky little things like that, which explains their pricing.

    13. Re:Back to piracy then... by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 1

      Currently it would be slightly tricky to sue you as you are technically buying the music, even if the legality of the site is questionable. More to the point, it would also attract adverse publicity, as you could quite reasonably use the defence that you were "trying to follow a legal route to obtain music".

      In the US, the legality is clear cut (it's not legal for people in the US to download from AllOfMP3) and there's no such thing in our copyright law as a defense of 'I thought it was legal.' I doubt it would have any bearing on PR either; the industry already looks pretty bad.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    14. Re:Back to piracy then... by stubear · · Score: 1

      Oh, I don't know, how about US Copyright law? The russians can sell all the russian music they'd like however they'd like to but if AllofMP3.com wants to sell music protected by US Copyright law they have to play by those rules. Don't I keep hearing how Microsoft has to play by EU rules if they want to sell software in the EU? Well, guess what? laws are funny that way. You don't get to pick and choose who they appl to and under what circmstances. The RIAA is well within their rights to have AllofMP3.com to remove any music protected by US Copyright law for which the RIAA member companies hold the copyrights.

    15. Re:Back to piracy then... by TheoMurpse · · Score: 1
      Don't I keep hearing how Microsoft has to play by EU rules if they want to sell software in the EU?
      Yes, you do. The difference is, AllofMP3 isn't selling in the US. Instead, the purchaser is going to Russia. Then they perform a transaction in Russia, and the purchaser returns to the US with his purchased music. Now, is importing music you legally purchased in a foreign country illegal in the US? No, it's not.

      Hence the gray area. Right now, courts are creating common law which considers jurisdiction over the internet, and "where" you are when performing a transaction (in the server's location? in the client's location? in both simultaneously?). Now, common law follows precedent, but it also follows fluffy language such as "traditional notions of justice and fair play." If you support AllofMP3, you are helping to change, over time, what "justice" and "fair play" mean, thus shaping common law.
    16. Re:Back to piracy then... by stubear · · Score: 1

      AllofMP3.com did not have a license to sell the music in the first place. The ROMS does not have the authority to grant such a license so no, the music they sell is not legal. And no, the seller is not going to Russia, they are in whatever location they were in when the transaction was made.

    17. Re:Back to piracy then... by TheoMurpse · · Score: 1

      Then why, pray tell, was an Australian who had literally never set foot inside the territorial United States extradited to the US for commiting hacking crimes "within the United States." Simple: he entered the US by "throwing" his bits there.

    18. Re:Back to piracy then... by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 1

      Yes, you do. The difference is, AllofMP3 isn't selling in the US. Instead, the purchaser is going to Russia. Then they perform a transaction in Russia, and the purchaser returns to the US with his purchased music. Now, is importing music you legally purchased in a foreign country illegal in the US? No, it's not.

      No, the transaction occurs in both the US and Russia, simultaneously. But that's not really the interesting part.

      The interesting part is that the music isn't moved or imported into the US. It is copied there. And copying music in the US -- which means, given the definitions within the law, writing the music onto a hard drive, or into RAM, which is physically present in the US -- is infringing. In fact, it's infringing in such a way that the 602 importation exceptions don't apply (they only cover distribution, not copying, which is reproduction).

      Also, importing the music into the US is illegal unless it was created in a manner that, if US law had applied in the place where it was made, it would have been legally made. Since AllOfMP3 claims to be using a Russian law that has no US equivalent, it would not have been legally made had US law applied there at that time. This makes it illegal to import under 602(b), regardless of whether 602(a) independently prohibits it or not.

      And it's still not importation when you download anyway, so it's pretty moot.

      There is no grey area. You aren't helping yourself, or others, by spreading misinformation. I don't care if you download music or not, but I care very much that people understand what copyright law actually says (rather than what misinformed people think it says) so that we can get them to support changing it to say something better.

      (Also, copyright law is almost entirely statutory; common law copyright is virtually a nullity and not a good idea in any case. You're not shaping crap.)

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    19. Re:Back to piracy then... by MojoStan · · Score: 1
      Now instead of AllofMP3 customers paying a small fee for music, I bet a lof of them will hit Shareaza and the file share networks again.

      Great move RIAA...

      The RIAA didn't get a penny of that small fee paid for music all AllofMP3, so this makes them happy. If a lot of them use "Shareaza and the file share networks," then a lot of them will be easier for the RIAA to find and threaten with lawsuits. Also, I'm sure some of them would switch to sites that do pay the RIAA (like iTunes and PlaysForSure sites).

      I hate the RIAA, but why is this a "bad move" (for them) to stop sales by AllofMP3? They got nothing out of AllofMP3 sales. The alternatives to AllofMP3 are either nothing (no gain or loss) or something (iTunes sales, CD sales, or lawsuits).

      --
      TO START
      PRESS ANY KEY

      Where's the 'ANY' key? I see Esk, Kitarl, and Pig-Up...

    20. Re:Back to piracy then... by Pofy · · Score: 1

      >Oh, I don't know, how about US Copyright law?

      US copyright law protects work in US (due to treates wuch as the Bern convention and others, it applies to works created outside US as well). Russian copyright law protects works in Russia (including works created in US). To sell music in Russia, you need prermission to do so, and allofmp3 has such a permission form the required authority in Russia and follows Russian copyright law. In the same way, a US company in US that wants to sell music (regardless of if it is US or Russina music) must follow US laws. It doesn't matter what Russian copyright law says in such a case).

      >The russians can sell all the russian music they'd
      >like however they'd like to but if AllofMP3.com
      >wants to sell music protected by US Copyright law
      >they have to play by those rules.

      You seem to think that one countries copyright law protects the work all over the world. That is not so. Each country has a copyright law which protects works created in that country and by its citizens or people living there. Through treates, such as the Bern convention, which most countries in the world have signed, the same protection is given to works created in other countries. However, for each country, the laws of THAT country protects the work.

      Lets say a specific tyoe of act, copying for private use, is allowed in country A but not in country B. Now, in country A, ANY work, regardless of if it is created in country A or country B can be copied for private use. SImilar, a work created in country A can still not be copiped for private use in country B.

      So, if allofmp3 wants to sell music in Russia, they have to follow Russian copyright law, which they do, they pay applicable license fees for example. It is completely irellevant what the copyright law of another country says. In the same way, if you want to sell or make a copy in USA of a work created in Russia, and US law allows it, it is irellevant if Russian law would forbid it.

      >Don't I keep hearing how Microsoft has to play by EU rules
      >if they want to sell software in the EU?

      Exactly, and allofmp3 must play by Russian rules when selling in Russia (which happens to be were they are located and are selling).

      >You don't get to pick and choose who they appl to and under what circmstances.

      Exactly, so....

      >The RIAA is well within their rights to have AllofMP3.com
      >to remove any music protected by US Copyright law for which
      >the RIAA member companies hold the copyrights. ... no, RIAA can't pick US copyright law to be applicable in Russia, Russian copyright law applies. It is a fairly basic principle, the laws of the country applies in that country. If you sell in Russia, Russian law aplies, if you sell in EU, EU laws applies (not strictly since there is no EU law, but the individual laws of the countries in EU are harmonized and are mostly the same and similar) and if you sell in USA, US laws applies.

    21. Re:Back to piracy then... by NulDevice · · Score: 1

      ...and lets not forget the fact that, regardless of copyright law, AllOfMp3.com is in the business of screwing the artist and to a lesser extent the consumer. It's slightly legal in Russia, maybe, but it's still kind of slimy.

      First, they don't generally pay artist royalties, thanks to the loopholes in the ROMS stuff. They don't have to unless you have some agreement with them. I know a lot of people are of the "stick it to the man" school, thinking that a dollar not paid means a dollar less in the RIAA's coffers. Well, that may be true in some cases, but not others. There are a lot of indie labels that have nothing to do with the RIAA, that run on a fairly tight budget...and here's a russian site selling their goods real cheap and not paying the people who made the music one red cent. Oh sure, it is *possible*, supposedly, to set up royalty payment agreements but having tried, it's not especially easy if you're not a russian lawyer. Actually getting a hold of them is difficult enough. (In the end, we convinced them to take our stuff down, just because it was easier and they weren't making much money from us anyway)

      (okay, I'm waiting for the standard "expecting payment for your art is unethical" argument. I say to that - whatever. Different argument for a different time.)

      Second, for all the vaunted arguments about quality encoding people make regarding these guys...they're not. For a brief period, one of my band's EPs was available for sale on the site...except it was not a real EP, it was distributed as a bunch of free mp3's. So, you could buy a high quality wav file from AllOfmp3 whose source was only a free mp3. No matter what upsampling software you use, you're not getting the quality back. And it proved my suspicion that these guys were at least occasionally trolling the net for their source material, not ripping shiny new CDs or whatnot. I would be entirely unsurprised to find out that a lot of their music was just ganked from torrent sites or whatever in the first place.

      I don't argue that there's something very wrong with the Big Music Industry, and that CDs, downloads, etc are just way to friggin expensive. Nor do I contest the notion that the music industry is hopelessly stuck in a past model that's been invalidated by changes in demographics and technology. Nevertheless, this constant championing of a rather questionable and artist-unfriendly web-business isn't really the way to change things.

      --

      ----
      "I used to listen to Null Device before they sold out."

  16. great timing ;( by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

    wow. just yesterday (seriously) I went back to that site to buy some more music. I had a small balance and added more funds to it. I noticed that visa WAS removed. was this an adblock thing? check firefox - nope. was it a javascript thing (checks my setting; nope, not that either). the visa pulldown just wasn't there anymore! I had a credit card that I used for stuff like this and I couldn't use it. I had to search for a MC card that I don't use anymore but is still valid.

    I was able to update my payment and d/l my chosen music. but there was NO explanation as to why this removal of 1 of the 2 major card types was done!

    if this is really the end of this site (sigh!) then I suppose I should get as much as I can now while the gettin' is still good.

    that site was golden, to me. MY choice of encoding, MY choice of format and bitrate, no US mafia in the way of me buying what I want to buy.

    sigh.

    this is not good. that was the one place I could still go to buy properly tagged encoded DRM free music. if that site goes, my music buying will 100% end. 100%. I will ONLY download pirated versions, then. screw the industry. you are forcing us all to fight YOU, when you take such strong handed tactics against your own buying base.

    screw you riaa and mpaa. I will never be buying a 'shiny cd' or dvd in a store. let the boycotts begin! (like kids today really need my permission to begin the boycott, ha!).

    --

    --
    "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    1. Re:great timing ;( by syrinx · · Score: 1

      Um, not to point out the obvious or anything, but allofmp3 wasn't legal in the first place. To the artists (and yes, the record companies), it doesn't matter if you're buying stolen CDs out of the back of a van, giving your credit card number to shady Russians, or downloading free music from Bittorrent; they still get nothing anyway. So if you switch from one illegal method to another, I don't think they're going to be affected.

      --
      Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.
    2. Re:great timing ;( by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 0, Troll

      this, very clearly, is NOT about illegal vs legal.

      if it was illegal it would have been shut down BY LAW ENFORCEMENT years ago.

      law enforcement != visa != mpaa != riaa.

      got it.

      good.

      you can't, on one side, say its illegal and that's why visa stopped it. so why is MC still in the game, then?

      your logic fails.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    3. Re:great timing ;( by Code+Master · · Score: 1

      His point was with regards to your comment slamming the *AAs and how they seem to have made it worse for himself. He's just saying that they don't see any of that money either way, so it doesn't matter whether you buy for allofmp3, or download via P2P. Infact, it's probably better for them to get users on P2P whether they know they can successfully extort/sue them.

      --
      The Code Master
    4. Re:great timing ;( by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      Just because part of the crime is committed in another country, where US police cannot go, and which may or may not respect US law, does not mean that it is legal, or that US citizens are not committing US crimes.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    5. Re:great timing ;( by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, AllOfMP3 is legal because it pays royalties to ROMS.

      It has been the big recording industry cartels who have refused to cooperate with ROMS.

    6. Re:great timing ;( by jamar0303 · · Score: 1

      I don't use AllofMP3 for a reason- they don't carry the music that I like to listen to. Unfortunately, I live in China- it's either face an extremely limited selection dominated by Ayumi Hamasaki and BoA if I buy legit or turn to commercial piracy if I want a CD. I turn to the file-sharing networks instead. Reason- I can also find a lot of old stuff by the artists that I listen to that no one sells anyway. That's my argument for file-sharing- open up all the artists' back catalog and open up international access (I'm after J-Pop, after all, not American music) then I'll turn to iTunes or something similar (probably Sony's mora service in Japan if what I want isn't on iTunes but they limit purchases to Japanese IP addresses).

      --
      OSx86 FTW
    7. Re:great timing ;( by Pofy · · Score: 1

      >Just because part of the crime is committed in another country,
      >where US police cannot go, and which may or may not respect US
      >law, does not mean that it is legal, or that US citizens
      >are not committing US crimes.

      However, in the case of allofmp3 there is no crime going on either in Russia, nor in any other country when a person buys a song from them. Or perhaps you could point out more specifically which law in Russia and which law (in for example USA) that is being broken?

    8. Re:great timing ;( by muuh-gnu · · Score: 1

      > your logic fails.

      His facts, upon which he built his flawed logic, arent correct either.
      allofmp3.com is _not_ illegal, it operates perfectly legal under russian law. Apart from the fact that some folks are pissed because the law of some foreign country on the other side of the globe doesnt work for them, doesnt make the practices of theis russian company any less legal.

      They operate in russia, their servers are on russian soil, they do not have a local branch in the US, they do not even promote their service to US citizens, so how exactly do they fullfill the definition of "illegal"? How is it different from having them ship CDs for example? It may be illegal for an US citizen to posess such audio files bought there, but i doubt that this is the case.

      They dont have a licence to sell music this way in the US - so they dont. They sell it to you in Russia, and then you download it from their russian server to the US.

      The withdraval of Visa now doesnt seem to have anything to do with the legality of allofmp3, for me it seems like a favor they aer doing someone in the music industry, at the price of all the transaction fees they lose this way.

    9. Re:great timing ;( by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      As far as I know, allofmp3 does not have license to distribute its songs in the US. Therefore, selling songs in the US is an act of copyright infringement in the US.

      Riddle me this, If what allofmp3 is doing is so legal in the US, why isn't there a US company trying to compete with them for US sales?

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    10. Re:great timing ;( by Catbeller · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "As far as I know, allofmp3 does not have license to distribute its songs in the US. Therefore, selling songs in the US is an act of copyright infringement in the US."

      They aren't in the U.S. There are no treaties involved, no trade agreements either. U.S. law does not apply outside of the U.S., with the exception of us kidnapping people around the world and torturing them to death, which apparently is legal whether anyone else in the world objects or not.

      And, to clarify the issue, think of it as people *phoning* a Russian server and listening to recorded music on the phone for a fee. Imagine them recording the sound with an old-fashioned tape recorder. This would break no law in the U.S. or Russia. It's not even a metaphor, it's what we're doing.

    11. Re:great timing ;( by Pofy · · Score: 1

      >As far as I know, allofmp3 does not have license
      >to distribute its songs in the US. Therefore,
      >selling songs in the US is an act of copyright
      >infringement in the US.

      You do know they are in Russia and sell their songs there, right? Just as if I (living in Sweden) goes to the website of an American store buying something, doesn't magically move them to Sweden and having to comply with Swedish laws.

      >Riddle me this, If what allofmp3 is doing is so legal in the US,

      They are not doing anything in US, hence there is not an issue of it being legal or not in US.

      >why isn't there a US company trying to compete with them for US sales?

      Perhaps no US company wants to set up business in Russia selling songs there?

    12. Re:great timing ;( by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 4, Insightful

      mod me a troll?

      this isnt' a troll post people, get a clue.

      it IS true that the mpaa is not the same as law enforcement. and visa is also not law enforcement.

      if I wanted to buy playboy mags, will visa 'use their morals' and stop me? no? oh really!

      how is this any different. they claim some law is being broken but they can't ennunciate what, exactly that is.

      again, I say - if a law is being broken, call the cops. visa is NOT my police force and I object to them even thinking they are allowed to wear that hat.

      you KNOW that pressure is put on visa from the record industry. in that light, I see the mpaa/riaa as no worse or better than the 'russian mob'. you can't claim you are following what's good and right and yet be pressured by NON LAW ENFORCEMENT LOBBY GROUPS.

      either you are a money brokering business OR you are in the morality and law enforcement business. you cannot be in both. and shouldn't be.

      (just because you (mods) may disagree with me - that does NOT make this a troll post. sheesh!)

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    13. Re:great timing ;( by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Do you know that in some countries, there are laws against porn? Downloading porn in those countries are deemed criminal and prosecutable. Does that mean Playboy whose servers are in the US needs to play by the rules in those countries? No. It simply means that Playboy's customers who try to access its website are criminal in the eyes of the law in that country.

      Similarly, AllofMP3 is legit in Russia, but does that mean it's legal if you are outside Russia? That's why it's term of use refers to the laws in your own country, right? The case may be more muddled than the porn example above since where the law stands isn't exactly clear; however, I can see why VISA pulled out its business since they could be implicated in a shady business dealing. Other posters try to the compare VISA to moral police and compare it to buying a Playboy with a VISA, but I don't think it's a case that has anything to do with policing moral. Playboy is a legit business. It's more appropriate to compare buying stolen goods from shady businesses using a VISA card and VISA knowingly provides the support to those businesses.

      If AllofMP3 is found to violate copyright infringement in the US, then VISA as a business partner may also be found guilty, or at least may have its name dragged though the mud. Seems like a good business decision, to me.

    14. Re:great timing ;( by senatorpjt · · Score: 1

      It's a lot like buying cigarettes at a reservation. Legally, you can possess (in NY anyway), I believe two cartons of untaxed cigarettes. The reservations do not charge cigarette tax. It is perfectly legal to go to a reservation, buy two cartons of cigarettes, and leave.

      However, it is still illegal for a store to sell untaxed cigarettes off the reservation, or for you to sell any of your cigarettes.

    15. Re:great timing ;( by Pofy · · Score: 1

      >Similarly, AllofMP3 is legit in Russia, but does that mean it's legal if you are outside Russia?

      allofmp3 is legal in russia and doesn't exist nor do sell in any other country, hence they can't be either illegal or legal somewere else as they are not in any other country. The customer, the one buying music could possibly do something illegal in their own country. They would be the one doing something illegal. SO lets see, do, USA, has any law that makes it illegal to buy music in another country? I highly dount so. Is there any law making it illegal for a private person, for personal use to bring sinlge copies of music into the country? No, it is specifically mentioned in the copyright law to not be considered as import and thus can never be illegal. So what other illegal activity do you propose a buyer do in either Russia or USA (or any other country for that matter)?

      >That's why it's term of use refers to the laws in your own country, right?

      No, their terms of use does not refer to any other counties law. Have you actually read them? You might think of some FAQ on their page which simply says that, of course, the buyer is responsible to follow any law of their country. As said, there is no US law violated when someone in USA buys music aborad or when taking such music into USA.

      >It's more appropriate to compare buying stolen goods from shady businesses using a VISA card and VISA knowingly provides the
      >support to those businesses.

      A completely pointless comparison since it is about completely different laws. Stolen goods has to do about ownership of goods while copyright is not at all about ownership and in fact, there is NEVER in the case of buing music someone not owning the specific copies that handles them.

      >If AllofMP3 is found to violate copyright infringement in the US,

      For them to violate a law in the US, they must be in the US and they must do something in US. That is the only way to violate the law in US. They are located in Russia, they sell music in Russia and hence can't break the law in USA doing so.

      By your reasoning, someone from a country comming to USA, or buying something form the USA (for example from a US store that has a web page for selling stuff) would make that store to commit an illegal act if it would have been illegal in the country were that person comes from. What a bizzare idea.

    16. Re:great timing ;( by LordVader717 · · Score: 1

      Just posessing copyright infringing material is an offense in the US. Keep that in mind.

    17. Re:great timing ;( by dkone · · Score: 1

      but States and other government bodies do this all the time. Take PA for instance they control all the liquor stores state wide, and make profit from sales of booze. Then they arrest you if you drink too much. In the business of both Vice and Punishment for Vice. Another fine example of this duality is lottery sales. I guess the bottom line is that if you are big enough you can represent both sides of the coin.

      DK

    18. Re:great timing ;( by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 1

      Whether or not this rises to the level of criminal copyright infringement will depend on just what the infringer's been doing. But as I've pointed out elsewhere, a downloader in the US has to comply with US laws, and our laws (in particular 17 USC 501 and 106(1); n.b. that 106(3) and 602 are not applicable in this case) prohibit this sort of downloading. For it to be criminal, you'd have to look at 17 USC 506, 106(1), and 18 USC 2319. Otherwise it's illegal, but only a civil offense, rather than both a civil and criminal offense.

      Whether or not AllOfMP3 is violating any Russian laws, I can't say. I'm not familiar with their laws. I'm a US copyright lawyer, though, and I'm pretty well-versed in ours.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    19. Re:great timing ;( by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 1

      The downloader is in the US. And unauthorized downloading of copyrighted works is illegal here (see, e.g. the Napster case, or Grokster, or Netcom, or my personal favorite, Intellectual Reserve v. Utah Lighthouse Ministry). The location of the uploader is totally irrelevant to whether or not the downloader is breaking the law.

      You're right though, in there's no treaties or anything that are at issue. This is purely a matter of our domestic law.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    20. Re:great timing ;( by Pofy · · Score: 1

      >Just posessing copyright infringing material is an offense in the US. Keep that in mind.

      So? There is no infriging material to start with!!

      As an aside, feel free to point to the law claiming such possession is illegal.

    21. Re:great timing ;( by Pofy · · Score: 1

      >(see, e.g. the Napster case, or Grokster, or Netcom,
      >or my personal favorite, Intellectual Reserve v. Utah Lighthouse Ministry)

      In those cases (never heared about the last one though), the one making the work available was doing so non authorized (and that was what those cases was about when they was not directly against the software maker that created the software). In such a case (of various forms of P2P networks), you actually has a case of one part making a work available and another one making copies. Both can commit infringinement, none can commit infringnemet or one of them while not the other do it. Often, depending on country, the act of copying and its legalness depends on how the work is made available, that is, if it was made avialbel in an infriging way or not. If you take iTunes for example (or allofmp3) the one making the music is doing so in a legal way, there is no problem making a copy. The same applies if you buy software, ebooks or whatever over the net, you don't need, as a buyer, any special permission from the copyright holder. In addition, there can be several other cases and situations were making a copy is perfectly legal that has nothing to do with the source and its legalness.

    22. Re:great timing ;( by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 1

      you don't need, as a buyer, any special permission from the copyright holder

      Yes, you do. Each of those cases says that downloaders are liable for infringement. They never say that this is due to the uploading being infringing as well. It's because all downloading is infringing if it is of copyrighted works, if there is not permission from the US copyright holder, and there is no exception in US law that applies.

      Here, there are copyrighted works, there is no permission from the US copyright holder, and there is no exception in US law that applies. iTunes has permission from the proper copyright holder. AllOfMP3 is relying on an exception in Russian law. They are wrong to do so, just as you are wrong in most or all of your posts about this.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    23. Re:great timing ;( by Pofy · · Score: 1

      >Here, there are copyrighted works, there is no permission from the US copyright holder, and
      >there is no exception in US law that applies. iTunes has permission from the proper
      >copyright holder.

      iTunes has the permission to SELL the music. You are talking about the users USE of the music. allofmp3 also has the permission. As a BUYER there is no difference. The same applies if you enter a store and buy a music CD, you don't need any permission to play or listen to the CD even if it involves making certain copies to do so (which it in one form or another often do).

    24. Re:great timing ;( by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      you are probably more versed in the law than I am (I'm pretty sure about that) ;)

      but what I am not clear on is this: as I understand it, if I travel to .ru or .cn and buy bootleg discs over there, that is actually not really a _US_ crime if it occurs over there. the source of the songs is in .ru (in this case) and its arguable, equally (it seems to me) that you can say the songs were BOUGHT 'over there' (the billing occurs over there and not here) and what I did was 'import' single copies. from what I understand (some law text I read) importing single copies for personal use if its not intended for rebroadcast is OK! this seems to be a loophole (and like 'them', we should take any loopholes we can find; they surely do!)

      allofmp3 DOES pay for its music (we have to assume, for now). we also have to assume that THEIR system gives whatever THEY feel is fair and just to the artists. I think the actual rub is that they aren't giving AS MUCH as the local greedy bastards (er, I mean the local *AA) wants. and the fact that they didn't insist on DRM crippling the music.

      where is it written that all music must have drm? its not! case in point: cd's don't have drm. in my mind, that sets a VERY important precident. additionally, cassettes and LPs are legal to make personal copies of. I'm not convinced that drm is REQUIRED for 'media to be legal to own' in the US.

      I'd be curious to hear your comments about these thoughts. IANAL (and I know you are) - but it doesn't seem to cut and dried to me.

      btw, why is this being fought in economic terms (visa withdrawing) instead of legal terms? that seems VERY suspicious to me. like hiring a mafia guy to 'whack someone' when you can't get the actual law enforcement to take a stand on a particular issue. the fact that they seem to be going OUTSIDE the law to strong-arm the russian mob (isn't THAT a change!) seems quite telling to me.

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    25. Re:great timing ;( by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 1

      as I understand it, if I travel to .ru or .cn and buy bootleg discs over there, that is actually not really a _US_ crime if it occurs over there.

      That's correct. US copyright law stops at the border (though transactions crossing the border fall under it as well).

      the source of the songs is in .ru (in this case) and its arguable, equally (it seems to me) that you can say the songs were BOUGHT 'over there' (the billing occurs over there and not here) and what I did was 'import' single copies.

      Well, there's the big difference. Geographic location matters.

      If the transaction occurred wholly within Russia, then that would be one thing. But here, the downloader never goes to Russia at all. He is always within the US, and so US law always applies to his conduct. Even if his conduct affects other countries, he's still here.

      Let's break down what happens step-by-step.

      We have Alice, the downloader, in America, and Bob, the uploader, in Russia. Everything that Alice does has to comply with US law. Everything that Bob does has to comply with Russian law. And in fact, both countries can and do regulate trade across their borders such that no one from foreign countries is allowed to trade across the border without complying with the law on both sides. Enforcement may be thorny, but the obligation remains.

      I'm an American copyright lawyer, and I really don't know anything about Russian law. Let's assume that it does what it is claimed to do: it permits Bob to distribute copies in Russia.

      That doesn't tell us what Alice is or isn't allowed to do; she falls under US copyright law. US copyright law (17 USC 101) says that a copy is a material object in which a creative work is fixed. For example, a novel is a creative work, but it is intangible. It can be printed in a thousand different paperbacks, but the novel is the same, and is present in each of those. A copy would be the paperback itself -- the material object in which the intangible work is fixed. The difference between the work in the abstract, and specific copies of the work, is important.

      It is entirely possible to go to Russia, pick up a CD, hold it in your hand, and return to the US with it. But it is not possible to download that CD, since a CD is a material object made out of atoms that cannot be sent across the Internet. Moving the information on that CD is not the same as moving the CD itself. And when you put that information into a new material object on the other end (whether it's another CD, or a hard drive, or whatever), you have fixed the work into yet another material object, thus creating a new copy. A fax machine works similarly; you cannot literally fax a piece of paper over a telephone wire, but you can make a new copy of the original piece of paper using information that was sent over the wire.

      US law prohibits the creation of new copies of a copyrighted work (17 USC 106(1)) unless either the law permits it because certain conditions are satisfied (mostly these exceptions are at 17 USC 107-122), or the US copyright holder permits it. Making a new copy is also known as copying, and as reproduction.

      The law has a number of exceptions built into it (again, mainly at 17 USC 107-122) that limit the scope of the prohibition. However, most of them only apply to certain kinds of works, or certain kinds of parties, or certain rights. For example, the 109 exception is not applicable here because it deals with the distribution right (17 USC 106(3)), not the reproduction right (17 USC 106(1)). The 120 exception is not applicable here because it deals with architecture, not music. The 121 exception is not applicable here because it deals with copies of literary works made for the blind. And so on.

      A copyright holder can grant permission explicitly (e.g. with the GPL) or implicitly (e.g. by putting up a publicly viewable website). The extent of the permission can vary (e.g. the GPL permits copying but only where the copies ar

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
  17. alternative by dhuff · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Looks like you can point your browser back to Mother Russia at Alltunes.com and be back in business pretty quick (incl. payment with Visa).

    1. Re:alternative by InfinityWpi · · Score: 3, Informative

      No, actually, that link goes through to chronopay, and they aren't taking Visa either. Thanks for playing tho!

    2. Re:alternative by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What's more 'allTunes' is just allofmp3.com using a separate application rather than a web browser.

    3. Re:alternative by AnyThingButWindows · · Score: 0

      That doesn't work. You have to have some proprietary application to use the music.

      No thanks. I like to stick to standards that WORK.

      --
      When government fears the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. - Jefferson
    4. Re:alternative by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All alltunes does is download the music right to your computer. allofmp3 and alltunes are the same people. just a nicer interface. allofmp3 accounts work on alltunes. i get much faster downloads using the alltunes application. (just open up more connections in the pref's) i reload my account with allofmp3. (xrost usually. i like the bonus)

    5. Re:alternative by daern · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yey for slashdot! You've not even tried it have you? Alltunes is actually a pretty cool application for getting music from allofmp3. It's quick, clever, lightweight and well designed. Oh, and it's free too. And not encumbered with loads of extra software that you don't want. Oh, no DRM too.

      You can even leave it running at home and when you order stuff at work, alltunes will download it. Clever eh?

      Oh, except that you're still rubbing your "open standard" sticks together, trying to make some fire...

    6. Re:alternative by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Looks like it only works on one platform... And is closed source... Thats pretty restrictive.

      And pretty lame to mod a person down because they don't agree with you.

    7. Re:alternative by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative
      To pay for music you can use xrost, and then use clicktobuy (allofmp3 links to xrost, which links to clicktobuy) -- you use clicktobuy (which takes Visa) to refill your xrost card, then enter the details xrost gives you to pay allofmp3. I've used this, it works. (I would have preferred to use PayPal, but there doesn't seem to be any PayPal payment option left, even via indirect systems like xrost)

      If you are using Linux and want to download the music you purchaced (not using alltunes), the "basket" page has a list of links. Do something like this:

      • Open list of links (separate page)
      • Copy and paste all the links to a text file
      • Run for URL in `cat links.txt` ; do wget "$URL" ; done
  18. now they love DRM !! by mAIsE · · Score: 0

    The RIAA has truly won, Russia can now join ITO

  19. Or... by AltGrendel · · Score: 1

    the bribery check was good.

    --
    The simple truth is that interstellar distances will not fit into the human imagination

    - Douglas Adams

  20. Visa Cuts Off AllOfMp3.com by Rik+Sweeney · · Score: 1

    *sigh*

    Oh well, it was fun while it lasted

    Sound of P2P application starting up

  21. Count me out... by scuba_steve_1 · · Score: 1

    I may be in the minority here, but I do not own an iPod...nor do I buy music online. In fact, this entire DRM movement (and associated legal wrangling) have soured me to purchasing music of any sort.

    I have a pile of MP3s ripped from CDs that I currently own, but find that I no longer even purchase CDs. I was formerly a HUGE fan of taking my music on the go...and am quite a tech gadget guy...but the RIAA and DRM in general have driven me away. I find that I just listen to the radio more now. Perhaps I am in the minority. I not only do not feel compelled to buy an iPod, their popularity and supposed status turns me off. I have an old SanDisk MP3 player that takes AAA batteries that I use in the gym...and it is often tuned to an FM station.

    This intellectual property fight and the corresponding limitations imposed on hardware for audio and video (crippled HDTV anyone?) have motivated me to spend my discretionary dollars elsewhere. My apologies to U2 and Metallica. They'll just have to settle for one less solid gold toilet.

    1. Re:Count me out... by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      I have an iPod, because it's a really good music player, but I don't buy anything on iTunes. I buy all my music on CD, rip it to mp3, and load it on my iPod in mp3. DRM doesn't come into the picture. I don't know how you listen to the radio. The commercials really grate at my nerves, as does the fact that they repeat the same songs over and over again. Plus very seldom do bands that I like even get radio time.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    2. Re:Count me out... by scuba_steve_1 · · Score: 1

      I don't know how you listen to the radio. The commercials really grate at my nerves


      24 presets...with 2 NPR stations & CSpan radio. Commercial airs and I am gone... :-)

    3. Re:Count me out... by QuebecNerd · · Score: 1

      That represent the way I'm feeling. I own 1500 vinyl records, maybe 450 cds and about 100 DVDs but my purchases have slowed alot during the last few years and not because I'm downloading; because they got me sick with their attitude in general. So I listen to what I already have and buy very few cds and rent movies instead of buying them like I used to do. The customers in general, have very little power over most big corporations. The only thing the customer can do is punish them by not giving them their money. More and more people are doing that to punish xxAAs and being all knowing and very wise they account those lost revenues on bad pirates using the tubes to rip them of their hard earned money. Only when they will have sued everybody in America and realized that their bussiness model sucks and is irrelevant will they realise that you can't force feed customers all the time and sometimes you have to listen to what they want... The Canadian Law is presently somewhat more relax, at present the real mafia comes from royalties organisations trying to collect license fees from everyone, but there are forces at work to screw us like they screwed our south friends a few years back, so it's only a matter of time. Dumbasses... Count me out

    4. Re:Count me out... by Alioth · · Score: 1

      You may like emusic - no DRM, plain MP3s. It's not a piracy site. They don't sell much top 40 stuff (i.e. big record label stuff) but they have pretty much every genre covered. In the 6 months I've had an account with emusic, I have obtained more new music than I have in the previous decade.

    5. Re:Count me out... by CthulhuDreamer · · Score: 1

      Try commercial-free radio stations. I've got two on my dial - one's run out of a local high school (KNHC), the other is an independant that changes formats every couple of hours (KEXP). I haven't heard a radio commercial in months.

    6. Re:Count me out... by Kazoo+the+Clown · · Score: 1

      I have a pile of MP3s ripped from CDs that I currently own, but find that I no longer even purchase CDs. I was formerly a HUGE fan of taking my music on the go...and am quite a tech gadget guy...but the RIAA and DRM in general have driven me away. I find that I just listen to the radio more now. Perhaps I am in the minority. [...]

      Well, you may be in the minority but you're certainly not alone. I used to spend $100 a week on CDs, and before that LPs. I remember when the CD was first announced-- LPs were around $8, and all the scuttlebut WRT CDs was how much cheaper they were to produce. CDs came out, and they were $14-$16 ea. I've never forgotten that little screw-over. In addition, there was this tendency to re-buy LPs I had on CD for the convenience.

      For the last couple of years though, I've probably bought a dozen new CDs at the most. I don't pirate not because I would feel at all guilty about it, but more because I'm pissed that risking illegal activity has become a so much better way to get music than legally buying it-- it has soured my taste in acquiring music entirely. Fortunately, I now have a relatively huge collection that I can continue to enjoy, and I do download legally free music from the internet sites that support independents such as Garage Band, etc., though the quality is often poor, I do find a gem now and then. So, I'm slowly converting all my CDs to mp3 files, and have a portable music player (Archos w/Rockbox) for on the go and a large network drive that I use for jukeboxing at home. I will never buy DRM'ed media of any kind, and if there comes a day where there is no legal media that is not DRM'ed I'll still have umpteen gig of converted CDs. Essentially, like the way we'd like to wean ourselves off of transportation dependence on oil, I've been able to wean myself off of dependence on media companies for music.

      And, I'm in the process of doing something very similar for video. I spend more time watching YouTube or some other ad-free internet content now than TV (and use a very effective ad blocker for web pages), and have amassed a relatively large number of legal DVDs of content. I buy lots of budget DVDs where I find them, such as 99 cent stores and 50-movie packages (I prefer old movies for the most part anyway), and buy lots of stuff used. Eventually I'll archive all of that to hard disks as well I figure. Interestingly though, unlike music the main reason I've soured off of the other channels for picture content is not DRM at this point, but the fact that I will no longer put up with the advertising-- the lure of Cable TV in the early days was the lack of commercials, but now it is pretty common for the movie channels (especially the "classic" movie channels) to now include commercial breaks. So, I stopped my Cable TV and now almost exclusively watch DVD. By the time the new HDTV and DRMed based content comes out I'll probably have collected enough unwatched media on DVD to last me the rest of my life-- and my eyes probably won't be good enough to tell the HD difference. I will have weaned myself off of content corporations entirely, including not only the DRM but the advertising.

      The lack of net neutrality may foster attempts to block independent content in favor of the majors, but that approach is ignorant of the fact that the internet is not a static entity-- it is subject to change and adaptation around such underhanded tactics to "deliver eyeballs." YouTube sprang up because people wanted a fun alternative to corporate packaged content, and if ultimately corporate interests start taking it over, inserting junk advertising or attempting to supplant it via internet anti-neutrality, some other inventive new means of sidestepping the corporate teat will crop up (though that's not to say net-neutrality legislation isn't necessarily a bad idea)...

  22. Prepaid Cards by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It is Visa's loss. They stood to make lots of money. However, as a suggestion, if you don't hold any non-Visa cards, may I suggest a pre-paid debit card?

    You just fill it up with money and re-charge it every time it runs out.

    Here is a start. Many of these are totally free - the banks make money whenever they process a transaction.

    Here is a suggested Google Search: Prepaid Mastercard.

  23. Maestro by MartinG · · Score: 1

    I just tried with my maestro card and that was declined too.

    --
    -- MartinG To mail me: echo kewyjlcxyzvjfxbqwh | tr bcefhjklqvwxyz .@adgimnoprstu
  24. No problem for me by edmicman · · Score: 4, Funny

    I'll just stick to sending them envelopes of cash like I've always done!

  25. This deserves a good "in soviet russia..." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In soviet russia, mastercard charges you!

    Sorry, not clever enough for a good one today. Anybody got something better?

  26. ours by seventhc · · Score: 0

    allofmp3 are belong to us!

    --
    'sig' deleted due to the stupidity of it's 'nature'
  27. No way to pay online now? by krell · · Score: 3, Funny

    Now I'm going to have to all the way to Russia with cash and bring back a suitecase full of MP3s. As long as I can get past the MP3-sniffing dogs at La Guardia, I should be OK.

    --
    Where were you when the voynix came?
    1. Re:No way to pay online now? by SkaOMatic · · Score: 1

      Thank goodness for you, we're not talking pirated movies here.

      You'd get licked to death by Lucky and Flo; the MPAA's disc-sniffing golden retrievers.

  28. Reminder: AllofMP3 uses broadcast rules by Uninvited+Guest · · Score: 4, Informative

    FWIW, remember that allofmp3.com claims to be "broadcasting" music on demand over the Internet, under the broadcast laws in Russia. Allofmp3.com pays its royalties based on those broadcast rules. This is similar to how ASCAP, BMI, and SESAC work with broadcast radio stations in this country; the royalties are sent to an agency which distributes the proceeds directly to the artists. The RIAA and others are claiming that allofmp3.com is duplicating and distributing recordings without paying for the rights to do so. Depending on how Russian law on broadcast rights is worded, allofmp3.com may be perfectly legitimate.

    --
    Sometimes I worry that I'll develop Alzheimer's disease, but no one will notice.
    1. Re:Reminder: AllofMP3 uses broadcast rules by Rocketship+Underpant · · Score: 1

      Also, under Russian joined the international copyright convention with various exceptions to the normal rules. For example, non-Russian works produced before 1970 (I think) have no copyright protection at all for Russian distributors. Copyright's all just an artificial government monopoly anyway, I'm glad Russia plays by their own rules.

      --
      He who lights his taper at mine, receives light without darkening me.
  29. XROST? by Kadin2048 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Can you elaborate?

    I saw the XROST option on there a while ago, but I don't know anything about it or how it works.

    Also, I recall at one point there was an option to use some type of "online currency" that was sold in the U.K. at gas stations and retail stores, meaning that you could buy them with cash, and then you went to a web site and typed in the number on the card you bought, and could transfer the money to AllOfMp3.com -- that seems like a pretty good way of doing cash-transations on the web. Pity it's not available in the states. Is this the same thing as XROST?

    I was thinking next time I went over to England, if they still existed, I'd buy some cards just to have around for stuff like that.

    As more and more things get on the web, I think there's going to be a greater and greater demand for a way to accomplish anonymous financial transactions, to replace what's done in the real-world with cash. As of right now, I don't know of any way to do that, and I'm sure the governments of the world like it that way...but if there's a will, there's a way, and pirated music and gambling are a big "will."

    --
    "Ladies and gentlemen, my killbot features Lotus Notes and a machine gun. It is the finest available."
    1. Re:XROST? by NetDanzr · · Score: 4, Informative
      XROST is simply an on-line gift card shop. You purchase a gift card, and get a card number and pin code in return. You input this information into Allofmp3, and your account is recharged.

      Not so long ago, XROST still worked with PayPal. Currently, it works primarily with prepaid cash cards - the type you mention - but also with Click&Buy, which is available in the US. I've got family in Europe, so for me it's easiest to Skype them and ask for one of the cash cards.

    2. Re:XROST? by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

      The next stage will be trading beads and beaver pelts for MP3s. Maybe I can barter with them? "I'll help you turn a couple of PCs into bots for some tunes."

      --
      It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
    3. Re:XROST? by massysett · · Score: 2, Interesting

      It seemed to me XROST was simply a front for allofmp3.com so that they could take credit cards. Have you seen any other merchant that actually takes XROST? I remember that every other retailer listed on their site was "coming soon."

    4. Re:XROST? by Vinnie_333 · · Score: 1

      Hmmmm. I'd be happier with the beaver pelt.

      --

      "We shall party like the Greeks of old! You know the ones I mean." - HedonismBot
    5. Re:XROST? by BrianH · · Score: 1

      Yep, that's how I've always done it. I'm a bit paranoid about handing my CC number over to a foreign group that has already shown a propensity towards "creative" interpretations of what's legal, but wanted to pick up some CD's from them. I bought the credit from Click&Buy with my Visa (Click&Buy is a reputable American company), buy XROST credits using my Click&Buy credits, and then pay for my AllOfMP3 account through XROST. It's a bit of a chore to recharge the account, but worthwhile IMO just for the peace of mind involved.

      I have about $50 sitting in my AllOfMP3 account right now, and this article has me a bit paranoid about it. I think I'll be going on a CD shopping spree tonight...just in case.

      --

      There is nothing so pathetic as seeing a beautiful young theory roughed up by a tough gang of facts.
    6. Re:XROST? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My Citibank MasterCard has a nice feature--virtual credit card numbers. Whenever you purchase something online, you can go to the site provided by Citibank, and create one of these "virtual numbers". What it does is simply create a valid, usable credit card number, but one that only works ONCE. If someone gets hold of it, who cares--it can't be used again. Another nice feature is that you can specify a maximum charge amount, to prevent even the valid recipient from overcharging you (e.g. specify a max charge of $10, and they can't charge that virtual number more than $10). I'm sure other outlets besides Citibank offer this feature...

  30. Yeah, Right by Lord_Slepnir · · Score: 1
    they are providing DRM-laden music that can be played only within a restricted player provided by the website.

    /me Starts Stopwatch

    Crack coming in 5...4...3...

    1. Re:Yeah, Right by Duds · · Score: 1

      And allofmp3 won't care at all, the entire smacks of "Well... fuck you then"

  31. So who's going to foot the bill now ? by Builder · · Score: 1

    On the heals of allofmp3.com's press conference trying to clean up its image, Visa has suspended its credit card service to allofmp3.com.

    So who's going to foot the bill now then ?

    Seriously, what do /. editors get paid and where do I apply?

  32. All of MP3 heals? by blueZ3 · · Score: 1

    I didn't know it was hurt. It's good to know that they're doing better now. I suppose this is due to that vaunted Russian healthcare system, which is not only healing citizens who can afford to pay, but is now healing companies that are suffering persecution in the West.

    I'm so glad this didn't come on the heels of some other bad news.

    --
    Interested in a Flash-based MAME front end? Visit mame.danzbb.com
  33. Support artists, not thieves by davido42 · · Score: 0

    What you should understand, in case you don't already, is that allofmp3 does NOT pay royalties to the artists, depsite claims to the contrary. DRM is going to eventually lose the audio war, but in the meantime we have to deal with this shit. As a musician, people claiming that "media belongs to the people" or whatever is just ignorance on parade. The artist (or whomever they have signed away their ownership rights to..) is the owner of the music. The whole system is fucked, so people justify ripping off the corporation, which in turn rips off the artist (who is already being ripped off by the corporation). The future will be better for the artists. http://www.bitworksmusic.com/

    --

    BitWorksMusic.com -- odd tunes for odd times

    1. Re:Support artists, not thieves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AllOfMP3 pays royalties to the appropriate agency (ROMS). RIAA and etc. refuse to cooperate with ROMS.

      End of story. No spin, please.

    2. Re:Support artists, not thieves by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I quite agree with you, except for one thing. The labels can only rip off the artist because the labels and the oh so evil RIAA are the only organisations who can still get the artists money in a world of unrestricted copying. Without the legal firepower of the music industry, Joe Artist would get nothing from digital distribution.

    3. Re:Support artists, not thieves by krell · · Score: 1

      "The whole system is fucked, so people justify ripping off the corporation, which in turn rips off the artist (who is already being ripped off by the corporation). The future will be better for the artists"

      Only possibly, only some of the time. What is a rip-off? The loss of something, right? Well, if someone downloads an MP3 from Allofmp3.com that they would otherwise never purchase otherwise (due to the price difference and high-quality DRM-free product that Allofmp3.com offers), then there is no loss to the corporation OR artist, and thus no rip-off. Such downloads are a significant percentage of music downloads, right?

      --
      Where were you when the voynix came?
    4. Re:Support artists, not thieves by Achromatic1978 · · Score: 1
      It pays royalties based on a knowingly deceptive "interpretation" of their works. They claim to be "broadcasting" an online radio service, which if you've bought anything from AllOfMp3, you'll know absolutely isn't remotely the case. The reason the RIAA refuses to cooperate is so as to not be seen to be accepting of this interpretation.

      No spin, please.

      Your spin was pretty damn obvious.

  34. What about ICANN? by javilon · · Score: 1

    I am surprised that ICANN hasn't removed their DNS entry like they are about to do for spamhaus.com. I am sure they can be sued in the USA for copyright infringement.

    --


    When his defense asked, "Which computer has Jon Johansen trespassed upon?" the answer was: "His own."
    1. Re:What about ICANN? by muuh-gnu · · Score: 1

      > I am sure they can be sued in the USA for copyright infringement.

      They cant. Allofmp3 does neither operate in the US nor do they have offices in the US which could be bound to US law. And they also dont do anything which would be illegal under russian law. Theyre simply some russians running a company in russia. Why should they care if some people from overseas click around on their website? Would you care if some iranians tried to purchase access to a US porn site?

      Of course, you can be sued in the US for anything you do anywhere on this planet (or, in future, in the space) an american citizen or company doesnt like, but lets forget that for a minute.

  35. My $0.02 by MyLoveIsAJoke · · Score: 5, Insightful

    allofmp3.com = Beautiful business model. If it is truly not legitimate, this should be a cue for a ligit company to start up stateside using a similar model. RIAA = Epitome of how an organization should not be run for 3 reasons. #1 is they screw over thier cash cows (the "artists"). #2 it screws over its buyers (us). #3 Thier suckyness is impacting the health of thier business, and will eventually, although it'll take a while and require alot of kicking and screaming, they will fail. Had they created a site like allofmp3.com in 1996 when I began using electronic copies of music...they could have saved themselves. iTunes sucks. Plain and simple. iTunes doesn't carry much of anything I listen to, its DRM is a pain in the balls, and $0.99 is too much to pay for a track with the fraction of the overhead of a record (conventional)store. That is all I have to say.

    1. Re:My $0.02 by nomadic · · Score: 1

      allofmp3.com = Beautiful business model. If it is truly not legitimate, this should be a cue for a ligit company to start up stateside using a similar model.

      This is a horrible business model if you're a music company; selling your product for next to nothing doesn't really help the bottom line.

  36. What right does Visa have to make this decision? by Rix · · Score: 0

    I think this goes to show that far to much power has been allowed to fall into private hands. Visa has essentially become a currency, and it should be run by a non profit organization.

  37. They died when they sold my email to porn spammers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I had an allofmp3.com account, created earlier this year. I also own my internet domain, so I can create a unique email address for every web account. In this case, my email was the unimaginative "allofmp3@mydomain.com".

    Because of concern over "pending Russian legislation" that was supposed to take effect in September, I used the last of the funds in my account in August. I have been waiting to see what happens before I do anything further.

    Three weeks ago, I began receiving porn spam at allofmp3@mydomain.com. In eight years running my own domain and giving out custom email addresses, this is the first time I've actually received spam targeted directly at one of those addresses.

    I've very glad I used a throwaway credit card number when I originally loaded the account. Anyone that will associate with porn spammers deserves to die a horrible, flaming death no matter how nice their service used to be.

    ----
    These are two of the 18 messages received yesterday. I've gotten 5 so far today. Spam Assassin caught and marked both of these, but missed several of them, too. Spam Vault caught them all since I've blocked the recipient address.

    ===SpamVault: Header contains [allofmp3@mydomain.com]
    Recipient: allofmp3@mydomain.com
    From tedrick@scientist.com Wed Oct 18 07:06:53 2006
    > Subject: *****SPAM***** Produce Stronger, Rock Hard E re cti ons.
    Folder: /dev/null 4065

    ===SpamVault: Header contains [allofmp3@mydomain.com]
    Recipient: allofmp3@mydomain.com
    From abw123456789tfiq@hotmail.com Wed Oct 18 18:36:41 2006
    > Subject: *****SPAM***** Crazy babe gets laid by her nasty dad
    Folder: /dev/null 3255

  38. Bah, just use Mastercard by Hoi+Polloi · · Score: 1

    They have a new ad slogan:

    "Mastercard, it is everywhere the law is gray."

    --
    It is by the juice of the coffee bean that thoughts acquire speed, the teeth acquire stains. The stains become a warning
  39. Re:What right does Visa have to make this decision by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Visa is a business, and it's your choice to use them or not.
    I don't use Visa, although I have such a card. I will only use Visa in emergencies.
    My choice is to pay them 20 euros a year for the service. That is my choice.

    What is your choice, support them or not?

    -m10

  40. I'm not sure a US court would agree with the last by blueZ3 · · Score: 1
    sentence you wrote:
    You are buying the music in Russia. Russian law applies.

    Once you bring your purchase into the US, US law applies. For instance, it might be perfectly legal to buy a fully automatic AK-47 in Russia (I suspect not, but it makes a simple example) , but importing such a weapon into the US would require jumping through numerous hoops. Indeed, unless you're a registered firearms collector or have the appropriate license, owning such a firearm would be against the law and you could expect the government to take action against you. The fact that you bought the item in Russia doesn't necessarily mean that Russian law applies.

    I'm not a lawyer, but I believe that the AllOfMp3 site violates the spirit, if not the letter, of international copyright law. However, I agree that the law seems to say that distribution, not use, is the problem. That being the case, you're correct that the user isn't breaking the law. It's just a convenient way for AllOfMp3 to shift the blame: "We told them not to download music if they are in a country where this is illegal. We can't be responsible if US or EU users are downloading content that they shouldn't."

    --
    Interested in a Flash-based MAME front end? Visit mame.danzbb.com
  41. On the heals of allofmp3.com's press conference by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Heels

  42. In totally unrelated news... by Lewrker · · Score: 1, Insightful

    several multimedia corporations have recently signed an agreement stating that the only available form of payment in their soon-to-be-opened electronic music stores will be Visa credit cards.

  43. Delays in reporting news by unk1911 · · Score: 1

    Is it just me or do other people notice that /. is late by about a day or sometimes more in reporting news stories. In the case of this story, I read about it yesterday on the New York Times... There were other times when I would read something in the WSJ and see it on Slashdot two days later. Makes a feller question certain things..

    --
    http://unk1911.blogspost.com/

  44. Speaking of.... by Cr33pybusguy · · Score: 1

    beaver pelts will they take Canadian Tire money?

    --
    Hee Hee The drinking bird does all the work!
  45. Re:I'm not sure a US court would agree with the la by Pofy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    >Once you bring your purchase into the US, US law applies.

    Yes, but please tell what specific law you have in mind, there really is none.

    >The fact that you bought the item in Russia doesn't necessarily
    >mean that Russian law applies.

    The purchase is done under Russian law if done in Russia. That is allofmp3's responsability. If a person then wants to use what they buy there to break the law in another country is that persons responsability. In the case in question, there is no such law violation though since it is perfectly legal to brgin a copy of a song or music into USA from other countries.

    >I'm not a lawyer, but I believe that the AllOfMp3 site violates
    >the spirit, if not the letter, of international copyright law.

    What spirit? Are you claiming that there is a spirit that says any product with a work protected by copyright can not be moved from one country to another? I suppose someone should tell that to all the stores on international airports selling music CDs. For the record, no, there is no such restriction or anything at all about such restrictions in copyright laws, treaties or that like.

    >That being the case, you're correct that the user isn't breaking the law. It's just a
    >convenient way for AllOfMp3 to shift the blame:

    So allofmp3 is not breaking the law and the buyer is not breaking the law, who is and what law?

    >We can't be responsible if US or EU users are downloading content that they shouldn't.

    What do you mean "shouldn't"? Either there is some law making it illegal or there is not. It happens to exist no such law.

  46. No "add to balance" method available by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I just checked my allofmp3.com account and there is no way to add to my balance -- CC isn't available and the xrost/kash/... methods available just yesterday are nowhere to be found ... sigh....

  47. Re:I'm not sure a US court would agree with the la by hughk · · Score: 1

    Actually proper firearms are very much restricted in Russia. Often, guards are reduced to using gas-guns to get over the issues with getting a hand-gun permit. The guards you see with hand-guns are usually moonlighting security-forces/military. Unfortunately, there is a very active black market in weapons so theoretically banned weapons such as automatics are easy to obtain there. I can't see a black market weapon's dealer taking anything other than dollars, cash.

    --
    See my journal, I write things there
  48. Re:What right does Visa have to make this decision by keith6689 · · Score: 1

    Visa IS a non-profit company.

  49. visa is a private company by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They, like all private companies in the United States which are not considered public service companies, reserve the right to refuse service to anybody for any reason.

    1. Re:visa is a private company by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      They, like all private companies in the United States which are not considered public service companies, reserve the right to refuse service to anybody for any reason.
      Which is what allows MasterCard to have that "No Niggers" clause, I guess.
  50. Rights depend on laws by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    What right does Visa have to make this decision?

    Actually that really depends on the laws of Russia. In the US AllOfMP3 might well be able to sue and demand service... but then again possibly not, I'm not sure there are laws that compell you to deliver service outside of things like anti-discrimination acts.

    It will be interesting to see what Mastercard does.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  51. Who cares? by Weaselmancer · · Score: 1

    The artist (or whomever they have signed away their ownership rights to..) is the owner of the music. The whole system is fucked, so people justify ripping off the corporation, which in turn rips off the artist

    If you, as a musician, are willing to do business with people who you admit are ripping you off right at the get-go, I have no sympathy for you. Give these goons fifteen bucks so you can get your dime? Not a chance in hell.

    --
    Weaselmancer
    rediculous.
    1. Re:Who cares? by davido42 · · Score: 0
      If you, as a musician, are willing to do business with people who you admit are ripping you off right at the get-go, I have no sympathy for you. Give these goons fifteen bucks so you can get your dime? Not a chance in hell.

      Well, for me personally, I don't have the talent (or more accurately, no desire to make my family starve) to do music professionally, but for those who are professional(tm), what choice do they have? Either they go indie, which is becoming more and more feasible and popular, or they sign with a major should they be so "lucky". The definition of "lucky" is left as an exercise for the reader...

      --

      BitWorksMusic.com -- odd tunes for odd times

  52. Re:What right does Visa have to make this decision by smbarbour · · Score: 1

    Actually Visa is a consortium of banks and other financial institutions that, in the interest of enticing merchants to accept the card, issues cards that will be accepted by anyone that agrees to accept Visa as a form of payment. MasterCard functions in the same way as do the variety of debit networks (Star, Maestro (owned by MasterCard), MAC, Pulse, Shazam, Interlink, etc.)

    Visa's structure is actually not unlike the MPAA or RIAA.

  53. redundant by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you see a word misspelled on Slashdot you can bet that someone else has already commented on it, such as in this case. It only takes a couple seconds to confirm this by searching the comment page for the misspelled word. Yet you mock Slashdot for not taking the time to spellcheck.

    Furthermore, spelling is so arbitrary it's insane. The only rule that is adhered to is that rules for spelling are merely suggestions. I'm quite sure that in this case heals instead of heels didn't cause anyone any confusion. What with the half hazard way the spellings of words are arrived at, any time mass confusion does not ensue I consider it a success.

    1. Re:redundant by Builder · · Score: 1

      Oh, I knew someone else had spotted it. But no-one had used my awful pun :)

  54. not for long by novus+ordo · · Score: 1
    Hmm
    NEW YORK, Oct 11 (Reuters) - Visa, the world's largest credit card payment system, said on Wednesday that it plans a series of restructuring moves that will ultimately result in the sale of shares through an initial public offering.
    Nothing like great PR to move the prices up...
    --
    "You're everywhere. You're omnivorous."
    1. Re:not for long by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Publicly owned companies are still private entities.

      They just are controlled by a board of directors.

    2. Re:not for long by novus+ordo · · Score: 1

      And, umm shareholders? I'm sure buying half their IPO will give me some say. Otherwise flooding the market with their shares is likely to cause some panic and change their opinion. Now to think of it...RIAA doesn't have such cash at hand...wait a minute!

      --
      "You're everywhere. You're omnivorous."
    3. Re:not for long by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm sure buying half their IPO will give me some say.

      WHen did this conversation take this turn?

      Perhaphs you confuse publicly owned and public works companies. I can't be sure.

      Either way, the poitn remains the same, it is well within the rights of Visa ro refuse to do business with allofmp3.com

  55. Visa = Hypocrites ??? by pandrijeczko · · Score: 1
    I've never used allofmp3.com and have no problem with people viewing or buying any material of activities performed by consenting adults. But haven't a lot of child pr0n sellers/purchasers been traced through credit card transactions and does Visa take an equivalent moral high ground when it comes to removing it's credit card service from those???

    Just curious...

    --
    Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
    1. Re:Visa = Hypocrites ??? by tehcyder · · Score: 1
      But haven't a lot of child pr0n sellers/purchasers been traced through credit card transactions and does Visa take an equivalent moral high ground when it comes to removing it's credit card service from those???
      I would imagine that credit card companies are strongly encouraged by law enforcement agencies *not* to remove facilites where their presence enables the easy capture of (presumably pretty thick) pedophiles.
      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  56. In Russia by Alchemar · · Score: 1

    Because in Russia you don't own the right to music, the right to music own...

    Wait a minute, that didn't work, when did the US have to start looking up to Russia as an example of freedom and capitolism?

    1. Re:In Russia by antispam_ben · · Score: 1

      Wait a minute, that didn't work, when did the US have to start looking up to Russia as an example of freedom and capitolism?

      And spelling, too.

      --
      Tag lost or not installed.
    2. Re:In Russia by tehcyder · · Score: 1
      Wait a minute, that didn't work, when did the US have to start looking up to Russia as an example of freedom and capitolism?

      And spelling, too.

      I think Capitolism is quite a good neologism to describe the way the US is run. Oh, and freedom and capitalism are not synonymous to everyone, heretical though that may sound to Americans.
      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  57. What thieves are being supported? by krell · · Score: 1

    "Support artists, not thieves"

    Hmmmm? Where is there any theft in the Allofmp3's operations?

    --
    Where were you when the voynix came?
    1. Re:What thieves are being supported? by ZPWeeks · · Score: 1

      Artists (or, more important to the RIAA, the artists' labels) aren't seeing money from AllofMP3. If they are, they're getting $ through ROMS, and that most definitely isn't a per-copy royalty like iTunes is.

      Personally, I don't care if the labels are missing out on their money. They are big profit goons between me and the artists I love and want to support. SO... if they're on a big label, I download from AllofMP3, and the band will get money when I go to their shows.
      If they're independent, I'll actually buy their album in the US. They get a much larger cut.

      I can't wait until the music labels fade and independent artists have more exposure. It's coming, boys, it's coming real soon.

    2. Re:What thieves are being supported? by krell · · Score: 1

      "Artists (or, more important to the RIAA, the artists' labels) aren't seeing money from AllofMP3"

      How does this equate to "theft"? The kids who sneak in under the big top to see the circus for free are not thieves (even if they are trespassers).

      --
      Where were you when the voynix came?
    3. Re:What thieves are being supported? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Try that argument in court, see how far you get with it.

    4. Re:What thieves are being supported? by krell · · Score: 1

      I'm sure I'd win, very easily. No judge or lawyer could pass the bar with a misconception that confuses "theft" with "trespassing". I am guessing you might be one of those who thinks that if it is illegal, it must be theft.

      --
      Where were you when the voynix came?
  58. Vista cuts off allofmp3.com by EXrider · · Score: 1

    Oh Visa... like the credit card company. I read it as Vista, as in the next version of Windows... I was thinking, oh wow, who cares, big suprise, etc.

    --
    grep -iw skynet /etc/services
  59. visa = vista? by krell · · Score: 1

    "I read it as Vista, as in the next version of Windows"

    Cue advert: "Vista. It's everywhere you want to be". Fade into still shot of Gates Borg.

    --
    Where were you when the voynix came?
    1. Re:visa = vista? by Beardo+the+Bearded · · Score: 1

      Or:

      "Vista: We know everywhere you want to be."

      --

      ---
      ECHELON is a government program to find words like bomb, jihad, plutonium, assassinate, and anarchy.
  60. Jeez by SkaOMatic · · Score: 1

    A couple months ago it was VISA only, MC not accepted. Now MC works but VISA doesn't? Trouble in quasi-legal paradise.

    I'll have to find a new source for my pre-paid "gift" cards. I've been ordering prepaid VISAs that allow online/catalog ordering for a small handling fee as I don't want to send my real CC data overseas. Worth a little peace of mind, IMO.

  61. heals by quonsar · · Score: 1

    it's "on the heels", you nitwit.

  62. Troubling... by novus+ordo · · Score: 1

    Why is VISA enforcing laws?

    --
    "You're everywhere. You're omnivorous."
    1. Re:Troubling... by /dev/trash · · Score: 1

      Wha good is a company if they can't operate?

    2. Re:Troubling... by Achromatic1978 · · Score: 1
      Huh? They're not enforcing anything. They're making a choice, as a business, not to do business with another company.

      No different from you going into a computer store, looking to buy a particular brand computer, and they've decided not to stock that brand, due to problems they perceive. Go to another store. Buy your music elsewhere, somewhere that accepts Visa.

    3. Re:Troubling... by Cederic · · Score: 1


      Financial prudence.

  63. I can stand the commercials... by hummassa · · Score: 1

    it's the horrible music that I can't stand!!!
    I don't even have a car radio on my car, but when I'm using the wife's car, I tune to the news stations.

    --
    It's better to be the foot on the boot than the face on the pavement. ~~ tkx Kadin2048
  64. Sodomy: The Official Sport of Republican Congress by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    *ahemcough*Sodomy is no longer illegal anywhere in the states.*cough*


    If it was, the Republican Congresscreeps would change the law to make in retroactively legal in order to avoid prosecution, since they bugger everything and everyone they touch.
  65. Selective quoting by Mr_Silver · · Score: 1
    For those who don't want to (or can't) buy allofmp3's DRM-free music, they are providing DRM-laden music that can be played only within a restricted player provided by the website

    You forgot to mention that the although the latter music option is DRM'ed and needs their own player - it is free. Gratis. Nado. Nothing. Zilch. Thats right, you pay nothing for the music.

    Which suddenly makes it a lot more appealing.

    --
    Avantslash - View Slashdot cleanly on your mobile phone.
  66. Re:They died when they sold my email to porn spamm by senatorpjt · · Score: 1

    I'm curious to know the date of when your spam started (Mine started Sept. 26), and whether you used Chronopay (I started getting them a few days after using it). Otherwise, I had the account for quite some time before receiving any spam.

  67. RIAA should subpoena list of people from visa by philipgar · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    I think it would be fitting if the RIAA got a subpoena issued against VISA to give a listing of everyone who has purchased music from allofmp3.com and than sued them. While I'm normally not a supporter of those harsh tactics, I'm sick of everyone talking about allofmp3 as if it were a great thing. It's illegal, and unlike normal filesharing, you're making some russian mafia rich while you steal other people's music. I think it would be within their rights to do this, and possibly easier to track who purchased these songs then it is to go after other online music pirates. A real quick way to get a listing of thousands of people who have been directly stealing from them.

    Sounds fitting to me.

    Phil

    1. Re:RIAA should subpoena list of people from visa by freedom_india · · Score: 1
      VISA does not have the list of music lovers or any such record.

      It is the issuers who have it.

      VISA network is used to validate and propgate any Hot Card files: that is all. All banks: StanChart, Bank Am upload their daily Hot Card lists to VISA network which is then propagated by VISA to all its millions of partners.

      It is like asking an individual McDonalds to give a list of convicted child rapists who ordered Big Mac. Max Mac can give is number of Big Macs ordered.

      --
      "Doing what i can, with what i have." ~ Burt Gummer
    2. Re:RIAA should subpoena list of people from visa by digitallife · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Please share with us the laws which make allofmp3.com illegal.
      Thankyou

    3. Re:RIAA should subpoena list of people from visa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Either the Russian mafia or the RIAA.

    4. Re:RIAA should subpoena list of people from visa by Rashkae · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What exactly would they sue allofmp3 Customers for??? The most they can do is demand that all files purchased from allofmp3.com be deleted. Unless they also have some kind of proof that the buyer has been copying the files to other people, there is no grounds for civil damage.

    5. Re:RIAA should subpoena list of people from visa by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Title 17 of the United States Code, you numbskull.

      Why do we have to go over this every fucking time allofmp3 comes up?

    6. Re:RIAA should subpoena list of people from visa by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      AllofMP3.com is located in Russia you idiot. US laws don't apply to other countries.

    7. Re:RIAA should subpoena list of people from visa by digitallife · · Score: 1

      Would you be so kind as to explain how American copyright law specifically makes allofmp3.com, a company working entirely out of Russia, illegal?
      Thankyou

    8. Re:RIAA should subpoena list of people from visa by philipgar · · Score: 1

      Did I say that american copyright law makes allofmp3.com illegal (I don't know the answer to that personally)? What is illegal is when you personally download a song from allofmp3.com.

      I just find it amusing how everyone swarms on this issue. I make one little joke about the RIAA suing users of a service that people in the USA can't legally use, and everyone jumps on me. Downloading a song from allofmp3.com is no different than if you were downloading a song off kazaa (or whatever filesharing people use now) when the person uploading the song to you is located in russia. Just because something might be legal in another country does not make it legal here.

      Phil

    9. Re:RIAA should subpoena list of people from visa by digitallife · · Score: 1

      I don't know if you said copyright law makes allofmp3.com illegal, but the anonymous reply to the question of how allofmp3.com is illegal was title 17, which is copyright law. I agree that downloading a song from allofmp2.com is similar to downloading one through Kazaa. You may note, however, that downloaders do not get sued for using Kazaa, uploaders do. Therefore, if I were to download a song from someone in Russia via Kazaa, RIAA suing precedence suggests there would be no legal consequence.

      What I'm more interested in, is how you interpret copyright law to make the claim that downloading songs is illegal.

    10. Re:RIAA should subpoena list of people from visa by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 1

      They would sue them for copyright infringement. And they would be able to have the files deleted, get a judgment for as much as $150,000 per work infringed (which could easily get up into the hundreds of millions for a typical downloader), and, with a bit of luck, get the defendant to have to pay the lawyer's fees and costs, and if they're very nasty (and a bit luckier still) get his computer equipment destroyed so that he can't use it that way again.

      You should take a look through 17 USC 502-505. There's some fun stuff in there.

      As for grounds for a civil action, that's 17 USC 501 and 106(1). Pretty open and shut, too, if you can identify the downloader.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    11. Re:RIAA should subpoena list of people from visa by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 1
      That uploaders get sued more than downloaders means nothing. The reason for it is because uploaders are easier to find, and are closer to the 'head of the snake,' making it more advantageous to shut them down. (It's the same reason that they go after the networks as a whole, as in Napster, Grokster, etc.; it'll make things harder for everyone downstream, or at least, that's the theory). In short, it's purely a strategic decision. From a legal perspective, they're easy targets, but too minor to bother with if there's anyone better to go after.

      As for downloading generally, I've been writing the same basic posts enough for one night. I'll just quote from the Utah Lighthouse case, which I find is very clear about the issues involved. It deals with web browsing, but there's no material difference between that and downloading material with a P2P app, or anything else, so far as we're concerned for this discussion.

      The first question, then, is whether those who browse any of the three infringing websites are infringing plaintiff's copyright. Central to this inquiry is whether the persons browsing are merely viewing the Handbook (which is not a copyright infringement), or whether they are making a copy of the Handbook (which is a copyright infringement). See 17 U.S.C. 106.

      "Copy" is defined in the Copyright Act as: "material objects . . . in which a work is fixed by any method now known or later developed, and from which the work can be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or device." 17 U.S.C. 101. "A work is fixed' . . . when its . . . sufficiently permanent or stable to permit it to be perceived, reproduced, or otherwise communicated for a period of more than transitory duration." Id.

      When a person [**10] browses a website, and by so doing displays the Handbook, a copy of the Handbook is made in the computer's random access memory (RAM), to permit viewing of the material. And in making a copy, even a temporary one, the person who browsed infringes the copyright. n5 See MAI Systems Corp. v. Peak Computer, Inc., 991 F.2d 511, 518 (9th Cir. 1993) (holding that when material is transferred to a computer's RAM, copying has occurred; in the absence of ownership of the copyright or express permission by licence, such an act constitutes copyright infringement); Marobie-Fl., Inc. v. National Ass'n of Fire Equip. Distrib., 983 F. Supp. 1167, 1179 (N.D. Ill. 1997) (noting that liability for copyright infringement is with the persons who cause the display or distribution of the infringing material onto their computer); see also Nimmer on Copyright 8.08(A)(1) (stating that the infringing act of copying may occur from "loading the copyrighted material . . . into the computer's random access memory (RAM)"). Additionally, a person making a printout or re-posting a copy of the Handbook on another website would infringe plaintiff's copyright.

      --Footnotes--

      n5 Although this seems harsh, the Copyright Act has provided a safeguard for innocent infringers. Where the infringer "was not aware and had no reason to believe that his or her acts constituted an infringement of copyright, the court in its discretion may reduce the award of statutory damages. . . ." 17 U.S.C. 504(c)(2).

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    12. Re:RIAA should subpoena list of people from visa by Pofy · · Score: 1

      > I agree that downloading a song from allofmp2.com
      > is similar to downloading one through Kazaa.

      (Assuming you meant allofmp3) Rethinking after having written the below text, I think we actually agree on the end result but I still think the details and differences is worth pointing out.

      It is most certainly not similar in most cases since most work on Kazaa is made available unautorized and in an infringing way. On allofmp3 it is made avilable for purchase in a perfectly legal way!

      >You may note, however, that downloaders do not get sued for using Kazaa, uploaders do.

      Well, you can get sued for violating the copyright law, it has nothing to do with if you are an "uploader" or a downloader". Both can get sued. Uploaders can get sued for distribution/making the work available to the public. The downloader can be sued for making a copy in an infriging way. Due to the way it works, it is very hard to spot or catch a downloader while relatively more easu to catch an uploader, so you go for the uploader.

      Downloading from an unauthorizez source on Kazaa is very different from buying from an authorized source though so while one can get you in trouble, the other won't.

    13. Re:RIAA should subpoena list of people from visa by Pofy · · Score: 1

      From your quote of a case:

      >The first question, then, is whether those who browse any of the three infringing websites

      Right there it turns out your example is a quite different one since it assumes the source is infringing to start with. That is not the case with allofmp3, they are not commiting any infringment and buying from them is not buying from an infringing source.

    14. Re:RIAA should subpoena list of people from visa by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 1

      How is that material, though?

      The law does not say that reproduction is only against the law if it is from an unauthorized copy. If I take a legally made book, and print up a thousand copies of it myself, I've broken the law. If I sell them, I've broken another law. If the buyers make more copies of those, they've broken the law because what is illegal is making copies, not making copies with a certain history. Their making copies is exactly the same offense as when I made copies earlier.

      Go ahead and delude yourself -- you obviously can't be talked out of it. But at least shut up so that you don't trick other people. They should know the facts before they do whatever they want to do.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
    15. Re:RIAA should subpoena list of people from visa by Pofy · · Score: 1

      >If I take a legally made book, and print up a
      >thousand copies of it myself, I've broken the law.

      Not nessecarilly, if you can apply any of the exceptions to the exclusive rights it might not be so. It can depend on how you copy, what you do with them and even how many (so a thousand might be infrigning, while 10 might not) and so on. So no, you might not have broken the law.

      >If I sell them, I've broken another law.

      Most likely, since for example, you would have a much harder time to claim fair use due to the comercial nature of it and how it affect others.

      >If the buyers make more copies of those, they've broken
      >the law because what is illegal is making copies,

      No, it is not certain they have broken the law, see above for the very same reason it might not have been so for you to start with.

  68. Re:What right does Visa have to make this decision by hughk · · Score: 1

    I understand that Visa may be listing soon which would end its non-profit status. MC is already a listed company.

    --
    See my journal, I write things there
  69. e-gold by Arthur+B. · · Score: 1

    Will they take e-gold?
    (eheh don't temper with freedom)

    --
    \u262D = \u5350
  70. False by RKBA · · Score: 1

    False. Guns banned in California are readily available in Russia:
    http://ron.dotson.net/guns/sb23-russia.htm

    1. Re:False by hughk · · Score: 1
      Not according to someone that I know there who hunts. Weapons may be available (and exportable) but the license isn't. The biggest exception is if you are linked to the military/security forces where you can obtain your own weapons (for example, as happens with the contract soldiers in Chechnya, who are well paid and use some of that on better equipment).

      OTOH, you may be able to bribe your way into getting a license.

      --
      See my journal, I write things there
  71. So... VIAGRA? by geobeck · · Score: 1

    ...Visa International Service Association ("VISA")...

    So... VISA Is A Goddamn Recursive Algorithm?

    --
    Find environmentally and socially responsible products on http://buy-right.net
    1. Re:So... VIAGRA? by Afrosheen · · Score: 1

      No but it seems to be a recursive acronym. :)

    2. Re:So... VIAGRA? by geobeck · · Score: 1

      No but it seems to be a recursive acronym. :)

      Damn. Note to self: Get sufficient sleep before posting.

      --
      Find environmentally and socially responsible products on http://buy-right.net
  72. give me a break by wardk · · Score: 1

    How is mom and pop consumer to know what retail websites are legit and which are supporting some illegal venture?

    a store is a store is a store to joe consumer. and it was taking VISA and MC.

    also, this site has not been proven to be illegitimate via the courts, right now it's he said, she said and global politics

    Just saying something is illegal and submitting a lawsuit does not make it so

    1. Re:give me a break by SQFreak · · Score: 1

      That's right. Two more things:

      1) What about those US citizens who've been to Russia? The RIAA would have no ability to claim that the transactions took place in the United States, and US citizens, when in Russia, should US and Russian law be contradictory, should obey Russian law. It seems that then the import would be the only illegal act, in which case, the worst thing that the government could do would be to file smuggling charges against you. But then Customs would have to inspect your computer upon arrival in the US, as any other search would violate the Fourth Amendment. If they don't...is there a law against possessing smuggled goods? And do files really count as goods?

      2) In Russia, piracy is big business. When I was in St. Petersburg, there were multiple stores on Nevskii Prospekt (think Oxford Street, London) called "Pyatsot Pyat" or "Five Hundred Five." (See http://www.505.ru/.) Basically all these stores sell are pirated movies, CDs, and software. One could buy upwards of USD1000 in software (say, Adobe Creative Suite 2 Premium) for about RUR200 (~USD8) and charge it to a US-based Visa card. One could buy a CD for as low as RUR100 (~USD4). And these are full quality CDs with album art, looking just like originals. They're not burned copies; they're pressed. One could use an in-house CD player to preview the CDs, or use an in-house DVD player and TV to preview the DVDs. (Sidenote: Because of stores like these, and huge markets in Moscow like Gorbushkin Dvor (http://www.gorbushkin.ru/), AllOfMp3 is only competitive in Russia.) Visa takes no action against these retailers, who, if I may say, commit far more egregious copyright offenses. It's just political pressure. If they really thought they'd get sued for processing transactions for illegal goods, why don't they cut off places that sell illegal software, since the BSA has no qualms coming down hard on businesses for illegal software? Why don't they cut off gomusic.ru (formerly mp3search.ru)? AllOfMp3 is the new Napster, the new KaZaA. Politics wants a scapegoat for IP offenses. AllOfMp3 is probably more capable of mounting a fight than the other two as Napster was based in the US where the laws existed and KaZaA was based in Australia where the laws can be more draconian that the US ones and the Australian government has no problem bowing to US demands. A Russian company may not cave, and the Russian government will only cave Putin decides they should.

    2. Re:give me a break by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 1

      How is mom and pop consumer to know what retail websites are legit and which are supporting some illegal venture?

      That's their problem. US copyright law doesn't care whether they thought they were acting legally or not. It is pretty harsh in that respect.

      also, this site has not been proven to be illegitimate via the courts

      Of course, we can all read the writing on the wall. Except for those people like yourself, who are keeping their eyes closed, as if that would help.

      --
      -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
  73. XROST still working by Apparissus · · Score: 1

    Contrary to a previous post, I just reloaded my Alltunes account via an XROST card, purchased via Click&Buy with my Visa debit. Throw a couple of $20's at Alltunes and your music acquisitions will be safe for a while, anyway.

    1. Re:XROST still working by SQFreak · · Score: 1

      I can't find a button for XROST on the site. In English, I only get the option for credit card. In Russian, I see credit or debit card, Yandex.Dengi (Yandex.Money), and allPay cards. Got a link to the XROST option?

    2. Re:XROST still working by Apparissus · · Score: 1

      Sorry for the delay. Try alltunes.com instead of allofmp3 (same people, your same account). They have the XROST and other links there.

  74. Visa - it's not everywhere you want to be... by Hap76 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Isn't their tagline "it's everywhere you want to be"...except what they think might be illegal, or wrong, or immoral....

    If you want to make brand money as a cash replacement (which I assume is what their money cards are attempting to do), then you have to be a open carrier (allowing the end users to deal with the legal responsibility of their use of money). Once Visa picks and chooses what uses of their currency to allow, I have no way to know what the value of their currency is (because I don't know what I can do with it), and there's less point to using it over using cash (potential safety is helpful, but like a gift card, limitation in usage is a significant loss in value).

    By announcing this loudly, they're telling their cash card holders that what they're holding isn't really cash, though Visa wishes to sell it as such. Maybe Visa's users will get the message.

    1. Re:Visa - it's not everywhere you want to be... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's everywhere we want you to be.

    2. Re:Visa - it's not everywhere you want to be... by tehcyder · · Score: 1
      except what they think might be illegal, or wrong, or immoral
      So you're criticising Visa for having ethical business policies?

      I'm confused.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  75. alltunes is also shut off by WebHostingGuy · · Score: 3, Informative

    According to MSNBC alltunes was shut off Oct 1 already by Visa; they are not that stupid, yet. (And no, mastercard does not work either).

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15323093/

    --
    Quality Hosting e3 Servers
  76. What does the artist get? by fritsd · · Score: 1

    What I would really like to know, is if there are any Real Artists (TM) now reading slashdot, if you could please state how much of your royalties you get from allofmp3.com and how much from, say, itunes? (I hope for you that you get royalties for your music).

    --
    To be, or not to be: isn't that quite logical, Slashdot Beta?
  77. Ha ha! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My mod points expired earlier, I'm so sorry.

  78. Personally by transporter_ii · · Score: 1

    I'm against that idea.

    Transporter_ii

    --
    Doctors destroy health, lawyers destroy justice, universities destroy knowledge, religion destroys spirituality
  79. Where? by Grendel+Drago · · Score: 1

    I can't find links to the free DRM-enabled downloads, only to the regular pay-downloads. A little help here?

    --
    Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
  80. Re:I'm not sure a US court would agree with the la by TBone · · Score: 1
    For instance, it might be perfectly legal to buy a fully automatic AK-47 in Russia (I suspect not, but it makes a simple example) , but importing such a weapon into the US would require jumping through numerous hoops.

    An AK-47 isn't legal in the U.S. Digital music is legal in the U.S., despite RIAA's attempts to limit the channels through which they feel you should be allowed to purchase it through. No one is going to label you a felon for having an MP3 file. This is such an overextreme and bad comparison.

    The current loophole works around that situation. It's legal to buy it in this method in Russia, and it's legal to own it in the U.S. (ok, technically you're supposed to pay duty tarriffs when you import things you personally buy, but that's an aside, the act of owning it is legal). It's legal to purchase such things overseas and import them to the US for your own use. There is technically no legal block here for disallowing AllOfMP#, other then the legal block that RIAA wants your Congresspeople to believe, that anyone who has non-endorsed digital audio files must have stolen them, and therefore is a felon.

    --

    This space for rent. Call 1-800-STEAK4U

  81. Re:I'm not sure a US court would agree with the la by stuuf · · Score: 1

    I think you miss the point with your analogy. The reason you can't import automatic firearms is because you also can't buy them here. Buying music from AllOfMp3 while in Russia is assumed to be legal, as would be buying music in a similar fashion from a US merchant. AllOfMp3's critics are claiming that importing it is illegal, although the purchase itself would be legal in this country. With firearms, you're being restricted from having something that you wouldn't be allowed to have anyway, but in this case you're importing something you could legally buy here anyway.

    --

    Everyone is born right-handed; only the greatest overcome it

  82. Read it as: "Vista" Cuts Off AllOfMp3.com by suggsjc · · Score: 1

    I was wondering what M$ had done to keep people from going to AllOfMp3.com

    --
    When I have a kid, I want to put him in one of those strollers for twins and then run around the mall looking frantic.
  83. Disposable credit cards? by Grendel+Drago · · Score: 1

    Where can you score one of those? It'd be the advantages of cash. Pretty sweet.

    --
    Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
  84. they seem to have removed 'explorer' ! by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

    there was a windows program 'all of mp3 explorer' which was a downloader for their service. I was running it and still am. it mostly works ok and shows you a set of 'meters' like the old kazaa did.

    I wanted to see if there was a newer version since I'm getting some download errors (socket errors, windows errors, etc). nowhere on their site could I find a link to the current version or even an older one!

    the one I have still mostly works but its very curious how the software is mentioned but not around anymore..

    I may have to refill my balance a few more times and 'get while the gettin is still good'. I fear this service may be shut down shortly ;( ;(

    --

    --
    "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
    1. Re:they seem to have removed 'explorer' ! by josgeluk · · Score: 0

      There is a link to "Allofmp3 Explorer" on the home page, at the bottom in the "Help" section.

    2. Re:they seem to have removed 'explorer' ! by TheGratefulNet · · Score: 1

      I don't see any EXE there. if you can provide a link that would be great, but I see the help section and text TALKING about it but no link TO the download OF the program.

      the program is gone. I looked and looked. they talk about it but I'm pretty sure the actual executable is gone.

      perhaps they're re-working it for this new free service ;(

      I want no part of the 'ad sponsored' crap. they say you have to be ON the net to listen to music. what the hell kind of freedom is THAT??

      --

      --
      "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
  85. Re:What right does Visa have to make this decision by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

    You have to pay to have a Visa card?

    Over here, we get them for free just by having a (free) bank checking account. The ATM/debit card doubles as a VISA card, and purchases are withdrawn directly from your checking account.

  86. Done. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There is a very simple man in the middle attack. MusicForMasses.exe sends unencrypted mp3 data to fmod.dll for decoding and playback. Just create your own fmod.dll and snatch the plaintext.

    All you need is the fmod 3.75 programmers API from http://www.fmod.org/

  87. Hypocrisy by MrSteveSD · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I think you have to be consistent with the application of this mindset. If it's not ok for consumers to shop around for countries with the most convenient laws, then it should not be ok for companies to do the same thing. That means no more situating factories in countries where working hours and conditions would breach your own laws.

  88. Thanks for stealing my music. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm a member of a small band, big enough to be (slightly) profitable, not big enough to hire armies of lawyers. I despise the RIAA as much as most of you. AllOfMP3.com is "hosting" our latest album, selling it for pennies, and not one cent goes back to us. ASCAP can't do anything because they view the Russian royalty societies are viewed as illegal and won't deal with them. I have gotten emails from people telling me about how great this service is, which makes me physically ill.

    So, Russian mafia kingpins profit from my hard work, and everyone cheers? Is iTunes really bringing you all to the brink of poverty?

    1. Re:Thanks for stealing my music. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have you talked to allofmp3.com?

      Have you talked to ROMS directly?

    2. Re:Thanks for stealing my music. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you are a memeber of a small band then you should thank god that you had such an exposure on AllOfMP3.com. If they sell thousands of copies, and you get nothing in terms of money, it still means the band is good and in future you will be well known and start making real money.

      Unfotunately you smell like a troll from ten feet away and prolly are in an amateur band.

  89. So if Kiddie prOn were legal in Russia... by antispam_ben · · Score: 1

    AllofMP3.com is located in Russia you idiot. US laws don't apply to other countries.

    If Kiddie prOn were legal in Russia, you wouldn't have any problem with those in the US downloading it from Russia?

    Just in case there's any doubt, I would.

    --
    Tag lost or not installed.
    1. Re:So if Kiddie prOn were legal in Russia... by Grishnakh · · Score: 1

      Kiddie pr0n is illegal in the USA, so taking it across the border (whether physically or electronically) is illegal, no matter where it came from. This is why they're called "contraband".

      MP3s are not illegal in the USA. It's fully legal to possess MP3s. Music is, however, protected by copyright law which sets limits on how you can copy it. You're not making copies by downloading an MP3 from Russia, you're just buying a product. The Russians are making copies, in Russia; so as long as they're following Russian copyright law, then everything's fine.

    2. Re:So if Kiddie prOn were legal in Russia... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, you are wrong. You are making copies when you download mp3s from Russia. This is bulletproof, well settled law. Every single court in the US agrees this is so. Read the Napster decision or the Utah Lighthouse Ministries case, which are only two of many cases, but two of the best.

      Downloading is copying. Uploading is distributing. Allofmp3 may be free to distribute, but you are not free to copy.

      Also, there is no importation occuring. You can't import transmissions. A copy is a physical object. Read 17 USC 101 for the definition of what a "copy" is.

      So, essentially, you are completely, 100% wrong. I challenge you to defend your point of view, because you can't. What I'm saying is irrefutable. You are so completely, pie in the sky, wishful thinking, I-really-really-want-this-to-be-legal wrong that it's clear you have no idea what you're talking about.

  90. why? by skiter666 · · Score: 0

    why buy mp3's?

    *runs*

  91. On /., YOU report or delay the news by antispam_ben · · Score: 1

    Is it just me or do other people notice that /. is late by about a day or sometimes more in reporting news stories. In the case of this story, I read about it yesterday on the New York Times...

    It's just you.

    Actually, Slashdot doesn't "report" stories, it (or those editor guys) just "approves" or "rejects" them.

    Perhaps you've seen the link at the bottom of every Slashdot page named contribute story. You can write up your own short blurb about a story, include the link to the NYT webpage or wherever, and maybe the ed's will get around to approving it faster than if you wait a day or two for someone else to do it. I've submitted several stories over the years, and even had one or two approved (though that was over a year ago).

    --
    Tag lost or not installed.
  92. Vista by spacemky · · Score: 1

    Holy crap. I read that as Vista cuts off allofmp3.com! Dang Microsoft!

    --
    640YB ought to be enough for anybody.
  93. Lossless DRM? by Spooon69 · · Score: 1

    So is this new DRMed music still available in lossless format? At least my burned CDs and mp3/m4a files I make from them can be created from a good quality source (compared to DRM AAC -> CDs).

  94. Re:They died when they sold my email to porn spamm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I paid using XROST and I have not had any spam at my allofmp3@mydomain.com account..... I think its chronopay (which is scary).

  95. Re:I'm not sure a US court would agree with the la by frickendevil · · Score: 1

    Just to reconfirm what you are saying, you can make your purchase in russia, and transport your goods to whereever you live. That is not illegal. You could break the law if your country forbids music to be stored in mp3 format, but i know of nowhere where this to be true. It could be like buying a sofa in china for a tenth of the cost it is here, then you bring it here. OMG THE SOFA INDUSTRY IS GOING TO GO BONKERS OVER IT :O

  96. Re:I'm not sure a US court would agree with the la by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 1

    It's legal to buy it in this method in Russia, and it's legal to own it in the U.S.

    That's great, but almost no one actually goes to Russia in order to buy it. Instead, they buy it while they're in the US. That the transaction is international doesn't put it under Russian law, it puts it simultaneously under both US and Russian law. Furthermore, copyright law prohibits making copies unlawfully in the US. Since copies are defined as material objects, and you're obviously not downloading actual, tangible hard drives over your connection, you aren't bringing copies (i.e. material objects) into the US. You're making copies in the US by putting the intangible work into material objects that are already here. This is illegal.

    (Also it wouldn't be legal to import actual hard drives of music either since they're considered piratical copies under US law and thus their importation is considered infringing under 17 USC 602(b). They can be confiscated by Customs at the border, if they're on the ball enough to notice for a change. But this is neither here nor there.)

    --
    -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
  97. Re:I'm not sure a US court would agree with the la by anagama · · Score: 1

    That comment is very insightful -- I wish I had mod points -- you desrve them but won't get them for bucking the mp3 party line. It's thought provoking too -- the notion that "downloading" isn't actually a transfer (like water through pipes) but merely a signal from one piece of hardware to a remote system that instructs the remote system to generate a copy. All the metaphors we use for the internet sort of break down against this reality that the copy is actually being made on the system "receiving" the data.

    Sadly, people will continue to take risks and because they want to continue performing that risky activity, will go to great lengths to convince themselves they are safe.

    --
    What changed under Obama? Nothing Good
  98. Re:I'm not sure a US court would agree with the la by cpt+kangarooski · · Score: 1

    Oh, it's not just a notion; courts have really said that downloading is infringing because copying necessarily occurs.

    Sadly, people will continue to take risks and because they want to continue performing that risky activity, will go to great lengths to convince themselves they are safe.

    Meh. If people want to engage in risky activity, that's fine, but they ought to have a clear idea as to the risks, rather than deluding themselves so as to have unfounded confidence.

    --
    -- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
  99. Oblig Soviet Joke by Gryle · · Score: 1

    In Soviet Russia, credit card cancels you!

    --
    Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not entirely sure about the universe - Einstein
  100. The catch by heroine · · Score: 1

    This is a Russian prediction of what Russians are planning to do some day in the future. In other words, it's never going to happen. There's never going to be a shift to ad support or a DRM laden player.

  101. that's what's happening, but it is illegal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    And, to clarify the issue, think of it as people *phoning* a Russian server and listening to recorded music on the phone for a fee. Imagine them recording the sound with an old-fashioned tape recorder. This would break no law in the U.S. or Russia. It's not even a metaphor, it's what we're doing.


    Well, actually, doing what you describe above is in fact breaking the law, for the same reason that it's illegal to download from allofmp3.com. Both are copyright infringement because both are acts of creating a new copy on the US end (making a tape recording, saving a file to disk). In fact, it's about the most clear cut, textbook example of copyright infringement you could have conjured.
  102. spamvertised sites by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If Visa wants to be so proactive, why doesn't it at least try to ban all transactions from the scumbag spamvertised sites that sell you all the goodies touted in the zillions of spam emails? This might do some good at least...

  103. Visa dropped support several months ago by deific · · Score: 1

    I tried refilling my account several months ago and was declined on the payment. I'd used the same card earlier in the year with no problem. So it looked like this happened quietly a bit ago and it isn't until recently that they've decided to make their decision public.

  104. Lets get these out of the way... by htnprm · · Score: 1

    "Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!!!!!!!!"

    And...

    "In Soviet Russia, AllOfMp3.com cuts off Visa" ....My first "In Soviet Russia". Don't think it works though.

  105. Why do you all support this? by assmongler26 · · Score: 1

    I am dismayed by the amount of support I've seen for allofmp3.com . It's disgusting that people will bitch and complain about paying for a legitimate copy of something, but nevertheless will pay cold hard cash to someone who gives absolutely nothing back to the artists. Sure the record companies rip off artists left and right, but at least they pay. I've downloaded mp3s before. I've used Napster. I know what IRC and bittorent are. (I guess thats a given being on slashdot). Hell I even can tell you the names of some prominent hacker groups, as if a google search couldn't reveal this information already. However, I have not once paid for stolen property. Why? Because its Fucking Stupid to pay anything for something that is illegal in the first place. You're flushing your money down the toilet, while your only return is something that could get you in trouble. I'm sorry but I like to get into trouble for free. So whine and bitch the allofmp3.com no longer takes your Visa cause you'er too dumb to find out how to get your illegal downloads for free. And tell an artist he's lucky that his band is getting blatently ripped off. And next week you can all donate to Pirate Bay.

    1. Re:Why do you all support this? by geoffhall · · Score: 1

      Ah, yes well... how much is your time worth? It gets tedious pretty quick trying to find something very specific and to avoid all the rubbish on P2P. Not that I've used allofmp3.com (I find itunes mostly painless), I think the main attraction is the convenience of it all.... a universally accessible source of music (over the web), in a universally portable/playable format with a (mostly) universally accepted form of payment (and cheap, of course).... Sometimes you just want to sample some music to see if you like it,... without wanting to feel ripped off if it really isn't to your taste, and without all the cloak'n'dagger crap.

    2. Re:Why do you all support this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Umm, what's illegal about it?

      Is it legal in Russia to do what they are doing? Yes.
      Is it legal in the US to import any single mp3 file? Yes.

      It may be *immoral*, but that's not the same as illegal. Visa are taking a moral stance, as are you.

      Are you as vocal defending the income of third world laborers as you are about the royalties of famous musicians?

  106. Whoa! by Vadim+Makarov · · Score: 1

    Before, choosing a credit card was like: do you want Pepsi or Cola with that? Same practical result (you get some water into your body), different aestetic preference.

    There actually is a good number of places that sell only one brand of carbonated drinks. But any place that does take a credit card I have seen up to now, always takes both Visa and MasterCard. I have sometimes been wondering what's the difference between the two if every place takes either.

    And now, finally, I have a solid reason to choose between Visa and MasterCard, aesthetic preferences aside (e.g. which name sound better or what logo is prettier). Is this actually the only shop in the world that takes just one of the cards? Or am I unaware of other examples?

    As it happens, I don't have to switch the card brand: I use a MasterCard.

    --
    17779 eligible voters in a district, 17779 'vote' as one. This is Russia.
  107. Incorrect :) by Mondor · · Score: 1

    Incorrect. The mentioned are foul and irrelevant. Jump the shark means that something is not finished yet, but shows a decline in quality. Like, for example, "Santa Barbara" tv-series.

    Russian for "jump the shark" would be something about "second freshness" - there are a lot of jokes about it. Although I can't find the exact synonym for "jump the shark", it is only because my brain is busy with other things. Russian language definitely more rich than English and the only language it can compete with is Chinese.

    However, there is another Russian saying, which can be translated as "For each artful ass a dick with a groove can be found". And this is quite relevant to situation with VISA :) In fact, I think this is the main idea behind the AllOfMP3.com.

  108. Same Here!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Same thing happened to me! I used Chronopay and the porn started on the 26th too! I don't use the account for anything else (created it just for allofMp3).

  109. Ask Visa by Roger+Wernersson · · Score: 1
    --
    temporarily sigless