Alltunes.com Lets Users Download AllofMP3 Songs

Stony Stevenson writes with word that, although AllofMP3.com was shut down by the Russian Government this week, customers from the site who have existing credit can still purchase songs through its downloadable windows desktop and smartphone client, allTunes.com. From the article: "A former AllofMP3.com user, who spoke to Computerworld on the condition of anonymity, purchased songs with his existing credit from the allTunes software client today and experienced no trouble doing so... AllofMP3's six million users will no doubt be delighted they can use their leftover credit to purchase songs, but the site's longevity hangs in the balance. Just days after the Russian Government shut down AllofMP3.com, its sister site, MP3Sparks.com, suffered the same fate."

Comments

Re:I don't get it...

[kebes]

ripping your own CDs is not convenient enough to many people.

You've hit the nail, there. The convenience of digital downloads is the reason people love mp3s from sites like AllofMP3. Some may argue that iTunes provides the same convenience, but for many the DRM is an inconvenience that they don't want to put up with. I think Allofmp3 also showed what the value of convenient access to well-tagged, well-organized content is. They were selling mp3s for money, even though equivalent files are available for free form various P2P networks. Basically there is an unfilled consumer demand here...

Then there is a vocal (on this site) minority of people, who justify "sticking it" to "the system" -- the usual childish claptrap -- who get more and more vocal with every rightful-but-clumsy step by the **AA.

I think you're seriously mis-representing the opinions of copyright reformists. Or rather, you're combining the arguments of the copyright reformists along with the anarchists and along with the "I just want free stuff" crowd. This is not a fair way to represent those groups.

According to them, it is not quite stealing, and therefor is completely justified to produce unlimited copies of somebody else's intellectual property against the owner's will..

I view the widespread civil disobedience of copyright law (whether intentional or incidental) as a very strong indicator that most people unconsciously feel these laws are overly broad in their current form. I'll admit that many people break this law without thinking about it, or even just because they are "too cheap" or whatever. However there is a growing number of people who have carefully studied the arguments on both sides (e.g. Valenti vs. Lessig) and come to the conclusion that copyright in its current form is broken.

Thus, they argue that the "rights" of which you speak are fictitious and illegitimate (or at least overly broad). The "intellectual property" which you refer to is seen as an oxymoron and antithetical to progress and free culture. I won't go into the arguments any further--they have been described in eloquent detail many times on Slashdot.

The extent to which moral disagreement with copyright justifies civil disobedience is debatable. I'll give you that. However your characterization of the copyright reformist ideals as "childish claptrap" is quite unfair.