Comments on: Are Russian music sites legal?

By: Scatterblak

Scatterblak — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 03:45:42 +0000

======================================
These sites are illegal.

I’ve found my music, which I self-produced and self-distribute, on sale on Russian sites. I do not have any contracts for electronic sale (I do not sell mp3s through iTunes, etc.) and I do not receive any money. They stole my music and they sell it.

How the fuck is that legal?
======================================

Wrong. Never confuse unfair with illegal. If there are no laws against someone else coming into possission of a tune you wrote and selling it, then it’s not illegal. A song or a melody isn’t a possession everywhere in the world, and there are plenty of countries where someone could grab your tunes, repackage them and sell them through Russian (or whoever) websites, and not be in violation of any international laws.

Until musicians in general start treating music as a business instead of just as an art, you’ll hear more and more complaining along these lines. The world doesn’t work that way anymore - if you find your tunes for sale on a Russian site (Which I also did - on mp3sale.ru, before it went away), leverage it for marketing. Issue a press release. Use it to generate media interest. In the mean time, keep this in mind — no matter how unfair it seems, no matter how mad you get, the sites simply aren’t illegal. Quit complaining and brush up on international copyright law, and quit just spounting ‘oh, they’re illegal!’ crap on the boards.

By: Gardiner

Gardiner — Fri, 25 Jan 2008 03:06:12 +0000

Most music blows balls which is why so many artists are hurting financially. Take a look at Phish and Grateful Dead. They allowed tapers at each show and never went after any recordings on-line, in fact, they tacitly encouraged it. How is it possible to know that a downloader who obtained a song “illegally” had any intention of buying it in the first place?

By: Pete (UK)

Pete (UK) — Wed, 28 Nov 2007 23:40:31 +0000

I tend to avoid mainstream music and mostly buy ambient and electronic music from small netlabels or direct from the musician. Prices are generally in the region of £3-5 ($6-10) and I pay it gladly and would rather do that than buy from dodgy sites although I have done that for uber rare stuff I can’t find elsewhere. I bought one DRM album from itunes and ripped it to strip out the DRM because I want to play it anywhere and I want to put it on my daughters MP3 player and on mine. I won’t buy from Apple again. Their service is a rip off with prices higher than CD’s delivered from play.com or amazon. How the fuck can that be? The industry ripped the public off for years and are still doing it. Seems they’re not so keen to get fucked in the arse themselves.

By: Xavian

Xavian — Mon, 15 Oct 2007 20:04:19 +0000

The sites are illegal, but it is not illegal for a person from the U.S. to use them.
It is NOT the resposibility of the consumer to pay royalties.
Say you bought a TV from bestbuy, can you be arrested if Bestbuy did not send in the sales tax on your item…NO, not your problem!

By: Noize

Noize — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 19:26:02 +0000

I think the RIAA are suing people for SHARING music, not downloading it.

I don’t know regarding the U.S., but in Canada, it falls under the terms of “private copying” and is perfectly legal since 1998. (Downloading is legal, not sharing).

Here are some details :

The 1998 amendment provided for the payment of a private copying levy to various copyright holders on the sale of “blank audio recording media”, in exchange for the “legalization” of private copying. “Private copying” occurs when individuals copy recorded music for their own personal use. There is no requirement that the source copy be a non-infringing copy. Therefore, the private copying regime applies to all private copying of sound recordings onto audio recording media, regardless of their source. For example, the source copy could be a pre-recorded audiocassette purchased at a music store, a borrowed or stolen CD, or an MP3 downloaded from the Internet.

By: JOE

JOE — Thu, 06 Sep 2007 22:06:13 +0000

GOOD Question JANO, the riaa is sueing people who cant afford to defend themselves. That one lady TONYA or something got her case dismissed w/ prejudice. that meant that she could sue for attorny’s fees or something. any way they paid her attorny’s fees, OVER $68,000!!!! So what happens when they come knocking at Grandma Helga’s house, she doesn’t even own a TV, let alone a computer, no email or ip address, and they say “Listen ya ol’ bitch, we gonna sue your ass for downloadin music. You can settle with us for $3,000 out of court, or we can take it to a judge (of course her attorney will win but it will cost her $68,000).” NOW WHAT?! thats called legalized extortion.

Someone needs to fuck the RIAA in the ass with no jelly. Like how about a young lawyer, who just passed the bar and wants to make a name for himself while he stilll lives at home with mommy and dadddy, takes on a classaction lawsuit against the RIAA. Every 13 year old kid in america sues for intimidation, RICO, and all sorts of shit! BYE BYE RIAA, Helloooo new lawyer with the big name! Almost turns me on.

By: jano

jano — Tue, 14 Aug 2007 22:29:10 +0000

but is it possible to be joined to a russian mp3 site, but then they get sued and they give the user info to riaa, and in turn riaa sues the users?

By: JR

JR — Sun, 03 Jun 2007 06:23:19 +0000

A dollar a song, or anything close, is far too much money to pay for a low bitrate DRM mp3!

When I buy a low quality 128 bitrate mp3 from Itunes, I am not paying for production of a CD or its distribution. I’m not paying for the loss in profit due to theft of the CD or when the CD doesn’t sell and sits on a shelf. I am definitely not paying for anything close to the quality of music that comes from a cda file format. And on top of that I have to deal with a DRM that controls how I use the song on MY computer in the privacy of MY house.

15 cents a song is simply much more reasonable to pay and that is why I go to mp3sale.com. If I truely like a song or an album I go out and buy the CD.

By: Sujith

Sujith — Wed, 18 Apr 2007 22:32:16 +0000

I am not paying 99cents each for a DRM, low quality song. Someone needs to stand up against these music industry giants.. while all you folks debate on legality, you miss the point on who made these rules and who is to gain from it?

I am not paying 99 cents for low quality DRM songs. PERIOD.

By: JD

JD — Sat, 20 Jan 2007 23:33:59 +0000

We can continue to debate this, but the facts are it will become illegal. The law will be changed. Any loopholes in the system will be found and eliminated. Just like anything else in America, like the IRS, you will not cut corners and escape. My question to Americans is why in the hell do you want to piss all your $$ to Russia? Its like buying blood diamonds or illegal animal fur. Our country has a lot of rules and regulations that other countries for a good reason. In China, you can probably burn tires in the front yard. In some countries, you can probably piss in the middle of the street. Does that mean we all should do it? Some of us need to generate a little more common sense.

By: Attic Attack

Attic Attack — Sun, 14 Jan 2007 23:45:55 +0000

This is very interesting but I reached this discussion page because I’m searching for a real alternative to iTunes (which is available in Portugal) and Napster and others (who don’t “operate” in Portugal). The one I have so far as one of the best (at least for alternative music) is http://www.emusic.com Now, I’m sorry but everything that seems too good to be true… usually is and those Russian sites seem like that. As far as I know, emusic is legal and provides track of what you download: the only flaw is that if you have a monthly subscription of 90 downloads per month and you only download 15, you lose the rest. And as far as I know, they pay the artists. So, until I find a real alternative I’ll stick to emusic.

By: Eli

Eli — Fri, 06 Oct 2006 22:42:25 +0000

Which site’s are legal AND moral? (i.e A fair amount of the money actually does go to the people that created it). I think that’s where online music sales will go in the future. Less need for middle men and MORE money going straight to the artists (esspecially the little guys that don’t sign with labels and distribute exclusively online). But this change will only happen if we INSIST on only buying from places that make sure the money is going to the people that deserve it. (Hey, maybe the music will even get better if the artists aren’t wasting time making filler songs to fill an album so they can meet their label’s deadlines. Which will happen if they know we’re only buying the one or two GOOD songs on the album anyway). so? What sites are legal AND moral and can you point me to the pages on those sites that specify where the money goes? Thanks in advance.

By: Kirill

Kirill — Thu, 15 Jun 2006 07:35:54 +0000

First legal on-line music store opened

Good afternoon!

AudioFind.Ru became the first Russian on-line music store to start legal sales. In 31 May, 2006 previously pirate recourse was bought and turned to legal by “Music Online” Ltd.

On the press-conference witch was devoted to opening the portal Patrick Sullivan, vice-president of The Orchard music catalog said that there is nothing to worry about thought. Piracy fighting abroad experience shows that this is an absolutely normal situation when pirate recourses closes or turns to legal one by one. It was about Napster who was among the first who shut down illegal music distribution channel and opened there a legal one.

According to Alexander Olkhovsky, chief of “Music Online” Ltd., the only real chance to end up with piracy is to build a legal alternative. He said that market of on-line music distribution can be valued to $300-400M. AudioFind.Ru is planning to get 10-15% of this market. Though, as Alexander adds, we have already got 100% of legal digital music distribution market share.

On the day of it’s opening, legal AudioFind.Ru offers 100’000 tracks for downloading, nowadays it’s already 160’000 that would grow up to 300’000 to the end of next month and became an 1 million catalog to the end of the year (that is three times as much of any pirat’s catalog and commensurable with top-level foreign services).

The AudioFind.Ru mission – to help creating a civilized society that is truly built on justice and responsible attitude to other’s businesses.

If you are interested in this information, we are ready to give you necessary information for more serious article.

Yours sincerely,
Press-director http://www.audiofind.ru
Kirill Samardakov
Moscow,
+7 495 788 1407

By: Notes from the Basement » Rogues

Notes from the Basement » Rogues — Sat, 03 Jun 2006 20:18:34 +0000

[...] AllofMP3.com has hardly put a dent in Apple’s music download business, despite the occasional free publicity from stories in the Wall Street Journal and New York Times (via its sister paper� IHT). Will this relatively small but highly visible irritant be enough to dash Russia’s hopes for entry into the WTO? Or will ROMS, AllofMP3.com, etc., make the necessary adjustments to satisfy the entertainment industry? Stay iTuned. Tags: mp3, Russia, WTO [...]

By: Svitlana Sweat

Svitlana Sweat — Sun, 30 Apr 2006 21:43:54 +0000

Hello everyone,

I have not been back home for a while and crave to listen to Russian music. Could any of you advice me on good sites I can go to and buy or download, or receive in email Russian songs?

Many thanks,

Svitlana

By: Ded

Ded — Sun, 23 Apr 2006 22:21:30 +0000

I get lots of music, for cheap money. I don’t care. I’d never buy from a Western MP3 site.

By: zu

zu — Sun, 23 Apr 2006 10:58:55 +0000

There’s this whole,sorta meek, ‘what can i get away with’ vibe going on here.Legal grey areas need to be navigated by an individuals’ moral compass.OF COURSE artists & copyright holders are not getting a fucking dime from these sites.I could easily walk into a store and steal a bunch of stuff; it’s my choice if i want to or not-not the fear of getting ‘caught’.I’m sorry but i think a lot of this is about being trifling & CHEAP-like, how much messing about, jumping through hoops, supporting dodgy geezers & screwing artists are you prepared to do to save yourself, like, 20cents?

By: hrmmm...

hrmmm... — Thu, 20 Apr 2006 15:13:09 +0000

there’s a big difference here that you’re not addressing. it is a SERVICE. as the russian law dictates, it is a broadcast license which allofmp3 is working under. therefore, one is paying for a service, and not the content itself. notice allofmp3’s language? the fees are explicitly billed as encoding fees, not as content.

By: grumbling » Does money reach artists?

grumbling » Does money reach artists? — Sat, 08 Apr 2006 16:23:36 +0000

[...] 同記事のコメント欄を見ると同じ疑問を持った人もいる。Can you provide some pointers confirming that money indeed does not reach the artists? I believe that this has been covered a number of times ― a good place to start is here.Hereのリンク先にはこの問題を書面から取り上げた記事が掲載されていて大変参考になるので是非お読み� �きたい。 [...]

By: Chris

Chris — Sat, 08 Apr 2006 16:10:50 +0000

Yes the legality of AllofMp3 has been tested in the Russian High court. It was deemed to be legal under Russiam copyrght law. Under USA import laws it is legal to import digatal goods to America, ie MP3’s, and as such it is legal, in the USA, to buy music from AllofMp3 (and AllTunes) and import it into the USA. This presumes that anything you import (buy) is for private use, and you no not distribute these copyrighted works without permission.

By: Alice

Alice — Wed, 29 Mar 2006 02:11:09 +0000

These 2 comments were found on a UK forum, if 2nd comment is correct it would seem that European’s & probably North Americans are within there rights to download from Russian sites.

Russian sites are legal in Russia, doesn’t mean they are legal in the UK. Actually no-one knows at present (not even the legal community) whether they are legal or not in the UK. It would be better to err on the side of caution on this one in my opinion (that is for the site).

Actually yes it does mean they are legal in the UK, in that music you download is considered legally licensed for personal use, and you cant legally be prevented from purchasing in this way. This is because of the Berne convention as administered by the WIPO, and WTO requirements.

I quote “…any country that is a signatory of the convention is awarded the same rights in all other countries that are signatories to the Convention as they allow their own nationals, as well as any rights granted by the Convention”

The pigopolist record companies dont like it because it cuts them out of the loop - the money paid for licences goes directly to artists! Therefore they do a ‘Bush’ and lie through their teeth even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary in the hope that you believe them and use their preferred overpriced and DRM crippled

By: Alex

Alex — Mon, 06 Mar 2006 03:44:48 +0000

To enforcement?
1) None as far as I know. Which law are they violating?
2) Winning damages in US courts will probably pay up $0, and so far it’s not enough of profit to justify the suit.