music_news 91 posts

The RIAA are greedy pigs and rather than searching for a solution to satisfy all..they feel attacking potential customers is the way to go.
Why don't they just pay these superstars less money..I don't care if Billy Joel can't build that new pool he was looking foward to in his mansion..what about us underclass citizens that love music and might not
be able to afford their inflated prices.. ALLOFMP3 and EMUSIC fantasic
music at a fair price.

The RIAA is the new mafia.

Don't be foolish. The artists are not where the money goes in the music industry. The label and publisher are the ones who are raping the consumer. The debate isn't about what artists are making, but rather the music industry clinging to a dying business strategy with a death grip. The days of a label being able to sell a $14 album on the back of one hit song are rapidly fading. If you are selling water in the desert and it starts to rain, you better start selling umbrellas. It's raining RIAA...

Am I just the one feeling like I'm in a parallel universe?

Seriously, I mean, WTF is wrong with the major? "Pre-lawsuit discount" !? So, from now on, it's official, you're guilty until proven innocent. There's something utterly rotten in the kingdom of RIAA.

RIAA to bandziory z USA. Pozrawiam portal muzyczny allofmp3.com

i actually rather enjoy watching how a doomed industry holds onto it's last breaths. those who embrace the direction that digital technolgy is guiding music, will be paid heavily, including the artists themselves, and music enthusiasts will have giant libraries. but that won't happen, until a highly publicized, and respected artist, comes out and speaks about the beauty of these business models. let's face it, the artists net their real money touring. what better way to draw fans towards your music??? $.15 for a song, why not?... empires always fall. long live the artists!

As far as I'm aware, the artists don't get any money from the downloads on this site. Hmmmm. Pity, becuase it's a great service, if I could only add credit to my balance

I know ALLOFMP3 is located in russia but what is the cost charged to someone in russia for a CD sold in a major store? Somehow I don't think it is the equivalent of the perhaps 18 american dollars or more which is charged to consumers in america. So what is wrong with people from other countries purchasing their music from russia for a discount? Are CD sold in poor counties the equivalent of the same 18 american dollars in local currency...I think not.

Anyway I get a great amount of satisfaction at seeing RIAA squirm when they can't hold back technology and progress. Consider this..does a thing have value if anyone with their own computer can generate an endless number of copies of it..of course not. The only value in a case like music and movies is perceived value which is based on the perception of the consumer. The law of supply and demand dictates that the price for music will decrease based on what people are willing to pay for it. I predict that in 20 years (maximum) most people will not purchase CDs from the major labels and will simply acquire copies of the music they like at little or no charge.

An average CD in a Russian store costs around $5. However, we get like 5% of Western releases here and few months later as well.

Also legal and unlicenced CDs cost the same. The difference is that the labels might choose not to release something in Russia or delay the release but then pirates will.

"There's something utterly rotten in the kingdom of RIAA."
Not just something, it's all completely rotten. I hope one day it'll be so rotten that it collapses on itself.

Look at this news story to see what UK music firms think of us getting music at a reasonable price.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6376785.stm

you know this sounds just like when Direct TV sent me a lawsuit for $10,000 USD for buying a simple card programmer. someone did a class action lawsuit against DTV for breaking the RICCO laws and won... hopefully someone has the balls to do that here. I don't... too much of a wuss.

Here was the stuff with the direct tv case... smells pretty similar
http://www.directvdefense.org/

keep the internet free!!!!!

HI FOLKS!!!!!
KEEP ON VOTING FOR ME AND MY PARTY THE REPUBLICAN PARTY AND THIS IS WHAT YOU ARE GOING TO GET OUT OF THE RIAA IT IS IN THEIR CARDS TO DO THIS TO THE LITTLE PEOPLE IN THIS WORLD

I agree with posts 3 and 8.

The artists make most of the money from touring, and public appearances, other gimics.

The music industry has been using their payola scheme to promote certain artists more then others, by paying stations to play the heck outta a certain song. Its not that the artist is any good, or could actually sing, they just pump the hell outta that crap. If you think the music industry did not know about millie and vanili, and everything going on there your sadly mistaken. The industry is as rotten as it gets, you think how much money they make from doing what they do, its sick that they can charge $18 dollars for a CD when we know that they could have sent the origional to china for all we know and had 50 million cd's pressed for 1/100th of the cost in america. Fact is they are out to screw us the little people.

Max - themaxfiles.info

No-one here has read the decision. The defendant a Debbie Foster (DF) was issued with a notice by parties representing the RIAA to pay $US5000 for downloading files from KAZAA. These parties said they would reduce their claim by $US1,500. At all times (DF) had said she was not the primary computer user and had not used KAZAA. The RIAA persisted and iniated legal action.

Likewise they asserted that a criminal act had been perpetrated and yet they did make a complaint to law enfocement agencies of any said criminal activity. This the trial judge was an assertion.

Likewise they ignored DF's protestations about lack of use of the computer and about other parties that may have downloaded the said files. In other words the RIAA"s prima facie case against DF was unproven.

Now the RIAA is attempting to get access to ISP records and that any offending parites be warned of pending action. This seems to be a legal relief for any potential defendant and that if the action continued the RIAA could argue that they had taken all necessary steps to stop the action from taking place. This would be mitigation on the plaintiff's behalf.

In a nutshell the RIAA just can't throw out a net and then start suing parties willy nilly.

If you want to see the RIAA wave the white flag rather than waiting for technology to make their DRM obsolete, then someone needs to countersue the RIAA for, by way of example, preventing the free flow of music that is, a breach of free trade. This would then cost the RIAA a good deal of money to defend and if they lost the case then it's all over for copyright.

Anyone out there got deep pockets?

So the RIAA is trying to use the threat of lawsuit to blackmail consumers without filing the actual lawsuit? I swear I have heard of this technique before, if I could only remember the word for it. Oh wait, I got it, it sounds like...EXTORTION!

Well no, it may sound like extortion but it isn't at all. The RIAA is trying to show that they can accept a smaller settlement to show that they are prepared to negotiate to avoid taking the matter to court, that is, a negotiated settlement.

However, the RIAA in the case of DF failed to listen to the defendant, failed to look at alternatives scenarios where another party may have been the computer user and downloaded material from KAZAA. If the RIAA fails to look into all circumstances behind a case then any future litigation may fail again.

I've noticed that representatives from international music industry are visiting numerous OECD countries. They are lobbying governments and ISPs to legislate to make the latter make available their records over the previous 180 days for any possible prosecution against copyright "infringers". ISPs have been reluctant because a customer backlash. If this takes place (and in some countries it is) then it will make it that much easier for the RIAA and others to take legal action over alleged copyright breaches.

I'll repeat what I said in my last post that until people start counter-suing the RIAA etc. then situation will continue to drag on for many years to come

to A. Aria:
Care to make your comments a separate post, so that it all can appear in the Journals section?
BR,
AllofMP3

It is quite amusing to watch the spectacular implosion of the music industry. Wow. Just, amazing.

To be honest, allofmp3.com is significantly illegal in the US, however, I think the site is a couple years ahead of the RIAA. Whereas the hundreds/thousands of lawsuits are being handed out over Gnutella, Grokster, Bearshare, etc, it'll be a while before the RIAA catches up and finds a way to prosecute Americans using allofmp3.com. Actually, I don't exactly know WHAT law Americans are breaking by using the site, so I'm not sure that we will EVER be prosecuted. I have a feeling that the site will go down either: 1. When the site gets shut down from foreign (american) interests' pressure. 2. When Russia updates it's copyright laws to include digital media. It doesn't matter when/how it will be shut down, but I don't think the consumer will ever be included in the lawsuits...any grad students/law students out there wanna clarify anything if I've said something wrong or unclear? :-)