The court decision that forced ISP Tele2 to block access to AllofMP3.com had a ripple effect on other service providers. On December 12, the ISP Perspektiv Bredband also blocked AllofMP3.com from its Swedish and Danish customers. Full Story at Slyck
I can’t blame them, since there is no evidence to date AllOfMP3 is illegal–only dubious ‘claims’ from the RIAA that AllOfMP3 is. Anyone informed about RIAA tactics knows that what the RIAA ‘claims’ doesn’t = the truth.
Oh, I didn’t know a court had sad that they had to block it, I wonder why not all ISPs does that then.
And illegal or not I think it’s a bad service since it beats the whole reason of purchasing anything in the first place, why pay at all when the artists get nothing? And why pay for “pirate copies” (althought these maybe shouldn’t be called that but it’s more or less the same anyway.)
Me myself would just get them for free instead, I guess the only reason to use the service is if you don’t wanna wait/search for the files or want them in a lossless format or as ogg or something.
But “I buy my music but I don’t like DRM so I bought it over att allofmp3” is quite a stupid reason
“Since AllofMP3.com has yet to be ruled illegal in Sweden or Denmark, the actions by both ISPs drew enormous criticism from citizens, journalists and copyright reform organizations such as the Swedish Bureau of Piracy.”
So no, no court decision I suppose?
[Quote=]since there is no evidence to date AllOfMP3 is illegal–only dubious ‘claims’ from the RIAA that AllOfMP3 is. Anyone informed about RIAA tactics knows that what the RIAA ‘claims’ doesn’t = the truth. [/Quote]
VERY TRUE VERY TRUE. There is no evidence so far that ALLOfMP3 is illegal in what they are doing. Anyway in a lot of countries it is legal.
[Quote=] And illegal or not I think it’s a bad service since it beats the whole reason of purchasing anything in the first place, why pay at all when the artists get nothing?[/Quote] Why is it a bad service ?? Because they are cheaper than the other download sites and donâ€™t have DRM on their music??? How much do you think the RIAA pays the Artist for each CD sold??? Very very Little they keep most of the money for them selves.
[Quote=] I guess the only reason to use the service is if you don’t wanna wait/search for the files or want them in a lossless format or as ogg or something.[/Quote]
Something like that .
Because asking for payment for pirated material should be thrown upon. It’s pretty lame to earn your money on someone else work, thought that is probably that how almost all wealth in the world is generated but anyway. It’s bad because no money goes to the artist, you could just aswell pirate yourself and don’t pay a shit.
No, because they take money of which none reaches the artist.
I have no idea, I’m not even american, but atleast the artist get some money, and I suppose they can choose themself if they want to get that cd contract or not, it’s not like someone is forcing them. But sure there could be better alternatives, some sort of online distribution there most money reaches the artist and some is spent on the bandwidth and storage, without any advertisment, middle hands and music stores. But in that case the artists themself need to start such a service or atleast use it. I think myspace where setting one up wasn’t they? Maybe that will work, althought myspace seems to be a pile of shit imho. Internet anno 1995.
But newly lame encoded mp3s sounds really good aswell, so I mostly belive it’s a mental thing with “omg it sounds so much better”, p2p/ftp leeched music probably work just as good, the question is if it’s worth the effort or if 10 cent / tune is easier. I wonder if it’s legal to buy music from such a service.
I don’t see the big deal about the money actually going to the artist. I look at it this way - there’s these things called “libraries” which give everybody totally free access to “copyrighted material” and I don’t hear of too many authors crying foul/poor all the time, or billion-dollar lawsuits against these libraries. There’s more money to be made in touring, etc., and they still get enough sales to boot.
Well, based strictly on that, that means there is no ‘abstract of judgment,’ i.e., no court decision saying what the judicial stand is on it. Good eye for detail, johankh, and I welcome you to read our news articles on the front page, as we could always use more input from readers with eyes for detail.
But with a library it’s another thing, one have agreed to get one and I would assume in most countries that they pay some sort of fee for the contents of it. But yes, if we skipped all middle hands and had say a digital library for everyone to use for all music available the costs would get drastically lowered and it wouldn’t cost so much. The people except the artists and producers working with the music could get some other more useful job.
Except libraries pay specific license fees based upon and agreement where they are going to loan to users. There are legal contracts covering this and money is collected. If a library user copies material, then it is the responsibility of that individual user for breaking copyright law. Also, we all pay for libraries in our taxes, so they’re not free, they’re just unlimited access.
Now, the issue of users copying CDs / DVDs from libraries is another thing entirely… That comes down simply to politics… no organisation is going to mess with the kind of jobsworths who sit on local councils and take away their library access rights and childrens educational material. - nobody would want to start that fight. Governments would get involved in that one pretty quickly IMO
Excellent points. I didn’t explain that metaphor very well; you two showed that. I agree with what you both said. There are some fees (most of them are quite small and one-time-only) and yes, we pay for them with taxes, but it’s a miniscule amount per person per year. I know that much - my mother’s a librarian. Trust me, Random House doesn’t exactly make a killing off of libraries. I was just kinda pointing out the similarities between P2P & libraries; the RIAA should relax. If they want more money in the artist’s pockets, go after the middle men/fatcats. Not the end users. Then again, it’s the middlemen they’re worried about, no? As in, rich powerful businessmen?
Anyway, that’s a bit off-topic. My opinion is that it was a dumb idea to block AllofMP3.com if it hasn’t been proven to be illegal (yet). They were just asking for a public outcry on that move. And it seems like they got it.