What is Digg?67 Comments
- Habemus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+26>They are pirates
They are not pirates. They pay the same rate as a broadcast radio or television station. Money that goes to the artists under the rates negotiated for broadcast rights. Under Russian law, the Internet is considered a broadcast medium just like radio or TV.
They are only "pirates" if you go the the far extreme and consider your local FM radio station a pirate as well because they pay money to ASCAP/BMI rather than to RIAA. - ug2b, on 10/12/2007, -3/+18My Q/A directly with Allofmp3.com
Payment Questions
13.05.2006 8:53:59
You wrote:
Hi,
Your payment area is temporarily down and I wanted to buy a gift certificate for someone - when will it be up again?
Allofmp3.com support reply:
We have some technical problems. It will be fixed in few days. Accept our apologies. - gwinerreniwg, on 10/12/2007, -4/+18I must admit I had a few days of panic. I simply love and embrace this business model for online entertainment. I believe it is much more in line with reality and true cost of music production. When the industry finally wakes up it will be too late. While I have not modeled it yet, I suspect that with their current price structure, AllOfMP3 is at or close to a business model that could legally fund the industry at close-to-current profit margins IF the industry were willing to be more liberal with licensing (not requiring copy restriction), allowing all artists and all material to be available, as AOM does. Heck, there is little price difference between AOM and eMusic now anyway. The difference is the latter imposes a throughput limit, and even that is easing up. They are fools to try to crush them, they should ally! Anyway, just my $.02 (per Mb ;-)
- jerrysizzler, on 10/12/2007, -3/+15sweet! so if you don't accept their apologies....? red dawn?
in soviet russia, apologies accept you!
a while ago i asked their tech support about a few incomplete files i'd gotten, to which they replied:
"That service is currently down. Please check back in 10-20 days. That service is unfortunately, currently, being upgraded. If you would still like to use that service, please reply with registered email and date of join-up. Accept our apologies for the inconveniences."
oh mother russia, stay strong. - ErrandboyOfDoom, on 10/12/2007, -2/+13"Do you mean not paying the artists, because that it what happens at allofmp3.com."
AllOfMp3 pays artists, it just doesn't pay producers. And why should producers get paid, after years of this nonsense:
http://www.negativland.com/albini.html - Habemus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10>These guys do not give the artists a single red-cent.
Yes they do. They pay for broadcast rights, the same as a radio or television station. That money goes directly to the artists here in the US via ASCAP and BMI. It simply doesn't go via RIAA. But it does get to them. It's probably more than RIAA would pay. - Saintlink, on 10/12/2007, -2/+11They still think they don't get enough money from iTunes. They'll never setup shop like this. That's wishful thinking.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10The RIAA can't do jack ***** to Allofmp3.com. The RIAA can sue in the USA, but they can't do ANYTHING in Russia, because Allofmp3.com is legal, according to russian law.
Plus, Allofmp3.com gives the artists about as much as the labels do.
You're probably an RIAA astroturfer. - Jugalator, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9I agree that their model is brilliant. They're actually doing what could make some stop pirating, because their library is better organized than most piracy sites, and in the user's choice of bitrate/quality and format. That's choice pirates don't use to get, and an example of beating piracy by being better than it.
The DRM is working in the direct opposite direction.
I think music companies need to accept the risk of having music pirated if being delivered as e.g mp3 and DRM-less, and simply trust in their users being honest and not spreading it around. Yes, they'll loose out on that, but I think they'll loose out more on having the music locked down, because it's very important to have playback flexibility with all the music devices there are today. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+8The RIAA can't "nab" anyone. They can try to sue, but only in the US. allofmp3.com is 100% legal in russia.
- newrican, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7RIAA can only do their crappy stuff here in the USA. They can only try to convince their counterparts to do the same.
- spenceman01, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10Previews aren't working for me. Ordering still disabled. I agree that the RIAA needs to take notes from these guys and lighten up. I feel, unfortunately, that with iTunes being as successful as it is, this won't happen anytime soon.
- captaindan, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7I think Jugalator was pointing out a cultural difference, not making fun of them.
- crazyc, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5@miscreant
Oh, I forgot to comment you line: "Music royalties and music law in general is a complicated issue, but what AllOfMP3 is doing is not legal."
It might not be according to American law, but they are not located in America. Whether it is right is a completely different discussion from whether it's lawful - I do not know much about Russian law, but the fact that it has been online for such a long time, suggests that it complies with its country's laws. - src666, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4miscreant, you make a very good point. Even if AllOfMP3 were sending royalties back to the artists (questionable for anyone but Russian artists), it would be the wrong royalty. The problem is that the "value for compensation" equation is so screwed up that it is inevitable that someone has to take it up the ass on this.
For decades it was the artists and the consumers who suffered. Artists get signed into incredibly awful contracts (just this side of indentured servitude) for very little, if any, real money. Consumers pay increasing, or at best constant prices for their music, even though the industry is seeing real savings from continuous technological improvements to the creation and distribution of music. And the industry gets fat off of everyone else's efforts and money.
Now the consumers have a way to break the cycle. So the artists are the only ones getting screwed now - the industry profits are still very high, the consumers are getting the music (one way or another), and the artists are still in their slave contracts. It's up to the artists to break the other side of the chain.
Personally, I believe that a system such as AllOfMP3 is a near perfect answer, with some adjustments. Adjustments such as the payments going to the artists, less a hosting fee. Think about it: If an album cost even $5 to download, with a $1 fee for hosting, and the RIAA didn't get a penny of it, the artists would make out like bandits. Of course, you still have to deal with the up-front costs of making the music, and promotion (isn't that what touring and concerts are for?), but the system could work a hell of a lot better than the current one.
But artists, it's up to you. Don't rail about how you aren't getting your pittance from the RIAA because of downloaders. You aren't getting your pittance BECAUSE of the RIAA. Period. Drop out of the major-label grinder, make music, and let the fans pay you for it. Most of us will. - jer2eydevil88, on 10/12/2007, -6/+9At least its coming back!! Slow and steady, steady and slow, thats the only way for anything in Soviet Russia to go!!
- EternalNY1, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4The billing is actually handled by a longstanding and reputable third party (in the Netherlands, I believe?) and not by AllOfMp3 themselves. So it's safer than you'd think.
- miscreant, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8I am an artist whose music is sold on AllOfMP3, and I haven't see a dime from them.
Habemus, citing publishing royalties as a way to make AllOfMP3 legal is shaky at best. Publishing royalties are intended as a vehicle to compensate artists when their songs are used in things like television shows, movies, or played on the radio. They are paid on a PER USE BASIS. Here's an example: one of my songs was used in Buffy the Vampire Slayer. EVERY time it airs, I'm paid a royalty for that use. A small one, but on a worldwide basis, it starts to add up some.
Now think about AllOfMP3. They sell songs for people to listen to as much as they want. If you want to use "broadcast rights" to defend them, then anyone who downloads from them should theoretically pay a fee EVERY TIME they listen to a song purchased there.
Music royalties and music law in general is a complicated issue, but what AllOfMP3 is doing is not legal. At all. It's always interesting to what sort of mental and legal gymnastics people will go through to rationalize a cheap download. - rusdude, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3Even if you have doubts about the legality of the service, it's got some advantages over torrenting. For example, the choice of formats/encoding/bitrate is much greater.
- TekJansen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Interesting idea, and I doubt the RIAA would be the least bit peeved at Apple for taking out AOM. However Apple would be shooting itself in the foot by taking out one of the drains in the MP3 pricing bucket. At least with AOM around Apple can have a bit more leverage when seeking to keep it's Tunes at the same price (or even lower) and therefore sell some more iPods. Every angel needs it's devil or else they all start to look the same.
- TekJansen, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I think that if I paid "broadcast rights" fees (each time) for the music I actually listen to, it would not be a bad deal. Since I end up spending about a buck on a song that I may listen to 6 times in a year, and the same dollar for others I listen to much more. It would also reward the good artists over the not so good ones. The downside would be more DRM and other restrictive measures that are killing some of the enjoyment - which is a big downside. But I agree, I cannot see how artists are getting much from AOM, how can they, and still pay for their overhead and make a profit? Obviously artists get much more from WalMart and iTunes, but so do the big labels - that is their business. The perfect answer is not here yet, and probably never will be as long as artists still find a need for big labels, and fans still find a need to get their music as cheap as possible. The only middle ground is that both need to eat, the middleman could care less.
- crazyc, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3@miscreant
That is exactly the way I would like to see the music industry - artists getting paid for their songs, every time they are downloaded. It would be so easy to give the artists 50%, and although the prices would be lower, it would still be a much sweeter deal for the artists.
The only ones who would lose would be the big record companies, but I truly can't see why they should get a piece of the pie, when they add no value to the product.
(And I wish people would stop modding comments up or down, depending on how much they agree with the comments.) - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2No, but you are a moron.
If apple bought Allofmp3.com, they would be dispwnd by the RIAA. And following that, they'd be sued for a LOT of money. - crackityjonesjr, on 10/12/2007, -7/+8Download connection timing out. But at least it allowed me to order.
- ipodfreek, on 10/12/2007, -6/+7can't add funds... i'm sad. :(
- THX-7168, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1allTunes will not connect to AllofMP3's servers. "Socket Error #10061 Connection refused." This began when AllofMP3 went down. Anyone else having the same problem?
- cybershoplifter, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1All music consumers who download from allofmp3 should consider this form of civil disobedience and a stand against DRM.
- bluemech, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3I can't understand why people insist on buying from this site, is it just to ease their minds? Does it make them feel better knowing they're paying money for the music? I've boughtne CDs before, directly from the artist or at least from a record label I know will give money to the artist. I do not care about the legality of the music, what matters is the artist gets my money/support.
It's silly to pay for thi music jus tto ease your mind, it's no different from torrenting it. Quit wasting your money. - baldycraig, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Yes. I think they are just taking allTunes out of beta and getting rid of Allofmp3 explorer.
- Teddo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Please please PLEASE someone make a website devoted to the issues allomp3.com raises. From a neutral standpoint! I keep hearing the same arguments again and again and they are so cyclical.
I would like to see (amongst many other things):
- A section with a clear FAQ on what is legal, what is not. Someone get well sourced, get the legalities (and link to legal sources!) and give as much information as possible in an easy to understand manner.
- A step by step on how to apply to ROMS (Russian version of RIAA apparently - see http://www.betanews.com/article/AllofMP3_Goes_Offline_Future_Uncertain/1147717756 post by PC_Tool 9:07 am) for artists to recieve royalties from allofmp3 (if this really is the case).
Someone do it now! And if it hits off well, you might even start drawing attention from allofmp3, and they may be willing to collaborate. Get this issue out of the 'mist' it is in. Remember, a NEUTRAL point of view is important. - scott88008, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I wonder if the people who rationalize not compensating artists are the same people who criticize religionists for rationalizing religious dogma.
- VladDrac, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I think that's great. If you were able to give them money but not buy, they'd clearly be scamming. The fact that they won't even take money makes it pretty clear to me that they can't. Thus, the problem likely is technical in nature.
- gwinerreniwg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1plaunie, I couldn't have said it better myself. What you see here is the market at work, and the erosion of a business model saddled with gargantuan costs of physical distribution. The industry is in flux, and things will equalize. Yes, artists and lables will take the brunt of the pain. For that I am sad, however, I am not inclined to prop up an aging business model of an over-valued commodity for an industry that refuses to change, and instead legislates or litigates their protection. Entertainment is overvalued and the market is starting the reflect that. The industry is now trying to justify why a song that costs fractions of a cent to produce should cost $.99 or more when it clearly cannot.
I am sorry to those artists that get caught in the crossfire, but you are also under obligation to challenge the status quo and figure out how you can make a buck in the new entertainment economy. It does not seem prudent to me to attach one's self to an business model that is so obviously out of date and unfair to all (esp. artists). - astrotrain, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3
LOL... Like to see the RIAA greeted by the KGB if and when the attempt to go after AllofMp3.
KGB: "заднепроходный cativty поиск!"
RIAA: Oh thats nice they are welcoming us...yes, yes, hello!
(english: anal cavity search!!!) - plaunie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Actually - the problem is a lot simpler than I think people make it out to be. People will pay what they feel is fair for the value of whatever it is that they are recieveing. Allofmp3 is the only one offering music close to what that value is (I say close because its probably a little higher than that, but I won't complain). The US music industry, unfortunately, has completely lost touch with what the consumers percieve as the value of their product. They try to engineer some noise based on surveys of what they think will sell and package it, call it art, then complain that noone gives them money for it. Fact is noone here thinks that the latest kelly klarkson disc is worth the $15, and they are trying to create a market for that crap where none exists. Artists (I use the term loosely) should stop trying to sign with record lables. They should create their art to express themselves, not get rich. Phyisical media is dying, along with the centralized distribution model of the RIAA and MPAA. We should let them go. Unfortunately the RIAA is too antiquated to embrace new business models like the RIAA so there is no chance for you, miscreant, to be compensated.
Art is supposed to be seen and heard, which is why artists are supposed to create it. I'm pretty sure davinci didn't go around Italy asking what kind of expression on mona lisa would be more popular so he could get a higher price for it. He expressed himself, said something valid, universal, and touching (a little devious?) and has been rewarded for it. 99.99% of the "art" out their is made to make money, not be itself. Reality just happens to be catching up with the music industry. - miscreant, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Jabbermonkey, I have a publishing administration company that collects worldwide royalties for me from places like MCPS, SABAM, etc. I still have yet to see anything from AllOfMP3... or any Russian performing rights association, for that matter.
Someone mentioned that AllOfMP3 is legal per Russian law. I recall reading a breakdown of the issues saying that essentially it's a loophole that is being exploited, and the current Russian government doesn't feel like taking the necessary steps to close it. I'll look into it more and see if I can come up with better information. - miscreant, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Jabbermonkey, I just read the faq you posted (should have before I posted last time... ;)
This is a classic case of black letter of the law vs. the spirit of the law. Yes, the words in law itself says it's legal for them to deliver it over "broadcast or cable" if they pay publishing royalties. However, I think any rational person will agree that the spirit of the law was intended for one-way, one-time consumption of media like TV or radio. It was never meant to include the Internet or digital media--such things hadn't even been thought of at the time the law was drafted.
Also keep in mind what I mentioned in my first post--publishing royalties are paid on a PER USE basis. Do you really want to pay an artist every time you listen to their song? This is technically what AllOfMP3 and its customers should be doing if they're going to hide behind the "performance royalty" shield. - Jerky1312, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Although its bad that the service has gone down and not fully come back, this is helping them garner alot of publicity. Especially the comments that the user community was going to miss the great service. I see allofmp3 getting more people using their service, because of all this recent news.
- Jugalator, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3Hehe, I guess their skills in how English sayings are used just aren't perfect. I bet you don't use to say "please" first over there when apologizing. The same goes for where I live too, actually, but then it's more like "apologies for something", not "accept our apologies". We never use "please" first though.
- DoctorLex, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I can finally order again, but online encoding seems to take ages. I ordered a song yesterday and 20 hours later it still isn't ready. I did use Ogg which is not a 'popular format', but it has never taken so long before (normally it only takes a minute or less). I suppose the servers are totally being hammered by people who think they should quickly use up their credit, before the server goes down again...
- bakunin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Why don't you do it yourself, or have it done for you?
- jabbermonkey, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Teddo - check out this FAQ: http://www.museekster.com/allofmp3faq.htm
Miscreant - it seems you have to apply direct to ROMS to receive royalties (see the second last question on the lined FAQ). Try e-mailing roms@roms.ru or phoning them (095) 221 7453. - src666, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I buy there for a couple of reasons. First and most important, I get the music in the format that I want it, at the bitrate I want it, at the quality I want it. Try doing that with torrents/newsgroups. Second is the convenience factor - with AllTunes, it is a very slick and simple way to get music.
Finally, I do it to show the industry that I am willing to pay for music. People who download torrents/etc. demonstrate to the industry that they are not willing to pay. When the record companies and artists (mostly artists) see how much money AllOfMP3 makes, it gives them incentive to try to get some of it. The best way to do that is to compete in a real way.
No, I don't expect my money to go to the artists at this time. But eventually, after the RIAA collapses into a sinkhole, it will. And that's the point - I am willing to pay for music if it is reasonably priced and provided in an unencumbered format of my choosing (or lossless). Artists - step on up, quit bitching about the broken system that you continue to participate in, and take my money. - DoctorLex, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This explains a lot: "Due to technical works Online Encoding service will be unavailable until 19.00 MSK (16.00 GMT). Please accept our apologies for the inconvenience."
I hope the 'technical works' involve the doubling of the amount of encoders! :) - robdobson, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Did you ever find a fix for your socket error? I've just downloaded allTunes for a new pc and am getting the same thing. Unable to connect to the iTunes music store as well. Both worked fine on my old Win2000 machine.
- SmilingFrog, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I can't download songs I have ordered, can't get the Explorer to connect and can't use AllTunes. :(
- cybershoplifter, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I want to d/l my music in high bit mp3s, thats why I use the site.
- SmilingFrog, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Scratch that, I am able to use AllTunes and at least download songs I've ordered. Just got it up and running after a few tries. Looks like in about 45 minutes or so I should have ONE song...and I'm on broadband.
Better than not being able to get it all though. - cybershoplifter, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0A bit slow but happy to say I am downloaded my 1st song.
- gwinerreniwg, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I've been an AOM customer for years, and done some research on the legalities of their model. Barristers I have discussed this with believe AOM customers have a good faith expectation that the service is legal. If the RIAA wants to bring suit against AOM customers, I believe they'll have a difficult time.
-
Show 51 - 67 of 67 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is