Results 1 to 12 of 12
  1.    #1  
    Hi!

    Check out www.allofmp3.com you can buy en ENTIRE album for .99 cents!

    and you can pic your fav. encoding + bitrate!


    As far as i'm concerned ITUNES music store is toooo expensive!


    Alex
  2. #2  
    i like itunes, because i know the artists will get their piece, while giving me a fair price and easy way to download and integrate.

    if you want to rip-off the artists, like allofmp3.com does, just use a peer2peer service and get it free.
    iBug
    mac osx usernew beetle pilotpowerbook operatorsmartphone communicator

    ----------
    vzw.kyo6035 > vzw.kyo7135 > vzw.treo600 > sprint.treo650
  3. #3  
    Exactly.

    If you're going to steal music, why use a rogue outfit out of Russia that's not giving money back to the artists.

    $.99 is my pricepoint (though I would love to see it lower), and the FairPlay DRM is a bit cumbersome, burning and ripping takes care of that with a little extra work.
  4. #4  
    I don't mind paying for music. The problem I have with iTunes is the "burning and ripping" as Pablo refers to it. Burning the Apple files to CD, then re-ripping them to MP3 (or any other format) plays Hell with quality. Nothing like running a file through two lossy compression algorithms to muck up the sound quality. If Apple would license their software so I could play native iTunes files on something other than the overprice iPods I might be more receptive.
    Bob Meyer
    I'm out of my mind. But feel free to leave a message.
  5.    #5  
    It says on te website, that they (allofmp3.com) do pay royalties to the artists..

    Besides, you can get your choice of encoding format and birate, and get whole album for .99
  6. #6  
    Quote Originally Posted by pavlov0032
    It says on te website, that they (allofmp3.com) do pay royalties to the artists..

    Besides, you can get your choice of encoding format and birate, and get whole album for .99
    You're precious.

    Barely Legal
    The hottest trend in file sharing.
    By Dana Mulhauser
    Posted Monday, March 28, 2005, at 12:35 PM PT

    It's the dilemma of downloading: The guy in the next cubicle is using office bandwidth to download the new J.Lo album using Grokster. But then your mother sends you newspaper clippings of all of those nice-looking people getting arrested for file sharing. You want to have the records without having a record. So, there you are—caught between your greed and a guilt complex.

    Until you find the silver bullet—the legal way to download music for free. Or at least almost for free. And almost legal: It's called Allofmp3.com, and it's the trendy, angst-free way to download copyrighted music. As the Supreme Court prepares to hear arguments tomorrow about the legality of Grokster, Aimster, and other file-sharing services, downloaders have been looking hopefully to Allofmp3.com as their only legitimate way to get 50 Cent for less than face value.

    Allofmp3.com is Russian, and its self-proclaimed quasi-legality stems from its claimed ownership of Russian music distribution rights. As their Web site puts it: "All the materials in the MediaServices projects are available for distribution through Internet according to license # LS-3М-05-03 of the Russian Multimedia and Internet Society. … AllOFMP3.com's Administration does not keep up with the laws of different countries and is not responsible the actions of non-Russian users." This site isn't free, but at about 5 cents a song, it sure beats iTunes.

    Could a scheme like Allofmp3.com be legal? Probably. Is it legal, in fact? Probably not. Will you get sued for using it? Not likely, or at least, far less likely than you would be for using Grokster or any of the other peer-to-peer networks. But let's take it one question at a time.

    1. Could a site claiming to hold foreign distribution rights be a legal way to download copyrighted music?

    Sure. Music licensing agreements vary from distributor to distributor and from country to country. If Allofmp3.com has legitimately acquired Russian distribution rights, it would be legal to download from them the same way that copyright holders have licensed iTunes and Napster in the United States, according to James Gibson, who teaches law at the University of Richmond and wrote a brief supporting the music industry in the MGM v. Grokster case.

    But get out your balaclava, pop the caviar, and activate those frequent-flyer miles: Because in order to download legally from a Russian rights-holder, you'd likely have to actually go to Russia. Foreign-rights-holders usually only control the copyright within the country itself, and that includes Internet distribution. (For those of you who prefer traveling to warmer climates, there's a similar—and similarly dubious—Spanish service called weblisten.com.)

    There is one other argument that might save Allofmp3, albeit an admittedly far-fetched one: That theory holds that all music downloading is legal under "fair use" doctrine, as long as it's only for personal use. In other words, your officemate is violating only the bounds of taste, and not the bounds of copyright law, by scoring that free J.Lo song.

    "If you're writing notes from a book in a library, or making a mix tape, or a clip of music to give to your friends, the law was never meant to apply to you," says Raymond Ku, a law professor at Case Western Reserve University and signatory to a Grokster brief to the same effect. Ku recognizes that American courts have not found his theory particularly convincing thus far, but courts in France and Canada have ruled that downloading copyrighted songs for mere personal use is legal. Then again, wouldn't you encourage the importation of foreign music if your national musical hero was Charles Aznavour or Celine Dion?

    2. Is Allofmp3.com actually legal?

    Probably not. The discussion above about what Allofmp3.com is allowed to do with international distribution rights assumes the site actually owns those rights. It doesn't—at least not according to the recording industry. The International Federation of the Phonographic Industry is the worldwide organization of recording companies, and it claims that Allofmp3.com has not been licensed to distribute its members' "repertoire" in Russia or anywhere else. While Allofmp3.com claims it owns distribution rights from the Russian Multimedia and Internet Society, the record companies say, "Nyet."

    Bruce Boyden, a copyright lawyer at Proskauer Rose, which represents the international copyright holders in Grokster, concedes that there's some dispute as to whether Allofmp3.com has in fact obtained the Russian distribution rights. But he has his suspicions: "Allofmp3.com doesn't sound Russian to me, and it doesn't sound like they're aiming at a Russian audience." Moreover, even if it does hold some Russian distribution rights, it certainly doesn't own worldwide Internet distribution rights.

    But there's the law, and then there's enforcement of the law. And you probably shouldn't expect the Russian authorities to crack down on the company anytime soon. According to unverified reports from Russia (and are there any other kind?), authorities there have decided not to prosecute Allofmp3.com, despite a recommendation from Moscow police that they do so. The remaining question—of whether the company could eventually be sued in American courts—turns, at least to some extent, on the results of the Grokster case.

    3. Will American users of Allofmp3.com get sued?

    Not likely. The Recording Industry Association of America has been bringing about 700 suits per month, but they're against uploaders—people who make music available for copying—and not downloaders. According to Justin Hughes, an associate professor at Cardozo Law School, this distinction is for obvious evidentiary reasons: The only way to catch a downloader is to actually get onto her hard drive and find the files, or spy on the transmission from the uploader to the downloader In KaZaA, Grokster, and Bittorrent, every user is both an uploader and a downloader—my price for downloading "Papa Don't Preach" from you is to let your roommate download "Like a Prayer" from me. But Allofmp3.com is different; users download music but they don't upload it. None of the RIAA's 8,000 lawsuits has involved such a scenario.

    Then again, the RIAA could always change its ways and decide to start going after downloaders as well, if that's where the money is. Just because it's ultimately more difficult to prove doesn't mean they won't try, and the music industry has shown it's not averse to scare tactics. The Material Girl herself explained this phenomenon best: "Experience has made me rich and now they're after me."

    The Grokster argument tomorrow should address at least some of these questions, including whether copyright violations should be enforceable against file-sharing services and whether downloading music could ever be considered fair use, along with the greater mystery of whether Sandra Day O'Connor can pronounce Gnutella or knows what an ISP is. Camp out early for good seats, and be wary of anyone trying to sell you pirated CDs outside the courthouse.
    Dana Mulhauser is a law student and a writer living in Cambridge, Mass.

    Article URL: http://slate.msn.com/id/2115868/
  7. #7  
    Quote Originally Posted by iBug
    i like itunes, because i know the artists will get their piece, while giving me a fair price and easy way to download and integrate.
    Do you know even one professional artist that gets their piece from Itunes? I would be very interested to hear how much they actually get....I would bet maybe 1 cent per song.

    If Artists are barely getting what they deserve from multimedia giants like Sony Records and Itunes pays Sony well I guess that tells you how much the artists really get.

    I buy my albums rather than buy overcompressed song's from Itunes! If Itunes is going to offer to sell me music and lock them with DRM they should give me the choice to download in .wav format with no compression

    http://www.philomenaproductions.com/article.htm

    "For more than half a century, the music business has done a better job of reaming artists than any other segment of the entertainment industry. Granted, managers and record companies aren't quite as brazen as they used to be--they no longer routinely steal publishing rights or simply neglect to pay royalties--but the system remains skewed. Record companies front musicians the money to record albums and also cover the pressing and distribution costs. In exchange, the average band signs away 85 percent of its profits, as well as ownership of the master recordings. Even goofier, the musicians agree to pay back that advance and various promotion costs out of the 15 percent that they actually receive."
  8. #8  
    Quote Originally Posted by timexx8
    Do you know even one professional artist that gets their piece from Itunes? I would be very interested to hear how much they actually get....I would bet maybe 1 cent per song.

    If Artists are barely getting what they deserve from multimedia giants like Sony Records and Itunes pays Sony well I guess that tells you how much the artists really get.

    I buy my albums rather than buy overcompressed song's from Itunes! If Itunes is going to offer to sell me music and lock them with DRM they should give me the choice to download in .wav format with no compression

    http://www.philomenaproductions.com/article.htm

    "For more than half a century, the music business has done a better job of reaming artists than any other segment of the entertainment industry. Granted, managers and record companies aren't quite as brazen as they used to be--they no longer routinely steal publishing rights or simply neglect to pay royalties--but the system remains skewed. Record companies front musicians the money to record albums and also cover the pressing and distribution costs. In exchange, the average band signs away 85 percent of its profits, as well as ownership of the master recordings. Even goofier, the musicians agree to pay back that advance and various promotion costs out of the 15 percent that they actually receive."
    Although iTunes may be another middleman with the RIAA, I'm not sure and not willing to research it, it (and the others like it) is a step in eliminating the cash cow bonanza that was the CD for the RIAA and NOT the artist.
  9. #9  
    allofmp3 is great. you know why? it gives the RIAA some much needed competition. they're offering something the RIAA/MPAA has never dreamed of.... actually giving the consumers some freedom with the stuff they buy. a recent court ruling said allofmp3.com is legal under current Russian law (due to a loophole) and the site will be around for a while, so it's not going anywhere. and i highly recomend it.

    here's slashdot coverage of the article:
    http://yro.slashdot.org/article.pl?s...tid=141&tid=17

    is anyone else sick and tired of being controlled by the music and record industries? limits on what you can do with something you purchased is ridiculous. it's all about control with these industries.

    for example, you buy a dvd movie and pop it in. now 10 minutes of previews start playing and you click the remote to fast forward to the actual movie. there's a good chance you'll get a "OPERATION DENIED" message on your screen. that's right, the movie industry is telling you when you can fast forward the dvd you just bought.

    ok next you buy some music from itunes. first off you can't even play it on your mp3 player unless you have an ipod. next you can only copy it to 3 computers and burn the same cd only a few times. doesn't sound too awful but why should i have all these restrictions on my music? am i a criminal? didn't i just pay my hard earned money to buy it? it's actually more like i paid to borrow it while someone watches me very closely while i use it.

    like i said it's all about control with the RIAA/MPAA. they want complete control over everything you do with their products. how would you like it if you bought a video camera and it was programmed to not let you record on sunday nights between 8-10pm? that's pretty much what they're doing with movies and music with their restrictions.

    i'm sick and tired of hearing the record industries complain about P2P and filesharing hurting their sales. cd sales rose 2.3% last year. they sold 666 million albums! by how they act you would think they're getting ready to file for chapter 11 bankruptcy. see the sales stats for yourself:
    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/4150747.stm

    the RIAA even sues it's customers. hate to break it to them, but it's not little mikey and grandma the RIAA should be going after, it's the real pirates that sell pirated CDs for money. they’re not going to stop them with all these restrictions and lawsuits against their real customers.

    ok so how will the RIAA/MPAA beat services like allofmp3? its simple, by offering better variety of content, easier and better interfaces for downloading, and less or better yet no restrictions on downloaded content. it can be done but at this point they just don't want to. they simply want control.

    its sad but the only way to really talk to these industries is with money. eventually, when the general public finds out about services like allofmp3 and starts switching over from itunes and the like, maybe, just maybe the industry will wake up. i for one hope so

    sorry for the rant
    Last edited by wahooka; 04/22/2005 at 04:35 AM.
  10. #10  
    Good post!!

    I agree-RIAA wants control.
    Visor Platinum-->Visor NEO--->M505--->Treo 300 Sprint--->Treo 600---> TREO 650 ---> Treo 700P ---> Treo 755 --->Touch Diamond--->Touch Pro ---> Palm Pre
    Check out the expert judges at http//:mobileappsshowdown.com
  11. #11  
    It may be beneficial to consider how various roles in the music industry earn revenue:

    Songwriters - Royalties from use of songs
    Publishers - Royalties from use of songs
    Performers - Union scale or negotiated rate for performance (live or in studio)
    Record Companies - Product Sells receipts

    In the industry, if you want to make more money, you have to play your role with greater frequency, or play more roles.

    I'm a musician. I have a great CD of my trumpet playing. I don't say that because its me. That is what people (general listeners and industry insiders) are telling me. My wife and I paid for the production of the CD. We are marketing it ourselves. We receive all revenue, less costs (which includes retail shares for the stores that are carrying the CD for us). We have moved about 1300 units in the first 8 months since its release.

    I am hearing that for an independent product, that is a good pace. If I had contract with a major record label, that number could easily be 10 to 100 times as large. But, my revenue would be considerably lower. Of course, my expenses would have also been considerably lower. That's the give and take of signing a recording contract.

    Record companies typically make the significant investment required to record, distribute and market product. They recoup that investment from selling that product. To them, artists are raw materials used in creating product. Sounds harsh, I know, but that is the reality. it does not mean they don't care about the artists. It just means that the artists are ingredients in the creation of product. And, NOTE, Artists are willing, even clamoring (see "American Idol") to be "parts and labor" in the process. Why? Because that marketing machinery of the record company gives them notoriety. Notoriety helps them get gigs (their primary source of revenue).

    If the record company is producing the product. They have the right to "control" the price for their product, and how their product is distributed. If you are peddling their product, without an agreement with them to do so, and, more importantly, not compensating them, you are stealing from them.

    While you may think that their contracts with artists are not fair to the artists, the artists signed up for that. Artists have access to legal council. Most don't read the agreements because they are just happy to be signed to a label.

    Just my $.018 (10% goes to my manager)
  12. #12  
    BTW: All of mp3 also let's you dload 24kbit sample songs for free. They sound fine on the treo speaker and are almost okay on earphones. I have the entire rolling stones song catalog on my treo. They sound like they're being playing by a fairly clear AM radio station.

    ABTW: allofmp3 is better than grokster et al because because the rips are high quality (no chirps) and the dload is instantaneous.

    I hate to say it but the record company business model is changing. They need to start finding better ways to make money and making legal aquisition more attractive. restrictive DRM just pushes people the other way.

Posting Permissions