|
Originally Posted by bp888
You lost me after the first "do the math". Sorry. :D
Trust me, there is a reason why entertainment lawyers cost a fortune and are worth their weight in gold. An artist should never ever sign a contract without having a good lawyer go through it with a fine toothed comb. And the lawyer has to be independent of the label. /E |
Emma, that was complicated but thanks for provided the detailed breakdown. I get the general drift even though I still don't understand all of the nitty-gritty details. :)
Your one question - what's wrong with the system? - was summed up well by your last post. That is, it's very complicated and requires very detailed examination by an independent lawyer, something that a new artist doesn't always have. |
Originally Posted by pinniped
Emma, that was complicated but thanks for provided the detailed breakdown. I get the general drift even though I still don't understand all of the nitty-gritty details. :)
A lawyer is something that can be factored in to the advance and the record company pays for your lawyer - just make sure it's one that doesn't work for the label! Too many bands have done that mistake with both labels and managers and years later screaming they got scr*w*d. Anyway - the point I was trying to make is that very few new artists will stand a chance making a living on their music with the illegal downloading. If they can't get a deal with a label who does the backing and marketing what can they do? And labels will be less keen to sign new artists if they can't sell them. The illegal downloading isn't affecting the wealth of those who already made their fortunes before downloading turned in to a problem. Oh - and how come CDs turn up on P2P networks long before they are released? Most often it's the journalists on the mailinglists. SOmetimes it's even the record company execs who have trusted a friend with a copy, who trusted another friend, who trusted another friend... and so on. Or it's the courrier who pulled the CD and ripped it while he was taking it to the record company. Or it's the recording studio who runs an FTP they never change the password on and who's had it hacked or who use them same access codes for all their clients, because they couldn't be bothered getting a sysadmin in to set up a VPN. Or it's the band who haven't worked out that yousendit.com and similar is NOT a good idea to use when shipping files between eachother. Sheer stupidity is most often the reason why a CD ends up on P2P before it's released. And a hefty portion of "lack of respect for other peoples intellectual property" /E |
OK, I am going to dip my toes in this hot water.
I see it as a gamble. The Record company hands over 200k with no guarantee they will make a penny. You yourself say that 6-7 out of 10 bands make a loss/break even but they still get their 200k advance, correct? You make it sound like the artists get nothing for the first 100k sales. BUT they got their advance. If they chose to see this as the first of many payments and blow it all on blow and hookers (or cribs) then thats their fault. If the album tanks, then its theirs and no one elses fault. I agree the unscrupulous contracts is unecthical and should not have a place in any industry. But to say they are hard done by, seems a little rich, 200k is a lot of cash for a lot of people, even split amongst a band. Considering it takes maybe 3-4 months to make an album. The allofmp3 issue; I would argue the RIAA or whoever should, and probably are, more interested in sites that pay zero royalties. Deal with lesser contributors later IF there is any case. |
Originally Posted by cressers
You make it sound like the artists get nothing for the first 100k sales. BUT they got their advance.
I was just in a top North American studio for a week. Band had gotten a good deal on it and paid $7k for the use of the studio just to mix. That was CHEAP! On top came fees for mixing engineer which is another $5k - $10. A top studio cost a couple of g-notes a day. A producer near enough $100k. A top producer more than that. (someone I know managed to get a producer that had produced and co written a couple of global hits that year for 80k and said it was cheap.) It's all coming out of the advance - mate. Not out of the record company's pocket. The bills add up. So 3 - 4 months of recording leaves the artist how much of the advance? Don't think it all gets blown on blow and hookers. Sure, you can do it cheaper. Find a cheap studio, record it digitally, self produce it, try to keep the costs as low as possible. Split the money between the band members and if you are lucky - you may get a tour that year that can earn you some income. Don't expect being paid while you're out there doing a PR tour. The record company might be paying your flights, hotels and feed you but you don't get paid. Not unless you want them to recoup their entire marketing budget as well as the advance. So there is a chance you could make ooooh, say $50k that year. If you're lucky. /E |
Originally Posted by Emma65
Did you miss the part about the advance paying for producers, studio time, mixing engineers, mastering, hotels (unless you actually live in the same city as the studio) travel to the studio and sometimes, the manager gets up to 20% of the top or of the net (if there is anything left that is).
I was just in a top North American studio for a week. Band had gotten a good deal on it and paid $7k for the use of the studio just to mix. That was CHEAP! On top came fees for mixing engineer which is another $5k - $10. A top studio cost a couple of g-notes a day. A producer near enough $100k. A top producer more than that. (someone I know managed to get a producer that had produced and co written a couple of global hits that year for 80k and said it was cheap.) It's all coming out of the advance - mate. Not out of the record company's pocket. The bills add up. So 3 - 4 months of recording leaves the artist how much of the advance? Don't think it all gets blown on blow and hookers. Sure, you can do it cheaper. Find a cheap studio, record it digitally, self produce it, try to keep the costs as low as possible. Split the money between the band members and if you are lucky - you may get a tour that year that can earn you some income. Don't expect being paid while you're out there doing a PR tour. The record company might be paying your flights, hotels and feed you but you don't get paid. Not unless you want them to recoup their entire marketing budget as well as the advance. So there is a chance you could make ooooh, say $50k that year. If you're lucky. /E yeah, i missed that bit. :p |
I do love when the record companies are screaming about stealing from the artists, etc. Bull-S. It's coming out of THEIR pockets. Their business model is old and outmoded. It needs to evolve but they don't know how to do it whilst turning the megaprofits they have in the past. Going forward, it's a broken model. Consumers don't want to do business that way anymore. They can fight as long as they wish, but in the end if they don't do something first someone will come along and do it for them.
|
Originally Posted by ScottC
If all you have is 2 old links of organizations that don't like them and one that says that it is "probably" illegal then this discussion isn't going anywhere, I'm still waiting for the definitive proof that downloading from allofmp3 is illegal.
Originally Posted by Mary Beth Peters, US Registrar of Copyrights
Russia has been on the Special 301 Priority Watch List since 1997. Today Russia's copyright piracy problem remains one of the most serious of any country in the world. According to the IIPA, piracy rates in Russia for most sectors are estimated at around 80% in 2004 and losses exceed $1.7 billion. In the past few years there has been an explosion in the growth of illegal optical media disc plants run by organized crime syndicates with widespread distribution channels. Russia has also developed a serious online piracy problem, as exemplified by the offering of pirated materials on the website, "allofmp3.com," which has yet to be taken down by Russian authorities.
Weird, nothing about music downloads and the RIAA not approving of ROMS In fact, there is NOTHING on their website at all about concerns regarding music download services providing illegal downloads claiming ROMS support. If you can't trust the RIAA then who CAN you trust? IIPA representatives have testified on a number of occasions before the U.S. House of Representatives Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property regarding intellectual property theft in Russia. IIPA has repeatedly reported to the U.S. House Subcommittee that the Russian government should take steps to curb intellectual property piracy, which it estimates costs U.S. companies $1.7 billion annually. One of the "six critical steps" that the IIPA recommends the Russian government take is to "immediately take down websites offering infringing copyright materials, such as allofmp3.com, and criminally prosecute those responsible." Clearly, the IIPA does not believe that allofmp3 is legal. IIPA has urged the United States to take actions to "mandate Russia compliance with international norms and obligations" regarding copyright enforcement. IIPA has urged the U.S. to: (1) Condition Russia’s entry into the World Trade Organization (WTO) on meaningful copyright law enforcement; (2) Designate Russia as a Priority Foreign Country (PFC) after the on-going out of cycle review by U.S.T.R.; and (3) Deny Russia’s eligibility for the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) duty-free trade benefits. Surely if this service that is used by millions really were illegal they would be all over it like a granny in South Dakota that let her grandchild download one song off bittorrent? So, why after 3 years still no action against allofmp3? Napster came and went in under a year... Sharman (Kazaa) isn't based in the US yet the RIAA didn't mind going after them too... Another matter that the Russian government continues to raise is the need for the U.S. copyright industries to use civil remedies for effective enforcement. The copyright industries (especially the record industry) have recently attempted to bring civil cases against illegal plant operators – although procedural hurdles are significant. However, in no country of the world, including Russia, can copyright owners be left to civil remedies in lieu of criminal remedies to effectively address large-scale organized crime commercial piracy. The government of Russia needs to play a major role in an effective criminal enforcement regime. The copyright industries generally report good police cooperation with raids and seizures, mostly of smaller quantities (with some exceptions) of material, but prosecutorial and other procedural delays and non-deterrent sentencing by judges remains a major hindrance to effective enforcement. |
Originally Posted by Febs
|
Originally Posted by Febs
|
Originally Posted by Diabo
Which russian law does allofmp3 violate?
|
Originally Posted by Diabo
Which russian law does allofmp3 violate?
|
Originally Posted by Febs
Read the "Promised legal reforms" section of the IIPA report that I linked to for an overview. Also consider that since the distribution of pirated materials goes beyond Russia borders...
Same goes for international distribution. As long as the russian law does not require allofmp3 to prevent export of purchased music by their customers, they can sell their songs to anyone they want. As long as the russians don't change their copyright laws allofmp3 can continue to operate under the current laws. A promised legal reform can't stop them. |
Originally Posted by murphy
I posted 5 links. I'm beginning to realize that God himself could tell you it's illegal and you wouldn't believe it, so I'll avoid posting 5 more.
|
Appeal to Authority is only a fallacy when the Authority is not truly an expert. Which one of my authorites is not an expert? Please note that I didn't actually cite God, and make no claims as to his/hers/its/their knowledge of international copywrite law.
|
Originally Posted by Diabo
A promised legal reform is irrelevant for allofmp3. They're only bound by russian law as it exist today, not by how it may look some time in the future after it is updated by the russian government.
Nevertheless, note that the section of the IIPA report that I directed you to does not talk entirely about prospective reforms, as you suggest, but is instead referring to reforms that the Russian government committed to making in 1992 and implemented in part in 1996 and 2003. The concern, as it is expressed in IIPA's report, is one of enforcement. |
The decison of whether allofmp3 is legal is with the russian courts. It's their interpretation of the law that matters, and according to them the new laws are still leaky enough to keep allofmp3 in business.
From the pdf file linked to earlier in this thread: In fact, the world’s largest server-based pirate music website – allofmp3.com – remains in operation after a criminal prosecutor in early 2005 reviewed the case and determined (wrongly) that current Russian copyright law could not prosecute or prevent this type of activity. In fact, this interpretation of the Russian law is contrary to all the assurances the Russian government gave the U.S. government and private sector during the years-long adoption of amendments to the 1993 Copyright Law; those amendments were finally adopted in July 2004. |
Originally Posted by Diabo
The decison of whether allofmp3 is legal is with the russian courts. It's their interpretation of the law that matters, and according to them the new laws are still leaky enough to keep allofmp3 in business.
From the pdf file linked to earlier in this thread: The russian government may have promised to outlaw allofmp3.com, but they failed to deliver. As long as they don't plug the holes that remain in the new laws, the site remains legal. Whether RIAA et al. like it or not. |
In which case it should be read "...in russia and any other country in which is it not forbidden."
Not that it really makes a difference, because a russian company doing business in russia is free to ignore any foreign laws. Even if their customers are not russian. |
Originally Posted by ScottC
Thank you for pointing to the statement I was looking for (and couldn't find online). Based on this I will immediately stop using allofmp3.
|
Originally Posted by alanw
Me too! Sure am glad I switched to alltunes.
|
I guess someone in Utah figured that if the Russians can do it, he can do it better:
http://www.ishowstogo.com/ |
Originally Posted by kanebear
I do love when the record companies are screaming about stealing from the artists, etc. Bull-S. It's coming out of THEIR pockets. Their business model is old and outmoded. It needs to evolve but they don't know how to do it whilst turning the megaprofits they have in the past. Going forward, it's a broken model. Consumers don't want to do business that way anymore. They can fight as long as they wish, but in the end if they don't do something first someone will come along and do it for them.
I'd say half the time it's the label ripping off the artist. the labels are now screaming because their profits are going down, thanks to downloads. Even legal downloads. Dreaded be the day when one major has to move their office in London and the big boss can't take his chopper from his country estate north of town in to work and land on the helipad at the top of the building. So, they are now trying to go after iTunes and force them to bring the prices up because the labels want more money. they're also trying to get mehanical payouts on the ipod as they do with blank tapes and CDRs. It's funny but Perl Jam has sold 3 million downloads of their concerts in the past 5 years through their website. They sell them for $9.95 each. there is no copy protection on the files. the pricing works. Fans get the equivelent of two CDs for the price of one. They also get photos from that show with the download. Queen are selling downloads of their concerts as well. I have no idea how well they are doing but they are selling them on a track by track basis at £0.99 per track. Once you have the entire show you've paid quite a lot. It will be a while yet before the labels realise that if they want to compete on the market and actually sell CDs they have to drop the price. It's not like music is alone to compete for the attention of the punters these days. You haave PSP, Xbox, computers, games etc out there too. /E |
Originally Posted by ScottC
I guess someone in Utah figured that if the Russians can do it, he can do it better:
http://www.ishowstogo.com/ |
Originally Posted by Emma65
A top studio cost a couple of g-notes a day. A producer near enough $100k. A top producer more than that. (someone I know managed to get a producer that had produced and co written a couple of global hits that year for 80k and said it was cheap.)
/E Not the original article I read, but here's the first hit on google: http://xxlmag.com/Features/2004/1104...rch/index.html |
not 100% true
Originally Posted by Emma65
Thanks. And yes, you are right.
A lawyer is something that can be factored in to the advance and the record company pays for your lawyer - just make sure it's one that doesn't work for the label! Too many bands have done that mistake with both labels and managers and years later screaming they got scr*w*d. Anyway - the point I was trying to make is that very few new artists will stand a chance making a living on their music with the illegal downloading. If they can't get a deal with a label who does the backing and marketing what can they do? And labels will be less keen to sign new artists if they can't sell them. The illegal downloading isn't affecting the wealth of those who already made their fortunes before downloading turned in to a problem. Oh - and how come CDs turn up on P2P networks long before they are released? Most often it's the journalists on the mailinglists. SOmetimes it's even the record company execs who have trusted a friend with a copy, who trusted another friend, who trusted another friend... and so on. Or it's the courrier who pulled the CD and ripped it while he was taking it to the record company. Or it's the recording studio who runs an FTP they never change the password on and who's had it hacked or who use them same access codes for all their clients, because they couldn't be bothered getting a sysadmin in to set up a VPN. Or it's the band who haven't worked out that yousendit.com and similar is NOT a good idea to use when shipping files between eachother. Sheer stupidity is most often the reason why a CD ends up on P2P before it's released. And a hefty portion of "lack of respect for other peoples intellectual property" /E so the problem is that the music and the movie industry is not able to protect their pre-release supplyment chain. so as you pointed out correctly the releases are leaked because somewhere in the release chain their are un-secure persons. the person who are working in the cutting studio journalist the artist people in the factory where the cd/dvds are pressed the person who delievers the cds etc. so these persons leaking the release, they are making a digital copy. so the release goes its way Leaker -> Scene -> FXP Scene -> P2p -> Enduser so the problem is the FXP Scene. the Scene itself is only made as a internal trade ring, so normally if not some dump persons let some FXP trader inside 90% of the releases would not be avail. for P2P /endusers. the fxp scene is hacking servers, and they are spreading a thing they were not involved . but its impossible to catch these as there are too many , and they dont know what kind of work is behind there for the real groups to make a release happen. the whole thing is much more complicated and most of you will never realize what is behind and how the releases are getting leaked. the whole problem will be non-exsistent in some years, as the prices for downloaded music will drop to the allofmp3 level. and for paying a fee around 10usd per month, you will have acess anytime anywhere through all media (computer , mobile phone etc. ) to your online music content. its just a matter of time, the prices will drop in the future. dp |
Originally Posted by Febs
The United States Registrar of Copyrights has characterized allofmp3's music as "pirated":
You've pointed to the lack of information about allofmp3.com on RIAA's website as indicating that the RIAA at least tacitly acknowledges that allofmp3 is legal: To the contrary, the RIAA is a member of the International Intellectual Property Alliance (IIPA), a private sector coalition formed in 1984 to represent the U.S. copyright-based industries in bilateral and multilateral efforts to improve international protection of copyrighted materials. According to the IIPA website, "IIPA and its member associations track copyright legislative and enforcement developments in over 80 countries, working with U.S. government, foreign government and private sector representatives. IIPA’s goal is a legal and enforcement regime for copyright that not only deters piracy, but that also fosters technological and cultural development in these countries, and encourages local investment and employment." IIPA representatives have testified on a number of occasions before the U.S. House of Representatives Subcommittee on Courts, the Internet, and Intellectual Property regarding intellectual property theft in Russia. IIPA has repeatedly reported to the U.S. House Subcommittee that the Russian government should take steps to curb intellectual property piracy, which it estimates costs U.S. companies $1.7 billion annually. One of the "six critical steps" that the IIPA recommends the Russian government take is to "immediately take down websites offering infringing copyright materials, such as allofmp3.com, and criminally prosecute those responsible." Clearly, the IIPA does not believe that allofmp3 is legal. IIPA has urged the United States to take actions to "mandate Russia compliance with international norms and obligations" regarding copyright enforcement. IIPA has urged the U.S. to: (1) Condition Russia’s entry into the World Trade Organization (WTO) on meaningful copyright law enforcement; (2) Designate Russia as a Priority Foreign Country (PFC) after the on-going out of cycle review by U.S.T.R.; and (3) Deny Russia’s eligibility for the Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) duty-free trade benefits. Your supposition that RIAA has not taken any action against allofmp3 is incorrect. The IIPA report to Congress notes: The emphasis is mine, but it highlights that it is much more difficult for RIAA to sue a Russia organization in Russia than it is to sue individual copyright infringers in the U.S. For that reason, the RIAA, through the IIPA, has pursued relief through diplomatic measures. While it apparently has not been very successful in those efforts to date, your argument that RIAA has somehow tacitly acknowledged that allofmp3.com is legal is flat-out wrong. Good to know that a US agency considers ALLofMP3 as pirated music but given that half of what I do when I go abroad violates several USA laws; I have no qualms downloading "pirated" music. I most definitely can sleep @ night. |
Originally Posted by jwalkabout
Good to know that a US agency considers ALLofMP3 as pirated music but given that half of what I do when I go abroad violates several USA laws; I have no qualms downloading "pirated" music. I most definitely can sleep @ night.
|
Originally Posted by murphy
It's great you're able to rationalize stealing.
|
From his profile:
jwalkabout Location: USA Interests: good deals Whether there's a loophole in Russian copywrite law or not, if the copywrite holders aren't being compensated, to me it's stealing. |
Originally Posted by murphy
Whether there's a loophole in Russian copywrite law or not, if the copywrite holders are being compensated, to me it's stealing.
/E |
Originally Posted by murphy
It's great you're able to rationalize stealing.
I don't rationalize stealing music, I happily do it with no qualms. When the risk is such that it is detrimental to me, then I will stop downloading from allofmp3.com until then I willfully and with good conscience will continue to do so. I just can't support $1 per downlaod of lossy data nor can I support $15 per CD of what I consider disposable music regardless of the fact that it is legal. ALLof MP3 and mp3search have the right cost to match the product even though it is considered "pirated". I just bought a CD of Classical music from Amazon for $5 which I thought was priced right too. If ALL music CD's were priced @ $5, I would actually buy the CD and not even bother with downloading data. If my hard drive crashes and I don't have my music backed up then it is all lost. I would bet that 75% of digital music downloaders don't have a back up of their music. Imagine their grief when their DAP or HD crashes and their library is lost. |
Originally Posted by murphy
From his profile:
jwalkabout Location: USA Interests: good deals Whether there's a loophole in Russian copywrite law or not, if the copywrite holders are being compensated, to me it's stealing. BTW I don't remember setting up that profile. I had better revisit it! |
Originally Posted by Emma65
the point is that the copywrite holders are not compensated. allofmp3 can pay as much as they want to ROM but if ROM isn't part of the international organisation tha govern all royalty collection agencies, then how are the artists compensated?
/E |
Originally Posted by jwalkabout
I just can't support $1 per downlaod of lossy data nor can I support $15 per CD of what I consider disposable music regardless of the fact that it is legal.
|
Originally Posted by murphy
So don't buy their product. It's their decision how to sell it, not yours or allofmp3's.
|
Originally Posted by murphy
So don't buy their product. It's their decision how to sell it, not yours or allofmp3's.
Let me put it to u this way. If u foud a bag of money with $25k in it that was dropped by an armored car or whatever and u had a slim to none chance of getting caught what would u do? I would keep the money, some would avoid the money and leave alone, others would turn it over to the police. Pirated music is the equivalent to me. You are under the impression that you need to impart some dose of moral values. Spare yourself the frustration because you won't influence me in the least bit. I know why I do what I do and I am perfectly comfortable with that. |
Originally Posted by jwalkabout
I don't buy their product @ their price. So what is your point?
Let me put it to u this way. If u foud a bag of money with $25k in it that was dropped by an armored car or whatever and u had a slim to none chance of getting caught what would u do? I would keep the money, some would avoid the money and leave alone, others would turn it over to the police. Pirated music is the equivalent to me. You are under the impression that you need to impart some dose of moral values. Spare yourself the frustration because you won't influence me in the least bit. I know why I do what I do and I am perfectly comfortable with that. |
Originally Posted by opus17
The same can be said about shoplifting.
This is like shoplifting when all the cops are busy eating their doughnuts. |
It's like shoplifting where the shoplifted item never leaves the store, or theft where nothing gets stolen.
Comparing downloads from allofmp3 or P2P networks with shoplifting or stealing or stealing of physical products is pointless, just like reading a magazine in the airport bookstore instead of buying it doesn't equal theft, and back to back ticketing is not the same as stealing from the airline. |
| All times are GMT -6. The time now is 2:05 pm. |
This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.