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 (a fact well documented in the report), analysis of the legality of that activity cannot be limited to analysis of Russian law.

It doesn't. Thus the service is legal for use within Russia. For those of us outside Russia (and specifically in the US), it's not. There's no difference between this and purchasing a pirated copy of Windows XP on the street in China and bringing it back to the US for use here. You paid someone for the media, but the rights holder and IP owner received nothing.

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.

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.

The old Appeal to Authority sure slaps my wrist!

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.

None of this is directly relevant to the point of my post, which was a response to ScottC's suggestion that the RIAA has tacitly acknowledged the legality of MP3. The RIAA, as a member of IIPA, has endorsed the position that allofmp3 is not legal.

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:

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.

Your sentence should read "As long as they don't plug the holes that remain in the new laws, the site remains legal in Russia."

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.

Me too! Sure am glad I switched to alltunes.

Isn't it the same thing? :confused:

I guess someone in Utah figured that if the Russians can do it, he can do it better:

http://www.ishowstogo.com/

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

This appears to be of "questionable legality" as well.

Yeah, I was reading a profile on one of the biggest producers in music today. Does rap, hip hop and whatever else is willing to pay his $50K (or was it $100K) fee, apparently enough to cover the payments on his mansion, fleet of exotic cars, and some major bling bling on his finger. And, oh by the way, he's a 30-something guy living in Florida with a production company called "Tuff Jew"!

Not the original article I read, but here's the first hit on google:
http://xxlmag.com/Features/2004/1104...rch/index.html