Allofmp3 Doesn't Really Care If Russia Joins The WTO Or Not

from the try,-try-again dept

The US (thanks mostly to RIAA lobbyists influencing politicians) has been putting pressure on Russia to shut down the infamous as a condition of being admitted to the WTO. However, there's still the same old problem that Russian authorities don't really see Allofmp3 as violating local laws. The company itself has finally put out a statement on the matter basically saying that Russia's position in the WTO is of no concern to them, and they're just going to keep selling music as they've always done. In fact, they've picked up on the idea that all this anger over their existence is helping them on the marketing side (just as every other attempt to shut down online services has done). An Allofmp3 spokesperson is quoted as saying: "[US Trade Representative] Susan Schwab markets us so effectively -- she could already be our press secretary." They then reiterated that they're in complete compliance with Russian law, and that the complaint is really anger over them being a better, cheaper competitor.

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

  1. identicon
    myself, 9 Oct 2006 @ 4:18am

    Re: Re: Re: Sad

    On demand is not usually for free and is usally interactive you, ask for a movie on demand (in cable) they send it to you an you pay for it

    They encode it and send it to you as packages you are the one that take them and make the physical copy. Do you know what is the difference between a streamed mp3 song and a no streamed one? The program you use to access it. If you capture an streamed file and you open it with a normal reproductor it work without flaw.

    The law is not outdated just different, basically any form of no physical transmission has the same consideration that "radio".

    There are several flat fee policies in USA copyright law if I am not mistaken. So I suppose you must cancel that too, So no more fotocopiers or music radio anymore?

    Who are you to decide what should get a flat fee and what should be negociate case by case?

    If that flat fee is an option and you are talking about something new what is wrong with that option.

    You has to understand is only a loophole from the point of view of the RIAA, not from the point of view of russian law. The russian law say that any method of no physical transmission of copyrighted material must/could operate by a flat fee licence. You can discuss what was intended when it was writen but it looks to me that they intended to be quite inclusive. You say is outdated law others could considered a very advanced law with a great future proyection.

    The truth is russian law is that way and the internatinal WTO treaties don´t say anything in one way or another so no loophole, well maybe in the WTO treaties but usually thats the way all the international treaties are the loophole of ones are the correct interpretation of anothers.

    They don´t steal anything they pay to the collection agency (ROMS) that would agreagete the incomes and the music company must collect their money from the agency that would give it share to the artist, thats the way all the flat fees work. The artist isn´t geting anything because the RIAA (IFPI) dosen't like it and wish to change it so it left the money at ROMS and do not collect the money for the artist as it should because do not like to accept this situation.

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter

Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Special Affiliate Offer

Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads


Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.