The RIAA’s Russian front

The Daily Vanguard
By Christian Gaston
October 21, 2005


An internet retailer that’s selling Franz Ferdinand’s latest album for $1.14? Sounds too good to be legal, right? Not in Russia.

AllofMP3.com, a digital music warehouse akin to iTunes, has ruffled the feathers of industry recording groups by selling albums at a cut rate, seemingly bypassing industry-standard repayment and copy protection schemes. To add insult to injury, pressure from the recording industry to shut the company down has fallen on deaf ears.

Those ears, belonging to Russian prosecutors, are deaf to the noise produced by recording companies because Russian copyright law may not cover “digital media.” And if the RIAA can’t shut the site down, AllofMP3 poses a more dangerous threat: outperforming accredited mp3 vendors in the marketplace.

The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) has been scrabbling since the 1999 debut of Napster to deal with internet music distribution. The organization started by suing companies that maintained “file-sharing” networks, winning victories over Napster and likeminded companies. But since that brief period of success, the recording industry has had a difficult time pinning down responsibility for the file-sharing boondoggle.

In 2003 a federal appeals court ruling allowed Internet Service Provider Verizon to refuse the RIAA’s request for data on its customers. The RIAA has since moved to suing individuals who download or “share” a significant amount of music, but the campaign to discourage internet piracy has caused a massive backlash among internet denizens.

In the case of AllofMP3, the case seems fairly clear, if the RIAA and its international counterpart, the International Federation of Phonographic Industries, can’t get Russian authorities to shut down the service, then they may have to resort to suing the users.

But that’s where things get tricky. In essence, the suits that the RIAA brings against individual music pirates in the U.S. are consistently valid because, almost unquestionably, those who download albums from Grokster, Soulseek or Bittorrent know that what they’re doing isn’t legal.

But customers of a commercial web site like AllofMP3, which seems to be on the up-and-up aside from the grammatical awkwardness of its moniker, have a lack of apparent intent. Instead of being obvious scofflaws, these users are more like unwitting purchasers of untaxed cigarettes. In that case the RIAA may have a very difficult time bringing lawsuits against AllofMP3 users, and it’s unlikely that federal prosecutors would bring charges.

In the course of my reporting, I couldn’t find any federal officials that would call the AllofMP3 situation a “law enforcement” priority. Nor did the RIAA have comment.

This sort of silence just underlines the complexity of problems that law enforcement and the record industry have encountered in trying to shut down the burgeoning online music trade.

According to a spokesperson for the International Federation of Phonographic Industries quoted by ZDNet columnist David Berlind, the federation has succeeded in having the German government declare AllofMP3 illegal and in shutting down the Russian company’s operations in Italy.

But ultimately they haven’t made any progress toward getting the Russian government — the only government with jurisdiction here — to close down the site.

Beyond threatening the RIAA’s authority in the states AllofMP3 also has the potential of threatening iTunes’ hegemony in the marketplace. Because, from a consumer’s perspective, it’s better.

AllofMP3 users have the option of downloading songs in whatever format they’d like. Cutting-edge “lossless” formats are available next to common MP3 and OGG.

With AllofMP3, users don’t have to own an iPod, reformat their music themselves, or break the law by actively ditching the copy protection tags attached to the files they buy online. None of these problems exist because none of the restrictions of use present with current online music brokers are present at AllofMP3.

Fred Von Lohmann, senior staff attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a non-profit working in the field of digital music consumer rights, hopes that the impermeability of the Russian threat will make the music industry take notice of their own weaknesses.

“I hope the music industry learns from this that there is still a considerable amount of demand out there that’s going unmet,” Lohmann said.

“Copy protections or restrictions are not slowing down unauthorized file trading at all. Every song that’s on iTunes is on EDonkey in about 5 minutes,” he said, “So the only thing they’re doing is frustrating legitimate music fans.”

Those frustrations are in place because of, not in spite of, the RIAA. The recording industry could easily re-contract with Apple or the now-reborn Napster in order to eliminate the copy protections, add new transmutable format options or lossless quality (akin to the extreme hi-fi of a direct drive record player circa 1977).

But that course seems as unlikely as the RIAA actively suing users of AllofMP3 or PayPal, the moneychanger that manages fund transfers between customers and the company.

“I don’t think it’s going to be a productive option to try to sue every competitor out of existence,” Lohmann said. “The option is for the music industry to compete with free.”

“High prices, limited inventory and restrictions on the files are not the way to compete with free.”

And if competing with free is out of the question, it seems that the RIAA will have to learn how to compete with $1.14.

I don't personally recommend AllofMp3.com ...I have heard that they claim to pay the artists a share of the money, but I have my doubts.

But the overall message of this article is correct, The RIAA/IFPI lunk-heads simply CAN'T stop/take-over p2p completely. Even if they could drive AllofMp3.com out of business, there is always gonna be the Darknets and such.

It's sort of an analog to the war on drugs. The more they try to limit "illicit" file-sharing, the more underground and black-market it becomes.

...then again, the cartel has always had the wrong approach.

If the recording industry would put out a model similar to allofmp3s, I wouldn't mind it. The biggest problem I have with the RIAA is DRM.

Anyhow, I admit to using the service to download songs from RUSSIAN artists, Kraski, Larisa Chernikova, Evgeniya Vlasovaya, etc.

But allofmp3.com begs a question. If they sell so many US/EU artists, how do they get them the money? The RIAA/IFPI would probably refuse the royalty checks (if paid) on the basis that they don't want to give legitimacy to them by taking their money. (RIAA turn down money?)

anyhow....

one wonders why "imports" cost so much. e-type

their selection has gotten better on kate ryan though.

if I want a riaa/ifpi artist, I'll buy them used anyway. Fragma

I read on this forum, perhaps another one, that under US law, importing IP for personal consumption is legal.
Since allofmp3 is selling product not illegal under the laws of the country (& isn't illegal in the US) where they operate, the RIAA would have a difficult time prosecuting US customers of that site.

http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap6.html#602

subsection 2 seems to be the defense for allofmp3.com users

§ 602. Infringing importation of copies or phonorecords

(a) Importation into the United States, without the authority of the owner of copyright under this title, of copies or phonorecords of a work that have been acquired outside the United States is an infringement of the exclusive right to distribute copies or phonorecords under section 106, actionable under section 501. This subsection does not apply to —

(1) importation of copies or phonorecords under the authority or for the use of the Government of the United States or of any State or political subdivision of a State, but not including copies or phonorecords for use in schools, or copies of any audiovisual work imported for purposes other than archival use;

(2) importation, for the private use of the importer and not for distribution, by any person with respect to no more than one copy or phonorecord of any one work at any one time, or by any person arriving from outside the United States with respect to copies or phonorecords forming part of such person's personal baggage; or

(3) importation by or for an organization operated for scholarly, educational, or religious purposes and not for private gain, with respect to no more than one copy of an audiovisual work solely for its archival purposes, and no more than five copies or phonorecords of any other work for its library lending or archival purposes, unless the importation of such copies or phonorecords is part of an activity consisting of systematic reproduction or distribution, engaged in by such organization in violation of the provisions of section 108(g)(2).

(b) In a case where the making of the copies or phonorecords would have constituted an infringement of copyright if this title had been applicable, their importation is prohibited. In a case where the copies or phonorecords were lawfully made, the United States Customs Service has no authority to prevent their importation unless the provisions of section 601 are applicable. In either case, the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized to prescribe, by regulation, a procedure under which any person claiming an interest in the copyright in a particular work may, upon payment of a specified fee, be entitled to notification by the Customs Service of the importation of articles that appear to be copies or phonorecords of the work.

The average reporter wouldn't know his bum from his elbow, legally speaking. But I do wonder how any prosecution would be brought. Which law is being violated here? What is the number of the US Code that would disallow these transactions? The site has already been tested in Russian courts and not found to be in violation of Russian laws.

I believe it would be legal for an American to buy a CD from a Russian music store, no doubt at a reduced price, and no doubt the artists would receive less royalty than if the same CD was purchased in the US. No doubt there are several other countries where one could import album X or Y, and save money, even considering shipping costs. As far as I know there would be no law against this.

I have purchased drugs from India, generics which are far less expensive than their US counterparts. And there may be legal loopholes to do even this. Obviously India is a patent outlaw, just as Russia is sort of a copyright outlaw. But even if there is a law against importing pharmaceuticals from India or Thailand, it is not really enforced. What worth is a law that is unenforced?

This Russian site would probably be in the same sort of category. And by the way, I know a man who married a Russian woman , who told me he will use the site to download Russian music for his wife. He has no other practical way to buy it. For domestic music, he buys iTunes. Boo hiss.

But maybe when he sees how cheap the downloads are, he will weaken and buy Western music too.

Both the Republicans and the Democrats are always touting free trade. So let's have free trade, then. Why should American record companies have protection from foreign production when domestic textile makers do not have protection from Chinese production?

"Why should American record companies have protection from foreign production when domestic textile makers do not have protection from Chinese production?"

I can see it now, Sherman Textiles Inc... scary

I'm just glad there is at least one government in the world not willing to let the music cartel write their laws.

I think it is despicable that the country you refer to is not the USA.

i use this website for all of my music needs and i have no problems morally with it. i have spent over $150 dollars and gotten about 80 albums encoded @ 320kbps or flac.