Tuesday, January 2nd 2007

RIAA suing Russian “pirate outfit” for $1.6 trillion

The Recording Industry Association of America has announced that it is set to sue Russian music firm Mediaservices for $1.6 trillion. Mediaservices also owns AllofMP3.com and allTunes.com and is accused of selling music illegally. Apparently the RIAA want $150,000 for each of the 11 million pirated songs. A spokesperson for AllofMP3.com claimed that the suit is unjustified because the company doesn’t operate in New York and obeys Russian Copyright laws – it even pays some of its profit to the Russian equivalent of the RIAA, the Russian Organisation for Multimedia, which the RIAA argues has no right to exist. It has been no secret that the RIAA has been unhappy with Mediaservices, but this is the first real action they’ve taken.Source: The Inquirer
Add your own comment

78 Comments on RIAA suing Russian “pirate outfit” for $1.6 trillion

#2
Jimmy 2004
by: Homeless
gl w/ that one...
It is crazy... the only way they could have a decent chance of winning would be to get Mediaservices to an American court - which I doubt they will.
Posted on Reply
#3
pt
not a suicide-bomber
by: Jimmy 2004
It is crazy... the only way they could have a decent chance of winning would be to get Mediaservices to an American court - which I doubt they will.
that would be funny
media services can just say:
*you can kiss my balls suckers...!* :laugh:
Posted on Reply
#4
ATIonion
years and years ago making music was written and made by artists not by record labels...but when recording companies started to become monsters they change they music industry...its no longer about making good music, but more about making alot of $$$$...

with that said i see a near future where p2p and other such systems of exchange will take back music and force many recording companies out of business....wouldn't it be nice to just have good music that was made for the sake of making it and not for the money........

i compare music and movies to going to an art museum....museums around here you can get in and walk around for free...you don't have to pay to look at anything....could you imagine paying $.99 to see a single painting? Hell no....so why should music be any different......because of the record labels is why....they will be their own undoing....:rockout:
Posted on Reply
#5
Seany1212
LOLOL, they want $150,00 for EACH song!! :roll: :roll: :roll: , money grabbing morons, ATIonion i back that one.
Posted on Reply
#6
WarEagleAU
Bird of Prey
HAHA! I wish them luck with that. On that note. Well Put Onion. well put
Posted on Reply
#7
bornfree
Despite the bashing of the RIAA, copyright laws will always prevail in a court of law - as they should. The Russian's think they are immune from prosecution for facilitating piracy, but they are wrong. It may take some time but you can be certain that AllOfMP3 will be closed down too, just like every other illegal P2P piracy website.

The courts have no choice but to enforce law and it's right to do so. Pirates will be forced to buy goods and services - just like every other citizen in society or go without. The marketplace determines prices. If you think the price of a product is too high then stop buying it. No one needs to steal - it's simply a bad choice they make and one that can land them in jail - as it should.
Posted on Reply
#8
bretts31344
by: bornfree
It may take some time but you can be certain that AllOfMP3 will be closed down too, just like every other illegal P2P piracy website.
LOL, you seriously think EVERY P2P site will be shutdown? You have to be kidding.
Posted on Reply
#9
pt
not a suicide-bomber
by: bretts31344
LOL, you seriously think EVERY P2P site will be shutdown? You have to be kidding.
in the dreams of the RIAA it will probabily happen :laugh:
Posted on Reply
#10
Track
Even if they take down the websites, there is NOTHING to do against P2P because its just 2 ppl exchanging data over the internet, and no one owns the internet. The only way would be to make it illegel to rip ur CDs and have the files on ur PC.
Posted on Reply
#11
Track
by: ATIonion
wouldn't it be nice to just have good music that was made for the sake of making it and not for the money........
If they couldnt make a profit off of it, they wouldnt be doing it.

by: ATIonion

i compare music and movies to going to an art museum....museums around here you can get in and walk around for free...you don't have to pay to look at anything....could you imagine paying $.99 to see a single painting? Hell no....so why should music be any different......because of the record labels is why....they will be their own undoing....:rockout:
No, thats because u get to keep the song, where as u cannot take the painting home. A museum is like a radio station where u can listen to songs just once, and u pay a little extra so that u can choose what songs are played.
Posted on Reply
#12
ATIonion
by: bornfree
The Russian's think they are immune from prosecution for facilitating piracy, but they are wrong.
I don't pretend to know about international laws and how one country would go about suing another country...So what i say isn't set in stone....however who do they prosecute? how do they prosecute them?

and who the hell has $1.trillion to payout anyway...if record labels have lost out on $1.6 trillion to this, then i have really under guessed the amount of P2P and piracy that occurs...


by: bornfree

It may take some time but you can be certain that AllOfMP3 will be closed down too, just like every other illegal P2P piracy website.
I don't think that could happen....trying to stop all P2P would be like telling everyone to stop listening....the way in which P2P works may change to side step legal issues....

by: bornfree
The courts have no choice but to enforce law and it's right to. No one needs to steal - it's simply a bad choice they make and one that can land them in jail
i agree that the courts have no choice but to do what they have to do.....and sure no one needs to steal...maybe in a life or death situation to steal could be justified...but we aren't talking about a loaf of bread or some milk for the baby...
Posted on Reply
#13
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
by: Jimmy 2004
The Russian Organisation for Multimedia, which the RIAA argues has no right to exist.
Man, the RIAA really needs a damn reality check.
Posted on Reply
#14
Fragman
I can understand why the rest of the world hates the US they think they a the world police.

ppl in the US need to get a fucking life.
Posted on Reply
#15
zekrahminator
McLovin
Nice find Jimmy, I heard about it in school today, and was going to post it, but... ;). From what I can tell...A- It's not possible for the lawsuit to actually go through. You can't sue a Russian company from New York, because Russia is not governed by the United States of America. B- $150,000 a song is outrageous and ridiculous, especially for a completely legitimate business in Russia. C- In the unlikely event that this gets into court and is actually accepted, they are asking an unreasonable amount of money. The gross national income of Russia is 1.5 trillion, and they're asking for 1.6. D- Once again, if this went through, a counter suit would be completely reasonable.
Posted on Reply
#16
pt
not a suicide-bomber
by: Fragman
I can understand why the rest of the world hates the US they think they a the world police.

ppl in the US need to get a fucking life.
i don't hate the usa, just their government and some stupid laws
Posted on Reply
#17
DMSMac_Consult
I wouldn't be surprised if the case was dismissed outright on jurisdictional grounds, or transferred to a Russian venue where Russian law will prevail.

And $1.6 trillion? If any judge actually considered letting a case proceed with such an egregious amount sought for damages, he should have his head examined. Is this like the largest lawsuit in history?
Posted on Reply
#18
ATIonion
by: Track
If they couldn't make a profit off of it, they wouldn't be doing it.
sure they would...music was around well before people started making huge profits from it....music is vital to all society.....music just wouldn't stop because you couldn't make money from it....


by: Track

No, thats because u get to keep the song, where as u cannot take the painting home. A museum is like a radio station where u can listen to songs just once, and u pay a little extra so that u can choose what songs are played.
i think you're looking a little too deep into what i said....tho i see your point...i'm not sure how to argue such a topic....we all have ripped from a friends CD...back in the day it was cassette tapes....then cd, and now MP and whatnot......we have all either recorded or have a recording of a live concert....

I'm not saying this is all OK, but its clear that huge changes are coming...and i think after time it won't be an illegal thing to worry about...they can't control it really, and more and more people are going to P2P networks to get movies and music.....after time it can only hurt those industries..
Posted on Reply
#19
tigger
I'm the only one
i'd just tell the riaa to fuck off and set the russian mafia on 'em.:roll:
Posted on Reply
#20
Steevo
With how easy it is to move content, the RIAA is soon going to be forced to try to outlaw music on the internet (fat chance) or to put their head between their legs and kiss their ass goodbye.


Private FTP, shared e-mail accounts, hell every messenger out there allows transfers. Talk to someone and get the new CD at the same time.


WTF do they think they are going to do about it?
Posted on Reply
#21
ATIonion
by: Steevo
With how easy it is to move content, the RIAA is soon going to be forced to try to outlaw music on the internet (fat chance) or to put their head between their legs and kiss their ass goodbye.


Private FTP, shared e-mail accounts, hell every messenger out there allows transfers. Talk to someone and get the new CD at the same time.


WTF do they think they are going to do about it?
i agree...


now the question is what will movies and music be like without the big $$$$ being spent on them....last i heard movie makers say they lose about 8% a year, and growing, to pirating....so we have a ways to go before that time...pretty obvious what would happen to the movie industry...they would have to sell a shit load of Pepsi ads in the movies, if they don't sell ads then the movies will begin to really suck...imagine DooM with guys in rubber suits like in Godzilla..lol....but do you guys think it will be good or bad for music industry???
Posted on Reply
#22
newtekie1
Semi-Retired Folder
by: ATIonion
i agree...


now the question is what will movies and music be like without the big $$$$ being spent on them....last i heard movie makers say they lose about 8% a year and growing....
I would atribute the movie industry losses on the fact that they keep churning out the same crappy movies over and over again and the number of crappy movies has grown leaps and bounds in the past years, while the number of good movies has declined sharply.
Posted on Reply
#23
overcast
by: ATIonion
years and years ago making music was written and made by artists not by record labels...but when recording companies started to become monsters they change they music industry...its no longer about making good music, but more about making alot of $$$$...

with that said i see a near future where p2p and other such systems of exchange will take back music and force many recording companies out of business....wouldn't it be nice to just have good music that was made for the sake of making it and not for the money........

i compare music and movies to going to an art museum....museums around here you can get in and walk around for free...you don't have to pay to look at anything....could you imagine paying $.99 to see a single painting? Hell no....so why should music be any different......because of the record labels is why....they will be their own
undoing....:rockout:
Museums are heavily financed mostly by wealthy private individuals. Often times you have to pay to attend artists exhibits. Your comparison make absolutely no sense. The record companies put up all the capital, produce the albums, pay all the people working on the albums, the artists, AND THEY OWN IT. They aren't allowed to defend what they own? Get a clue. These arguments are so stupid, you have absolutely ZERO right to their music. You are paying for a licensed copy of the music, you don't own it. Saying you have a right to steal their music is just ridiculous. These laws weren't created with the invention of distributable music/movies. They were created because people are stealing them. YOU CAUSED IT, YOU DEAL WITH THE REPERCUSSIONS. You can't honestly believe that you have a right to free music and movies. I guess I have a right to free cars and houses right? Who is going to make this magical music for the sake of making music? Are you going to feed these people? Pay for their mortgages, their cars? A Communist country might suit you better.
Posted on Reply
#24
ATIonion
by: newtekie1
I would attribute the movie industry losses on the fact that they keep churning out the same crappy movies over and over again and the number of crappy movies has grown leaps and bounds in the past years, while the number of good movies has declined sharply.
by: ATIonion



last i heard movie makers say they lose about 8% a year, and growing, to pirating....
i made an edit to what i said....they estimate 8% a year to just pirating...im sure they have a lose figured in the crap movies they put out tho...




by: overcast
Museums are heavily financed mostly by wealthy private individuals. Often times you have to pay to attend artists exhibits. Your comparison make absolutely no sense. The record companies put up all the capital, produce the albums, pay all the people working on the albums, the artists, AND THEY OWN IT. They aren't allowed to defend what they own? Get a clue. These arguments are so stupid, you have absolutely ZERO right to their music. You are paying for a licensed copy of the music, you don't own it. Saying you have a right to steal their music is just ridiculous. These laws weren't created with the invention of distributable music/movies. They were created because people are stealing them. YOU CAUSED IT, YOU DEAL WITH THE REPERCUSSIONS. You can't honestly believe that you have a right to free music and movies. I guess I have a right to free cars and houses right? Who is going to make this magical music for the sake of making music? Are you going to feed these people? Pay for their mortgages, their cars? A Communist country might suit you better.
argue what you want....thats apart of TPU, but remember when you read this stuff that its mostly opinions....to get all upset over a simple discussion is a waste...and it makes you look like a dick....
Posted on Reply
#25
pt
not a suicide-bomber
by: overcast
Museums are heavily financed mostly by wealthy private individuals. Often times you have to pay to attend artists exhibits. Your comparison make absolutely no sense. The record companies put up all the capital, produce the albums, pay all the people working on the albums, the artists, AND THEY OWN IT. They aren't allowed to defend what they own? Get a clue. These arguments are so stupid, you have absolutely ZERO right to their music. You are paying for a licensed copy of the music, you don't own it. Saying you have a right to steal their music is just ridiculous. These laws weren't created with the invention of distributable music/movies. They were created because people are stealing them. YOU CAUSED IT, YOU DEAL WITH THE REPERCUSSIONS. You can't honestly believe that you have a right to free music and movies. I guess I have a right to free cars and houses right? Who is going to make this magical music for the sake of making music? Are you going to feed these people? Pay for their mortgages, their cars? A Communist country might suit you better.
too bad comunism isn't like that in real life, i would become one :D
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment