Talk:AllOfMP3

message: I've read on various boards that this service is run my the russian mafia and it funds organised crime involved in, not least, sex trade trafficking. Can anybody clarify the owners of the service and if they are infact gangsters/gang masters selling MP3 to fund drug and people smuggling? 62.3.70.68 16:25, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Why are these links always made... either something is illegal or it isn't - just because something is (or might be) criminal doesn't mean it's funding other criminal activities - wouldn't those activities fund themselves anyway?...or couldn't they have been funded by the same funds instead of this? --193.63.247.68 09:51, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: These links are always made because any hint that a Russian business might not be 100% kosher immediately produces the knee-jerk internet response that the mafia must be involved. I have yet to see any credible evidence that AllOfMP3 is anything but a legitimate business taking advantage of the ambiguities of Russian copyright law (evidence found on "various boards" should be dismissed outright, in my opinion; it hardly qualifies as credible). -- Hux 09:00, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Organised Crime or just dubious copyright 

message: I edited the article to note that the downloaded files are transcoded from 384 kbps MP3 files. Another user deleted that edit, saying that the MP3 spec only supports up to 320 kpbs.
That's going to be news to AllOfMP3.com, which includes 384 kpbs as one of the options on the download dialog box.
--Alaska Jack 20:27, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Then they're wrong. Please take a look at the MPEG 2 Layer III spec. Decoders are only required to support up to a 320kbps bitrate (there's a mode called 'freeform' that for instance LAME can create which has basically an arbitrary upper bitrate limit but that is virtually never supported by decoders and is hardly ever used). There are bitrates of 384k+ for layer 2 and layer 1 (aka MP1 and MP2). If *that* is what they're using, well, no wonder the sound quality sucks. --Bk0 (Talk) 02:50, 1 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Good info. I guess when you download a file, it's pretty hazy as to what exactly you're getting. I still think it's worthwhile, though, to note that most files from AllOfMP3 will be transcoded. I don't think most people realize that. Alaska Jack 01:14, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The spec goes up to 320 kpbs. AllofMP3 offer out-of-spec 384Kbps files. You can encode this type of file with the well-known program LAME, as stated, so why is it hard to believe that this is what allofmp3.com are doing? I find this conversation rather funny :) Why not go look at allofmp3.com and see how it works instead of quoting a spec? | Kristleifur 22:34, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's hard to believe because very few (if any) players (hardware or software) would be able to decode it. MP2 is still widely used in the radio/telecommunications industry so I would be more inclined to believe that they are using layer 2 encoding (possibly some commercial hardware device) and calling it "MP3" just for simplicity's sake. --Bk0 (Talk) 22:54, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's still what they do :) I have 384kbps files from them right here on my drive. They're freeform MP3s, I've checked. This is what they transcode from, when the tracks are marked "OE". "OEEX" tracks are transcoded from some form of lossless encoding. They don't offer 384kbps files as one of their "normal" encodings, but if you go to the Advanced view you can download these. And besides, the sound quality over there is just fine. Have you checked it out? :) | Kristleifur 00:20, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Anyway, it doesn't matter, as the article is correct now. I didn't actually check the article to see what was in there - how appropriate :) | Kristleifur 00:22, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough, if that's what they do. At least the article is correct now. Thanks. --Bk0 (Talk) 00:35, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  MP3 spec and transcoding issue 

message: Slashdot has a story (slashdot.org) about this story (gizmodo.com), which reports that the Russian judiciary cannot procecute AllOfMP3.com. Please read the articles and tell me what you think about it. In this light, we might have to rewrite or edit some of the article.
:OK, I see that Paranoid has already taken care of this. Thanks a lot!--capnez 22:17, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Legality in Russia 

message: Kinda off-topic, since its not directly related editing the article, but what do people think about the legality of this service in the UK?  I use it and find it to be excellent, but I am concerned about the legal side?  I am not concerned about the threat of prosecution or the opinions of the RIAA/BPI etc but I don't want to break the law (as a christian I believe we should follow the laws of our country). Anyone have any opinions? Feel free to boost this comment to my user page if you feel it won't help the article! akaDruid 12:04, 10 Aug 2004 (UTC)
replies: text: Don't see why this is off topic. If anyone knows about legality in the UK it should be in the article. Why should wikipedia be more interested in US law than UK law? --Dilaudid 16:01, 23 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree that it's certainly on topic. I don't know much about UK copyright law, but I do know that it's illegal to make a copy of a work for personal use in Britain (software excepted in the case of essential backups) because I read in the news recently that the BPI (UK version of RIAA) recently advocated a change in the law to permit such copies. Additionally, a large bulk of US law is based on UK common law so, if I had to put money on it, I'd guess that the status of AllOfMP3 in the UK is essentially the same as in the US, i.e. if you're a user you're probably infringing. -- Hux 16:02, 24 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Legality in the UK 

message: This article now claims that mp3stor.com is the new database of AllOfMP3.  Where is the proof on that?  Their design looks similar, but I thought they have already been around before ALLOfMP3.  --Bapinney 20:17, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: there are definitely recordings which were present in AllOfMP3's inventory before the outage that are not listed at MP3Stor. likewise, there are recordings in MP3Stor's collection which were not present at AllOfMP3. --G0zer 09:37, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  mp3stor.com = allofmp3.com? 

message: I don't agree with this warning - the section is factual, and is immediately followed by criticisms. Thoughts? guiltyspark 22:23, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agreed. -- BBlackmoor (talk) 23:16, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  advertisement warning 

message: I think the article should have a separate section about how much artists are paid by the service.  This issue should not be described under the Legality heading; it is a distinct issue.  Unfortunately, it is difficult to find out exactly who ROMS is paying and how much.  They are required by Russian law to pay all Russian artists and (to my understanding) any foreign artist who sends ROMS the proper paperwork.  Does anyone know any Russian artists paid by ROMS?  Does ROMS subdivide or sum radio and internet payments?  Have any non-Russian citizen artists fluent in Russian sent ROMS the proper paperwork to get paid?  Also, the ROMS article should be expanded.  -Kslays 15:11, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Artist Payment 

message: Hi, this line in the article is problematic:  
"As of August 13, 2006, the basic price for one gigabyte of music downloaded is $0.03 or 3 cents per megabyte, increased from the previous 2 cents per megabyte set on January 15, 2005."
This implies that one GIGAbyte of music costs the same as one MEGAbyte to download. I propose we change the line to 
"As of August 13, 2006, the basic price for one gigabyte of music downloaded is approximately $30 or 3 cents per megabyte, increased from the previous 2 cents per megabyte set on January 15, 2005."
or
"As of August 13, 2006, the basic price for one megabyte of music downloaded is $0.03, increased from the previous $0.02 per megabyte set on January 15, 2005."
:Done. RichF 17:00, 16 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Pricing confusion 

message: This paragraph seems to me beeing very POV and I think it should be rewritten:
:This means that the court ruling finds that Tele2 are unlawfully making copies while routing their customers communication. So they are not directly forced to block information from Allofmp3.com, they are found to be making "pirate copies" when doing their job of directing communication on the internet, that is what a router does, and internet cannot function without it. This basically means that this court has forbidden the internet in Denmark. This goes also for modern mobile communication too, since a mobile phone also can be used to unlawfully communicate otherwise already published and not stamped with secrecy information. It is a lot like if the old telephone company had been held responsible for what its customers said on the phone. Tele2 has applied for retrial in higher court.
--Vladimír Fuka 13:55, 8 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  NPOV 

message: I have removed the cleanup tag from the article now, as I think it's much improved since it was first tagged. MartinBrook t 12:01, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cleanup 

message: 1.65 trillion bucks asked. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 60.241.49.114 (talk) 
*Funny thing about that is Russia's GDP is only 1.57 Tril (according to the page here on Wikipedia). I'd like to see how the American DMCA holds up in Russia. This will be as funny as them sueing grandmothers, 9-yr olds, and dead war veterans. -Ghostalker
:Ok, sueed. What now? Whats happening? No money to RIAA? Or did RIAA simply miss the fact that allofmp3 is located in Russia?Was this just something they did for media attention? Anyone got some news or something they can add? It simply doesn't give any sense to write that they got sued for 1.65 trillion, end of story. This is of cours my humble opinion. :) Mr Mo 21:55, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sued! 

message: I've been watching this page for a long time, paying attention to what gets changed, and I've come to a conclusion: the vast majority of the edits made are really unnecessary since they're concerned entirely with whether or not the service is currently operational, whether or not one can currently add money to one's account and by what method, etc. etc. These details are not relevant for an encyclopedic article. If anyone needs to know about the operational status of AllOfMP3 then the best place to go is AllOfMP3.com and their forums. This article should concern itself will what the service is, how it works in general, discussions of relevant legal issues, etc. etc. Frankly I think the whole thing could do with a major rewrite, excising all the superfluous junk and cleaning up the legal issues. That's a big job though! -- Hux 07:05, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You're missing the point by getting hung up on the details. Whether or not AOMP3 (or Xrost or anyone else) has forums is irrelevant. The fact remains that status updates are not encyclopedic and things that are not encyclopedic do not belong on Wikipedia. They belong somewhere else. This should be obvious, shouldn't it? -- Hux 06:07, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Unnecessary updates 

message: Re this quote under payment methods (by 24.211.249.157):
however AllTunes does not accept any major credit cards. They only accept credit cards from the Japan Credit Bureau.
I've just gone through the payment process at alltunes.com and the only option I get is MasterCard. I suppose it might depend on the user's location. Anyway, I think it's best not to be too specific, and it seems to me that the exact payment details aren't really relevant for this article. I've gone ahead and removed the statement, feel free to improve though. MartinBrook t 10:45, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Japan Credit Bureau? 

message: 71.31.88.132 19:40, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  MP3Sparks.com 

message: It's no longer Allofmp3.com so the article title needs to be changed as well.Funkbomb 23:32, 26 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Requested move

message: It looks like the site is starting to come back alive.  I added a small blurb that it looks like it's coming back, but didn't modify the whole article to remove ALL the closed references.
Sstucker 01:51, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  I'm sure it's not dead yet. I've made some more changes to the stuff about MP3Sparks, which is clearly alive and kicking. And of course, the only official line from AllOfMP3.ru is still "down for maintenance"... MartinBrook t 12:57, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Starting to come back up 7/12/2007 

message: Just wondering whether the section on legal issues should be given a more prominent position near the top of the article. It seems more relevant than 'how the service works' at the moment. I'm reluctant to do it without some input from others though. MartinBrook t 22:25, 17 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I would definitely agree with this, this is one of the reasons I visited the article in the first place. --Aimaz 09:00, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Legal issues should be moved higher up? 

message: Please don't remove the reference to the legal issues from the lead section of this article. The lead section is supposed to be a summary of all the relevant points from the article - the legal issues are probably the most relevant thing in this article at the moment! If you're not happy with the paragraph please try and improve it, but don't just remove it. MartinBrook t 13:55, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lead section 

message: We should include somewhere in the article the recent existence of sites like www.mp3search.ru and www.legalsounds.com, which seem to be operating on very similar models to AllofMp3 !  BlackberryLaw 14:14, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  All Of MP3 Replacements 

message: What does this mean? When was that written? Please add a specific date explaining when the mp3sparks shut down the ability to add money to your account. Is this still even the case? Not that I doubt it, I just would like to see a specific date or even month/year.  comment added by Wellesradio (talk • contribs) 18:42, 18 May 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  "past two months"? 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 7 external links on AllOfMP3. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070110055529/http://www.nypost.com/seven/12212006/business/music_labels__nyet_to_russian_pirates_business_peter_lauria.htm to http://www.nypost.com/seven/12212006/business/music_labels__nyet_to_russian_pirates_business_peter_lauria.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061106100423/http://www.ustr.gov/assets/Document_Library/Transcripts/2006/September/asset_upload_file794_9872.pdf to http://www.ustr.gov/assets/Document_Library/Transcripts/2006/September/asset_upload_file794_9872.pdf
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061201050141/http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9588_22-6122879.html to http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9588_22-6122879.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070927213442/http://www.russianspy.org/2006/10/27/swedish-tele2-will-block-allofmp3com/ to http://www.russianspy.org/2006/10/27/swedish-tele2-will-block-allofmp3com/
*Added  tag to http://business.bostonherald.com/businessNews/view.bg?articleid=173284
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070322040930/http://tech.cybernetnews.com/2006/12/22/allofmp3com-sued-for-165-trillion/ to http://tech.cybernetnews.com/2006/12/22/allofmp3com-sued-for-165-trillion/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070110055529/http://www.nypost.com/seven/12212006/business/music_labels__nyet_to_russian_pirates_business_peter_lauria.htm to http://www.nypost.com/seven/12212006/business/music_labels__nyet_to_russian_pirates_business_peter_lauria.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070823070406/http://eng.cnews.ru/news/top/indexEn.shtml?2007%2F07%2F13%2F258719 to http://eng.cnews.ru/news/top/indexEn.shtml?2007%2F07%2F13%2F258719
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:21, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on AllOfMP3. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://archive.is/20120906024755/http://www.p2pnet.net/story/12348 to http://www.p2pnet.net/story/12348
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:38, 5 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified