I'm an artist, I paint. Do I demand money every time people look at my paintings? No, that would be absurd, I sell my work once and get paid for my time. If that becomes unprofitable, I would do other things. Seems fair to me. Gee, getting paid for your time, what a concept... Over the past 100+ years though, our society has been brainwashed into thinking otherwise with this trick known as royalties. The thing is, that trick doesn't work anymore, game over, evolve or die people.

caliman, Los Angeles, USA

Great Site and cheap enough for those on minimum wage to earn. But then corporations ans the Government want to deny everything to the poorest

Stephen, Bridgnorth, Shroshire

Hey Marion. It's Illegal because the owners of the music and the artists who created the music don't get any of the money. It's like if you made 100 copies of the new Harry Potter movie on your home computer and sold them out of the trunk of your car and kept all of the cash. It's not your content to sell...Illegal.

Jon, San Diego, CA

I think the only reason they were shut down was bec they were charging alot less than everyone else. If you're paying for the music, I don't see how it's illegal. It's like not being able to purchase things on vacation bec they sell it cheaper than the US. This is BULL!

Marion, Chicago, Illinois USA

It`s too bad because i got used to it and frankly it is the most organised music industry site i`ve ever seen.

amer, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emarites

On Wednesday, August 15 2007, a district court in Moscow ruled that AllofMP3.com operated within the bounds of Russian law, and the owner of the company operating allofmp3 was acquitted of all charges against him :) One can only hope that this cost the RIAA a significant amount.

Nick, London, UK

allofmp3.com never die!
http://www.mp3sparks.com - we live!

Russia, Moscow, Russia

I used allofmp3.com for music. It was the right price and the interface was wonderful. Since it is now gone, this has saved me money. I can go to newsgroups and get what I want for free. Thanks, RIAA!!

Joe, Oswego,

Mp3 sparks is the exact same as the old site Allofmp3. The same usernames and passwords carried over, as well as balances left from allofmp3. What a sacrafice, Russia changed the name of their illegal site and now they can join the WTO.

Jesse, IN,

It saddens me that the Russians are caving in to the Americians. This has nothing to do with Piracy just competition. The americian sites just want to maintain the price of a track as high as possible. Allof Mp3 offered the royalties to the USA but they didn't want them. There is no such thing a piracy it is just another form of market force. If a product is the right price and worth it people will pay for it.

Chris, Sydney,

I like the new world order. Russia and China giving the finger to the evil USA corporatocracy.

landon, New York, NY

Sure would like to see the RIAA try to go and push around some of the folks in this country the way the bully the bureaucrat's here in the USA. A few years in a Siberian prison until their trial comes up would mellow them a bit I bet.

Steve, Etown, KY, USA

You can get your balance transferred from allofmp3 to mp3sparks (if indeed, this does not happen automatically).

I had an issue, in that the system did not recognise my login details. Naturally I clicked on the 'Forgotten password' icon - it claimed not to have my e-mail address on the system. So I tried registering. Strangely, it would not accept my e-mail address, as it was already registered ( the same address that it could not find).

Anyway, a quick e-mail to the address on the help menu got a swift reply and it's sorted.

Chris, Sheffield,

The problem is that record companies don't recognise that the MP3 player has changed the way people listen to music. 't "experience" an album in your room or study anymore, music is like popcorn, you can consume huge amounts of it relatively easily. I listen to it on the way to work, on the way back, during my lunch break, when walking... all because it's so easy to transport l amounts of varied music. My brother has music coming out from his PC no matter whether he's playing a game or watching TV. The pricing structure around music has simply failed to adapt to these new habits, but consumers have, and sites like allofmp3.com are nothing more than a response and a wake-up call.

Paul Cocker, Blackwater, UK, Surrey

How safe from prosecution are users of Russian download sites ?

Martin, Welshpool, Wales

So instead of getting *some* money from consumers, the rip-off record labels have now driven the majority of allofmp3's customers to using P2P. Well done!

Nick, East Anglia,

i loved allofmp3.com! who wants to pay a dollar for ONE song?! and it wasn't stealing, you paid for it... im sad to see it gone.

chelsea, pleasant grove/ utah, USA

What happens to the money customers ahve pre-paid on their accounts?

claire, Poole, DORSET

Maybe the record companies should consider a royalty of 10 cents a song for an album or 0 cents a song for nothing. I was hppey to pay a realistic price for music rather than go to the trouble of a torrent. I guess the torrent wins. - Torrents 1 - Record companys 0

Paul, Merimbula,

it's sad to see the man coming down on the little guy who just wants to save us from paying more to download an album from itunes than it costs to buy the same album at the store with jewel case, liner notes, artwork and burned disc.

patrick, santa barbara, CA/USA

So what happens to all of those pre-paid accounts balances on allofmp3.com?

Jack, Lindenwold, NJ/USA

Allofmp3 and mp3sparks led the download music revolution as the quality to price made it dirt cheap in comparison to the itunes store, which in my opinion was/is a rip off.
The thing to remember is the music site was legal under Russian law and charged the consumer to download hence who is the Americans or any other sovereign state got the right to dictate to the russian owners what they can or cant do.
Lets just hope that the site is not gone for good and in the not to distant future the same owners will re brand and re establish a likewise site for the good of music.

Richard, Southampton, Hampshire England

Nice news.

Tom, NY,

Nice

Pixar, Los Angeles,

I've heard so many people griping about "having to pay $18.98 for a CD with only one good song", and now that you can easily buy that song for a dollar or less they're still bitching. For one thing, anyone who pays $18.98 for a regular US CD is an idiot who goes to the drug store to buy music. And the concept of intellectual property is an old one, well-accepted in the civilized world. Technology doesn't change morality. There are a lot of people today that will steal from their own mother and their only concern is will they get caught. I despise billionaire CEO's too, so I buy from lots of indie artists that offer reasonable prices and free downloads(of their choosing).

Paul, Seattle ,

Just want to know how in the world will I get my five dollars back that would have lasted me about a years worth of downloads. Reembursement?

Jack, Chicago, IL

ha-ha!!! russian programers - ruuuule! :)

Dima aka Deman, Odense, Denmark

Typical America. The big companies can't accept that they've been beaten in the price war so turn to their lawyers. If people are buying from allofmp3, perhaps its time the big companies realised that like hell am I gonna pay 79p for a track which comes with no CD, no case, no 70% retailer markup, no nice physical shop to walk around. The cost of recording the actual track is so little once you spread it around between however million times it is distribute.

And those trying to say it's a bad deal for musicians, I agree, but try attacking the real problem, the record companies (what a surprise). 10p per album sold i was quoted. Thats 1% of the cost I pay. If there's a problem in this whole thing then surely that's it?

Mike Blitz, Winchester`, UK

There are actually many alternatives to AllOfMP3, some which are even cheaper : check out www.songboom.com . There are reviews of over a dozen other russian music providers.

robert f, london,

Allofmp3 was too popular because it offered fantastic choice (wider than any other download site) in a format of your choosing at a really sensible price. It gave customers what they wanted, not what the record industry wanted you to have.
Why should you pay the same price on iTunes for a track from a 40 year old album as for a single in the charts? None of the music I want is being advertised so the idea that the £10 CD cost is being spent on marketing is a complete fallacy.
If the music industry followed the Allofmp3 model and charged $3-$4 for an album I think they would be amazed at how much their sales would hold up, and how little piracy there would be.

Jack Jones, Oxford, England

If I could pay money directly to the artists, rather than to the music company, I'd happily pay a lot more. As it is...it's annoying to pay £15, at least, for a CD where I might only like a few of the songs, or download them for a pound a go. Nope, buying songs directly from the bands, which they can then spend themselves directly on advertising, production and more music, sounds like a far better idea. And I say this as someone who wants to be in a successful band!

Sam Stone, Belfast, NI

I work in the music industry having recently completed work on Bruce Springsteen’s Live In Dublin DVD. Trust me on this, we do not rip you off, although you are correct to say that the 'physical' purchase (CD, booklet, case, etc) is no longer there so costs should fall, the truth is that these cost very little so a CD should retail at around $2-3. Where the money comes into it is paying the artist, band, engineer (me), studio etc, but the biggest cost is advertising, this must be recouped. If we didn't advertise the fact that your fav groups new CD was out via Internet, posters, trailers etc how would you know to buy it? Case in point, a CD that gets little advertising usually ends up in a CD bargain bin, and if this were not true why do even huge bands like Bon Jovi spends millions advertising and doing TV slots. When we've coasted this CD now costs around $5-6. As for different prices in Europe (read Britain) for music, simple blame your government, they take a far higher tax/VAT.

darren, preston, UK

I'M DISSAPPOINTED, PUTIN HAS THE ONE OF THE WEAKEST US PRESIDENTS TO EVER BE IN OFFICE AND HE BOWS DOWN TO HIM.RUSSIA SHOULD REALLY BE ASHAME.USA 2 RUSSIA 0 REMEMBER REAGAN AND GORBY

Randy Duncan, Athens, usa/georgia

Free internet radio is about to disappear in the United States, so music piracy will surge again. Governments are playing Wack-a-Mole with music-downloading sites. They knock one down and another one pops up. Musical artists have to find a more effective method of bringing their work to the masses, while ensuring that they continue getting paid for it. C'mon Kidwell! Hilary Duff! Ya gotta finish strong if you're going to bring such passionate views to the table.

Rossman, Chicago, The United States of America

Before I found allofmp3.com I used to contribute around 30 GBP per year to the music industry. Since discovering that I could now not only browse and sample albums on allofmp3 BUT ALSO AFFORD TO BUY them this sum rose to around 250 GBP per year!!! Now that the site is closed I will no longer be browsing and sampling since I know that I will not want to pay the extortionate price offered by the likes of itunes for the tunes that I wish to buy. There is no point in shopping for music if you are forced to restrict your choice due to financial constraints so I have stopped buying music again (I do not use file sharing). It seems the industry has miscalculated the gradient of it's demand curve!!

Joe Bloggs, England,

Wow! "...shutting down AllOfMP3 was a *non-negotiable condition for enry into the WTO..."?? Somebody in the USA is making some serious "campaign contributions". Economies measured in the trillions of dollars, and one site that allows downloads that are also still available via free (illegal) file-sharing is an impediment to WTO membership?? Priorities, priorities.

Lack of rule of law, corruption, criminal organizations, no respect for the property of foregners confiscated by the Russian government, murder of critics abroad - why should any of these be impediments to WTO membership? After all, they're not as serious, are they?

Maurice, Manitoba, Canada

We need to put the RIAA in charge of middle east negotiations, immediately. With back-up support provided by Visa and Mastercard.

Jack P, Tampa, USA / FL

I just love how these left-leaning musik stars make their little speeches about big, bad Amerika and how awful things are here. These same hypocrites then run to the courts, all in the name of protecting their "art" because people don't want to pay over-inflated prices for what is basically a collection of mostly poor music. Like one or two songs? Too bad, you gotta buy the complete CD (of which 8 songs of the 10 may vary in degrees of suckiness). Well, what is it? Is Amerika big, bad, and non-caring? Or only when they deem fit? These lefties, in the end, or no better than anyone else...hit 'em in the pocketbook, and off they run, squeeling like a stuck pig. God, I love it when these types begin their whining!

Enigma, Yourtown, USA

If the artist and music are good they will get "out there" and they can make their money touring (anyone checked out the prices for concerts these days?) Just because a site charges less than a US site, damaging US business, uncle Sam flexes his muscle. For imposition of US law read, threat with menace and we teach our children bullying is unacceptable.

mike gee, bournemouth, uk

Most music artists make very little from the sale of their music. Their main income is from road trips. The music draws attendance to the road trips, and the music labels do promote the music to the radio stations. Free distribution of music does not diminish attendance but promotes it.
If the radio stations ever make the link between free downloads and what they play, I wouldn't bet on the stock of record labels. They charge far more than what they contribute, and totally rip off the small artist.

David, Winchester, VA

When will the music industry learn about equality and availability of its products?
I appreciate that royalties must be paid to the artists but when people like iTunes charge in pence what the US pays in cents how can we take their arguments seriously? How can it possibly cost twice as much to download a piece of music from the same website? Although reading the article above it appears royalties were offered and refused by the western music industry - therefore how can they complain? If people try and pay and they refuse to accept payment isn't that a just little childish...
I tend to look to Amazon nowadays as I get the physical item, sleeve notes and all, for cheaper than I could download it for.

Mutley, Hull,

Brandon, I have to tell you that the four biggest labels, SONY BMG, EMI, Universal Music Group and Warner Music Group aren't even owned by US companies, nor by US citizens except as minority investors. They are owned by European, Japanese and Canadian investors. The four of them control more than 80% of the US music industry and about 73% of the world market, so maybe if there is any finger pointing done it should be done at the greedy Bronfman, Bertelsmann, Seydoux and Morita families, none of which live in the USA.

David Cartier, Dore, France

I buy my songs on iTunes, but I don't think the $0.99 price is fair. I'm all for respecting intellectual property rights, but prices could be slashed anytime keeping the business alive and healthy, bringing more customers to the party. Oh, and stop telling me what I can do with what I buy. If I want to copy it to a CD or other computer, that is my problem. The irony of all the recent advances in technology is that the more sophisticated we get the more restrictions we have on what we can do. Allofmp3 kept this discussion alive.

Sergio, Memphis, TN, USA

As a musician and recording artist I think .99 cents per song is a fair price. You get to pick and choose from a collection, or buy the entire collection. Some consumers are just cheap and always looking for a free lunch.

96tele, Arlington,

Walt D, the "will of the people" put those "greedy profit-hungry politicians" in office. Just because they are not expressing *your* will does not mean they are not expressing the will of the general population.

Further, it has been captilaism that has made the United States a great and powerful country. Protecting their economic interests abroad is a function of our government. Simply put, they must protect our business efforts internationally because we have to follow harsher rules, generally speaking, than much of the rest of the world.

Stephen M, Reston, VA

One word: Bittorrent.

Google it.

Pete, Cov,

This was a good site, songs on Itunes are too much 79p each. America just has a big mouth and like`s to stop the fun. What if Russia stops the oil and the gas what would happen next let me guess, 0h war.

peter monk, redhill, london

I love how people assume that musicians should not be compensated for their product. AllOfMP3.com DID NOT compensate artists for their work product.

No one forces you to buy or listen to music. If the cost for the enjoyment is too much tough luck. I would love to have big screen plasma's in every room - should I rant against Sony and Toshiba - blame the US gov't for making the prices too high for me to afford?

Music is a luxury item. If you want it - buy it. If you can't afford it stop blaming everyone else.

bj, spokane,

That site is 10 x worse than the file sharing sites. I believe the RIAA lawsuits are as wrong as could be, but this site is nothing more than theft. I equate it to this. The file sharing sites to me atleast are the same as sharing the old "mix tapes" that used to be so popular. This site is trying to sell them. That is clearly not right.

TD, Allentown, PA - USA

Walt D. What??? The US is fighting for the wants and needs of the people that OWN the music. What if I wanted your TV for $.20? Should our government protect my desire to buy your TV for $.20, or your right as owner of the TV to set whatever price you want?

Why don't you start your own record company and then sell your music for $.10 a song?

Jim, Austin, TX

Until the likes of iTunes bring their prices for downloads down to an acceptable level, websites like allofmp3.com will continue to appear and be successful!
Why should people pay £7.99 to download a charted album on iTunes (files only) when the CDs (inc packaging, etc.) can usually be purchased for as little as £6.99 from the local supermarket, whose overheads are far greater!
iTunes does not have the distribution costs, the loss risk or the overbuying risk faced by the retailer, so why the high cost?

Fade to grey, Reading, Berkshire

"Why don't you libs calling America arrogant and greedy come mow my lawn for free?"

Nobody is saying they should allow stuff like this WITHIN THEIR OWN COUNTRY. They should enforce things within the US, of course, but they have no right to tell other countries what to do. They can discuss it with them, ask them nicely, but they have no right to TELL them.

By the way "liberal" means something else here.

starling, Lancaster,

As an Artist who has recored for major lables. My veiw differs from many of you. Recorded music is a craft to many of us. It takes hundreds of hours to create and record just like a painting or a sculpture. If you stole the painting you would be a criminal. However people who would never think of that will take my craft without paying you for the time you spent. If you went to work and spent the day and then your boss said your work is too high priced so I'm not going to pay you. you would be angry. Major lables are being strangled by the loss of income and the people who pay are the new and smaller artist. so you steal so downloads and the lables don't bring out the artist that are a risk or who dont knock down the charts within the first week. Music suffers, listeners suffer because you only get the giants.

This is not a national issue, it is a moral issue. if you steal you are a criminal! In any culture it is wrong to take the work of a craftsman without paying him for the job.

Nate G., south, USA/USA

It is complete symbolism. If you insist for paying for music on the Russian sites...there are plenty to choose from. It will be 25 years from now before our non-responsive government will attempt to do anything to stop you.

John, Las Vegas, Nevada

I think we can all argue about the ethics of greedy record companies and poverty stricken artists ad infinitem - we shall all have to agree to differ. The fact is that a generation of kids (and a growing proportion of adults) no longer see the point of buying CDs or DVDs when the content can be downloaded online for minimal or no cost. So the record companies are fighting a losing battle if they stick to their traditional policy of trying to impose a product onto consumers. People don't mind paying a fair price for a music download - but £0.79 for a DRM-restricted track is not it.

Gazza, Hertfordshire,

Steve in Toronto and Joe From Sacramento clearly do not understand the definition of simple words like "theft". Theft implies two things - A) the taking of an item that previously didn't belong to you B) at the expense of the previous owner losing that item.

So unless Joe can tell me how he'd _duplicate_ the groceries in my fridge to make his snack - all without ever leaving his house, much less coming over to mine - then his analogy is severely flawed and fully worthy of ridicule.

Quit pretending that people deserve to be millionaires for writing a catchy tune, and quit pretending that downloading a file is just as bad as stealing the crown jewels. Retarded comparisons like that can only hamper the movement to ensure that artists get something for what they do.

G, Austin, Texas, USA

'Western music companies refused to accept the fee, arguing that the Russian Multimedia and Internet Society had no right to represent their interests'....why the hell not! Are the music companies so arrogant that they believe their 'law' stands in someone else's country!!! Whilst this kind of attitude persists, the Western music industry will never win the moral argument regards music piracy

John Dixon, London, UK

then there is GoMusic.ru, which I have used for some time, as recently as yesterday. Has just about everything I have sought, for $.19 per track.

Good luck!

jay byrd, las vegas, USA

Spoken like a true major label employee Will. Well, I'd bet any amount of money you don't mow your own lawn, so who mows your lawn Will? Perhaps an illegal alien working for very cheap? No, you're not arrogant or a freeloader are you??? You're just busy/important...but if you actually get out in the real world you might learn something....
Think about it this way: If you buy a cd for $17.99 (or more) in a store the artist who create the music on the cd gets about 25 cents in royalties (assuming they have already paid their debt to the record company). The royalties for sales off of Itunes are *nowhere* near as generous. So, the artist is basically working for free regardless of whether you get the music legally or illegally. However, if you get music through these Russian sites the record companies (and their pampered execs) don't get their very substantial cut of the pie so that's why we keep hearing about the "problems" of Russian sites offering mp3s at reasonable price.

Winthrop Sloan III, Cambridge, Ma

As someone in a band who's music gets illegally ripped off by websites like these, I have to say that I'm really pleased that this finally happening. Russia's stance on downloading has always been at odds with almost every other country in the world, and the fact that they can in effect do what they want with your music and then pay you a pittance (or not at all as has been the case for us) Makes me very bloody angry.

Please also note that the owners of these websites illegally offer up music that they don't have permission to. I know I never gave permission for allofmp3.com to use mine.

It is MY music

That THEY make money from.

without MY permission

and WITHOUT PAYING ME FOR IT.

It should also be fairly simple and sensible to anyone with two braincells to rub together that there is something slightly unfair about this and using the excuse "Music should be free because we don't want to pay for it" is a crock of bull.

Raymon, London,

If the artist made money on the sale of the CD and not the record companies then your rant on mowing the lawn for free would hold water. The Dixie Chicks themselves said on TV during an interview that they did NOT make one cent from the sale from CD's they made their money doing tours and merchandising. Also if artist made money on CD sales then why are artist like Tobey Keith,Prince and David Bowie running their own stuidos and doing things the way they want to? They wouldn't do it if they were getting stacks of money from the CD sales thats for sure.

Kevin Stone, Glenwood,

Most artists make very little from music sales, either physical or electronic. Most make their money from merchandise and touring. The money you pay goes mainly to the label.

Well-established artists like Marillion and David Bowie are wise to this and are eschewing the traditional music "industry" and using self-publishing, etc. There are also up-and-coming acts who can make it to the i-Tunes number one spot without a record deal.

Tom Robinson (He of "2-4-6-8 Motorway") was giving away all his music for free, as he only makes a few pence on each song if sold on i-tunes.

The writing is on the wall for EMI, etc. They are not adapting to the new world around them, and, like the dinosaurs, won't live on in their current form.

An idea: what if you bought the music on this dodgy site, then sent a paypal payment of a pound to the artist? It's probably more than they get for selling an album on i-tunes. It'll be the publisher that sues you, not the artist!

B. Lanark, Berkshire, United Kingdom

I can't see any justification at all for charging higher prices than allofmp3 were charging. If musicians are good they will make money touring and playing festivals, like for the whole of recorded history except the last 40 years. 99 cents a track with DRM-infected files is a rip-off, and I really don't understand why anyone with half a brain would pay that much.

Music is not a "job for which you should get paid" - if you think like that you should be a lawyer not a musician. Music is a pleasurable way of life allowing exploration of art, and the possibility of making money if you're good.

Another thing is that these days the technology exists to make pro-standard recordings for a few hundred pounds, and unlimited ways to publicise it if you have the time and dedication. So we should be spared the sob stories about sub-standard musicians struggling to get by.

Adela, Peterborough, UK

PEOPLE

its not about money, its not about music companies....its about the idea that the owners of the site are making money off the work that musicians put in to create the music....i dont care if the companies get money, but what kind of right do those people have to sell that music

its like me robbing ur house and then selling ur items on the street and telling you its legal...they should get shut down, stripped of all the money and put in jail

Tom, NY,

Just logged on to mp3sparks and they transfered my account (balance, wish list, bookmarks and all). Long live Media Services!

Bob, Fort Collins, USA/co

Its both typical and hilarious, that the rest of the world has so little musical talent that they have to steal american music!

if you hate americans so much, why are you humming my melodies?

If you were artists instead of mere consumers/thieves, you'd understand how stupid you sound..."music should be free"- Hahahaa!!!!!

The real artists will protect themselves and leave you with the pop bubblegum that europe deserves. Enjoy your new bootlegged Spice Girls single!! Haha!!

Paul, Montville, NJ USA

I loved the site, received alot of music. They closed it down here in the states long ago. Must make the rich richer here in the states........

loren, akron, oh

Oh yes, you "need" mp3 to survive no doubt. You whining fools make me sick.

Artis L, Las Vegas, USA Nevada

Leave your door unlocked, I'm coming over to fix myself a sandwich, followed by cookies and milk. When you look in your fridge, and it's empty, if you get mad you must be GREEDY or from AMERIKKKA. Be right over!! Steve in Toronto is right on the money.

Joe, Sacramento, USA

I have to agree with the people who are saying that the United States is throwing it's weight around too much. Countries should not have to 'bring their laws up to the United States level' in order to join the WTO.

Instead, the United States should be forced to change THEIR laws to reflect the lack or looseness of foreign laws.

The United States is going to have to realize that our IP laws are seriously broken and fall into protecting the copyright and patent holders way too much. The music companies are going to have to realize that people are not going to pay $1 US for a song anymore.

Personally, I wouldn't pay $1 per song for the latest Hilary Duff single, whose music I happen to ADORE.

Christopher Kidwell, Aberdeen, Maryland

Allofmp3 is offline, but it's been reported that another one has started up called mp3sparks, apparently it's just the same as allofmp3 and run by the same peple, just a different name, and charging more.

hazh, Oxford,

my view on this is basically the same as ricks i hate having to pay such an abundance for 30 minutes to an hour of music that i will go off in like a few months its pointless and i dont think the companies understand its not about the money its about the "music", music is like football or american football they get paid loads for something thats merely a hobby taken to extremes, where as police officers, the army etc. hardly get anything close to their wage and they even put their lives on the line so its really agitating for me to see that. i think media downloading should be legal they let us stream it so whats the point in not being able to keep it. i also think that when you buy a cd you should be able to do what you want with it not all these strict rules about the way you use it am i in primary school again? or something. and to be fair they give people the means to do it like re-writable cd's etc.

danny walker, England, UK

Music companies ae only happy when the rip-off applies to consumers, not their profits. Producing and selling a CD used to involve the cost of production and cover printing, distribution, transport, retail rent and staffing costs. Now the consumer has to buy the means to download the track, print the cover and so on. Downloaded tracks are not necessarily compatible with different brands of music player or car stereo, can be accidentally lost or overwritten and cannot be lent to a friend. Companies have added restrictive digital rights management then charge for a premium for NOT including it. British consumers are charged more for the same track than American or European consumers. A fair price for music would see a drop in demand for illegal sites like these.

Dan, Oxford, England

Oh, come come now Ron... "big bad" USA always so morally correct, protecting the poor and the opressed against capitalist greed. I think you should put your Captain America magazine down - he died recently anyway did he not ? I think it was in Iraq or Afghanistan...
In any event, perhaps you should find out how most artists feel about this "protection" you talk about, being afforded to them by the large record companies... I have many artist friends who have never seen a penny in royalties from their "protectors"... if you want your lawn mowed, get mowing cos I don't think any of those companies will come and give you a hand... and less still, protect you from others or yourself for that matter. Best.

Luis, London,

Conflating intellectual "property" with actual physical property is one of the biggest scams going on right now.

It's nothing more than an attempt to limit consumer choices while forcing them to pay above market prices.

hg, Toronto,

Right, as though conservatives can take the moral high ground on anything, tell that to your accountant when he`s busy readying your myriad tax shelters in the caymans. furthermore as a musician and artist I fully support the distribution of music through all sources, including the internet. I think the root of the issue is that allofmp3.com was lowering the prices below what the robber baron oligarchs of the RIAA were willing to accept as fair payment. Sorry guys, that`s the nature of free market economy:when someone beats out your prices, you either lower yours, or get out of the business. it`s called laissez faire. don`t remember still? go dust off that adam smith tome "wealth of nations" and read up. I think that the record companies shouldn`t be able to dictate prices when their parallel monopolies are shattered by this (not very) new medium, the internet! how much is it costing you to encode files off a studio`s computer with pro-tools? i`ll tell you. NOTHING!

Blaze Hauser, houston, texas

The sad thing is, is that unless artists have a good manager/lawyer they see very little of the money that comes in from their material, as copyright can be assigned/sold, and often is to record companies.

There has been lots of criticism, even from Justice Laddie (one of the UK's leading IP rights lawyers, and a former judge) over the length and strength of copyright protection, that it is too restrictive and undermine's its basic purpose: to protect artists.

As for the music industry, if they can afford to pay the likes of Mariah Carey USD 80mn for a contract, then they can afford to cut the price of mp3s. One of the main arguments for allofmp3.com was that your average Russian could not afford the rates that iTunes charged.

Lisa, London,

It costs a lot of money to make a record and make it available and known about. A LOT. You can point your little greed finger at US corporations or whatever, but in the end, there are musicians and engineers who work like everyone else to support themselves and their families, not to mention the marketing, sales, distribution and manufacturing people. Allofmp3 is taxed theft. You know it. I know it. Everyone knows it. The problem is not greedy corporations. The problem is consumers who have lost their conscience, steal, and try to conceal their shame with skewed leftist moral relativism about the "US" and "corporations".

Steve, Toronto, Canada

Ron, the fact is that Amerikkka is trying to impress ITS laws and views on other nations, like The Netherlands and Russia. When Americans stop thinking that THEY are right and start working WITH other nations, maybe then we'll see some progress.

Brandon, seattle, usa

I know recording artists that have worked hard in a hard business for very little pay. There are many artist the big bad music companies try to promote.. many don't make it. A few lucky ones do. Who is going to put up the money for studio time, promotion materials, traveling expenses etc. to support all the hopeful artists that are promoted by the music companies? Are all the freeloaders out there going to support all the potential hitmakers? As far as the online download of music is concerned, down load services like itunes, napster etc. are nothing more than digital CD stores and they should all be able to provide the same music to the public, (no exclusive contracts with music companies). This will help to bring in the free market and the pricing per download song will probably decrease from it's current 99 cents.

Patrick W, Bloomington, MN

When you write your own songs, then you can give them to the ripping sites.

Rocker, Cleveland, OH, USA

With the increasing popularity of Torrent, GNUTella and eMule, sites like allofmp3.com are no longer relevant anyway.

John, Jakarta, Indonesia

Isn't it great when globalisation works in favour of the consumer as opposed to the poor recording artists and music studios. The studios would be the first to move production to low cost economies, but when the individual attempts to follow its called "unfair" and illegal.

Ted, Southampton, UK

Hey, Walt D., I 'need' your shoes, that doesn't mean I should have a right to them for $0.20 now does it. Need is not a claim on anyone else's life or property.

Since when does cheap music fall under the umbrella of "need" in the United States? I don't recall FDR listing that as a relevant "need," nor George Washington nor Lincoln. As if this country isn't rich enough, we need to steal music by paying a small sum for it to make ourselves feel better about the theft.

You have no right to anyone else's property except to the extent that they're willing to sell it and upon the conditions under which they're willing to sell. And those songs are neither the property of Walt D. nor AllOfMp3.com. It's that simple. Can't afford $0.99 at iTunes, then get a better job and earn your right to purchase cheap music in a legal manner from Apple.

Jason Rodeheaver, Los Angeles, USA

It wasn't shut down, it just moved. All accounts, and even funds were moved to another server, one with less "heat". -iSE

Mickey M, Las Vegas, Nv

There is no reason a downloaded song should cost 99 cents. No CD had to be burned and labeled. There are no assembly costs, no packaging costs, no handling costs, no retailer overhead, and no shipping/distribution, all of which are part of the cost of a CD. Sites like AllOfMP3 only exist because of the desire for consumers to be fair and pay for their music without paying the unjustifiably high rates demanded by music companies.

Rick Steele, Richmond, Virginia-USA

Why don't you libs calling America arrogant and greedy come mow my lawn for free? If not, why do you expect recording artists and the ones that pay for their marketing campaigns to work for free? Typical liberal freeloaders always want something for nothing.

Will Roberts, Los Angeles, CA

The media paradigm is changing. These archaic companies need to wake up and find a new way to make money. The old system simply is no longer viable. Music spreads like wildfire because the technology is there. Its one thing to shut down a website, but you can not shut down trading from friend to friend. The song spreads exponentially. Technology won't work because someone will simply counter with an accessing technology. Just wake up people!

Eric, South Hadley, USA

Yeah, that big bad USA...trying to protect the rights of musicians. I'm sure you'd feel the same if you were the artist getting ripped off, eh? Why are you guys upset, anyway? If you really want to cheat the artists whose music you're fans of, why not go to the 100% free share sights?

Ron, CHicago,

There is no physical media when downloading over the internet. It is no different than recording a radio broadcast. That is why the licensing model for Allofmp3 is the same as for music broadcast over the radio. Strange that I don't see any radio stations closed down because the have not specifically obtained permission to broadcast their music. The royalty paid by allofmp3 for the copyright holder is about the same, but fairer, than radio (who only use a representative sample period to determine who gets paid) and also about the same as the record company and I believe slightly more than iTunes. It's a shame for consumers that America is once again dictating to the World how it should act - same as the Iraq war - because, irrespective of price, Allofmp3 offered the best quality downloads of any online store.

Tom R, Sydney, Australia

allofMp3.com has been operating legally under Russian law for many years now. Only because the arrogant US government throws their weight around, giving in to the wants and needs of big business (aka the record companies and the RIAA), all of the sake of money. It's a true shame that so much of my country (the USA) is run simply by greedy profit-hungry politicians who don't care about the needs and wants of the people.

Walt D in LV, Las Vegas, USA / Nevada