I downloaded the Yo La Tengo album from eMusic, legally, using 15 downloads from my monthly 40 downloads, for which I pay $9.99; meaning I paid $3.75, legally.

I understand you want to push a good band, but to really make the Russian deep-discount pop, I'd use an major-label example.

Yo La Tengo gets at least $3 for each CD sold They have a good deal from matador and they most likely paid for the recording themselves, plus there is another $0.11 per track sold in songwriters royalty (the mechanical which every p2p proponent like you fail to mention), and since they wrote all but one of the songs they get that cash as well. How much is Yo La Tengo getting from AllofMp3.com? Crap written by andrew leonard is why I have no issue sending a bookmark which allows free reading of salon without having to watch that stupid ad. Hope you enjoy waiting tables Andrew.

I always fun when somebody calls my stuff crap and then signs themselves "no name given." Really makes the insult sting, you know.

But, Mr No, your reading comprehension is as limited as your ability to deliver criticism. How you read my piece to be in support of allofmp3.com is beyond me. I think it is fascinating that a download site in Russia is an issue in WTO negotiations. That doesn't mean I think the operation itself is anything close to legal, though.

is no name given has his shorts up in a knot over your perceived approval of music piracy thus robbing the muscicians of thier royalties but has no componction in preventing Salon of earning revenue of thier content.

Thanks for responding Andy,

But don't tell me you weren't espousing the benefits of allofmp3.com. Not only did you talk about much of a bargain IANAOYAIWBYA is on allofmp3.com, but for the comparison price you went on the high side, Matador sells it for $12.00, ITMs... $10.00. I doubt it sells for more than $12.00 at Amoeba. The problem is while you wrote about the benefits, you failed to point out how to Ira, Georgia, and James you may as well download it for free off BitTorrent. But that gets rid of the last benefit of AllOfMP3.com, somehow it is better to use, since you are "paying" for it. See the example in chapter 1 of Freakonomics about fining people who were late in picking up their children from daycare.

-j

Having recently returned from a summer spent working in oscow, I can tell you that the concernes over allofmp3.com, although waranted, are really only the tip of the iceberg. In the large cities, you can find any movie, cd and even software for a fraction of what it would cost in the west. Not to mention the amount of immitation designer clothing, handbags and shoes.

I am not talking about a system lke what you may see on the streets of New York, where the 'merchants' pack up and run at the sight of police. In Russia this is much more institutionalized. Nearly every metro station and underpass has atleast one permanent kiosk selling pirated goods. This is not to say that all of the goods sold there are pirated, but more often than not, this is what you will easily find.

For instance, this summer, movies which had just come out in the US and had yet to be released in Europe were available for approximately 100 rubles (just under $4). Granted, many of them have terrible Russian dubbing laid over top, but it is also possible to find perfect quality (although often slightly older -- say a year or so) dvds, in English, French etc. Often the dvds are classified by actor or actress, so for all of $4 you can get 8 films starring Tom Cruise or Sean Connery all on 1 dvd.

The problem with allofmp3.com is that it opens this supply to the entire world (well, that part which is conected to the internet, at least). I would argue however, that the real problem is that the law enforcemt of copyright infringement regulations is extremely lax and that without fixing the infrastructure, as soon as this website is shut down another will replace it.

First of all, thank you for your article, Andrew. The topic of allofmp3.com is one that I have looked at myself over the past year. One part of the discussion that I find oddly lacking, though, is that no one seems to be addressing this issue from a consumer perspective in a global free market economy. We are all very used to the notion that US corporations are eager and willing to ship jobs and production overseas in order to take advantage of labor, environmental, and tax laws that benefit their own bottom lines. Some might call such laws legal "loopholes" that allow corporations to engage in activities that would otherwise be illegal in the United States, but I'm sure that corporations who benefit from them refer to them as something a bit more innocuous--such as conditions that maximize shareholder return. Should we be surprised or dismayed to learn that in a global free market economy consumers will also seek out legal "loopholes" (as the Time article you reference refers to them) that will allow them to maximize their purchasing power?

American pork and poultry exporters chafe at the limitations of Russian meat import quotas and are suspicious that Russian inspection requirements are just a scam to keep out American product.

A flashback to 1989: Russian scientists emigrate to America. I take two of them shopping at Von's. They are excited at all the food products until they see the sausage counter. The wife looks over the packages and expresses alarm.

"Your government allows you to eat this?" she asks, her face turning white with shock.

"What's wrong with those sausages?" I ask.

"They contain nitrates," she says, "Nitrates cause cancer. In our country these chemicals are banned."

I wonder, might issues like this have anything to do with why American pork exporters are chafing at Russian restrictions?