Home › Forums › Music Sites › LegalSounds

Beware of Legalsounds? [Yes, it is legal]

Wed, 07/18/2007 - 09:00 — hardmoon

My review of Legalsounds was removed so I will post my comments here on Legalsounds. I'm a signed artist who has released some work for free a few years back. It's available for free on the netlabel www.subco.org . However, Legalsounds is trying to pull off money from unsuspecting customers by selling it on their website.

I do understand that people rave about LS's low prices on tracks, but be aware that in some cases, you're paying too much and filling LS's russian pockets with money that should still be yours!

Great MP3-Downloader ›
Mon, 08/22/2011 - 00:01 — FortWorthMusicLover (not verified)

Legal, but not moral

Yes it's legal, but not moral. Legalsounds does not pay royalties to the artists who make the music that they sell. They steal from the artists and make a profit for themselves. Do you really want to support a company that does that? So what if it's legal according to the laws of Russia. Since when do the laws of Russia determine what is morally right or wrong? One common argument in many of these comments is that music is not worth paying for. Ok... if you believe music is worthless then quit downloading it. But don't download it then justify not paying for it by claiming it's not worth anything. Try applying that reasoning at a restaurant you just ate at... walking out on your bill and refusing to tip the waitstaff because you deemed the meal and services not worth paying for. One word - F R E E L O A D E R S! IF YOU ENJOY MUSIC, PAY THOSE WHO MAKE IT, NOT THOSE WHO STEAL IT.
Sun, 07/24/2011 - 13:33 — andy (not verified)

i just downloaded a very rare recording from legalsounds

i found a very hard to find Outlaws album on leagalsounds,and downloaded it for 81 cents it is on ebay for $30-40 continuously once more people find out about legalsounds,look for itunes and amazon to try to run them out of the US
Mon, 07/18/2011 - 15:56 — One-Timer (not verified)

Okay. I came here because I

Okay. I came here because I wondered about the legality of LS. Of course all I get here are people's opinions and assertions, but that is helpful. The fact is that I don't know if they are legal or not. My guess is that they are legal in Russia and that they don't in general pay royalties. But if they remove tracks upon artist complaints, then at least they have some decency. Most of what I have read here is simply self-serving rationalization. So here are my self-serving rationalizations. 1. Most "music" is simply horrible and not worth paying for or keeping. But at LS prices I can check out some music and simply delete what is not worth keeping. That's also what I do on Amazon with their mp3s. I wouldn't buy from iTunes under any circumstances. 2. In almost every instance I can tell the difference between mp3 "quality" and CD quality music, especially Baroque and Classical music, and any modern music which has "depth" ... A lot of the older rock music is poor quality to begin with so the mp3 is as good as the original lp or even cd for that matter. Therefore, I buy lots of CDs. I only buy and download mp3s if they are not available at CD quality. 3. Over the years I have spent over $100,000 on CDs. And before that I had many hundreds of vinyl albums that my wife got in the divorce. Anyway, every now and then I buy a CD from someone "good" and it turns out to be a throw-away. And every now and then I download an mp3 from someone I have never heard of and end up buying all their CDs. 4. In my experience, only about 15% of the tracks on any album I buy are worth keeping. The actual percentage of "good" tracks is much much lower, because I only buy albums of "good" artists. 5. My main concern with LS is credit card security. So if I buy in to LS I will use a credit card that has already demonstrated they will protect me from unauthorised charges. In fact, the card I plan to use will usually call me regarding any charge from "Russia" ... 6. So. Most of the so-called "artists" whining about royalties are simply not worth listening to anyway, and the ones whose music is worth listening to, or at least the 15% of their stuff that is not unbearable, are horribly overpaid as it is. There is no way that anyone "deserves" to rake in millions of dollars a year based on "talent" ... That's just how I feel about it ( and by the way I am more than a millionaire but I have worked hard to get where I am without ripping off anyone ). There is a difference between honorable work and greed. I have no respect for anyone who wants to get-rich-quick or believes the world owes them anything. 7. Now. Just because what LS does "might" be illegal in the USA doesn't make LS "evil" ... If they are complying with their own country's laws then that is all they need to do to be legal. Even as an American, I wouldn't even begin to "impose" my sense of what is legally right in my culture to what is legally right in another culture. Morality is a bit different, but much more personal and subjective. And it is no more "right" for me to impose my sense of morality on anyone else. My morality is up to me, for me. So I shall proceed in good faith and good conscience ( especially given my own self-serving rationalizations ). But do not kid yourself --- your self-serving rationalizations, for or against buying from LS, are no more or less valid than my own. 8. And regarding my own country America. Goodness gracious there is enough corruption here to gaddle a coggleburton. Yes I have traveled around the world quite a few times, and have seen corruption in many forms, but I choose to live here. I have no respect for our legal system, which has very little to do with truth or justice, and I have seen better ( and worse ) legal systems in other countries. We seem to live in a society of me-first, greed is good, and Hollywood ( self-serving ) morality. I don't like any of that, but I would still rather be here than in most other places. 9. Guess what folks, everyone is biased. It is just the way we humans are. Anyone who pretends he or she is unbiased is simply self-deluded. We are biased by what we believe. We are biased by our culture and upbringing. We are biased by our values. 10. End of rant.
Fri, 05/13/2011 - 02:26 — Laurie (not verified)

oh please....

I am really sick of all this belly aching about artists losing money. Black eyed Peas has more money then God, they have admitted it. Second of all, you are getting a crappy copy of an mp3..but if I like I will buy cd, but most artist put out two good songs, and the rest is junk. I am not paying itunes for a crappy copy of an mp3, that I can go get the cd cheaper at the store. If you are a struggling artist and they are selling your stuff, maybe someone will buy it and like it, that would be in your favor. I wouldn't even know half this stuff if I didn't have cheap access to it. Furthermore, the bar I deejay at has to pay the music mafia, EMI, eight hundred fifty dollars a month for me to play a bunch of disposable garbage that I promote, and people buy cause they hear something they like. Last but not least, the rock group Heart complaigned the Republican campaign used their song without permission, which ended up giving them attention and gained popularity for them again. I don't even use half the mp3's I buy for the club from Itunes because they sound like crap! To Ann and Nancy..I own all your Cd's but next time you do a concert at the fairgrounds, you might at least wave at your fans when you exit, instead of acting like they don't exist. I understand you need privacy, but we are the reason you have been able to make a living doing what you love.
Sat, 07/23/2011 - 02:03 — Texrat (not verified)

fail

You probably believe yourself to be reasonable and intelligent, Laurie, but your argument is just one long logical failure.
Thu, 04/07/2011 - 13:54 — Croaking Lizard (not verified)

Morality

I know that using legal sounds is morally wrong. It would be the same as agreeing to have Kylie Minogue perform fellatio on me without my wife finding out, it is wrong but I would do it. If there was a site like legalsounds that allowed you to make a donation to the artist I would definitely donate a percentage to the artist. Remember that the artists themselves only get a tiny fraction of the profit of when a CD is sold. What percentage of the price do the artists get when a track is sold on i-tunes ??? Does anyone know?
Thu, 03/24/2011 - 16:34 — Zardoz (not verified)

No money no honey.

I won't get in the debate of the ethics of getting music for free or not. I just wanted to say that my music is on it and its being sold without me getting a penny or my approval.
Mon, 12/27/2010 - 10:32 — MusicBuyer (not verified)

The problem is that the

The problem is that the copyright laws in the US have not been put together for the benefit of the artists and the music industry as a whole, and many of the things you see happening are certainly not for the benefit of the record buying public, and it is good to see them fight back. Once we have a fair system I hope everyone will play by it. Things that we see that are not in the best public interest: - International restrictions, so you cannot buy music from a foreign online store like iTunes US / iTunes UK / iTunes Australia, unless you are from that region. Similarly amazon. You cannot even buy from one EU member if you are located in another. (I could not buy from Amazon UK when I was in Denmark in spite of having a UK credit card. I would say that breaks EU regulations as there is supposed to be free trade between the UK and Denmark, both being EU member states. It's lke saying you can't buy from New York if you are in California). - Beatles songs not being available for legal download until recently, and then only available on iTunes. - Artists releasing "limited edition" particularly 7" only, not caring that many of the public don't listen to vinyl. - Tracks only being available as part of a whole album. - The continual increase in prices, that in the UK at least have seen prices rise to 99p on iTunes for many artists, not only the major ones. At least they got rid of DRM. I would actually really like to see that legalsounds really distributes the royalites. I would pay a bit for them to do so, but I like the policy that they can make available any track they want to as long as they pay the royalties for it. I like the policy that you can buy from them regardless of where you are in the world. I don't want to "get" at the artists but do want to get at iTunes for trying to dominate the download market, and at the big labels for trying to force the geographical restrictions and setting the prices far too high. By the way, this week I bought 2 tracks from legalsounds late in the week, one of which I had requested for them to add, because they were 99p on iTunes. I would have bought them at 79p. As it is I paid about 11p for the two together. If Debbi and Mona supply me with a paypal account I will happily send them both 73p each.
Sat, 12/18/2010 - 16:27 — Visitor (not verified)

I found this thread because

I found this thread because I was interested to find out more about the true legality of LegalSounds.com. I was delighted to find this website only a couple of months ago when I got fed up with all the effort it was taking to digitise all my old vinyl to get them on my iPod! (+ I feel really ripped off having spent a fortune with iTunes over several years) My point: I would love to support artists for the work that they do - I agree with a previous poster on this thread however that a. some artists have made an obscene amount of dosh from doing what they love & b. all the middle med jack up the prices extortionately. You can't blame LS for grasping an opportunity. Also - most of the stuff I have downloaded is 60's and probably out of copyright anyway! So - for folks like me who are happy to pay a few pence for the LS search & download service - Perhaps the atrists could band together and ask that LS provide a link to an appriopriate medium for downloaders to make a contribution? Is there a Beatles@hotmail.com PayPal account? Yes, I know - Sir Paul + Ringo probably don't need my 10p - but lots of less successful artists probably would! So - instead of moaning that no-one pays the artist - why not ask LS to add a section on their download confirmation page that says: The artist's PayPal account is: .. .. .. .. Please make a payment that you feel is appropriate. Some folks on this thread have passed some quite harsh opinions - maybe LS is run by a bunch of Russian crooks! who knows? But perhaps they are normal guys & gals who have had a good idea and imlemented it. They might even think that this is a good idea - 'coz if more people are able to pay the artist - more people will pay LS 9c per track .. .. Win-Win?? Ha! - I do go on - but I think I have a point ;-)
Tue, 11/23/2010 - 18:30 — Asshole #1 (not verified)

Minstrels

Dear everyone, there was a brief period in human history where recording artists, or minstrels as they were once known, got paid extraordinary sums for ordinary work. Yes, some may have lifted our spirits and yes, some may have produced "anthems" for our everyday lives. The truth is that their achievements are paltry compared to the giants of history who have given us electricity, the motor car, quantum mechanics, evolution, the jet engine, micro-chips, the computer etc. etc. People like Michael Dell, Charles Darwin or Henry Ford deserve to become billionaires, the Rolling Stones do not. I love the Rolling Stones, I'm British and a big fan because of their music and the fact that they make our nation proud, but the bottom line is they are not worth the huge amount of money that they have accumulated. In fact, the example they set, with their behaviour, is hardly good for our society and they are supposedly the better behaved acts. The revolting behaviour of more recent acts, who can make a decent tune while openly abusing drugs and other people, makes it hard to reconcile the wealth they accumulate. It is good however that the Stones now make more money now from their gigs, filling stadia with happy people who are willing to pay the gate fee. It was never good that they, or their record label, should have made extravagant margins from the brief business model that existed between circa 1960 and circa 1998. These days an act should publish their material free until they get enough of a following to fill a venue or sell a t-shirt to those who like to "define themselves" in this way. Eventually they can fill a stadium if they are any good and maybe get some merchandising revenues. It is tough, sorry. Whether we should pay Russian crooks is another matter. People, take your money where it is best spent. Hopefully the artists will adapt and enable good value downloads from similar sites but until then Legal sounds gets my cash. Please post here any websites that do what legal sounds do better. If they pass on a piece of the pie to the artist then even better.
Tue, 01/25/2011 - 22:21 — Visitor (not verified)

Comment on "Minstrels"

AH#1 wrote: Yes, some may have lifted our spirits and yes, some may have produced "anthems" for our everyday lives. The truth is that their achievements are paltry compared to the giants of history who have given us electricity, the motor car, quantum mechanics, evolution, the jet engine, micro-chips, the computer etc. etc. If Einstein, Planck, Schroedinger, Heisenberg, Bohr et. al. hadn't figured out quantum mechanics and relativity, others would have... and probably relatively quickly. What Charlie Parker, John Coltrane, J.S. Bach, Stravinsky et. al. gave us is unique to them, and the same music wouldn't exist if they hadn't. I'd rather we'd missed out on Einstein and Heisenberg than on Bach and Charlie Parker. (And I'm a quantum physicist.) And what people are willing to pay for their music (and that of the Stones, Beatles, etc...) surely has something to do with what they deserve for it? Who are you to decide it's not? The end result of musicians not paid, will be music not made. What a loss.
Sun, 07/03/2011 - 16:52 — Visitor (not verified)

minstrells

Regardless of the rest of this argument about whether or not the atrists get paid (which they should) a fair price, everyone else gets paid for the work that they do. BUT, as for the likes of the Stones, or the remnants of the Beatles, they haven't written or recorded anything worth listening to in decades!! "They" call The Rolling Stones the "greatest rock n roll band ever. NOT!!!! As far as class and content, there are mnay bands that are far better. Uriah Heep springs to mind (the classic version, anyway) And The Beatles recorded and sold a lot of records in their time, but looking back, sometimes you gotta wonder why. YES, they recorded some very good songs, but they also recorded a lot of garbage!! Blackbird?!?!?! Ob LA Di???? Give me a break!!
Mon, 04/04/2011 - 20:00 — j-head (not verified)

'The end result of musicians

'The end result of musicians not paid, will be music not made. What a loss.' - No...that wouldn't happen. Most of the best musicians in the world have normal day jobs, and get paid nothing for their talent.
Wed, 06/08/2011 - 19:32 — Visitor (not verified)

The end result....

Music would still be made. Einstein was working at a patent office and wrote his basis of relativity on the back of an envelope on a train. People like to make noise. If you don't get paid.......you would play for beer, food or just because you have the talent. I sing and I don't get paid because I like to and I like to enterain people. I have a job to support my FUN with music. I would like to get paid but I am not going to stop just cause I dont. BTW I am not a physicist nor a college grad. Ford on the other hand probably would not have invented the car if he did not think there was any money it. Einstein still would have done his thing with or without money. :) cheers
Fri, 01/14/2011 - 23:34 — Al (not verified)

Art

Dude, do you really think electricity is more important than art - music? Well, I say think again.
Sun, 06/12/2011 - 19:27 — Visitor (not verified)

@ Al how can art be more important than electicity?

Although music is awesome. Electricity is giving you the ability to even post on this website. It makes sure you food doesn't spoil over night and it lets you listen to the music you love so much without having to hear it live. Recording wouldn't be possible without electricity and it makes our days much easier. Much of the music that is played today wouldn't even be possible with out electricity.
Sun, 09/26/2010 - 07:29 — Visitor (not verified)

Legal Sounds

Great comments and very helpful. I have had major problems trying to download any songs via Amazon UK, USA or Germany as I am in Afghanistan and using a VSAT internet link that thinks it is in USA! Keeps telling me I am in the wrong geographical location to download, doesn't help that I am Brit and reside in Germany... However, I just want to download some freakin music, have looked at Virgin etc and the sites are crap. So, where have I ended up? Yep, Legal Sounds and just giving it a quick checkover when I landing on this site before I download anything! So I will use Legal Sounds, I did want to use Amazon so the artists get their royalties, but hey ho, I can't. Cheers.
Wed, 10/06/2010 - 12:48 — Visitor (not verified)

Free

What a load of old twaddle is being peddled on this page, how can people expect to be paid for making a NOISE, anyone can do that, i can shout and scream and bang things,do i get paid for that ,of course not,so why should lazy arsed layabouts get paid, they should get a JOB. I have downloaded in access of 1000 albums over the last 7 or 8 years, do i feel guilty NO, 85% of it is pure crap,why would i pay for that, I'd rather cut off and eat my own dick, so all of you saddos who think music should be paid for WHY. NOISE=MUSIC?=FREE.
Sun, 08/21/2011 - 23:36 — Visitor (not verified)

If it's pure crap then don't

If it's pure crap then don't download it. If it's noise to you then ignore it and life your life as you please, without music. But don't give this stupid crap about it being worthless yet worth you downloading 1000 albums of it. That's like stealing a car but telling the judge that it's not wrong because the car isn't worth anything... yet you'll continue driving it anyways.
Tue, 05/24/2011 - 21:02 — Visitor (not verified)

EVERYTHING FREE!!

Ha! From Quantum Physicists to Quantum Jerkascists!! If 85% of your legalsounds downloads are crap, why did you download them. I'll give you the benifit of doubt. Maybe like myself, you are an out and out 'music head' and have been since hearing Robert Johnson when I was 12. I hope you havent just said "who the f... is Robert Johnson" I have downloaded 8488 songs to date, mostly on albums. Couldnt be bothered working out the maths on what that would have cost in high street CDs. Nor would I have heard many of the wonderful artists and bands that I have discovered via LegalSounds. I have also recently bought actual CDs by some artists, as in Devendra Banhart, Dylan LeBlanc, Josh T Pearson. And will always buy 'real' CDs, But I dont think Beady Eye, Fleet Foxes, Pearl Jam will miss a few cents of royalties. Was looking at going to Beady Eye in Belfast but £40!!! Legalsounds is also a great source of back catalogue music. Before the advent of CDs I had about 5000 'albums' growing every week (now reduced to 1000) then CDs came along. At one time I had maybe 3000. So I have 'paid my dues' I have recently started downloading albums from my past to suit the modern devices now available. Maybe its an age thing, but Im 56. Some sites on the web, everying from 'running' sites to, well, this one, always seem to have a 'Mr Angry' posting some nonsence. So, explain why you refer to people like me as 'Saddos'. Does a Golf fanatic not pay for his clubs, an art lover for his paintings, an avid reader for his books... hell! why dont we just make EVERYTHING FREE!!
Sat, 01/15/2011 - 20:33 — Ralphie Chews Sand (not verified)

We have a genius here

See this makes sense, and I'm on board. I think 85% of cars are pure crap, so I'm going to just walk onto a bunch of dealerships and take in "access" of 1000 cars over the next 7 or 8 years, because, why would I pay for pure crap?
Thu, 12/16/2010 - 14:12 — Rob1 (not verified)

So why don't you buy the CD

So why don't you buy the CD copy of the 15% of music you do like so the artist receives a payment? You also say "making a noise" have you tried to learn to play an instrument ? It takes years of practise and dedication. People like you annoy me, you are just trying to justify why you steal music. If you think they are lazy and should get jobs then why are you downloading 1,000 albums of music? It seems you hate muscians but then feel you should have 1000 albums free because 85% are crap (also down to opinion of what crap is) How would you like going to work each day and receiving no payment even though you have done the job. Do you know how hard it is for an unsigned musician? The 1,000s of pub/club gigs before even getting noticed. Working late hours to entertain people like you who don't even appreciate what music is about.
Sun, 08/01/2010 - 05:03 — voodoo child

I wish

99 cents!!!!!!, I wish!!!!. Here in Australia it is $1.69 per song if you can even find what you are looking for. I cannot purchase anything from USA sites. It seems only Americans are supposed to listen to music not the rest of the world. As a result of all this bullshit I have no choice but to deal with legalsounds.
Fri, 04/09/2010 - 09:15 — Scott in Corpus Christi, Texas (not verified)

C'mon Rob, get off it. Try

C'mon Rob, get off it. Try this. What if you had fifteen or twenty bands come in and give you their opinion? If all music download shifted to sites like LegalSounds, what would the artists have? How about nothing. Most everyone is bothered by the issue to some degree; that is called conscience. Most people can sense that something's not right. From there a person either does the right thing or finds someone like Rob to tell them it's all O.K.
Sat, 05/29/2010 - 07:21 — Visitor (not verified)

Scott, if the artists find

Scott, if the artists find that such a problem they should stop recording songs. Nothing lost. I think it is about time we loose this get rich quick culture anyway. And believe you me: real artists will keep making music with or without pay. Besides, there are plenty more ways to make money than through track sales. Go do gigs, TV appearances, etc. But mostly: play for the love of it, not for the money. It seems that any old hag with a pairs of t*ts and a hand to hold a mike can make herself a multiple millionaire within months. Good for Legal Downloads, good for the consumer and in the long run good for music!
Fri, 03/26/2010 - 16:45 — War Sex Video (not verified)

LegalSounds is just the best way to go.

I've been using LegalSounds for many years, AND I'M PROUD OF IT. Firstly, I'm not obliged to question the legality of LegalSounds, as a simple consumer merely buying from a store. If they say it's legal, that's good enough. And I must offer my truly educated opinion, that Legal Sounds is the smartest method to buy AND SELL music FOR CONSUMERS, ARTISTS, RECORD COMPANIES, music download services too, and video, and printed matter, etc. Let me explain: LegalSounds accepts payment for downloads, only in pre-paid increments of more than $25. LegalSounds is earning interest on the unused portion of those balances. Directly, my point is, this permits LegalSounds to sell songs for 9 cents, and compensate fairly artists and publishers, BOTTOM LINE (I'll bet ya'). Right now, under Russian law (the only law governing Legal Sounds) the copyright owner of a work, can demand the work be excluded from the licenses which allow LegalSounds to sell downloads. On the same token, a copyright holder can demand a licensing fee, for the sale of the work. That fee, can be any amount, the copyright owner wants, for past and future sales. Right now, LegalSounds offers massive 'free song' downloads, if the user pre-pays more than $25. The larger the pre-payment, the more free downloads. While the LegalSounds user is downloading songs for free, the balance of their pre-payment remains unused, and collects interest. The user grows weary, and bewildered, from downloading (which is always at lightning fast speed) album after album for free, and/or at the rate of 9 cents per song (not being able to imagine another song or album in the whole world they want). And large balances remain unused, through many purchases, and after download binges. That is why the songs are cheap, and the 'free song' downloads are generous. The LegalSounds catalog is amazing. That is because copyright owners don't often demand files be deleted. And the user is encouraged to invest in the pre-payment, and pre-pay in larger amounts for the 'free songs'. Right now, on top of all this, Legal Sounds offers a free download for every paid download, of the same file, you can e-mail to a friend as a gift. Yet, we don't see the biggest stars in the music industry complaining on the nightly news (like they did when Napster ripped off everyone). You can buy their music at LegalSounds. And, they're 'on guard'. So, I think they know. I know, at 9 cents per song, I can afford ten times as much music, as the record store offered to me. That is 'the best' for me. The artists, and the record companies know it, and need exactly that. Long ago, retail vinyl and tape cassette recordings were the only way for the consumer to buy recorded music. The tremendous cost of the product, caused everyone wanting a sizeable recording library, to buy tape cassette recorders (that connected to record players via a wire, and/or housed dual cassette players [one to play, one to record]), and blank cassettes. Everyone copied the music they bought, again and again, and traded mercilessly. The artists and record companies, nary complained about it, for many different reasons (mostly the poor performance of vinyl recordings over time). But those reasons, and limitations, no longer exist. The attitude of ruthless tape trading, led to the mistakes of Napster, and other file sharing conspiracies. The MP3 revolution so shocked everyone (the consumer, the artists, and the record companies), the new options and possibilities to sell music, to buy and collect recordings, were unexplored, before the lousy atmosphere reached a breaking point [at file sharing], alas. I don't want to pay CD prices for MP3s, ever again. If a download service is charging retail CD prices for MP3 downloads, THAT IS THE BIGGEST RIP OFF EVER! If you hear of an artist, or record company complaining about LegalSounds selling music, for which they own the copyright, that artist or record company, probably doesn't pay, like $30 a month, for an attorney; is probably naive as a lamb, and frustrated five seconds after discovering the work for sale on Legal Sounds. So, we all have a way to learn. It's the huge amounts of bank interest LegalSounds is earning (AND TECHNOLOGY), that makes recorded music TRULY AFFORDABLE to the average consumer, finally; not Russian law, or some weird thing like that. And that's my educated opinion. I don't hear any people, I NEED TO LISTEN TO, trying to change it either. You don't need to search further for an answer yourself. Every complaint I read about this company was wack, compared to what I just said. Some nut said, you can send a dollar to the artist for every album you download.
Sat, 05/08/2010 - 10:07 — Visitor (not verified)

legal Sounds is not legal

This is only a legal site in Russia. Why don't you bother to read the Terms of Service at the bottom of the website where they cover their wrongful selling of this music by making you responsible. (iii) You agree with the fact that you are not able to use or to download audio materials from LegalSounds.com if it is in the conflict with legislation of your country. LegalSounds.com is unable to control all LegalSounds.com users, therefore you are responsible for usage of the materials represented on the LegalSounds.com website. My husband found a lot of his music on this website and when he approached the company, they removed his tracks....why would they do that if they had the tracks legally. He makes his living out of selling his music and they have no agreement with the artists, they just rip the artists off and don't pay them a penny for the usage. According to their website, it is the responsibility of the user to pay the owner of the music. I don't imagine you bothered to read that, nor have you bothered to pay the owner for using his music. it is no different to walking in to a shop and walking out with items without paying for them. It is stealing and stupid people like you, are stopping people from earning their living.
Sat, 01/08/2011 - 08:49 — Visitor (not verified)

hmm

Who's your husband? i bet he lost boat loads of cash, like maybe a cruise ship full of cash.
Sat, 04/17/2010 - 21:48 — Visitor (not verified)

"I don't need to confirm if

"I don't need to confirm if something is illegal. I can put my head in the sand." Where were you when our country needed you?
Thu, 03/18/2010 - 18:59 — Visitor (not verified)

The thing that seems most

The thing that seems most ridiculous about all this to me, is the fact that although 99c for an album might seem like a bargain, all this music is available for FREE through torrent and p2p. In this day and age the only reason to pay for music would be bcause you want to support the artist who made it and/or want to own the original physical cd with artwork etc. If these considerations do not matter to you, why the hell would you want to pay for your music at all, when it is available for free? I produce electronic music and recently released a track on a compilation cd for a tiny non-profit label, only 500 copies printed and sold worldwide, although we knew full well that many times more than this would be downloaded and shared through soulseek ect - this is the norm and everybody does it, so we recognise that we are effectively relying on the goodwill of people who want to support the artists and the scene, in order to sell any copies at all. the real problem i have with a scam like legalsounds is not that they distribute our music without paying us (slsk and bittorrent have been doing this for years, it even generates publicity for artists), i also don't care that they con suckers into paying money for illegitimate downloads that they can and should get for free. the problem is that legalsounds' claim that artist recieve money for the distribution of their tracks, this is a barefaced LIE and morally repugnant whatever your stance on file-sharing and piracy, with the risk that people buying their music here may be duped into believing that they are supporting the artist. In conclusion, if you care about supporting the artists you listen to, buy your music from the artist or label. If not, you can get your music for free - no big deal. Just don't be a sucker and give your money to the likes of legalsounds, who dont support the artist and who dont offer anything that you can't get for free
Tue, 03/02/2010 - 23:33 — Visitor (not verified)

Legalsound.com is absolutely not legal

Not even a penny goes to any artist from the income these Russian crooks make selling art that is not theirs. They do not have any single agreement signed with any musician, music producer or music association. If you download music from this site you may one day be accused of violation of Copyrights. Then, it is not fair to the artists and producers to buy from such thieves. In court you will not be able to say that you didn't know that they were illegal. The lack of knowledge of the law does not release you from violation of the law. It is simple! :)))) I am worning you, do not participate in it. Also, it is not ethical to buy from theves.
Wed, 01/20/2010 - 13:26 — Visitor (not verified)

Legal Sounds Review - using for 5 years

Hello,

I've been using LS for over 5 years now and cannot fault it one bit. Personally I only buy well known song and they've got enough bloody money for me to care. I prefer this site because I hate downloading from those other sites because you're downloading from other peoples computers and I used to get a lot of VIRUSES!!! With legal sounds you download from them directly and it's almost instant. Hate Itunes- complete rip off, the music companies should start trying to be a little more competitive than they are now.

Thanks :)

Mon, 04/12/2010 - 23:20 — Visitor (not verified)

Well then you're an idiot

Well then you're an idiot then! You've taken tracks for free and don't be surprised if you get a copyright fine or worse, turn up in the mail! There are loads of sites out there which are free of viruses, at least you could use those instead of giving money to crooks!
Fri, 12/18/2009 - 19:13 — Visitor (not verified)

Legalsounds is awesome

I started with Legalsounds a few years ago. Regarding the exchange of money with Legalsounds, I never had any problems. Here's my take on it. I am relatively poor. If I relied on Itunes for music, I would never buy any songs. Why should I? If I want to hear a certain song, I can download it from an illegal U.S. site or even find it on Youtube, Myspace or Facebook. I use Legalsounds because I can afford to download entire albums. The download time is extremely fast and I have never gotten a virus from Legalsounds. To be honest, most of what I have downloaded is older albums that I purchased long ago in vinyl form and on cassettes, and I don't enjoy being forced to buy the same CD's over and over again every time the electronics industry finds a new method of playing albums. One might say that Legalsounds is immoral. As a former musician, I understand this opinion, but I disagree with it completely. I believe it is the recording industry and MTV that have ruined opportunities for up and coming musicians/bands. The "music industry" has spent the last 20 years pushing certain types of "music" that I cannot honestly even classify as music in my own heart. I feel that at least half of the music that has been released by record companies in the last 15 years has no chance whatsoever to become "classic" music. Most of it is forgotten in 15 minutes. Most of this "music' was shoved down the throats of an entire generation of young people who have no concept of what music truly is. I believe they were more or less brain-washed into thinking that this talentless crap was actually worth listening to. There are still some bands, i.e. Tool, that are actually great bands. I purchase all of their CD's at stores. I perceive the main problem to be the fact that unknown bands that are actually good bands, are no longer signed and/or promoted by the music industry.
Thu, 03/11/2010 - 02:06 — Visitor (not verified)

LEGAL SOUNDS ROCKS!

That comment was BANG-ON!!! Major Record labels = MAJOR GREED................'NUFF SAID....... .......That's why a handful or artists are starting their own record labels...so people buy them. anyone with any sense of the value of a dollar (or a pound) know how overtly over-priced new music is. Remember, the most expensive CD, DVD, or ALBUM produced is the FIRST ONE off the lot. As soon as the distributors buy them from the record labels, they are paid for. Now for the mark-up!! As soon as department stores buy them from the distributors, they have been paid for 100 times over. As soon as people buy them from the department stores they are paid for about a 1000 times over. That's just plain economics, not rocket science........ .....CUT THE OVERHEAD....REDUCE THE PRICE.....OR DEAL WITH ONLINE PLACES LIKE THIS.
Fri, 01/15/2010 - 05:11 — scott (not verified)

Re: Legalsounds is awesome

I agree with Visitor (not verified). The comments are right on the money.
Fri, 12/18/2009 - 18:56 — Nova (not verified)

Woah!

The problem with the internet is the anonymity of it all; you can say all manner of horrid, extremist things, and all you get are a few nasty comments in return. But RogerRoger isn't what this topic's about, eh? :P So here's what I have to say about LegalSounds - and essentially, the age-old legal/illegal - music debate.

Support.

The.

Artists.

While we all sit here raging on at each other about what's right and what isn't, there are fantastic artists going under because people aren't buying their music. So instead of focusing the argument on the (even moral high-horse old me has to agree) ridiculously greedy record labels, let's look at it from the artist's perspective.

If you buy from legit sites, royalties - however small, however reluctantly - go to the artist. The bottom line is that LegalSounds (whether it tried and failed or simply didn't try at all; I don't think we'll ever really know) don't give royalties at all, however much you hedge it.

LegalSounds do not support their artists.

I know it sucks that the big guns like Amazon and iTunes take a lot of the cash for themselves, but a tiny royalty is better than a non-existant one, hey? :) And it doesn't hurt to find out which sites which give their artists the largest percentage.

Buying directly from an artist - from their website, during gigs, etc - is another good way of making sure they're getting what they deserve. After all, at the other end of all of this, the music we're Limewiring, Youtubing or LegalSounding is someone else's work. Hours of time, promotion, stress, and bloody hard work; all poured into one three-minute song we've taken a shine to. It's mental.

So if we have it on our iPods or CD players, I think it's... almost common sense to pay the £0.79/$0.99. Or if not common sense, common courtesy. I mean, if you loved a work of art and wanted it in your house, you'd gladly pay the painter... right? Or if you went out to eat and loved the service, you'd also gladly pay - maybe even give a tip!

Music's an awesome thing, and so I believe we should all support the artists we love. It's a very unpopular view - ripping it off YouTube is cheaper and so easy these days - but one that I think everyone should at least hear, whether they agree or not.

I know that if I was an artist, I'd sure want my music to be bought. And I'm pretty sure you would too! :)

Anyway, that's me done; thanks for reading if you got to the end. I'll stop rabbiting on now... us humans and our bloody opinions, eh? :P

- Nova, 16, UK.

P.S. And because this topic's getting kinda... cut-throat, I'd just like to clarify that the last statement I made was a joke. x
Thu, 08/12/2010 - 17:15 — Visitor (not verified)

How exactly does an artist

How exactly does an artist "go under"???? Moron.
Mon, 02/08/2010 - 13:54 — Visitor (not verified)

...

You're 16, shut up.
Mon, 04/12/2010 - 23:29 — Visitor (not verified)

And you're a c**t, shut up.

And you're a c**t, shut up. Nova speaks the truth. About time someone did, ass*ole.
Thu, 07/29/2010 - 10:47 — Visitor (not verified)

Agreed! someone gives a good

Agreed! someone gives a good informative response to an argument and all you pick up on is their age. That's big and grown up now isn't it.
Wed, 11/18/2009 - 19:49 — Visitor (not verified)

Is Legalsound.com illegal?

Our band Kuru's debut CD called "Jälki" was released in October 2009. We haven't got a record company and paid all the expenses ourselves. It was released two months ago and we still haven't got back the money we put in. And we don't have the money to make another CD before we pay the first one. And now I can see that you can download our album from legalsounds.com for 1,08USD. They haven't asked permission and for every download we get...well, nothing. So, what do you think? Is legalsounds.com illegal? Jussi
Tue, 07/06/2010 - 17:08 — ReallyReal (not verified)

To be honest, after

To be honest, after listening to a few of the songs off your album it's not even worth the dollar so don't get too stressed about it. If anyone paid good money for that sh*te you would be just a guilty as Legal Sounds for ripping them off.
Wed, 11/03/2010 - 14:51 — LOL (not verified)

That made me laugh!!!

That comment made me laugh so hard!!! Thanks But seriously, 2 points come from these comments. 1. Why should the public pay top dollar for sub-standard product(s)? i.e. an album of 12 songs with only 2 decent tunes on it OR any pop music that doesn't warrant a premium price tag as its musical content is poor & will have little to no value when its fad wears off. 2. If LegalSounds didn't exist, I would never of heard of Kuru, nor ever have listened to their music. But because Kuru are using forums to plug their music on LegalSounds, I have now listened to 2 songs. So I guess Kuru & LegalSounds are even. In fact Kuru, you may even owe legal sounds money for allowing you to promote yourself to an audience well beyond your current reach.
Fri, 03/26/2010 - 11:39 — Visitor (not verified)

eh, yeah, you should demand

eh, yeah, you should demand payment from the 'collection society' under Russian law. You may need to research that. I'm guessing you will find your licensing payment satisfactory. You see, legalsounds is earning interest on pre-paid account balances (which is the only payment method, and larger replenishments earn free downloads). That's all; that's the whole explanation for 9 cent songs. Pretty simple. But, you can also demand legalsounds (and other services like it) delete your work, and/or cease distributing it.
Sun, 01/03/2010 - 01:06 — Visitor (not verified)

Sure it's legal

Jussi, You said you did not get paid for the music by the Russian "Legal Sounds" and you assert, therefore, that it is illegal. But, that site is in Russia and operates under Russian laws. If it's legal in Russia, then it's legal, period. What you should do, though, is request that they remove your music from their site or to pay you a commission. If they fail to do either, then you would have legal rights under international copyright agreements to file a lawsuit against them in Russia. Good luck with that, though. So, I understand your situation. What Legal Sounds is doing appears to be entirely legal, but it does not work in the interests of Artists from other countries. There is little you can do until you can get your own country to negotiate directly with the Russian government to work out some kind of royalty agreement. Does your own country care about your ability to make money on copyrighted works? If so, then they ought to do something. This is not a matter of the RIAA vs. some country, but country vs. country. It is not a matter of laws being broken, but a matter of agreements being negotiated. Paul
Sat, 11/07/2009 - 19:31 — Visitor (not verified)

It's bad enough musicians

It's bad enough musicians rarely make any money and are literally starving, when these companies try to leech off your hard work it is absolutely absurd. I just had to get them to get our album off and can't believe how quickly these mp3s have gotten around, not just legalsounds but plenty of others. I wish someone would step in and discipline these companies, like others wrote there are loop holes so it's a hard task. It is just so lame to take advantage of people especially hard working independent musicians. Just some thoughts, Kindle to Ember
Fri, 10/16/2009 - 19:37 — Angie (not verified)

legal sounds decision

After reading the comments, I will not purchase from Legal Sounds.com. I read one comment saying if they can sell it for that price why can't the studio, because they are greedy. I have the opposite feeling. The studios have to scout for artists, pay for voice/dance coach, position the artists, create artwork, produce the album, marketing cots, studio costs, payments to artists, equipment, promotion, distribution costs even make up and wardrobe, agents, executives, production people, on and on and on. ......then someone, anyone, can buy a song for $.99 then sell for $.10, it pays itself in 10 downloads, then its all profit. They don't have to pay for much overhead, except for the web page development, shopping cart and credit card transactional fees. Who is the greedy one here? This is robbing not just from the artists and studios, but all the people who work for them. It would be like working really hard on a big project at work and your coworker takes all the credit, gets a promotion and a rasie while you just get more work. Don't get me wrong, I know studio and the stars make big money and all the little people like me work our asses off and make nothing. It hardly seems fair, but I still won't steal from them, or anyone, because it is not just about the studio and the big stars, there are lots of low pay production people involved too. They keep a whole lot of us employed.
Mon, 02/08/2010 - 11:11 — Visitor (not verified)

you need to toughen up and

you need to toughen up and realize that if labels werent so obsessed with all the b.s. expenses you named, and focused on the art it would be more appropriatedly priced. stop buying into the pop machine. records are supposed to be advertisments for live tours. support your artist when they come to town. they actually see most of that money
Mon, 04/12/2010 - 23:44 — Visitor (not verified)

You need to shut up and

You need to shut up and realize that the so called "art" you talk about doesn't even sell!!! If it did, don't you think those corrupt idiots are the record labels would be jumping on that bandwagon istead of manfactured crap like Britney Spears and American Idol shite??? PS: To the person who posted before: The artist pays for studio costs, make up, videos, etc etc. The record company then owns them. Not fair at all. I don't not give two shits about record companies, but I do about certain artists and they should get the money for making their music. Simple as that.
123next ›last »