THATS VERY TRUE. THATS A HARD ONE TO ARGUE TOO. HOWEVER MUSIC TONES NOW ARE THE ACTUAL SONGS SO NOW THE GAME IS DIFFERENT. MUSIC IS CONSIDERED INTELLECTUAL MATERIAL (NO MATTER HOW DUMB SOMEONE MIGHT THINK A SONG IS) & COPYRIGHTED. THEREFORE A COMPANY CANT JUST TAKE CLIPS OF SOMEONE ELESE PROPERTY & SELL IT FOR PROFIT WITHOUT COMPENSATION FOR THE OWNER. POLYPHONIC RINGTONES WERE DIFFERENT TO A CERTAIN DEGREE & I CANT TRULY SAY IF THEY SHOULDVE PAID FOR THEM OR NOT
... but, the legislation didn't originally specify what "kind" of ring tone. It just specifies ringtones in general. So when ringtones got better... the legislation didn't immediately change.
...and there was was legal wrangling over the length of a clip, which was compared to an actor in a commercial who doesn't appear for more than just a few seconds.... and how a ringtone is made vs. an actual rebroadcast.... etc, etc. lawyers
like i said, i couldn't really grasp all the loopholes and it was over a year ago... but it wasn't/isn't an "open and shut case" like most would believe.