Napster controversy essay

The Napster Debate

Essay authored by keith

1 . Background

The Napster application (http://www.

napster. com), released early in 1999, allows online users to share and download MP3 FORMAT files directly from any computer system connected to the Napster network. The software is used by downloading a client program from the Napster internet site and then attaching to the network through this software, which allows sharing (uploading and downloading) of MP3 files among all users connected to the network. While Napster does not condone copyright violation, there is no option in the software to stop this, or intended for royalties to be paid to artists in whose songs are being copied for free.

In contrast to similar file-sharing applications (Gnutella, Freenet), Napster limits users to uploading/downloading of MP3 FORMAT files simply. These files are pressurized wave (. wav) files. The advantage of MP3 files is they are around one-tenth how big the corresponding.

wav file and is close-to-CD-quality. It is for this reason that many artists, record labels and also other music industry stakeholders are worried by the MP3 file format and applications like Napster that simplify the sharing of copyrighted materials.

Different file formats in common make use of on the Net are not since threatening for the recording industry, primarily as a result of reduced quality of the recording. Real audio tracks (.

ra,. rm) data have lowered sound quality (comparable to radio) and are usually streamed on the different protocol, allowing individuals to listen to tracks without having (or being able) to download the source files. Another music file format common on the internet is the midi file format. These files are of no threat to the music industry since the files aren’t actually a recording with the music, rather a set of guidelines to the computer system as to what appears to play (and there is no way to replicate vocal tracks).

This kind of file format is usually becoming outdated and being utilized less and less.

2 . Effect

The reaction via recording artists, record product labels and other music industry players has been diverse, but primarily anti-Napster. The first actions to be taken against Napster was by the band Metallica.

In 04 of this 12 months, they sued Napster Inc for copyright laws infringement. The situation was completed out of court when ever Napster consented to ban a few 300, 000 users who allegedly downloaded Metallica songs. Again in June Napster Inc was sued for copyright infringement by The Saving Industry Affiliation of America (RIAA), a trade group representing the united states recording market, alleging Napster is¦ allowing and encouraging the illegal copying and syndication of copyrighted music. Napster claims that Audio Residence Recording Take action that permits burning of material for private use, allows its uses to change MP3s.

Napster even more claims immunity by understanding the company because an ISP under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act. The RIAA unsuccessfully applied to provide an injunction to halt Napsters operations until after the court circumstance in Sept, so Napster will carry on and operate until (and if) the the courtroom rules against Napster.

Other designers and record labels (http://www.napster.

com/speakout/artists. code and http://www.napster. com/speakout/labels.

html) have taken care of immediately the advent of Napster and similar applications in a more positive way, embracing the new technology rather than rejecting it. Online, the Offspring says MP3 technology and programs just like Napster an important and necessary means to encourage music and foster better relationships with this fans. Interestingly enough, the Offsprings last album, Americana, was made available on the web illegally prior to commercially unveiled, yet is it doesn’t bands best-selling album currently. Furthermore, several surveys have got proven that Napster users actually buy more CDs, after sampling the songs online (http://www.

theregister. co. uk/content/1/12093. html).

It is this problem that is at the core of the RIAA lawsuit, if Napster and similar applications will mean reduced CD product sales. Napster does challenge the standard distribution of music (CDs, cassettes, plastic etc) nevertheless whether this could be seen as a threat or simply a fresh medium to become exploited by the music market is another concern. Some record labels, especially Epitaph (http://www.epitaph.

com) have got partnered with sites like e-music. com to sell complete albums and single music in AUDIO format within the web. In such a case, the record company offers in fact attained a new distribution method, rather than seeing it as the enemy. Naturally , in this scenario, the record company still gets a cut in the profits, a thing that artists whose songs are downloaded through Napster dont get.

The simple fact that Napster is cost-free and more hassle-free than visiting a record retail outlet makes it a desirable way to get music for customers. The problem the record companies have is the fact there is no technique of regulating who has access to the data, and hence no chance of taking advantage of it.

Napster also facilitates international distribution intended for unsigned performers. This as well threatens record labels.

Previously, without being signed to a list label, an artist just could not get the exposure to earn a living as a music performer. With the Net, sites just like mp3. com and Napster, this is today possible.

While Napster does allow music writing to an magnitude that could theoretically destroy the retail music industry, blocking Napster will never stop all their problems.

Record labeling need to discover this new technology not as a threat, but since a challenge. They have to come up with tips to encourage visitors to buy Compact disks (multimedia components, attractive artwork, lyrics, photo books etc). Perhaps if perhaps they presented better solutions to their fixed artists, fewer artists may wish to release their very own music themselves.

Napster challenges the background music industrys monopoly on division.

People can now download music totally free in their very own homes and artists can release their music themselves. In theory, this could mean the end of record labels and other associated companies, and this is the reason why groups like the RIAA are so worried.

3. Conceivable Solutions

The music industrys response to Napster is just like the response to the introduction of cassette tapes and VCRs.

Both new technologies allowed people to record and replicate copyrighted details and at the time, these were viewed as threats to the respective industries, but time has proven that tape recordings are no substitute for professional, commercial recordings. The same can be said pertaining to Napster, while the songs offered, they are not really CD quality (for one of the most part) and complete albums are very difficult to come by on Napster. Once a great MP3 is usually downloaded, it could only be listened to on a pc (or a walkman-style system, such as RIO). CDs, however, are more lightweight they can be very easily listened to everywhere, on a computer system, stereo, cascos, in a car, friends stereos etc .

Although MP3s can be created to Compact disks, the level of experience required to try this means that for most of us it is much easier to buy a commercial CD.

The accessories consumers get when they obtain commercial Cd albums also motivate people to buy CDs. Artwork, lyrics, images and other boat information make the purchase of a COMPACT DISC more valuable than just the music. However , fresh advancements including multimedia pieces for computer systems (already available on some Compact disks, eg Blue Plate Unique by the Move Hall Crashers) including video clip, photos, video games etc would encourage the purchase of CDs more so.

If Cd albums were produced with better extras and reduced rates, people will be more likely to obtain them. In cases like this, Napster could continue, serving its goal as a try before you get application intended for the music industry.

In the same way people still purchase and rent movies even though they will record films from TV and acquire tapes coming from friends, persons will still buy CDs, and will be urged even more so in the event that prices will be reduced and extras given away with the music.

Music industry players such as BMG (Bertelsmann Music Group), EMI, Sony and Universal happen to be launching initiatives to overcome Napster and take advantage of the options the Internet provides (http://www.

theregister. co. uk/content/6/12778. html).

These companies happen to be launching their particular MP3 revenue and circulation services, or perhaps offering membership services that allow registered users to download unlimited songs for a limited time. It is also worth observing that e-music. com previously offers this sort of service, together with a monthly registration service. Yet , on e-music, users can easily download endless MP3s from a number of labeling, whereas the label MP3 distribution sites can exclusively disperse the record labels MP3s.

Most likely eventually sites like e-music. com can partner with most labels, such as the bigger types and will provide a better support (faster downloading, better quality files, more selection etc) than Napster can.

Yet , the fact that over US$15 million continues to be invested in Napster Inc signifies that Napster will not die quickly. If the RIAA is successful in the current legal action against the business, Napster can just modify direction.

A few solutions have been recommended.

Probably the most practical and realistic substitute that has been suggested is that Napster Inc pays off royalties to artists when ever their tunes are downloaded, much like the car radio pays artists when their songs will be played.

Another option is that Napster could use the music market to distribute certain test tracks to the public. These types of tracks could be distributed royalty-free as advertising for the album, or Napster can agree to spend royalties.

Another solution staying adopted by simply other similar information-sharing applications like Napster, Freenet and Gnutella should be to make record transfers above the application private. Adding to that, the fact that the central servers themselves do not have to have any copyrighted files, discovering users breaking copyright laws will be amazingly difficult.

4. Positives and negatives of Conceivable Solutions

The option of Napster spending royalties to artists in whose songs happen to be downloaded will be a positive move because it would mean that designers receive good compensation because of their work.

Yet , on the other hand, to compliment the enormous expense of such a move, Napster would either have to become a paid subscription service, or show marketing (which wouldnt necessarily cover the costs). Added to this, the price of modifying the application form, and doing exercises a way to determine what songs have already been downloaded, the administration costs for Napster would improve greatly.

The option of a supportive effort with all the music market has the benefit of being fully legal and stopping all conflicts among Napster as well as the RIAA. Nevertheless , such a model would mean an excellent reduction in the amount of songs obtainable and might eliminate the writing aspect of this program.

The advantage of the anonymous peer-to-peer model is the fact if zero corporation, specific or different entity says ownership, no-one can be sued. And because simply no files are stored around the central server, no copyright laws is being infringed there.

The disadvantage with this method, would be that Napster would be breaking the law, and undoubtedly new legislation would be brought in and measures can be taken to stop the services. Furthermore, in the event that Napster cannot take credit rating officially for software, they could not profit from it (something they need to carry out, considering the investment in the company)

five.

Suggestions

I believe that Napster is a valuable plan and indication of things to come. Yet , in its current state, it’ll have a very difficult experience remaining legal. I believe the only way Napster is going to survive will be to change the service (and it may actually be forced to by the courts). I recommend that Napster develops a lot of system of paying royalties to artists in whose songs will be downloaded more than their application.

It is the only useful way that Napster can continue and even though you will be charged the company a great deal to implement this method, it will show that Napster will probably be safe from lawsuits by the music industry. It will eventually mean that Napster users won’t have to worry that they will be breaking the law, and may encourage artists to embrace online circulation. I would recommend that Napster subsidises the cost of the royalty payments by exhibiting advertising in the application (much like GetRight (http://www.getright.

com/) and CuteFTP (http://www.cuteftp. com) do). This kind of advertising could possibly be used by promoters to target music enthusiasts, meaning increased earnings for Napster.

I really believe that if the royalty option, subsidised simply by advertising is definitely implemented, Napster will be able to continue safely and profitably.

Cultural Issues