BANDWIDTH: A Popular Culture Electronic Magazine ©2000

Music Point Counter Point: Napster

Napster

By: Jennifer J.

      I like Napster. Songs I have not heard in years available in well 10 minutes or one hour, depending on the connection-and it costs me nothing. Well in economic terms, I did spend something, because there is no such thing as a free lunch. I spent my time downloading the song, which encompassed the use of my electricity and phone line. But there was no exchange of currency, between you and the makers of the music product; and therefore the people involved in the production of the music product were not compensated. This makes Napster inefficient in the market sense because proper payment is not getting to the parties whose time, money, energy, and talent went into the music product.

      And that is why 20 million people almost lost Napster on July 27, 2000. Yes, Virginia, using Napster to download copyrighted material is stealing, for reasons already explained. But before all of you out there bombard this poor lowly editor with hate mail, read and learn.

      If you feel that Lars Ulrich of Metallic, Dr. Dre and the hundreds of musicians who are anti-Napster, are greedy bastards then you need a dose of reality. These people, like millions of artist, their producers, and companies, put a lot into making these music products for your entertainment, and they have a right to make a profit. I hope when you go to work tomorrow that someone takes credit for all your work, and denies you a paycheck out of the sheer belief that your output should be free, because you or the owner of the company is "rich enough".

      Now for the flip side of my argument, poor Shawn Fanning (the nineteen year old creator of Napster), he was just doing a good deed for his fellow human. Fanning just wanted to share the world of song with fellow music lovers. This is a great gesture, and would have been cool without the support of a venture capitalists who obviously only invest when money is to be made from the advertising revenues. Which of course will go directly to the owners and employees of Napster.

      But what Young Fanning did was start a revolution; one I think the founding fathers would be proud. The people, the consumers of music, have finally realized the error of their ways and do not want to pay high prices for LPs any longer. The music lover no longer has to be subject to the marketing schemes of the large record companies and media outlets that tell us who has the talent and who does not. We can decide for ourselves! No More Heavy Rotation Radio! God Bless America! Courtney Love, lead singer of the group HOLE, summed up this point during her poignant and terrific speech given during the Digital Hollywood Online Entertainment Conference in New York City, May 16, 2000.

...Somewhere along the way, record companies figured out that it's a lot more profitable to control the distribution system than to nurture artists. And since the companies didn't have any real competition, artists had no other place to go. Record companies controlled the promotion, marketing; only they had the ability to get lots of radio play, and get records into all the big chain stores. That power put them above the artists and the audience. They own(ed) the plantation...
...Being the gatekeeper was the most profitable place to be, but now we're in a world half without gates. The Internet allows artists to communicate directly with their audiences; we don't have to depend solely on an inefficient system where the record company promotes our records to radio, press or retail and the sits back and hopes fans find out about our music...Digital distribution gives everyone worldwide, instant access to music....

      With the number of artist and music companies, why are CD prices climbing into the twenty-dollar ranges? Twenty dollars for a forty-five minute LP-Don't think so. Mr. Fanning, if you are out there reading this, you are a true revolutionary. Please take solace in starting a social and economic revolution, where the people, the consumer are regaining control of their pocketbooks. If you have go the pay-per-download thing, at a reasonable price many would probably still tune into Napster.

      Finally, all of you pro-Napster consumers, you must note that Napster is company, just like those that are fighting to have it cease and desist. And personally I am afraid that they might sell all of us users out. What? How? When? Why? Well, if you are like me you just skim on over those nasty provider agreements (the ones you have to agree too before using any type of software). And according to Napster, users are not supposed to download any "copyrighted materials".According to Napster's Terms of Use:

Napster respects copyright law and expects our users to do the same. Unauthorized copying, distribution, modification, public display, or public performance of copyrighted works is an infringement of the copyright holders' rights. You should be aware that some MP3 files may have been created or distributed without copyright owner authorization. As a condition to your account with Napster, you agree that you will not use the Napster service to infringe the intellectual property rights of others in any way. Napster will terminate the accounts of users who are repeat infringers of the copyrights, or other intellectual property rights, of others. In addition, Napster reserves the right to terminate the account of a user and to block use of the Napster service permanently upon any single infringement of the rights of others in conjunction with use of the Napster service, or if Napster believes that user conduct is harmful to the interests of Napster, its affiliates, or other users, or for any other reason in Napster's sole discretion, with or without cause.

In accordance with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act of 1998 (the text of which may be found on the U.S. Copyright Office web site at http://lcweb.loc.gov/copyright), Napster will respond expeditiously to claims of copyright infringement committed using the Napster service that are reported to Napster's "Designated Copyright Agent"...

      Now I am certainly no lawyer, so I may be wrong, but I wonder if Napster continues its stance that it is an ISP, that means they technically are just a provider like AOL, which means they are not breaking the law. Does this mean that we the people, the members of Napster, are the criminals and face the possibility of being sued by individual record companies? Just a thought-or is it a possible reality?

      Not too mention Napster is not exactly safe. According to an article published by CNET.com: Security problem discovered in Napster music software in January 2000, There are ways for someone with a fair hacking background to hack your hard drive through Napster's software, while you are downloading. So before you go and ready yourself to the stake for Napster's service, or similar services please consider all that you have read.

      Comments are greatly being sought on the MP3 issue. If your feeling the need to vent drop me a line! For more information on this issue and how it may put a damper on your life check out the following online literature on the subject:

Society: Government Sites and Articles on MP3 Trading Companies

Industry: Reaction and Preservation

     BANDWIDTH will keep you up to date as this issue progresses. Send all comments and questions about this article to JenniferJ@ybfree.com