The Rise and Fall of Napster It started as an accident. Shawn Fanning was just experimenting and thinking of an easier to go through a search engine for music. What was a simple idea turned out to be a phenomenon in the Internet world. The creation of Napster led to many problems and brought about new issues that involved the entertainment industry and piracy laws. Napster is a software where a compilation of all of its user’s files are held in a central unit and each user is able to use its search engine to look for a song from another person’s computer. The issue surrounding this problem arose when the Recording Industry Association of America claimed that Napster was basically giving out free music and was not paying the fees to issue “free” music. Napster claimed that all the music was shared among its users and were shared from computer to computer rather than a free website issuing free files for all to download. With the innovation of new technologies today, new problems will always come up due to better ways of getting things done. The same incident happened with the “new and improved” VCR. After fighting some battles, it was made legal for consumers to record from their own home and uses it for personal matters. Again, this situation is similar, but with more strings attached. Napster was thought to be similar to the VCR problem, but with the piracy laws and the government still trying to find ways to regulate the Internet, it became a more difficult battle for Napster to fight. Recording artists were losing money in the sales of compact discs and they were blaming it on the rise of file sharing. Although the radio does entertain the public with its free music, they do have to pay the fees to play the music. They make their money but advertisements and sponsors. Napster used the excuse that people record off the radio for free, but they cannot burn the music they hear. What Napster did not understand was that the music is offered free because the radio stations do pay for it, and they have the rights to issue the music at the level of their pleasure. Napster was simply taking it from the artists and giving free music. This had an effect on both the consumers and producers of music. What turned out to be a result of the matter was that the prices of music were climbing and consumers were not buying as much. They resorted... ... middle of paper ... ...er was unintentional, but it brought about an enormous worry for many people. The right or wrong answer does not lie in the hands of the “upper class,” but in the minds of each individual who cares about the issue. Many think that Napster did nothing wrong, but when given the facts, it is almost as if Napster was stealing candy from a baby. Bibliography Ante, Spencer. “Inside Napster.”Online Article. August 14, 2000. http://www.businessweek.com/2000/00_33/b3694001.htm Evans, Chris. “Napster, My.MP3.com, Digital Music, and the Future.” Online Article. March 28, 2000. http://www.netfreedom.org/news.asp?item=113. ”From Betamax to Napster” Online Article. http://www.msnbc.com/modules/DigitalMusic/ Hansen, Evan, John Borland. Mike Yamamoto. ”Napster wildfire spreads beyond music | CNET News.com” Online Article. May 15, 2000. http://news.com.com/2009-1023-239700.html?legacy=cnet Kahney, Leander “Wired News: Uncovering the Napster Kitty Ads.” Online article. September 22, 2003. http://www.wired.com/news/digiwood/0,1412,60525,00.html King, Brad ”Wired News: The Day the Napster Died.” Online Article. May 15, 2002. http://www.wired.com/news/mp3/0,1285,52540,00.html
A popular program easily accessible on the Internet is called Napster. After you download it from Napster’s site, you basically tell it where you keep your Mp3 files and when it connects it cross-references everyone’s files and lets you search through them all and download as you please. 90% of the files that are traded daily are illegally “ripped” from CDs. Napster has a blurb at startup that states “Copying or distributing unauthorized Mp3 files may violate United States and/or foreign copyright laws. Compliance with copyright law remains your responsibility.” The RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) is charging the site with copyright infringement and alleges that Napster has created a base for music piracy on an unprecedented scale. Napster contends that they provide the platform, not the actions, and that as the blurb states it’s up to the people. Napster is not at fault because the RIAA has overstepped their boundaries and infringed on first amendment rights online.
What trends in networking in the 1990’s and early 2000’s drove the popularity of Napster? What other technologies contributed to Napster’s success?
Napster was an American company that created a revolutionary platform that allowed for music sharing online. Originally, it was established as a peer-to-peer file sharing service that emphasized the exchange of MP3 formatted soundtracks. Founded in 1999, by Shawn Fanning and Sean Parker, who rebounded post-Napster to become the first President of Facebook, it operated between June 1999 and July 2001. It was a revolutionary because the network allowed for music to be “set free” – suddenly, an incredible amount of information was made available on the Internet, a relatively new forum that had yet to experience huge waves. Napster was that wave – it democratized the access to information and enabled the common user to listen to millions of songs without having to pay for it. Within a few months of its opening, it had 20 million users – an exponential growth which would attract the attention of large media companies, record labels, and famous bands like Metallica, which would eventually lead to the downfall of Napster.
The ethical dilemma of computer downloads, namely music downloads, has been under great scrutiny in the last few years. Napster, if any one symbolizes the new technology, was the front runner in developing the new digital trading. The ethical issues seem to revolve around the all mighty dollar. Some particular musicians, namely Lars Ulrich from Metallica and Dr. Dre (rap star), have had some serious issues with Napster. Their claims have merit, but so do the claims of the creator and users of Napster.
Sean Fanning and Sean Parker originally intended for Napster to be a “peer to peer” file-sharing program. Napster changed the way we as a community shared files. Instead of going out and buying a CD from one of your favorite artist, rather you could download their latest single and create your own CD rather than buying just one CD because you only like one of the songs. Instead you were converting different music files into MP3. These changes caused the Music Industry to take a hit singles were being released before they were even suppose to come out. CD sales dropped. The Record industry became outraged, even musicians started getting fed up. When it comes to the whole Napster vs. RIAA I had no idea that it was as huge as it was. I can understand
Selvin, Joel. “Did Napster Help Boost Record Sales.” The San Francisco Chronicle August 5, 2001.
...ample, thirteen hours of mp3 files can now be stored on a cd compared to traditional digital audio only allow for seventy-four minutes. mp3 files not only provide an efficient means of storing audio information but also for transmitting it. It is here that most discussion concerning mp3s is centered. Prior to a court order closing down online music distributor Napster in 2001, mp3 users were able to traffic and trade favored songs, artists and genres with other users with a speed and an ease that were previously unknown. Intervention from the music industry, however, has attempted to halt this activity, with copyright infringement cited as the legal rationale”( GÜNDÜZ).
According to the text A Gift of Fire, Napster “opened on the Web in 1999 as a service that allowed its users to copy songs in MP3 files from the hard disks of other users” (Baase, 2013, p. 192, Section 4.1.6 Sharing Music: The Napster Case). Napster was, however, “copying and distributing most of the songs they traded without authorization” (A Gift of Fire, Section 4.1.6 Sharing Music: The Napster Case). This unauthorized file sharing resulted in a lawsuit - “eighteen record companies sued for contributory infringement claiming that Napster users were blatantly infringing copyrights by digitally reproducing and distributing music without a license” (Communications Law: Liberties, Restraints and the Modern Media, 2011, p. 359).
The story really begins with Napster and its free software that allowed users to swap music across the Internet for free using peer-to-peer networks. While Shawn Fanning was attending Northeastern University in Boston, he wanted an easier method of finding music than by searching IRC or Lycos. John Fanning of Hull, Massachusetts, who is Shawn's uncle, struck an agreement which gave Shawn 30% control of the company, with the rest going to his uncle. Napster began to build an office and executive team in San Mateo, California, in September of 1999. Napster was the first of the massively popular peer-to-peer file sharing systems, although it was not fully peer-to-peer since it used central servers to maintain lists of connected systems and the files they provideddirectories, effectivelywhile actual transactions were conducted directly between machines. Although there were already media which facilitated the sharing of files across the Internet, such as IRC, Hotline, and USENET, Napster specialized exclusively in music in the form of MP3 files and presented a user-friendly interface. The result was a system whose popularity generated an enormous selection of music to download. Napster became the launching pad for the explosive growth of the MP3 format and the proliferation of unlicensed copyrights.
There are several competitors who have modeled their distribution after Apple. However, Napster 2.0 takes a very different stance on digital music distribution. They charge customers a monthly subscription fee and allow users to stream and download as much music as they want. However, if customers want to copy music to their mp3 player, or burn songs to a CD, they music pay extra. Napster also uses Microsoft's WMA format for their DRM scheme which makes Napster incompatible with the iPod. Both Apple and Napster are United States based companies and therefore must abide by our laws. However, a Russian website called allofmp3.com offers DRM free music....
The music industry survives mainly on the sales of CD’s. Napster enables one person to purchase the CD, and through the use of their computer, they give the music to millions of different users.
As one can deduce from the information presented in this essay, the court case involving Napster
In 1999, a new file sharing service was introduced. This was called Napster. A peer to peer file sharing service where people could go on and download any song or album they wanted for free. That started a revolution; the download revolution. It has an effect on more than what most people think. It affects the record companies, the record stores, and the recording artists themselves. People need to not do it as much if they want to continue to have new music in their life.
CNN (March 12, 2001) Canada firm uses pig latin to fool Napster block. Available at www.cnn.com/2001/Tech/internet/03/12/napster.02/index.html visited at 11/17/02
...music. Napster worked through the use of a main server hosted by Napster that contained a central repository. Users would connect to this main server to search for a desired MP3 file and the server would search the server database for a different user in possession of that file. Once a user with the file was found, the two users would become directly connected and the file could be downloaded. Due to the use of this central server, Napster could be considered a type of “brokered” P2P networking, as the two peers only connect after Napster resolved the IP addresses between the two PCs [4]. Regardless of the moral or legal issues surrounding Napster, it is irrefutable that Napster was instrumental in how peer-to-peer networks work today.