The Napster Controversy
From the writings of Burke I get the understanding
that he believes that representation is done through
the idea of symbols; symbol making, symbol using and
symbol misusing. He believes that we use language,
that we use it best in a nonverbal way in which we all
can understand. And that language verbal or not is the
essential key to all representations through any lens
or idea. He also believed that we invented the idea of
anything to be negative and that we are what makes
things negative. Simply put; All things are good until
man makes it otherwise. And by using Burke's "lens" we
can look at the internet use of Napster and see how
different people have found different views of it and
how now some people deem Napster as bad or in a
negative lens they see Napster.
The Napster software, launched early in 1999, allows
internet users to share and download MP3 files
directly from any computer connected to the Napster
network. The software is used by downloading a client
program from the Napster site and then connecting to
the network through this software, which allows
sharing of MP3 files between all users connected to
the network. Napster does not condone copyright
infringement, there is no opportunity in the software
to stop this, or for royalties to be paid to the song
belongs to.
The reaction from recording artists, record labels
and other music industry players has been varied, but
primarily anti-Napster. The first action to be taken
against Napster was by the band Metallica. In April of
this year, they sued Napster Inc for copyright
infringement. The case was settled out of court when
Napster agreed to ban some 300,000 users who had
allegedly downloaded Meta...
... middle of paper ...
...co.uk/content/archive/12647.html
- 4/9/00
Napster Boosts CD sales - survey -
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/1/12093.html -
4/9/00
Napster Details Copyright Case Defence -
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/archive/11750.html
- 2/9/00
US Appeal Court sets Date for Napster Trial -
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/1/12909.html -
2/9/00
Napster Loses Preliminary Hearing -
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/archive/10729.html
- 2/9/00
Napster throws Metallica a Curvevall -
http://www.salon.com/tech/log/2000/05/10/napster_metallica/index.html
-
31/8/00
Napster to Face Music in Courtroom -
http://www.usatoday.com/life/cyber/tech/review/crh121.htm
- 2/9/00
Napster is Ordered to Halt Swap of Music -
http://www.latimes.com/business/reports/musicweb/lat_napster000727.htm
- 2/9/00
AOL Unit Runs Napster-like Search Engine -
In America, there is currently a lawsuit pending that threatens to change the face of the music industry. The lawsuit is against Napster it has been brought by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) as well as other major music labels.
Online, you can find a digital version of any song that your heart desires from classical to hardcore to country in less than 10 – 15 minutes. Terabytes or 1000000000000 (a trillion) bytes of Mp3 files can be found online at peak times, which roughly translates to 330,000 songs in 3100 different collections. A Mp3 is an individual song converted into a digital format and playable on computers.
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?
which gives artists the exclusive rights to their music from the moment of its creation until,
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.
Since 1999, the situation around music has been changed drastically. In that year, the novel software “Napster” was released. With this software, people became able to get any file they want easily, sometimes illegally. Some musicians and people in the entertainment industry have tried to exterminate that P2P “Peer to Peer” technology. But it looks as if their efforts are in vain. People are going to use P2P technology more and it might as well become the official way to handle music distribution. The music industry should rather take advantage of the technology than keep trying to exterminate it.
The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) is suing Napster for allegedly enabling music piracy through its proprietary MusicShare program. MusicShare allows music lovers to open up their stores of MP3 files to all other Napster users. Whenever a user is online, his MP3s are up for grabs, with the only stipulation being that users upload a file for each one that they download. The RIAA says that many of the shared MP3s are illegal bootlegs, but Napster insists that it "does not, and cannot, control what content is available to [users] using the Napster browser." Citing the many legal issues of its program, Napster makes a firm case.
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
Napster was the pinnacle of this combination of recording technology and the internet. Napster was an internet company that launched in 1999 and focused on music streaming and music downloading. At the time Napster was the only real web company looking at the industry of music streaming and music downloads and as a result , Napster saw tremendous success in the first few years of its life and taking the crown as the fastest growing business ever , a record still unbeaten today. Napster’s focus with regards to peer-to-peer music sharing was ease of accessibility and speed , and in both areas they excelled. Napster made peer to peer music sharing easier than anyone had previously thought possible with the introduction of their massive online music market place in which people could share any type of free mp3 into one mainstream directory. However much like streaming services that push the envelope of accessibility Napster ran into several problems along the way and faced heavy opposition.
The sharing of illegal or copyrighted material is against the law. Also known as copyright infringement is the act of violating any of a copyright owner’s exclusive rights granted by the federal Copyright Act. There are three elements that must be in place in order for the infringement to occur. (1)The copyright holder must have a valid copyright, (2).The person who is allegedly infringing must have access to the copyrighted work. And (3).The duplication of the copyrighted work must be outside the exceptions.
Along with the development of a file format (MP3) to store digital audio recordings, came one of the new millennium’s most continuous debates – peer-to-peer piracy – file sharing. Internet companies such as Napster and Grokster became involved in notable legal cases in regards to copyright laws in cyberspace. These two cases are similar in nature, yet decidedly different. In order to understand the differences and similarities, one should have an understanding of each case as well as the court’s ruling.
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.
In 2000, Metallica filed a lawsuit against Napster and won. As a result, Napster banned about 300,000 of its users who were sharing Metallica songs. Soon after, the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) filed a suit against Napster and the file-sharing server was forced to shut down. [1]
Napster is a company that developed the so-called peer-to-peer technology that lets people search and retrieve music files directly from one another's personal computers. When Napster first came out, millions of internet users worldwide were illegally downloading and distributing copyrighted music, videos, images, and software for free. After being vilified by the entertainment industry, which claims that Napster and any similar programs could make piracy of almost any digital work unstoppable, and many court battles, Napster was ordered by court to be shutdown in 2000. The technology has been praised as a revolutionary development for the Internet—unaware of the problems that would arise from such practices. However, the termination of Napster was not enough, months later, dozens of new, like programs were being developed and used. And since Napster, not much has been done to stop these latest downloading programs.