For many years the record companies have fixed record prices to avoid competing with each other and to maximize their profits. Currently, the record companies are collaborating in order to force Napster to shut down. The record companies are claiming that Napster is breaking copyright laws. Napster is a peace of software available for free on the Internet, which allows you to download almost any song you can think of. All you need to get Napster is a computer and Internet connection, the faster the better. Should people feel sympathy for the record companies because of the supposed starvation as a result of Napster file sharing? Or should the sympathy lie with the users of Napster? Let us examine who is trying to shut down Napster and for what reasons. Let us also determine the reasons why people want Napster to remain open.
The Record Company is strongly opposed to Napster for one reason and one reason only. Apparently, the record companies are losing more and more of the market to Napster file sharing on the Internet. Record companies justify their lawsuits against Napster with the line so often used in press conferences, “Napster breaks copyright laws.” This phrase seems like a legitimate argument. One could understand the reasons for feeling this way. For simplicity sake, we will use Dave as an example. Dave developed a product and sells it, and, at first, his product does very well. His product is then duplicated again and again by a person who purchased his product. Dave watches his sales plummet and, of course, feels cheated. Should Dave have the right to sue the person who copied his product? Most people would say yes. This is the argument the record companies are making in defense of the lawsuits against Napster. However, let us look deeper into the matters of sales within the record companies. Record companies say they are suffering as a result of Napster. The price of a CD has stayed the same for many years as far as I can remember. Why would the record companies not raise the price of a CD if their profits were dropping? Also, the sales of records from1999 to 2000 have actually increased 2%. Why would there be an increase in sales if, the record companies claim, Napster is hurting their business and taking up some of the market? I am sure if Napster was good for business in the record companies’ eyes, the record companies would not be complaining about copyright infringement laws being broken.
The RIAA believe that Napster has helped users infringe copyright. The threat of the lawsuit has been around since the conception of Napster and was actually filed four months after Napster went on line. The case is not as clear-cut as it first appears. RIAA argues that most of the MP3's on Napster's site are mainly pirated. Therefore, by Napster allowing and actually making it easier for users to download MP3's this means that they are assisting Copyright infringement.
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.
In this case, there are three main effects of Napster on the recording industry. The first one is that it caused a large decline in record sales in a short time. According to this case, the spending on recorded music in U.S dropped 4.1% in 2001 and the industry’s top 10 albums also sold much less compared to the year before. The second effect is that it cased the sales of CD burners, blank CDs and digital audio players increase and nowadays, most new computers come with CD-RW drives installed, which means people can easily store downloaded music, share music with friends and take it with them anytime as well. The third effect is that it increased the cost of recorded music. Once people can download free music through peer-to-peer software services, they have less incentive to buy original editions, which will make recording industry spend more to fight against copyrights and invest more in new artists and new music. Overall, these three effects make the recording industry go through a hard time.
“It is estimated that such illegal product costs the music industry more than 300 million dollars a year domestically.” This is why the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) is taking a strong stance against MP3 piracy. The damage done to the recording industry in lost profits, increased prices, and lost jobs is overwhelming. In an attempt to put a damper on file swapping, and recapture lost revenue the RIAA has been suing people ...
The approach that was taken by the music industry to take down file sharing service was to attack it from all sides – Napster was hit with several lawsuits from different sectors of the music industry. First to hit was A&M Records. A&M Records was actually not a single record label, but a group of plaintiffs that were all members of the RIAA, the Recording Industry Association of America. Some of these plaintiffs include Sony Music Entertainment, Virgin Records America, Universal Music Group, and Warner Bros. Records. When Napster was issued a preliminary injunction by the District Court, it appealed the decision at the Ninth Circuit. I chose to focus on the District Court case because it was where the arguments were ...
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.
Napster creates a threat to the music industry, which includes Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) and well-known musical groups, because it diminishes their distribution control, record sales and lowers their profit. The music industry must continue to take legal action against Napster to eliminate its negative impact.
Nearly 75 percent of college students have downloaded music from the Net, according to a recent study by Greenfield Online, an international research firm. Nearly two-thirds of the 1,135 college students surveyed say they download music as a way to sample music before buying it. So does this prove that the artists are actually benefiting out of Napster as people will hear there songs and possibly go and buy there singles. Many people believe music labels should have been donating money to Napster users, not threatening to sue them. And so the much-libelled Napster users are dedicated music buyers, quick to reach for their wallets. Greenfield research says it found that 45 per cent of online music fans are more likely to have increased their music purchases than online fans who don't use Napster. The study of Napster users found that 71 percent of users say they're willing to pay to download an entire album.
Napster was created in 1999 by a college dropout named Sean Fanning. Napster allows users to swap digital song files over the internet easily and most of all free. Millions of people used Napster to retrieve almost any song a person could think of, for example, songs that are current number one hits to the other songs from the "one-hit-wonders." Napster created a way for people world wide to exchange or share music files quickly and easily. This causes the ethical dilemma on whether trademark rights are being infringed or is "sharing" the music files legal and ethical.
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
First, it is important to discuss the direct, contributory and vicarious infringement claims against Napster. Direct copyright infringement claims are based on a breach of a copyright owners’ exclusive rights to the copyrighted work(s). A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc., 239 F.3d 1004, 1013 (9th Cir. 2001). Napster was found liable for this because the users used its platform to upload and download copyrighted music, thus infringing on
As I sat in front of my computer downloading my favorite song from Napster, I started to think about how hard it must have been to write a song so sublime with the way the words flow from one another, and how talented one must be to do so. I started to think how hard people work on their music for themselves and their fans, and how their fans don’t realize what they are doing every time they download a song off the internet. What they don’t realize is that it is messing over the people who worked so hard pouring out their heart and soul into their music for everyone to enjoy. They are the people who are responsible for the music, not the people who work at Napster, or any of the other shafting music networks, who are embezzling from the people we all admire for the way they can flow out those heartwarming words. These words move us to the point that we want to cry, and sometimes do. These words we listen to when we want to go off into our own little world, and think about an extraordinary moment we once had that makes our sorrows disappear. These words remind us of a passed loved one who was once forgotten, and never to be again. They are the people who put their heart and soul into their music; these are people we use so selfishly and don’t even realize how much blood sweat and tears they shed just to put out quality words. They are the people we take for granted, and they are the people who sometimes take us, their fans, for granted as well, they are the artists themselves. File sharing is what it is thought as, but I don’t see it that way. I see it as theft, music theft; most commonly know as shafting. Every day people use shafting and think nothing of it. People sit in front of their computers and go to their favorite website and download file after file with out thinking how or where it comes from. They think it is just there for the taking and it is. Shafting is a trend that has just begun, but only time will tell how far it will go.
The other side of this argument comes from the people that absolutely hate Napster. Musicians, record companies and anyone that makes money off the sale of music are Napsters biggest enemies, and the reason why is money.
Many record companies did not want to deal with Napster and some even thought Napster was becoming detrimental to the music industry as a whole and as a result very few record companies attempted to work with the Napster business
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.