Napster Essay, Research Paper

Music blares from the speakers every morning as I sit down to type my homework. 320 songs from many different artists and genres of music are available in my library. Most of these are local artists, one hit wonders, and acts that I have discovered through Napster. Because I am not willing to dish out the $ 150 plus for a burner or spend the money buying every one of these CD s, the only time of day I have to listen to these songs is while using the computer for educational or recreational use. Many of the songs I once had on file have been deleted because I have purchased the CD after realizing that I enjoyed it so much, figuring it would be worth my $ 12. Unfortunately some people have taken advantage of this, and made some of our money hungry musicians angry. What they don t apprehend is that Napster users give more than they take, and by creating all of this trouble they are only hurting themselves.

When Napster first came out it had approximately 50,000 users. Record companies saw this new mp3 trading system as a glorified bootlegging operation. Now, two years later, it has over 80 million registered users. Its growing popularity has concerned the corporate pigs of the RIAA, or Recording Industry Association of America, who feel they and their artists are not getting the royalties they deserve from people copying their CD s, rather than purchasing them. Shawn Flanning, the young founder of Napster, is encouraging fans to let Congress know how passionate they are about Napster and music. But until they do that, Napster must begin blocking songs from being traded.

Now Napster usage is down and 90 % of the songs that people were once downloading are being blocked. From February to April alone downloads have fallen 25 % ( from 2.8 billion per month to 1.6 billion. ) But with 2.8 billion songs and copyright damages of up to $ 150,000 per song, Napster is in serious trouble.

Record companies are responsible for the injunction. The copyright holder gives Napster the song title, performers name, file name of infringing work as posted on Napster, and a legal certification of copyright ownership. Napster then has 3 buisness days to begin blocking that file. When a new song comes out record companies give the song title and artist and a notice in advance, to start blocking the song. This is not an easy process for Napster or the record label.

According to Lessig, Artists should be paid for their art. But there are many ways to ensure this, and not all of them give labels a veto over innovation. ( Lessig ) Some songs are still slipping though these filters because Napster is not required to police for misspellings and other variations of song titles. For instance a person looking for the the song Smoking by the band Boston, could simply type in Smokn by Bosten, and still find the song. Napster does not need to be shut down quite yet, but its files are being reduced and it faces the billions of dollars in damages from previous copyright variations.

Many bands and artists have made it publicly known whether they are pro-Napster or anti- Napster. Metal group Mettallica and rapper Dr. Dre are infamous for being the ones to have started the trouble. Since they have made their opinions public other artists such as Blink 182, Creed, Beck, Barenaked Ladies and Elton John have come out to say they agree. Elton John has stated, I am excited about the opportunities presented by the Internet because it allows artists to communicate directly with fans. But the bottom line must always be respect and compensation for creative work. I am against Internet piracy and it is wrong for companies like Napster and others to promote stealing from artists online. Other bands such as the Offspring have offered things such as pro-napster t-shirts and stickers at their concerts. It is in a sense tearing the recording industry down the middle. But bands need to remember who is buying their music, and that it should be made for the fans, not the money. For many artists Napster is the only way to get their music heard. While mainstream artists receive only $ 1 for CD s, artists on Indie labels can sometimes reach up to $ 3 or $ 4. Other artists, such as the popular live band, The Dave Matthews Band, have taken advantage of Napster by releasing singles first over the Internet

The Napster fan base has grown so much that people are having trouble parting with it. According to Streitfeld, They [fans] have clearly and emphatically said how mush they love this service. Not, he stresses, because it is free, but because it allows the sampling of, every kind of music. ( Streitfeld ) Now that the idea of trading mp3 s is out there it is impossible to get rid of. Fans with move to other Napster clones, such as Imesh of other file sharing services. People have originally gone to Napster because it is user friendly, rather than other less known file sharing companies. Although they can know longer download certain songs, Napster fans can still use Napster to play and manage music files. There is still a lot of music out there. Napster is full of independent jazz, blues, bluegrass, country, etc.

Napster has been trying its best to be a good guy. It has offered RIAA a guaranteed $ 1 billion over five years for legal cease-fire and licenses to distribute music through paid Napster subscription. Record companies allow AM and FM radio to broadcast songs for ASCAP fee why not Napster ?

Reporter Dvorack has done the math. Record companies can make as much or more money by abandoning their old business models and going with Napster. He also figures they should, use both business models and make twice as much money. ( Dvorack ) According to Napster Interim chief Hank Barry, compulsory licenses would provide consumers more than the smattering of songs now available online and simultaneously assure that publishers and artists are compensated for their work. The RIAA has stated that the CD business is a $ 13 billion market. Much of this money goes to distribution and manufacturing. This money could be saved by a paid service. Napster users have offered to pay up to $ 20 a month to keep the service alive, the company suggests only a $ 5 a month for access. The $ 20 may not even be necessary according to Dvorack who states: If 50 million users each paid $ 10 a month or $ 120 a year for unlimited access to everything, the service would gross $ 6 billion annually. This $ 6 billion would be almost pure profits to the record companies and artists, who could make more money then from conventional CD s. These record companies could oversee the file sharing and monitor which songs are being downloaded for royalty distribution, which would come from subscription revenue. The only people this hurts is one hit wonders, who have CD s full of unwanted junk.

Most people use Napster to sample songs before they buy a CD, and to discover new and hard to find artists. It expands musical horizons beyond the mainstream music, which is obvious, is only made for the money. The record companies aren t missing out on anything because they would never have made money on a CD I never knew about.