Kristina Halmai Halmai page 1
Professor Cross
English 305
May 3, 2001
I SEARCH, YOU SEARCH, WE ALL SEARCH NAPSTER
Preconceptions
Controversy is the term most often used when referring to the company Napster. For myself, an unsavvy computer user, Napster is an online recording service that enables a member to download individual songs by various artists. Membership is required to join the on-line community though the required information is limited and can be falsified without penalty. All that I know about Napster now (prior to my research) I learned from an MTV program of under 21-year-old music millionaires.
The origin of Napster is rooted in a college dorm room by a freshman named Shawn Fanning. Because Mr. Fanning was discontent with his roommate’s choice of music, he began to ponder the idea of creating a computer music file sharing system so as to introduce his roommate to a wider range of musical choices. For some time, Fanning’s creation was small scale, only reaching a select college audience. The college age crowd enjoyed the swapping so much that soon enough word spread and his idea of unrestricted music trading had taken off without him even realizing it. Soon after realizing the potential of his endeavor, Shawn left college to put all his effort into his growing
Halmai page 2
empire. While this was well received among Fanning’s college brethren, the artists themselves were unhappy with the act of trading copywritten music
without permission. The artists and their record labels are in fact quite bothered that they are losing potential royalties.
Several well known artists have gone so far as to make
public outcries and take the matter to court.
There have been several highly publicized meetings in which bands are
trying to receive the royalties that they believe Napster owes them. One such man in particular is Lars Ulrich,
the drummer for Metallica. He expressed
in a congressional hearing that Napster is denying his band and other artists
of due royalties. Another artist
leading the battle against Napster is Dr. Dre.
Dre told MTV in an interview that “Napster is straight up stealing my
money.”
While many artists are against Napster, many also support
it. Don Henley and Alannis Morrisset
spoke in support of it in a congressional hearing earlier this year. Other bands have also come out in support of
it, including the Dave Matthews Band, Phish, and Widespread Panic. Last month the Dave Matthews Band released
its first single off of its new album to Napster because they knew it would
have been added to Napster anyway.
It was at this crucial point in Napster’s fight for
existence that I believe I started to pay attention to the issue of music
piracy. I have been to concerts where
friends of mine bring hi-tech microphones and digital audio recorders (DATs) to
record their favorite bands. Once on
tape, these small but tight knit
Halmai page 3
groups
of fans distribute the “shows”, to one another. Having received a copy or two of some good shows, I am fan of
music trading.
If I like an artist or band, I will buy the music and the
concert tickets. The benefit of bootleg
copies is the variety that becomes available to fans. Most people enjoy the radio version of a song. All artists, however play that radio song
hundreds of times live and each time the song is a little different. A true fan would love to be present for all
of those variations, but are unable.
The unrecorded copies simply provide fans with the ability to
artificially attend the performances.
Ten different copies of my favorite song are no doubt better than one.
In the I search paper process, the
Internet has been my primary research tool.
Because the Napster issue is such a high profile topic, there is an
abundance of information available. In
fact, the amount of information is so much, it was crucial to sort through and
choose what I feel are most reliable and relevant and of course
interesting. Additionally, a majority
of the information eventually begins to repeat itself in terms of the copyright
controversy and the ensuing court battle and recent ruling.
While browsing the Internet for
Napster sites, my primary focus was on finding credible news sites. I chose articles that have authors and dates
and posting dates and I avoided articles that are based on the author’s
personal opinion, hearsay, and speculation (i.e. Jon Doe’s Web page). Due to the fact
Halmai page 4
that
Napster is such a controversial issue, unfortunately many of the articles on the
Internet lay within this unaccountable category. However, the Internet is also
filled
with numerous accountable sources. Some
of the first online sources I targeted are CNN, MTV News, and Time
magazine.
Being a music based company and faithful to journalistic integrity, MTV has a plethora of valuable Napster information. The information provided by MTV, are the basic Napster facts with the special addition of artists’ opinions. A majority of the available information focuses on the artists themselves and their different opinions on illicit music trading. The interviews are valuable, as the artists are the creators of the music and ultimately should be able to decide whether or not they wish to be a part of Napster.
CNN, a traditional news network,
focuses more on the politics surrounding the Napster issue. CNN articles primarily focus on the court
hearings and rulings and on the Napster technology. There are numerous links on each page that can take the user to
other articles; it was at times overwhelming.
It is on a CNN page that I found the most reader friendly visual
description of the actual technology. I
appreciated the visual diagram as it is for the layperson, and now I understand
the process that occurs when one logs on to Napster.
A few months back, I recall that
Time arrived to our home and the cover story was on Napster and its founder
Shawn Fanning. I decided it would
benefit me to locate that particular issue on line. Time.com allows for archive searches, which is where I found the
October 2, 2000 issue of Time featuring Napster.
Halmai page 5
After some searches down the wrong paths, and a broken lamp
(searching from home is comfortable but the dogs are running wild), I found and
printed the story.
In Addition, I have consulted an attorney on the copyright
issues surrounding Napster. While
reaching Mr. Dan F. Trammell was simple, writing his words down quickly enough
was challenging. He did however provide
me with interesting and helpful information all in a total of thirteen minutes.
I also found Internet World magazine and PC Magazine on line and retrieved some
useful information from both sources as well.
As I previously mentioned, the research process was not as
challenging as some of my previous research endeavors as far as spending
tedious hours in the library finding old books and scholarly journal
articles. It is definitely nice to
search from the comforts of my own home and computers. The Internet has certainly brought a lot of
convenience to the user. The challenge
in this research came in sorting through the information, as the subject is
extremely rich in the amount of literature.
Shawn Fanning had been hearing complaints about how
difficult it was to find good music on the net. Hearing the complaints sparked an idea and the college dropout
worked tirelessly to make it a reality.
In three months time, then eighteen-year-old Fanning produced his idea
of a program that would allow computer users to swap music files with one another
directly without going
Halmai page 6
through
a centralized middleman or file server.
The Windows API protocols and Unix server commands eventually evolved
into the Napster software (Greenfield 2000).
The result is the music file-sharing program called Napster.
The Napster service allows users to easily trade music
encoded in the MP3 format. MP3, short
for Moving Picture Experts Group Audio Layer 3, is an audio data compression
format. It compresses recordings into
small and portable files without sacrificing quality, and allows for them to be
sent over the Internet (McCarthy 1999).
In using Napster, the process is quite simple. First I enter the music title I desire into the program’s search
engine. My computer then searches other
computers on the Internet running the Napster program and tries to find
people’s computers with the song I am looking for. I then select a computer, usually based on their connection
speed, and transfer the music to my computer.
I can even find out if other users have similar tastes as I do and
search throughout their entire personal MP3 collection. Napster has published a disclaimer on its
web site that states copying or distributing unauthorized MP3 files may violate
U.S. and foreign copyright, adding that compliance with the law is the
responsibility of the end-user.
Napster has come to represent the murky intersection where
commerce, culture, and the First Amendment are converging. Federal copyright laws were originally
designed to protect print, film, and records, all of which were then difficult
to duplicate. Copyright law is not
equipped to deal with modern technology.
A few years back the duplication of compact disks was difficult
Halmai page 7
because
it required CD burners. Today most people
with a computer have the technology to burn CDs. “It is now so simple to make copies of nearly everything, except
for smell, that technology has outstripped the law. In terms of Napster, the cats gone out of the house and no one
can get him back in” (Trammell 2001).
On behalf of five media companies, the Recording Industry
Association of America (RIAA) has filed suit against Napster Inc. of violating
federal and state laws through “contributory and vicarious copyright
infringement” in the U.S. District Court in Northern California. The most powerful recording companies
represented by RIAA include: Seagram Co. Ltd.’s Universal Music, Bertelsmann
AG’s BMG, Sony Corp.’s Sony Music and AOL Time Warner Inc.’s Warner Music Group
and EMI Group Plc. RIAA claims that the
web site and Fanning’s program are facilitating the widespread theft and
dissemination of intellectual property (McCarthy 1999).
More recently, individual artists have targeted the company
in lawsuits claiming copyright infringement.
The suing artists include Metallica and rapper/producer Dr. Dre; the
same lawyers represent both. Both
recording companies and the artists want users to stop sharing MP3 files over
Napster. Not all artists are against
Napster however; some artists have expressed support of the technology. Limp Bizkit and Cypress Hill will begin a
free string of Napster sponsored concerts this summer to show their support of
the endangered company. Another high
profile supporter, The Dave Matthews band released
Halmai page 8
their
first single off of their new album to Napster before it hit stores. They also revealed to MTV that the
technology itself is wondrous and that their music would have eventually gone
to Napster anyway. When asked about the
loss in wages,
Dave
Matthews replied that he makes enough money.
More money would make him feel like “a pig” and that as an artist the
music comes first. According to Mr.
Trammell, the “one hit wonder” bands are those most likely to be negatively
affected by on-line trading not the mega artists. The ultimate decision on
Napsters fate is neither up to the recording companies nor the artists
themselves but up to the court.
On February 12, 2001, the 9th U.S. Circuit court
of Appeals ruled that Napster knew its users were violating copyright laws
through the music file sharing service, but the court allowed the company to
continue to operate until U.S. District Judge Marilyn Hall Patel can re-draft
her injunction. While Napster is
allowed to continue operations, the ruling did force Napster to block access to
copyrighted music within 72 hours of receiving lists of titles from the record
companies. The plan however is not
failsafe. Napster’s screening system
depends on accurate computer file names.
The record industry is identifying pieces of music by specific file, or
song names. The more savvy Napster
users have been disguising song titles by writing titles backwards or in some
type of code. Some critics have claim
that users will become frustrated, and stop using the program, although use has
slowed, no use at all has not been the case.
Halmai page 9
Use of the Napster service, has occurred in waves since the
controversy began. Use increased in the
time leading to the injunction as users rushed to download music. Internet World Daily (2001) states that
“users of Napster’s software numbered 9.1 million in December 2000, up from 1.3
million in
February. In December, 11.2 percent of U.S. home
Internet users experimented with Napster”.
Even if Napster ceases, file swapping on the Internet will not. Other similar music file sharing systems
like Napster exist like Gnutella, Freenet and Aimster. The Los Angeles Times reported on April 26,
2001 that Napster has lost about 20 percent of its users after it began
deterring searches. Despite the fall,
18 percent of U.S. Internet users visited Napster’s web site. “At Napster’s peak in February, the web site
drew 17 million users in the U.S. or almost 20 percent of those who went on
line. Of that number, 15.2 million
logged on to the Napster system” (Healy, 2001). With numbers like these, lawyer Dan Trammell believes that the
music industry may be better off joining Napster rather than fighting it. Because Napster is the major name and player
in the music swapping market, the music industry might benefit from doing
business with them because the technology is going to become faster and easier
to access and the music lovers have the option to use other swapping
companies.
In researching Napster, I have personally learned a lot
about the technology that we call Napster.
I have discovered that Napster is actually software and that Shawn
Fanning had to teach himself a number of programming concepts in order to
create the proper command lines. Prior
to the research, I
Halmai page 10
had
this image of Napster being a huge computer with every music title I can
imagine stored in it and that users received the music from the Napster
computer. In actuality, users receive
the music by searching other user’s personal MP3 files. In regards to the copyright issue or the
stealing of intellectual
property,
I have had an understanding of the issue prior to my research. Perhaps downloading the Napster files is
piracy, I do however feel that the technology is worthy of praise as it is no
less an impressive creation. I for one
am a fan of Napster and have been able to access quite a bit of live concert
music that I would have never been able to obtain. It will be very interesting to watch the final outcome of the
issue and how the Napster controversy will influence future copyright law as
well as future technology.
“limp bizkit: devil’s
advocates.” April 2001. MTV.com. April 18, 2001 http://www.mtv.com/news/gallery/l/limp00/index.html
McCarthy, Jack.
“Studios sue MP3 startup Napster.” December 9, 1999. CNN.com. April 19, 2001 http://www.com/1999/TECH/computing/12/09/napster.suit.ing/index.html
“Napster: Stealing or
sharing?” CNN.com – In Depth Special. April 18, 2001 http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2001/napster/timeline.html
Perrotta, Tom.
“Commentary: Court Says No Way to Napster.” February 13, 2001. Internet Word
Daily News. April 19, 2001 http://www.internetworld.com/news/archives/02132001a.jsp
Riley, Theresa. “Metallica Wants Fans Banned From Napster.” April 19, 2001. Time.com. April 19, 2001 http://www.time.com/time/nation/printout/0,8816,44376,00.html
Trammell, Dan F. [Law Offices of Dan F. Trammell]. Personal Interview. Santa Monica, CA. April 20, 2001.
Annotated Bibliography #2
1. CNN.com
CNN.com is a portion of the CNN television network. Similar to most media web sites, one can access topic searches to find articles. The available information and article pools are constantly being updated. The web site is user friendly and has a plethora of information available.
2. Internetworld.com
Internetworld is a daily online news and Internet information web site. The site has many links that lead the user to very technical to fairly basic articles, depending on the user’s preference. Articles do have author’s names and article dates. I imagine information on any Internet issue can be located through this site.
3. MTV.com
MTV.com is a library in itself. Because MTV is such a huge multifaceted corporation, its main web site has several links. The web site is fairly simple to maneuver through it has many photos and graphics. I believe MTV to be a credible source although article authors are not always given.
4. Time.com
Time.com is a part of Time Magazine. What is really great about this web site is that the current issue is available and past issues are easy to locate. It is easy to move through the site and does provide its own search system to better pinpoint desirable articles. Time articles do have authors and dates.
5. ZDNet.com
ZDNet is a technology magazine. The site allows the user to easily search for a topic of interest easily. The side also provides links to several technology reviews, articles, and product price checks and opinions. The topics are somewhat technical, as it is a technology site. Information for beginners is also available. Authors are given on some articles.