SitePoint Sponsor

User Tag List

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 51 to 69 of 69

Thread: Supprt Napster

  1. #51
    ********* Evangelist
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    KY
    Posts
    277
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote/font><HR>The don't allow copying of their holdings (take a look at the photocopy machines at a library, they are plastered with the Federal Copyright Law). And it is quite illegal to photocopy a book, CD, video cassette, that one checks out of the library.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
    It may be completely illegal due to copyright laws, but books are photocopied all the time in libraries around the country. The Federal Copyright Law notice is there so the library can say "we told you so" if anyone gets caught, which rarely happens. It's there to protect the library from liability. Doesn't stop most people from taking an encyclopedia or whatever and making a copy of a page.

    ------------------
    Eric Radtke - SitePoint Chat Addict
    InterSurge Internet - Linux Website Hosting
    DomainMailings.com - Who says all the good domains are taken?

  2. #52
    Destiny Manager Plebius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 1999
    Posts
    682
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote/font><HR>Libraries don't loan out photocopies of books or other items. They loan out the original items. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    And Napster doesn't distribute copyrighted mp3s, they merely index mp3s on a users's system. They are not responsible for the copyright, the user is responsible.



    ------------------
    Martin Kretzmann
    Plebius Press - A progressive perspective ... "Insert favorite quote here"
    We have hosted and perl scripts too!

  3. #53
    Fluffy Kitten Programmer~ Elledan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    1,356
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Napster doesn't break any copyright-laws, nor is it distributing mp3s. If anyone is a victim in this case, it will be Napster, since it's being abused for illegal purposes by it's users.

    It's the same as with the internet: the internet was never meant to be used as a way to copy warez and mp3s, but it happened there too, and so will everything that can be used for this purpose ('distributing' illegal programs/music) be 'abused' the way Napster and the internet are being abused.

    ------------------
    Elledan Dunedain
    Webmaster
    www.emudreams.web.com

  4. #54
    SitePoint Zealot
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Duluth, MN USA
    Posts
    166
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    I suppose one way to make CDs cheaper would be to record 30 seconds or so of commercials at the end of each track.

    Just because people do photocopy copyrighted materials, does not make it legal. And the library does inform its users that it is illegal to copy copyrighted material. Napster has not done that.
    <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote/font><HR>
    And Napster doesn't distribute copyrighted mp3s, they merely index mp3s on a users's system. They are not responsible for the copyright, the user is responsible.
    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
    But Napster does nothing to prevent the downloading of copyrighted material. Yes, the user should be a nice enough person to respect the copyright laws, but unfortunately for our society, it seems that people are being less and less responsible for their actions, which may or may not be a reason why so many stupid laws have been created lately. Napster is providing a means to do either a legal or an illegal act, however. Are they responsible for enforcement of the copyright laws--no. But, they need to make a resonable effort to discourage illegal copying of copyrighted material. And it appears that they have not.
    --Bill

    ------------------
    Lake Superior Smokin' Brews
    Make It Different: Brew Your Own!
    www.smokinbrews.com
    MSN: smokinbrews@hotmail.com

  5. #55
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    Hamilton, Bermuda
    Posts
    20
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote/font><HR>Originally posted by Elledan:
    If anyone is a victim in this case, it will be Napster, since it's being abused for illegal purposes by it's users.
    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Lets not live in a fantasy world, I fully support Napster but face the fact - Napster was built by a college student for college students. It wasn't made to trade unknown artist, so why pretend like it was ?

    In the beginning Napster messed up because they actually promoted the trading of copyright music, and the RIAA used it against them. When the RIAA was after them Napster then reviewed all it's policies and reinforced the copyright one to "sorta" cover their backs.


    Ravi



    ------------------
    Lyricsh.com
    Lyrics to over 10,000 songs!

  6. #56
    Fluffy Kitten Programmer~ Elledan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    1,356
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote/font><HR>Originally posted by RaviJP:
    Lets not live in a fantasy world, I fully support Napster but face the fact - Napster was built by a college student for college students. It wasn't made to trade unknown artist, so why pretend like it was ?

    In the beginning Napster messed up because they actually promoted the trading of copyright music, and the RIAA used it against them. When the RIAA was after them Napster then reviewed all it's policies and reinforced the copyright one to "sorta" cover their backs.


    Ravi


    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Hmmm... Didn't know that, thanks for telling me!
    So maybe Napster is guilty and will be banned, but that still doesn't change a thing about the fact that the trade in illegal stuff can't be stopped; nor on the streets, nor on the internet.

    The only way to stop the illegal trade of music is to make CDs less than $1 or totally free but that'll probably never happen...

    ------------------
    Elledan Dunedain
    Webmaster
    www.emudreams.web.com

  7. #57
    Destiny Manager Plebius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 1999
    Posts
    682
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Making a personal copy from a selection of pages of a copyrighted book fall under fair use. Why not making a personal copy of a song from a copyrighted CD? Particularly when that personal copy is more likely to lead to a sale?

    If it is found that Google is indexing some material that is either violating copyright or might be, should Google be shut down? No. It is not their responsibility, they merely index, like Napster.


    ------------------
    Martin Kretzmann
    Plebius Press - A progressive perspective ... "Insert favorite quote here"
    We have hosted and perl scripts too!

  8. #58
    SitePoint Wizard wdmny's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    Here
    Posts
    1,010
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    My personal opinion is that there was trading of copyright material long before napster and will be long after. Napster is a directory like Yahoo or Dmoz, mp3 could be found on those directories too. Also, Ftp, Email, etc... have all been used to share mp3 and pirated software, is RIAA going after them next? I think not.

    ------------------
    Wes
    wes@demoney.net
    http://www.demoney.com/www
    http://www.600webstudios.com

  9. #59
    SitePoint Wizard TWTCommish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 1999
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA, USA
    Posts
    3,910
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    If you're going to shut down Napster for such an "offense", then you have to shut down sites linking to MP3 sites, don't you? After all, they're just SHOWING you the sites and ALLOWING you to use them, but that doesn't mean it's legal...it just doesn't add up.

    Napster's original purpose does not matter here, in my opinion. Like Wes said: email and FTP can be abused and used to distribute MP3s...but can you shut those down? SHOULD you? Nope!

    As for commercials at the ends of songs...dunno if that was a joke or not, but either way people would find a way to remove them, or skip over them alltogether.

    Here's a can't-miss idea: songs ABOUT products!

    Bayyyy-bay...I love you like PEP-SAY...

    I've loved you through
    All these years...
    And we both know...
    To shop at Sears.

    Think of the possibilities!



    ------------------
    Chris Bowyer chris@mycoding.com
    MyCoding.com: Visit for Launch Notification!
    DomainMailings.com: Who Says All The Good Ones Are Taken?
    MovieForums.com: Talk About Your Favorite Flicks!

  10. #60
    SitePoint Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    Hamilton, Bermuda
    Posts
    20
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Hi,

    I think many people are missing important points here. Sure Google, Yahoo, MSN all of them may point to illegal MP3 sites. However it is not their main focus, one may slide in now and then but their business goal is not to provide users with MP3 sites. Napster's business goal was to allow users to exchange MP3s. It's whole company was built on this. That's why they are specifically going after Napster instead of Yahoo! or MSN. And Sahti, just like libraries put that notice on their photocopier Napster has ALWAYS had a copyright policy, which can be found here:
    http://www.napster.com/terms/

    I think that is just as good as sticking a piece of paper on the photocopier in a library. You surely don't go into a library and see hired staff standing next to the photocopier making sure it is used in the proper manner. It seems as though everyone is just saying things without actually thinking about it. Shut down e-mail ? E-mail was never developed to exchange MP3's, sure some people do that via e-mail but it's a minority amongst the big picture.


    Ravi

    ------------------
    Lyricsh.com
    Lyrics to over 10,000 songs!

  11. #61
    ********* Evangelist
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    KY
    Posts
    277
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    You don't need to tack ads on the end of CDs in order to reduce the price... they cost less than $0.25 to produce so there is no reason they should be selling for $17 in the stores. The reason they keep selling at that price is because people continue to buy them. However, the high prices certainly have some effect on the number of people who switch to Napster because they can't afford to go out and purchase the latest hits every time they come out. Reduce the prices, and people (excluding DSL/cable users, for the most part) will buy more CDs rather than bother with Napster.

    ------------------
    Eric Radtke - SitePoint Chat Addict
    InterSurge Internet - Linux Website Hosting
    DomainMailings.com - Who says all the good domains are taken?

  12. #62
    Destiny Manager Plebius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 1999
    Posts
    682
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    The reason CD's cost $17 is because the RIAA has managed to fix prices. The RIAA is a price fixing organization who's main purpose is to increase the profit of the record companies and maintain control over the vast majority of the music industry.



    ------------------
    Martin Kretzmann
    Plebius Press - A progressive perspective ... "Insert favorite quote here"
    We have hosted and perl scripts too!

  13. #63
    SitePoint Zealot
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Duluth, MN USA
    Posts
    166
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    TWTCommish: Yeah, that was a joke. I don't think that would be a good idea. But it would lower the cost of CDs.
    <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote/font><HR>
    Making a personal copy from a selection of pages of a copyrighted book fall under fair use. Why not making a personal copy of a song from a copyrighted CD? Particularly when that personal copy is more likely to lead to a sale?
    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
    My understanding is that you can only copy material that you already own. It does not matter if it is for personal, non-profit use--you must own the original work and can then make copies for YOUR personal use. Here is the US copyright law, it is pretty explicit: http://www.loc.gov/copyright/title17/92chap1.html#107
    <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote/font><HR>
    [CDs] cost less than $0.25 to produce so there is no reason they should be selling for $17 in the stores.
    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
    Does that cost include the art work put into the CD, the reproduction of the CDs, the shipping from the manufacturer, to the distrubutor, to the retailer, the advertising to promote the band and the CD, the rent the shop keeper is paying for his/her space, the wages payed to the clerks and owner(s), the insurance payed for the business and unemployment, payroll taxes, business taxes, utilities at the shop, business overhead (cash register tape, pens, display shelving, etc.), advertising for the business itself to attract customers, not to mention the cost of the product itself so the artist, producer, recording studio, agents, etc. can make a living? If it only cost $0.25 to make a CD why does Dialbo II cost $60 and MS Office cost nearly $500!!!!! That's a major rip-off then compared to $17.

    RaviJP: Sure, Napster says that copying copyrighted material is illegal, but I just went to their site, and I can download as much Metallica as I want--even though Metallica has very explicitly said that their material is copyrighted and cannot be distributed freely. And earlier you pointed out that:
    <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote/font><HR>
    Napster messed up because they actually promoted the trading of copyright music
    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
    I could better be on Napsters side, if they at least blocked out Metallica's music. I can't really absolve Napster of wrong-doing, since they are knowingly allowing Metallica's music to be traded illegally using their services.

    CDs can probably be cheaper, after all tapes and albums are not that expensive (except for vintage, mint condition, first releases)
    --Bill


    ------------------
    Lake Superior Smokin' Brews
    Make It Different: Brew Your Own!
    www.smokinbrews.com
    MSN: smokinbrews@hotmail.com

    [This message has been edited by Sahti (edited August 02, 2000).]

  14. #64
    Destiny Manager Plebius's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 1999
    Posts
    682
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Law concerning fair use, the LIMITATION ON EXCLUSIVE COPYRIGHTS OF OWNER.. in other words, the right of others to copy works in some circumstances without permission of the copyright owner.

    <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote/font><HR> 107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use38

    Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include-

    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Let's look at the conditions.

    <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote/font><HR>(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Users download the songs for personal, nonprofit use to educate themselves on whether they like the music or not before buying.

    <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote/font><HR>(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    This is not what I would call "explicit".

    <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote/font><HR>(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole;<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Downloading whole albums would not constitute fair use here since it is basically the whole copyrighted work, minus the CD cover design, etc. But how many Napster users actually download whole albums?

    <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote/font><HR>(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Considering that a study has shown those who download MP3s are more likely to purchase the CD, there is no detrimental effect on the market value or for the copyrighted work.



    ------------------
    Martin Kretzmann
    Plebius Press - A progressive perspective ... "Insert favorite quote here"
    We have hosted and perl scripts too!

  15. #65
    ********* Evangelist
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    KY
    Posts
    277
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    <BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote/font><HR>
    Originally posted by Sahti:
    Does that cost include the art work put into the CD, the reproduction of the CDs, the shipping from the manufacturer, to the distrubutor, to the retailer, the advertising to promote the band and the CD, the rent the shop keeper is paying for his/her space, the wages payed to the clerks and owner(s), the insurance payed for the business and unemployment, payroll taxes, business taxes, utilities at the shop, business overhead (cash register tape, pens, display shelving, etc.), advertising for the business itself to attract customers, not to mention the cost of the product itself so the artist, producer, recording studio, agents, etc. can make a living?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
    Much of that is irrelevant. The majority of the revenue generated by CDs goes to the recording industry and their lawyers, while only a small portion actually ends up in the hands of the artists themselves.

    You brought up a good point: cassette tapes. One thing you should be aware of though is that even with all the artwork, plastic case, packaging, etc., CDs cost considerably less to produce than tapes. So it just depends on the chunk of money these recording execs and their lawyers want to collect which determines the fixed prices they set.

    LuZeR did a nice job at analyzing the US copyright law as it would pertain to the MP3 industry. Like LuZeR said, how many Napster users actually download whole albums? Downloading whole albums seems quite a bit different in my view: someone who purposely goes and finds every song from a particular album is clearly not interested in using Napster to sample songs, create their own personal music compilations, or whatever else the majority of Napster users do with their music.

    ------------------
    Eric Radtke - SitePoint Chat Addict
    InterSurge Internet - Linux Website Hosting
    DomainMailings.com - Who says all the good domains are taken?

  16. #66
    SitePoint Enthusiast
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Ireland
    Posts
    59
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Some people have said something along the lines of "in my opinion napster is illegal". Well it's not up to those people to choose whether napster is illegal or not. It's up to the courts.

    If the courts do deem napster to be illegal then so be it, I and most other users will just move to a napster clone. In my opinion, the RIAA are shooting themselves in the foot by attempting to shut down napster.

    Sure it may be illegal to download mp3s, but these are man made laws and man can make mistakes. I don't think that you can compare someone copying a website design and someone downloading an mp3. Think of it this way:
    <UL TYPE=SQUARE>
    <LI> Are you (the designer) going to earn money by someone copying your design? - No
    <LI> Is the person who copies your design going to earn money from it? - Possibly
    <LI> Do you get recognition for the design? - No
    <LI> Will your design be distributed by the person in it's original look? No, the person has more than likely made slight changes to the design and major changes to the content.
    </UL>

    Now look at the copyright of mp3s:
    <UL TYPE=SQUARE>
    <LI> Are you (the artist) going to earn money by someone making a copy of your song? - Yes, possibly, as there is a good chance of someone buying the cd after listening to the mp3 if they like it.

    <LI> Is the person who copies your design going to earn money from it? - No - neither napster or the individual users charge for the service

    <LI> Do you get recognition for the song? - Yes - the name of the artist and the name of the song is contained in the file

    <LI> Will your song be distributed in it's original way? Yes, the songs are normally distributed without being tampered with by anyone</UL>

    I don't think that you can class all cases of copyright theft in the same way. People seem to forget that napster does have it's good points and that there are many artists that actually support it or at least see no problems with it. It seems to me that it is mainly the record companies and a few of the bigger, richer and greedier bands that have a problem with it - and does anyone really give a rat's ass what they think?

    ------------------
    Gem
    S I F O X - Giving The Internet A Makeover

  17. #67
    Add new title here.. john's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 1999
    Location
    Amsterdam, The Netherlands
    Posts
    259
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    1 Thread(s)
    Here are my final thoughts. (Do I sound like Jerry Springer?)

    No matter how you look at this whole copyright/Napster case you can only come to one conclusion:

    You cannot stop technology! You can shut down Napster as a company but try to close Gnutella. That's impossible because it's open source software like Linux. It is being developped by the internet community and given back to the same community.

    So instead of taking Napster to court the RIAA and every record company should really take some time to find out how they can profit from new technologies and internet because there will be new technologies available....

    ------------------
    John Muijen


    http//www.muijen.com

  18. #68
    SitePoint Zealot
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Duluth, MN USA
    Posts
    166
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    GEM is right in that whether we think it is legal or illegal what Napster is doing is irrelevent. But it's a fun discussion nevertheless.
    LuZeR: some good points about the copyright law. But I think that is stretching the first condition a bit (I don't think evaluation and education mean the same thing). I read it differently, but hey, that's what lawyers are for.
    eradtke: my point about the cost of CDs is, who do you pay the $17 dollars to? Directly to the RIAA or a music store (physical or virtual). And if $17 is too much, why not just buy CDs at Disc-Go-Round or some other used CD store. Usually they are only around $5. If the artists are hardly getting any money from the sale of their albums, then why isn't Michael Jackson destitute?
    --Bill

    ------------------
    Lake Superior Smokin' Brews
    Make It Different: Brew Your Own!
    www.smokinbrews.com
    MSN: smokinbrews@hotmail.com

    [This message has been edited by Sahti (edited August 03, 2000).]

  19. #69
    ********* Evangelist
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    KY
    Posts
    277
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Sahti: I personally don't purchase CDs at the big music retailers like Wherehouse Music and Blockbuster Music where the prices average $17 or $18 a piece, I shop around and usually get the CDs I want for about $12 if I'm lucky. That's not to say that a large percentage of the population does that though. As for used CDs, I wouldn't have much of a problem with that other than because I know many used CDs are either scratched up or outdated by a year or so for the most part. CDs are not a necessity, they are entertainment. If I couldn't pay the prices, I wouldn't buy the CDs. I disagree with some of the prices and where the money is going to, but since I know where to look for lower prices I don't let it get to me that much. A large percentage of the profit from CD sales does end up in the hands of the recording industry and their lawyers, and of course the music stores take their own cut, but a small portion is what the artists themselves get. It's not small enough to cry over... if you add up the number of CD sales you realize it is still a pretty hefty figure, but it is still considerably smaller than what their recording industry counterparts pull in. How come artists are not destitute then? They make tons of off concerts, promotions, appearances, etc., which for a lot of artists is more than they pull in from CD sales. And how does this tie back in to the MP3 debate? The more people that download music from a particular artist and really enjoy it means greater interest in that artist or band, which ultimately results in more of these new fans attending concerts of these artists when they appear in their home town.

    ------------------
    Eric Radtke - SitePoint Chat Addict
    InterSurge Internet - Linux Website Hosting
    DomainMailings.com - Who says all the good domains are taken?


Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •