To date (August 4, 2000 10:05 AM PST), I have approximately 4 GB of MP3 files stored on my computer, more than 1,000 separate files, more than 100 folders. I’m not even close to finding all the music files I want and even further from deciding if Napster, the monster that spawned this whole mess, is inherently right or wrong.
For the uninitiated, MP3 is a compression scheme for shrinking audio files. Around 4MB in size, MP3 files can be sent by e-mail, something that can’t easily be done with uncompressed audio files. Napster is an Internet service that allows computer users to search for and download MP3 files onto their computers and, if they wish, share the files that they have with other users. (See this page for a full overview.)
Barbarism Begins at Home
For the record, most of the MP3 files on my computer were from CDs I bought. Keeping a library of CDs on hand got to be kind of a chore; choosing at home what I predicted I would want to hear at work, realizing later I didn’t have what I actually wanted, futilely searching record stores for something I thought I wanted… It was a full-time job.
When I was introduced to Napster, it was like finding Shangri-La, like stumbling on an empty radio station. Did I feel in an 80s mood? Within minutes I could be humming along with Slade’s "Run Runaway" or Baltimora’s "Tarzan Boy.” Was I more in a jazzy mood? No problem! Songs from Dizzy Gillespie, Artie Shaw, Billie Holiday, and Louis Armstrong were gathered in the blink of an eye. Old-school rap, obscure techno, even the soundtrack to "Conan the Barbarian" — nothing seemed out of reach within the Napster community. There was no more twisting the radio dial, no more listening to samples on CDNow. Finally there was contentment. My personal MP3 library exploded in size within days.
Bigmouth Strikes Again
I won’t pretend that the world surrounding Napster is an easy place to understand. There seem to be two sides to look at: the legal and the moral. From a moral standpoint, using Napster makes you feel like a kid in a candy store! And it’s about as "evil" as trading bootleg concert tapes! On the other hand, you know something this easy can’t be 100 percent right (even with the "wild west" attitude that abounds on the Internet), though paying $20 for a CD doesn’t feel that great either. And it’s only "swapping" isn’t it? It’s not like you’re paying for these songs, after all. As for the legality of it, who can say? If the Dead fans aren’t getting busted in FBI stings, why should Napster be shut down?
If I were forced to take sides on this issue, I think I’d have to grudgingly err on the side of caution and admit that something about Napster doesn’t sit right. While I’d rather not have stringent regulations and advertising mixed in with music downloading, it’s kind of comforting to know that someone’s overlooking it all. But then my fickle Libra nature would kick in: I’d also have to admit that the music industry’s position is just as flawed. We’ve had blank tapes and blank CDs for years. Why is this any different from making a birthday mix tape or taping the X-Files season finale?
I’ve had it explained it to me this way: "If Napster sold auto parts and did business with chop shops, wouldn’t they be liable for selling illegal merchandise?" Well, yes, they would, but are stolen car parts really equal to copied songs? Songs are copied off the radio and taped at outdoor concerts and copied from friends every day, after all, and nobody gets arrested for it or even morally condemned.
How Soon is Now?
Although around for only a year, Napster had been riding a tidal wave of MP3 madness. With MP3 files and a free software MP3 player called "Winamp" available on the Internet and portable MP3 players gaining in popularity, there seemed to be no limit in sight. But, with all things too good to be true, it couldn’t last. In quick succession, events overtook Napster’s rise: Rock group Metallica and the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) sued Napster for racketeering, a Senate Judiciary Committee debated the legality of Napster’s approach, and last week U.S. District court Judge Marilyn Hall Patel finally ordered Napster to cease its operations. "Napster wrote the software, it’s up to them to write software that will remove from users the ability to copy copyrighted material," Patel said. "They created a monster … that’s the consequence they face."
For the time being, Napster is safe. The 9th Circuit Court ruled that Napster could continue operating while its appeal of the injunction is pending. Still, Napster’s future looks uncertain at best.
Girlfriend in a Coma
In a lot of ways, this turmoil can’t be a surprise. By living in a legal gray area, programs like Napster, Gnutella, iMesh, Scour, et al, run the risk of ending up in court, in cases that fall to conjecture and judgment calls. What they do isn’t obviously and inarguably illegal, but what has The Clash taught us? You fight the law and the law wins.
Already on the web are spirited defenses of Napster and music sharing, forward-looking visions of the future for the music industry, and articles about MP3 trading in hindsight. If you’re just joining this clusterfumble, it may take awhile before you find yourself with an opinion…
The Boy With the Thorn in His Side
For my two cents, I’ll admit that record executive Martin Bandier does make a point: On a spreadsheet, downloading the whole Motown catalog (worth $20 million annually) from Napster is hurting the makers of the music. Downloading songs takes potential dollars away from them, giving something away for free that should, by all the laws of the land, be paid for. If I can find all the tracks to Prince’s 1985 Atlanta concert, why should I search record stores to find the album? What’s the point of ever buying a CD again?
But it’s not that easy. Even if I had a Rio player and a CD burner and enough free time to surf Napster until sated, it still wouldn’t be the same as owning a complete album. Napster MP3s are often incomplete, poorly copied, incorrectly named, or just plain impossible to find. Complete albums come with arrangement, sound leveling, lyric sheets, contact information, design work. Owning an album and posessing the tracks from the album are two vastly different things and most music fans are smart enough to know that. There is no proof that music sharing actually steals record sales, or that one artist has gone broke because of Napster or that one artist ever will. Bootleg Dead albums abound, bootleg Phish albums abound, yet the members of the Grateful Dead and Phish are multi-millionaires. Metallica sued Napster for millions, yet claimed themselves that the songs lost to Napster were "pocket change." Isn’t there a logic gap here?
Stop Me if You’ve Heard This One Before
In the end, this article has really been much ado about nothing, as will most of the upcoming trials and legislation. The underlying fact about all of this is that the idea of using the Internet to send music has been released and it can’t be recalled. Like sending viruses or hacking into secure sites, people out there will be trading music until the cows come home. Is music sharing right or wrong? It’s moot in the end. It’s out there and can only go forwards from here.
My advice? Enjoy it while it lasts, listen to what you can (good snag for today: "Gillian Welch –- Paper Wings") and don’t tell the boss how many files you’ve got on your computer.
Luke Farrell was fired today for abusing Napster at work.
This article was last modified on January 18, 2023
This article was first published on August 4, 2000
Commenting is easier and faster when you're logged in!
