This editorial is in response to a poll conducted by Kurisu, over at the United Mercury Board....

Hey--

We've all heard about the Napster legal battle. Do you agree that Napster should be shut down and that it is indeed a way to infringe copyrights, or do you think that Napster is not responsible for the actions of it's users like an ISP? I myself think it's illegal, however, the latter is a formidable argument.

-Chris

So far, the only response besides mine (which is the material that makes up this editorial), was the following from Merisusa:

I think it's totally illegal. However, it's a very good and useful tool. What they should do is conduct it like a radio, where the station pays for the songs and then there are commercials. If all goes well, many people would like to have their ads of Napster.com and they'd get money to buy the songs. I really like Napster and download songs from there often, so it would be sad if it would go away completely.

So, having set the stage a bit, here are my comments on the whole Napster snafu...

In and of itself, Napster is probably illegal, simply because of the way they do things. In Napster, you sign up as a user, and then when you sign in, you are given the option of letting Napster scan your system for MP3s, and those are then added to the combined list while you are there.

This list is kept at a central location, so when other people log in, they are routed to a server, where they can browse the servers for material that other users have submitted to the server. This is akin to having a record store that simply gives away it's musical selections. Very convenient. Very high-quality, but also very illegal.

Now, there are other services, like Gnutella, and what is different about them is they are a software package, and that's it. The software is installed on your system, and when you activate it, it scans the Net looking for other users. When it finds them, it enables you to link to them if they have something you'd like. So where Napster is like a virtual music store, Gnutella and others are akin to me handing you a CD. Technically, me handing you the CD is probably breaking the copyright laws, but at that level, the laws can't really be enforced.

So, that being said, what should the record companies do? Because I can tell you now, I lost no sleep over the apparent death of Napster. I was on Scour the next day sampling a BOOKOO-load of stuff from Third Eye Blind. Because the Napster people are right. A lot of people will use online services as I do, to sample a band's works before deciding whether they are worth the investment of time and money to go to the mall and obtain their CDs.

What music companies should do is this... On each download screen, I'd suggest that record companies print a coupon redeemable for $2 off the purchase of the applicable CD. Perhaps this would provide an incentive for more people to actually buy CDs, and at the same time, the record companies will be in a position to take advantage of a "genie" that can not be put back into the bottle.

Artemis

(comments welcome - please email me at lunahq7@yahoo.com and I will post your comments here as well.)