Napster Accomplishments

A&M Records vs Napster was one of the biggest copyright infringement cases that later defined the legality of file sharing. It was a class action lawsuit that include over fifteen major record labels including Universal Studios, Warner Bros, and Sony Entertainment. The official case though is called A&M Records vs Napster. A&M Records sued Napster claiming they were infringing on their plaintiff's intellectual property. Napster was a peer to peer file sharing service. It was mostly used to share mp3 music files in mass volumes. This was right at the start of mp3 players. Music was starting to become easily accessible through digital copies.

A&M Records v. Napster is a landmark case in which the application of intellectual property laws has forever impacted contemporary culture with regards to digital works. The legal issues and applicable laws presented in the instant case resulted in a holding, which set forth a precedent that has influence the mode and means of digital works distribution. The outcome of Napster affects both businesses and individuals.

Starting in the year 1999, a company called Napster opened up a whole new world to the Internet where every song ever made was instantly available to you on your computer for free. It was created by an 18-year-old Northeastern University student named Shawn Fanning. Napster transformed personal computers into servers that shared mp3 files all across the Internet (Mayer, 2008). It became popular very quickly because exchanging mp3 files freely and having any music desired right at your fingertips had never been possible before. However, this program that provided the privilege of having free instant music to download did not last long, it was shut down after just two years by

A&M Records v. Napster is a landmark case in which the application of intellectual property laws has forever impacted contemporary culture with regards to digital works. The legal issues and applicable laws presented in the instant case resulted in a holding, which set forth a precedent that has influence the mode and means of digital works distribution. The outcome of Napster affects both businesses and individuals.

MP3 is an audio format that allows users to compress and send music files easily over the Internet. The major problem with this music sharing is that most of the files are pirated, which has caused a stir in the music industry. Music companies and music artists have been complaining about how their music is being stolen and therefore lowering their album sales. The major blame has been put on Napster and other file sharing software available on the Internet.

Along with the development of a file format (MP3) to store digital audio recordings, came one of the new millennium’s most continuous debates – peer-to-peer piracy – file sharing. Internet companies such as Napster and Grokster became involved in notable legal cases in regards to copyright laws in cyberspace. These two cases are similar in nature, yet decidedly different. In order to understand the differences and similarities, one should have an understanding of each case as well as the court’s ruling.

In 1999, three young men who were passionate about computer programming created a website that would bring an entire industry to its knees. As the three boys, Shawn Fanning, John Fanning, and Sean Fanning, worked hard on their project, they could’ve never imagined that their invention, a peer to peer music file sharing service called, Napster, would effectively revolutionize the way an entire generation created, delivered, and received its entertainment. Since then, the internet, file sharing, and the music industry has changed drastically. Since Napster’s invention in 1999 we’ve had millions of different similar services come about such as iTunes, Rhapsody. Roxio, YouTube, Spotify and NoiseTrade. Napster’s creation and then subsequent demise in 2002, sparked a controversy that still exists today, the effects of music downloading on music industry revenue.

Napster was the first website with downloadable software with the purpose of trading free music. It started off as a chat room

The dawn of the internet brought forth a revolution that, by now, has seeped its way in the the very fibers of almost every human experience. Education has changed. Communication has changed. Entertainment has changed. Business has changed. Entire industries have been built, and destroyed, by the information age. The music industry, in particular, has felt both. With precursors of the Compact Disc (CD) and digital music formats, Shawn Fanning single handedly eviscerated the music industry. Napster, his peer to peer mass file sharing service, is what landed the fatal blow, and the industry has been bleeding out since.

Both Grokster and Napster “distributed free software that allowed computer users to share electronic files through peer-to-peer networks” (Oyez). In the Napster case “The recording association asserts Napster is guilty of contributory copyright infringement” (The Guardian). According to Slate “Grokster is, of course, the sequel to Napster”. Mindsets were very similar in certain aspects. Grokster and Napster both thought they weren’t breaking any laws due to Acts and finding ways to cheat the system. Even though either one won in court, both played a major role in leaving a footprint when it comes to violating copyright laws.

The issues that will be slugged out in federal district court in San Francisco sound a little too pop culture to be all that serious. How many music CDs are people buying these days in record stores throughout the nation because of Napster? Is the technology that Napster uses legal? Napster is, of course, the wildly popular file-sharing service whose 20 million users have downloaded some half a billion songs--most copyrighted for free. The technology that Napster has brought to music listeners across the globe has allowed the freedom of obtaining music for free and should not be shut down by the entertainment industry's argument in federal court.

Before this case was heard by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, the district court granted A&M Records’ motion for preliminary injunction prohibited Napster providing the services that their business relied on. After entering a temporary stay of the preliminary injunction the Ninth Circuit decided to affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand the decision of the district court.

In may of nineteen ninety nine, Shawn Fanning and Sean Parker had had enough of paying for music. So, like any entrepreneur of the late nineties, they took to the internet, and founded Napster. A free website that used file-sharing technology to allow people to get their favorite songs by sharing files over the internet. The website was so successful, record companies began to take notice of their dwindling sales. By December of the same year, Napster was sued by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), and basically anyone else who produced music for copyright infringement. Although the site got shut down, Fanning and Parker started what would become the music industry's streaming revolution. Music has become more and more vital over time because of the technology we use. Learning more about music can be beneficial to people all over the world. Today we will discuss the ways in which we consume music in the twenty-first century, how it has evolved, and what it means for the music industry going forward. I am going to discuss the way we listen to music because I have done Research about this topic and this is something I am passionate about. First, I will talk about the different technology that was so big decades ago. Then, I will talk about the different ways we consume music today and what that mean for the future. The changes in music development had in incredible impact on the music industry.

In 1999, Shawn Fanning and his little program called Napster created quite a stir in society. Napster's software allows music listeners to open pieces of their personal hard drives to everyone using Napster, sharing whatever MP3 songs they have already downloaded or stored. At any time, thousands of people are online, sharing hundreds of thousands of songs, many of which are technically illegal to download without the permission of the copyright holders. [1] This led to a lawsuit filed by the Recording Industry Association of America, with the rock group Metallica as its frontman. In this case, several issues were brought up, one of which was the right of the creator of the music to control what happens with

Digitalization, data compression, and the internet have affected the music industry significantly. These technologies have shifted the recording industries from hard-copy recordings to digital music distribution. This has made it easier for consumers to enter the music market through copying. Consumers have access to copying technology that allows them to obtain music without paying the record label. The situations clipped high in 1999 when Napster, a file-sharing service was launched. The service facilitated music file sharing on a wider scale. The consumers just download the music and transfer it to a digital music device. This has negatively affected the trade value of music sales, for instance in