Napster's Collaborative Consumption

In our world of instant gratification, people got to save money any way they can. People that shop online need to wait 48 hours before making an impulsive purchase. They are spending too much money on clothes, shoes, and accessories. One can start by cleaning out closets and sell the items that not being worn. In 7 Things Young People Are Spending More Money On These Days, Sam Becker states,This has led many to think that they are a bunch of entitled brats who refuse to grow up. But we have to take into account that millennials are saddled with more debt than any other previous generation, have grown up in a post-9/11 world of perpetual war, and entered the workforce during one of the worst economic stretches in American history. It hasn’t been all beach trips and Mike’s Hard Lemonades, though things are getting better (Becker, sec. 3). He says, The millennials

In an effort to save money and lower debt, more and more millennials are turning living in their parent's basement from the punchline of a bad joke or sitcom fodder into an accepted, and even

When I was in middle school, the biggest way to get music for free was a website named Limewire. Nothing was more exciting than to be able to hear a song on the radio then go home and download it to our desktops. Also cool, was the fact that if one of us didn’t have a song, our friend could simply “burn” it onto a c.d. for us. That was the only way we knew how to get music, aside from going out and buying the whole album. Apple’s iTunes was just starting out and iPods were just being created. Limewire was the way to go. Little did we know that Limewire was illegal and costing singers, songwriters, labels, and everyone associated with just one song, huge amounts of money.

Owning a property has long been a gateway to the American dream. Individuals have possession of the house if they have enough money to afford the payment on a home, and be willing to purchase it. As the owners, they have the power to make decisions about the property. Other people who rent have limited control and have to depend on the ruling of the owners even though they pay the rent monthly. Advocates of house renting may claim that renting seems to be a better option than buying in the aspect of cost. However, they often overestimate the benefits of renting and lack consideration of the time factor. Instead, many people argue that buying a house is better than renting since it brings tremendous advantages to individuals and the community. In the United States, there are 56% of people own a house, and 25% of non-homeowners are looking to acquire their home in next 25 years, while only 11% of non-homeowners do not hope to own a home in the future (Newport, 2013, p.1). Therefore, purchasing a property is the desirable and the best option since it generates financial benefit, build self-confidence for owners, and profits the construction of the community harmony rather than renting a house.

In 2018 a mother of a 12-year-old girl in New York settled a lawsuit of $2000 because she was illegally sharing copyrighted music files according to www.pediatrics.about.com. Why would someone want to do that? As the person, you’re taking the money of someone else’s hard work. The artist that wrote the song took a lot of time and effort to make it. There are thousands of music artist and stealing their money is not fair for all they do. To stop this from occurring there must be harsher penalties or else artist will not have money to exist anymore or employees or money in return.

This case study about the Spotify business model allows a broader vision of what the digital music industry is. In a short time, many companies have developed and managed marked their territory in a highly competitive industry. The start-up Spotify has undergone a remarkable evolution in a financial point of view but also in terms of its popularity. Its various competitive benefits regarding the market leader and its respect for music labels have enabled the company to be renowned and to have a reputation in the real business. Today, five years after its creation, Spotify is certainly criticized in some aspects of

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

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.

The RIAA evidently disagreed with the 20 year old due to the filed case, however Napster did have one substantial legal advantage. Because Napster’s system only hosted file names from millions of users from all over the world, Napster could not be held liable under the DMCA. According to the DMCA, it is illegal to directly share and download copyright music; Napster was simply a distribution channel. In terms of legality, the user is liable for illegally sharing music, but it is nearly impossible to apprehend these individuals because there are so many of them.

In the music industry, there are several methods of sharing content. Between playing live shows, producing physical records, and now, streaming over music streaming services, artists and musicians from around the world contribute to the entertainment industry each day; however, in light of today’s technological age, more and more content is being shared and consumed through the later. In 2015, music streaming services grew to 317 billion streams, doubling the record amount of streams from the year prior—a figure that is only projected to grow in the years to come (“Nielsen: Music Streams”, 2016). Any consumer with an Internet connection can access these services’ content with

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 the days of YouTube and the Internet, a band 's chances of striking it big depended on record companies. If a band was lucky enough to get a record deal, it gained access to a label 's vast resources and connections. The company paid for the band 's studio time, … and got its music played on the radio, reaching millions of record buying Americans” (Majerol, 1). Now, anyone with talent can post a video of themselves and become an internet sensation, only to then receive a deal with a label to continue growing their career. The issue is, with the Internet came digital downloading, and with the growing popularity of digital downloading came illegal downloading, known as Digital Piracy, which has affected the music industry greatly. This issue affects everyone involved in the Music Industry. From the small CD store owner to the Artist on stage, everyone has and continues to be affected by the growing popularity of digital downloading services. Artists, producers, and songwriters lose an estimated 12.5 Billion USD every year to illegal digital music services. Further, the economic impact from [digital downloading] is an estimated loss of 2+ Billion USD (Storrs, 1). This money affects the “little guys” in the industry and the average worker within the industry.

When speaking economically, the digital music sector of the international music industry is undoubtably the most important sector in the industry. Within the last decade, music has seen cardinal changes in the way both major and independent labels distribute their products. An industry that once relied on Payola 's and mass distribution of physical records and CD 's now relies heavily on the power of the internet. The first instance of mass distribution of music through the internet was by the service Ritmoteca.com in 1998 [1]. Ritmoteca had a library of over 300,000 songs, offering individual songs for 99 cents each and albums for $9.99. After signing distribution deals with many major music labels such as Warner

In the midst of the United States’ “dot com bubble” (years 1997-2000), there was a surge in technology that brought about file sharing and digital downloads. Threatening the survival of the music industry and introducing a unique set of challenges for the industry to overcome. To remain relevant in the new global market of digital music online, the music industry would have to evolve and change with the introduction of each new facet technology had to offer. The introduction of digitally compressed music files, so easily attainable for a small fee or downloaded legally (pirated) for free, made the music industry reevaluate how to make a profit and protect copyrights. Social media created a visible opportunity for both consumers and artists to maintain digital relationships while providing a platform for consumers to follow and discover new musicians and bands, naturally, making the internet a promotional medium for artists. As the corner record shops closed to make way for virtual storefronts and instant downloads; the internet, digital downloading, and social media made an enormous impact on the music industry that has changed the way consumers purchase, source, listen to, and produce music today.

1. The legal issue involved in this case is the piracy of music from various artists that is easily accesible to everybody from the website called “Napster”. The moral issue in this case is the music being stolen according to the music companies or the music was just being borrowed by people all over the internet according to Napster supporters. The difference between the two is the legal issue is based on actual evidence like there is a law imposed about this case while the moral issue is based on strong likelihood or firm conviction. The systematic, corporate issue is about the website booming and how it affects the music industry while the individual issue is the persons who makes