Lately a new controversy has surfaced in the digital domain of the Internet, this worldwide network of information coursing across the planet like the nerve impulses inside an everchanging collective mind. The progress of the internet has been rapid and far reaching. It has touched our homes and our lives. The nature of the internet is such that it has become an inherantly free form of communication, unencumbered by political distinction or national boundary. Any human being on this planet capable of logging on to the internet can communicate with another human being at anytime. As this technology has progressed, and bandwidth speeds have increased it has become more and more easy to share information of many varied kinds and types. Recently, the unbridaled freedom of the internet has been challenged by the established systems of govenment and legal representation present in the country of the United States. The issue of sharing music has been taken from the cyberspace world of the internet and brought it into our analog material reality.
This controversy has been over a program, called Napster, that allows those who posess it to transfer files of a specific type to each other. The idea isn't exactly anything new. There have been ways to do this before, but none so innovative and none so specific as to cater to the needs of many people worldwide. You see, Napster allows for it's users to trade digital music converted most frequently from Compact Discs to file types called MP3s. These music files are significantly smaller than the actual size of the data on a typical CD, and much more managable on today's bandwidth infrastructure. MP3's essentially are a carbon copy of their original source material and can be duplicated and even "burned" back to blank CD-R's. When you log on to Napster you discover the infinite smorgasbord displayed before your eyes. Any genre, style, band, or specific artist can be located in a matter of seconds. The entire library of human musical composition is essentially at your fingertips.
In this freedom, no actual cost is involved in the transfer of this information. (outside of what you pay for internet service monthly) Essentially it renders the the local Music/CD store obsolete. Gone are the days where you have to reluctantly shell out $20 for a CD that contains probably a 2 or 3 songs that you really like and a whole bunch that you don't really care for. This is where the companies who market, produce, and distribute the CD's have been most enraged. You see, in actuality the cost to produce a CD is very minimal, averaging between 10 and 25 cents to fabricate and copy. The margin of profit on CD sales is phenomenal. The artist whose music is being sold receives some percentage of these sales, but in many cases it's the record companies that usually procure the most financial gain from this.
Now here comes Napster, and throws a monkey wrench into the whole mix, rebelling to the tyranny of price fixing. Bands like Metallica start coming out of the woodwork outraged that their music is supposedly being stolen by users of Napster. Soon after the entire Recording Industry Association of America jumps into the fray and demands compensation for this afront to their routine of in general screwing customers of CD's. The RIAA, Metallica, Dr. Dre, and others start filing a lawsuit against Napster claiming that severe damages have been incurred that facilitate immediate action and rectification.
The kicker here is that neither the RIAA or bands like Metallica are hurting for money, in fact they are literally smothered in it. Looking at this issue objectively it is clearly apparent that the root of this whole argument is that those who have maintained a status quo, wallowing in an unending gluttony of profit that has existed for decades, are afraid of losing their prowess and ultimate control of music distribution. So far Napster has obtained no profit from the creation of it's software. The company itself was started by two Teenagers with a great idea for making it easier to share music with friends online. Napster operates on the donations of venture capitalists who forsee a potential gain by investing in their company. Napster does NOT openly distribute these copywritten music files online, users of the software componet are the ones trading the files, not Napster the company. It's like saying that we should sue gun manufacturers because someone used a hunting rifle to kill a person instead of a deer. Napster doesn't infringe on copyrights, millions of people who use Napster allegedly do, at least according to the standards the RIAA uses. The RIAA's only alternative, albeit it a very unfounded one, is to direct their fear of losing more profit to Napster, considering it would be a nightmare and a staggeringly costly effort to attempt to locate all twenty million, and growing, Napster users and litigate the issue in all the courts in the land. Impossible and futile would such an attempt become, so the next best thing is to attack the guy who has been likened to "the pusher," by lawyers and opponents of the Napster movement.
On July 26th the injunction was made against Napster that the company would have to shut down and cut off it's millions of users from the service. Napster quickly acted this decision and upon appeal the lower court's judgement was overturned until the ultimate outcome of the case had been decided upon. It was a victory for Napster users, but had the site failed to stay it's imminent shutdown it would have not been of much consequence. The Government, and big business record companies really have little control over the internet, and the expense in attempting to put out a forest fire with a garden hose is a wasted effort when other innovations and changes in their ways of doing business would be more productive and lucrative. There are many other upstart programs and supergeek "appz" that do essentially the same thing, like Gnutilla for example could be considered even a more deadly factor than Napster ever was having the ability to not discriminate what file types are being traded. What the RIAA and Government don't realize is that you can't punish a company that doesn't exist, and such is the case with Gnutilla, unlike Napster there are no central hubs containing lists of online users, rather the middle man is cut out and users link directly to each other's computers.
It's obvious that we are entering an age where entertainment forms where previously we had little choice as a consumer but to pay up and shut up, we can now otherwise call the shots. It's high time for some innovation in the record industry. Artists crying that they are going to lose money because of programs like Napster should be ashamed of themselves. Think about it, how much did you pay for that last concert you went to? $20? $50? $100? Popular artists often get endorsements and sponsors as well as profits from the sale of related group merchandise. Obviously there are still profits to be found for artists, and those who jeer Napster and file sharing should really take a look at what they are attacking. What better way than to get exposure and popularity than to distribute your music freely to those who want to listen to it. I mean the Radio plays music for free not charging people to listen (they do have to pay a licensing fee to the Recording Companies of course) how is this any different. The only group that stands to lose most is "Big Record" who doesn't want you to let your friends listen to the music you just dumped off of your CD onto the your computer.
Napster is only a precursor foreshadowning for things to come in the near future. The Motion Picture industry will soon experience the consumer shockwave of retaliation against the same old regime of 19.95 - 24.95 for a virtually worthless VHS of the latest released blockbuster. In the next few years DVD-RAM drives, as well as DVD-R's will become widely available and affordable. Broadband access capabilities will allow users to transfer data at 100 times that of today's Dail up allowing for downloading of Digital Movies online. Entertainment information of all forms will someday be as accessable as water from the tap. Furthermore, the Telecommunications and Long Distance Carriers will have to find alternate forms of revenue when sites like Phoneforfree.com, dailpad.com, and various upstart internet phone software programs allow for direct long distance calling, eventually worldwide video conferencing for free. The internet revolution is poised to reach it's most historic accomplishments, and Napster is just the first wake-up call to those stuck in the old ways of last century. We have entered a new Millenium, and these times are a changin'
In closing this article, I want to discuss my own experiences with Napster. At first I had never heard of the software, but I was soon invited to download it, and when I did a whole world opened up me. I really didn't obtain Napster to infringe on Artist copyrights. Here in the United States it's virually impossible to get some of the Japanese Symphonic Nobuo Uematsu themes for the Final Fantasy games, as well as Remixed, orchestrated and vocalized versions of many great RPG and video game themes. I found music on Napster that I had always wanted but could never hope to find. I found beautiful Final Fantasy music, orchestraed, and vocalized by japanese aria singers. I had taken a step into something wonderful and worthwhile. Today I have close to 200 MP3s and acquire more daily. I would emphatically recommend Napster to those who just don't have the kind of money to spend on hundreds of CD's. I've been watching reports on this whole Napster debate, and it would seem that this whole movement belongs to us, mostly young people about 25 or younger. People our parents age are often overwhelmed by the fast paced world of the internet, and are quick to judge Napster superficially claiming it's stealing and morally wrong. Has anyone stopped to consider the moral implications of enguaging in a practace to price fixing to keep CD's at excessively high prices? I personally don't see paying any more than 4 dollars for a music CD and these big greedy companies need to realize that sometimes enough profit is just that, enough. I've noticed that many of these seasoned politicians in Government are very unknowledged about internet affairs and living in a wired society. Fuddyduddyism and "old-fashioned" often ring in my ear when I try to see these guys attempt to make sense of the internet and futily try to regulate it. The internet population is pretty much in control, and it has become the most liberated society in the world. I thought to myself after the injunction came against Napster, "I know there are going to be some site hacks now" and sure enough, Metallica's site and the RIAA's site were both hacked. You see, people on the net pretty much have the last laugh, you can't just push large groups of netizens around and not think there will be some kind of repercussions. I remember when congress was thinking of passing a bill that would charge 10 cents per email you send, that was shot down quickly, then when the RIAA attempted to shut down Napster, they faced the wrath of boycotts, and hacked websites. The best thing to do is not oppress the people. You piss people off and their pretty much going to rebel, such was the case during the Revolutionary War when colonists said "No" to English dictatorship. The internet is going to be the planetary movement for information freedom. The net is the foundation which human society will build a civilization where information is no longer a commodity to be bought or sold, but rather a fruitage of humankind to be shared with all those who will pay attention to the message being delivered. As more and more countries that were once technologically inferior due to poor education become connected, this vast gateway to a better tomorrow will be opened up to these nations. The next hundred years will most likely go down in history as the transition years when we went from being subdivided to becoming an indivisible whole of human civilization.
