Mp3 napster player

MP3 and Napster Controversies

MP3 is a system for digitally encoding music so that it may be played back on a personal computer. The primary benefits of MP3 are that it compresses digital audio information to a file size small enough that it may be sent over the Internet and that the sound quality is at the compact disc level. Although the MP3 may be used for any information, it tends to be used primarily for music and specifically sound recordings. The MP3 itself has both infringing and noninfringing uses. An example of a legal use is when one purchases a music CD and then encodes it onto an MP3 file so that the work may be enjoyed via a computer instead of a CD player. On the other hand, posting on the Internet MP3 files that contain sound recordings without permission of the copyright holder appears to be infringement. Record companies are concerned about the spread of MP3s because it is a direct threat to their distribution of sound recordings. Not only can one listen to MP3 files on the computer, but there are also separate MP3 playe rs available.

Napster is a very successful company which makes software that combines chat features and a music player. It has attracted over nine million users since last fall. The software permits users to share their MP3 collections with each other and facilitates locating MP3 files on the Internet. Napster does not host files on its servers but it does provide access to music files on others' computers. There are three major components to Napster: (1) a chat program so that users can talk with each other about their favorite music genres, (2) an audio player to play MP3 files right from inside Napster in the event users do not have an external player, and (3) a tracking program that allows users to organize and keep track of their favorite MP3 libraries for later browsing. A user who wants to locate a song using Napster can enter the name of the artist on the MusicShare search page and then download the song from the list of files generated by the software. There has been litigation over both the MP3 and Napster techno logies.

In Recording Industry Association of America v. Diamond Multimedia, [1] the court was asked to enjoin the manufacture of the Rio portable music player, a device about the size of an audiocassette that permits the user to download MP3 files and listen to them with headphones. The Rio can store about an hour of recorded music or 16 hours of spoken material. The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) claimed that the device was an infringing digital audio recording device and as such it violated the Copyright Act. According to the court, the RIAA represents six or so record companies and the artists on their labels; they control approximately 90% of the distribution of recorded music in the United States. The RIAA's concern is music piracy. Even though digital files are used by the Rio, its sole output is analog audio signal sent to the user via the headphones. No recordings can be duplicated using the Rio device.

The court held that although the Rio utilized digital audio files, it was not a digital audio device and therefore was not covered under the Digital Audio Home Recording Act of 1992 which places restrictions only on specific types of recording devices.

At present there are several suits involving Napster. In A&M Records v. [Napster,.sup.3] several recording companies sued Napster for contributory and vicarious copyright infringement since it provided free online access to copyrighted music recordings. Napster claimed that its activities were protected under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act because it acted as an online service provider Napster claimed that it was merely a passive conduit for the exchange of MP3 files and that it specifically prohibits piracy in its service agreement with users. The court noted that there appears to be little or no enforcement of this requirement, however. Denying Napster's motion for summary judgment, the court held that Napster was not a passive conduit and that it turned a blind eye to the real names and addresses of users so that any user whose service is terminated may simply reapply under another name.

Arguing that the conversion of music recordings to MP3 files was not copyright infringement but was instead a transformative use, the defendant in UMG Recordings v. [MPJ.com.sup.2] claimed that its free service that offered recorded music for downloading over the Internet was not copyright infringement. MP3.com alleged that its service was the functional equivalent of storing its subscribers' CDs. The court, however, disagreed, holding that in actuality, the defendant was replaying for the subscribers converted versions of recordings it copied without authorization from the copyright holder MP3.com asserted fair use as a defense claiming that it was a "transformative space shift" which allowed subscribers to enjoy the sound recordings without having to take the actual CDs with them. The court found that the unauthorized copies were simply being retransmitted in another medium which was not a transformative use. Defendant also argued unsuccessfully that this activity actually had a positive impact on the producer's market since a subscriber was denied access if they had not already purchased the CD.

More recently the heavy metal band Metallica and the rap artist Dr. Dre have sued, claiming that Napster violates the copyright law. An outside consulting firm hired by Metallica identified more than 335,000 Napster users whose online activities during a three day period resulted in 116,500 copies of the band's works being posted. The names of nearly 318,000 users were presented to Napster, and Napster blocked these users' access to its software. More than 30,000 of these users soon submitted sworn statements that they had been falsely identified and should be reinstated. Several universities were also identified as infringers because of the number of MP3 files hosted on their servers. Yale, Indiana University, and the University of Southern California were dropped from the suit when the institutions banned practically all uses of the MP3 music-file-sharing software on its servers.

The rapster Dr. Dre presented a similar list of names to Napster, but he has requested that his songs be banned from Napster, not that individual users be banned. However, this may not be technologically possible, according to Napster officials.

Unless Metallica or Dr. Dre sues individual users who challenged being blocked, those users will be reinstated to Napster. Small record producers are not necessarily troubled by Napster and other technology which permits them to bypass the major record labels. Further, some artists are distributing their works directly over the web. For example, Chuck D (Carlton Douglas Ridenhour), leader of Public Enemy, hails the development of Napster and related software. Many unknown and lesser-known artists are using this medium to become known. The controversy promises to continue.

(1.) 180 F3d 1072 (9th Cir. 1999).

(2.) 92 F Supp.2d (S.D.N.Y. 2000).

(3.) 2000 US. Dist. LEXIS 6243 (N.D. Cal. 2000).