Off topic but music related

[Robert Goodale]

WARNING: Off topic, but directly music related.

I previously sent this post but it never made it to the list.  I am
assuming that the list filter may have dumped it.  We'll try it again.

Has anyone besides me been following the news on the Napster
controversy?  Now THIS is interesting.  For those not familiar, Napster
is an internet hub where users can log on and exchange music files in
what is known as mp3 format, (a mutated mpeg file layered and converted
to transmit CD quality audio).  This system has become an unbelievable
success.  It was started about a year ago by a 19 year old college drop
out who did the programing in his dorm room.  It is now used by hundreds
of thousands of users at any given time.  The system works not as
central web server, but rather it is a junction point that allows users
to directly interface with each other's hard drives.  The system will
ONLY relay mp3 files and blocks all other transmissions.  Because mp3
files are not executable there are absolutely no security risks.

The controversy stems from whether or not it is legal to share music
among your peers via the internet.  Until now copyright laws have always
strictly prohibited the copying or distribution of music without
expressed written consent by the publisher and/or composer.  There is a
supreme court decision now in progress, however, which could change all
of that.  Earlier this year a lower court judge ruled in favor of
Napster.  Monday a panel of three Supreme Court judges heard testimony
by attorneys from both Napster and the recording industry.  Although no
ruling has been made, the judges have again agreed to allow Napster to
remain on line.

It would appear that the era of music recording copyrights could be
coming to an end.  Traditionally the courts have ruled in favor of the
consumer in this area.  You may recall that in 1984 following months of
hearings the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Sony saying that it was
legal for consumers to record television programs via video tape.  This
ruling opened the flood gates for the VCR manufactures which have been
with us ever since.  This appeal of course was made long before Sony had
entered the recording business.  Other landmark decisions include upheld
arguments of consumer's rights to make digital recordings since this
would allow duplication of recordings on a whole new level of quality.
This started as a case against the use of DAT machines, (Digital Audio
Transport),  which recards digital sound on tape.  At the time DAT was
headed toward the home market.  As it turned out DAT pretty much
remained in the studio and never hit it big with consumers.
Nevertheless the Supreme Court's ruling gave consumers the legal right
to record music in digital audio.  Next recording companies tried to
stop CD burners, machines which allow consumers to record there own
CDs.  This argument stemmed from the consumer's right to store computer
data on CD's, however the technology also permits audio recordings.
Since the two technologies cannot be separated again the courts ruled in
favor of the consumer.

Today the internet has been accepted as public domain and has become the
ultimate test for free speech.  Since the internet knows no
international boundaries it is nearly impossible to regulate and no
court has come close to trying and doubtfully will.  The only exceptions
have been for the distribution of illegal materials such as classified
documents and certain perverted materials.  Even this, however, can be
difficult since arrests and prosecution of such cases can only be made
if the offender's web server/account originates in the United States or
other country which has adopted similar laws.  Threatening e-mail is
also illegal, however this relates more to other applicable laws.

Out of curiosity from hearing about this case I down loaded the
shareware and logged on to Napster for the first time yesterday to see
what this was all about.  I was absolutely stunned to discover the
amount of the music available for downloading, literally thousands of
titles. The music is CD quality digital stereo.   With a free third
party plug-in the files can be instantly converted to wave format for
burning onto a CD.   This admittedly is a very attractive resource and
if one was determined you could download and burn an entire album
verbatim in equal quality of a CD from a store.  I have to admit that I
downloaded several pieces that I have always wanted but would never
otherwise have gone out of the way to purchase.  This is one of the
primary arguments attorneys are using in favor of Napster in that users
have openly admitted that they would likely only download music that
they would otherwise never buy.  Indeed downloads take a lot of time and
you would have to be pretty determined to collect a lot of music.  It
has also been suggested that Napster may encourage CD sales since it
provides opportunities for listeners to become introduced to music by
certain artists.

On the flip side the music industry argues that under any definition
users are downloading material that they have not paid for.  A
comparison that one attorney stated was that "You can leave your keys in
the car and the doors unlocked but if a thief takes it he is still
stealing".   A more relevant threat may be that the music industry
senses a fear for it's own survival.  If the courts rule in favor of
napster the internet could do to the recording industry what cable did
to network television.  Some recording artists have already suggested
that they may soon bypass recording companies entirely and go directly
to the internet.  You may recall recently that Steven King published and
distributed a novel exclusively on the internet, completely cutting out
his hard copy publisher.

This will be a very difficult ruling and thus far the courts have
allowed Napster to remain on line and operational in spite of
restraining requests by the music industry.  Although Napster's
technology invites the violation of current copyright laws, it does not
prevent anything that the court has already agreed to, that being the
use of CD burners by the consumer although with full knowledge that it
is inviting copyright violations.  Even DVD burners are expected to be
available within the next year or so.  With the nearly unenforceable
freedoms of the internet and the traditional judicial sympathy toward
the consumer's rights of making recordings, it is very conceivable that
the 19 year old kid who invented Napster may change the rules forever.
As one talk radio host stated, "the genie is already out of the bottle
and it will be very difficult to put him back now that the technology is
here".   What's more intriguing is that in spite of Napster's existence
CD sales are at an all time high and the use of video cassette recorders
has not effected movie theater attendance.  There is also non copyright
music available on Napster and again since the two cannot be separated
this makes things even more difficult for the courts to decide.  Napster
only provides the connection and has no way of controlling it's users.

I would be very curious to hear other's comments on this.  Has the era
of internet music arrived?  Is it even possible to stop it now that the
technology is here?  Have the supreme court's past decisions already dug
the grave?   What will this mean for the future of the recording
industry?  Has anyone else on the list used Napster?

Although this is off topic from pianos, it does concern the music
industry in general.  It seemed to me like it might be worth a brief
discussion, particularly since many of us have done work for recording
studios.


Rob Goodale, RPT
Las Vegas, NV