RIAA tries to shut down Napster

By moving for an injunction against the file-swapping service, the recording industry shows just how little it gets the Net.


You’d think that after several years of doing battle with the digital music community, the Recording Industry Association of America would have figured out how the Internet works. But on Tuesday, the RIAA filed a motion for a preliminary injunction against Napster, in an attempt to shut down the digital music file service immediately — even before a ruling in the RIAA’s copyright infringement suit against Napster.

If the RIAA thinks turning off Napster will slam the door on file-sharing once and for all, it’s got another think coming.

The RIAA is arguing that the judge should pull the plug on Napster right away, because “the music industry will likely succeed [in its case against Napster] on their claims of contributory and vicarious copyright infringement and because Napster is causing irreparable harm to plaintiffs and the entire music industry.”

The group cited a Field Research Corporation survey of some 2,555 Napster users, which it says shows that “essentially every single Napster user sampled was engaged in some copyright infringement while using the Napster service and [of] the overwhelming majority of songs actually copied and downloaded on Napster, over 87 percent (and likely much more) are infringing.”

And the motion it filed included juicy supporting declarations from Napster competitors, like Michael Robertson of MP3.com and Robert Kohn of EMusic.com, both of whom posited that the revenue-free Napster is doing harm to their more “legitimate” downloadable music businesses.

Robertson’s participation was especially galling; it has been but a few days since MP3.com itself was an RIAA pariah. Just last week MP3.com settled two lawsuits brought against it by major record labels and you have to hope that Robertson’s declaration wasn’t discussed during the settlement talks.

Besides, Robertson should well understand that the record industry needs to work with its digital brethren if it is to grow the market for music online. But if Napster is shuttered for the interim of the lawsuit — an act which threatens to put the start-up out of business, even if it eventually wins its lawsuit — there is little chance that Napster will ever find a way to work with the record labels and give those artists it is “harming” their just compensation.

It’s clear at this point that file-sharing software will never disappear; already, more than a dozen Napster clones let music lovers swap tunes. If a judge grants the proposed injunction, the fans booted off Napster will probably just flock straight to Freenet or Gnutella, which are competing open-source file-swapping technologies. With no corporate backers and scores of unknown users hosting the software on their private machines, services like Gnutella will never cut deals with record labels or musicians. They will never take in subscription fees.

The RIAA, and those artists that it claims to be protecting, would be better off trying to work with Napster and set an example for the rest of the file-sharing software makers. A recent study by the digital entertainment consulting firm Webnoize indicated that nearly 58.5 percent of Napster users would happily pay a subscription fee to access the service; why isn’t the RIAA taking this good news and trying to access some of that potential cash for its artists?

As Napster CEO Hank Barry put it in a press release: “Distributed information technology is the future. File-sharing technology is here to stay. It does not threaten copyright any more than any of the other technologies that have been developed in the past. The RIAA is seeking to control this technology by claiming that its only use is to infringe. Nothing could be further from the truth.”

It’s hard to imagine that shutting down Napster will have much of an effect on the whole culture of file-sharing. But attempting to work with Napster to develop a revenue model in which artists are compensated for their work would have a huge impact. It’s a setback for artists that the RIAA won’t acknowledge this.

Janelle Brown is a contributing writer for Salon.

More Related Stories

Featured Slide Shows

  • Share on Twitter
  • Share on Facebook
  • 1 of 11
  • Close
  • Fullscreen
  • Thumbnails
    Burger King Japan

    2014's fast food atrocities

    Burger King's black cheeseburger: Made with squid ink and bamboo charcoal, arguably a symbol of meat's destructive effect on the planet. Only available in Japan.

    Elite Daily/Twitter

    2014's fast food atrocities

    McDonald's Black Burger: Because the laws of competition say that once Burger King introduces a black cheeseburger, it's only a matter of time before McDonald's follows suit. You still don't have to eat it.


    2014's fast food atrocities

    Domino's Specialty Chicken: It's like regular pizza, except instead of a crust, there's fried chicken. The company's marketing officer calls it "one of the most creative, innovative menu items we have ever had” -- brain power put to good use.


    2014's fast food atrocities

    Arby's Meat Mountain: The viral off-menu product containing eight different types of meat that, on second read, was probably engineered by Arby's all along. Horrific, regardless.


    2014's fast food atrocities

    KFC'S ZINGER DOUBLE DOWN KING: A sandwich made by adding a burger patty to the infamous chicken-instead-of-buns creation can only be described using all caps. NO BUN ALL MEAT. Only available in South Korea.

    Taco Bell

    2014's fast food atrocities

    Taco Bell's Waffle Taco: It took two years for Taco Bell to develop this waffle folded in the shape of a taco, the stand-out star of its new breakfast menu.

    Michele Parente/Twitter

    2014's fast food atrocities

    Krispy Kreme Triple Cheeseburger: Only attendees at the San Diego County Fair were given the opportunity to taste the official version of this donut-hamburger-heart attack combo. The rest of America has reasonable odds of not dropping dead tomorrow.

    Taco Bell

    2014's fast food atrocities

    Taco Bell's Quesarito: A burrito wrapped in a quesadilla inside an enigma. Quarantined to one store in Oklahoma City.


    2014's fast food atrocities

    Boston Pizza's Pizza Cake: The people's choice winner of a Canadian pizza chain's contest whose real aim, we'd imagine, is to prove that there's no such thing as "too far." Currently in development.


    2014's fast food atrocities

    7-Eleven's Doritos Loaded: "For something decadent and artificial by design," wrote one impassioned reviewer, "it only tasted of the latter."

  • Recent Slide Shows



Comment Preview

Your name will appear as username ( settings | log out )

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href=""> <b> <em> <strong> <i> <blockquote>