File Sharing
“I 'd like to propose another toast to you, the listener. It doesn 't matter how you got this, you bought it, you downloaded it, and your grandma gave it to you.” (Jones). Chances are anybody who has ever used the internet has downloaded copyrighted material. Many people view downloading copyrighted material from the internet as stealing, but others see it as a distribution of human knowledge and information. File sharing, more formally known today as torrents, should be legal. File sharing is only illegal if the material that is being distributed is copyrighted. Even then if the creator of the content chooses to distribute their material in this format it is also legal. Companies argue that the unwanted sharing of their
…show more content…
Floppy disks had shrunk down to their final format which was three and a half inches. “In 1992 floppy disk piracy was so popular that a campaign called ‘Don’t Copy That Floppy’ started” (Smith). The campaign mainly featured little white kids rapping about floppy disks.
“The controversy which defined file sharing for this period surrounded one file format - the mp3” (Smith). In the late 1990s, Napster, a web service that provided mp3 files to people who paid a small subscription fee, was founded and was known for hosting a large amount of mp3 files that anybody could download. That same year a service called Audiogalaxy was created as well. The two sites had friendly competitions to see who could get more web traffic and downloads. Napster was shut down due to copyright infringement in 2001. Audiogalaxy closed soon after due to pressure caused by the RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America) and was sold to Vivendi Universal, a company that would later turn the service into Rhapsody.
In the same year that Napster was shut down, Windows released its new software version which would replace Windows 98. “Windows XP, released in 2001, included a feature called Simple File Sharing which made it easy for Windows users to file shares among computers on a local network.” (Smith). In simpler terms, if one family used more than one computer in their household they could get any file from one computer to another.
In 1999, Shawn Fanning and his little program called Napster created quite a stir in society. Napster's software allows music listeners to open pieces of their personal hard drives to everyone using Napster, sharing whatever MP3 songs they have already downloaded or stored. At any time, thousands of people are online, sharing hundreds of thousands of songs, many of which are technically illegal to download without the permission of the copyright holders. [1] This led to a lawsuit filed by the Recording Industry Association of America, with the rock group Metallica as its frontman. In this case, several issues were brought up, one of which was the right of the creator of the music to control what happens with
Both Grokster and Napster “distributed free software that allowed computer users to share electronic files through peer-to-peer networks” (Oyez). In the Napster case “The recording association asserts Napster is guilty of contributory copyright infringement” (The Guardian). According to Slate “Grokster is, of course, the sequel to Napster”. Mindsets were very similar in certain aspects. Grokster and Napster both thought they weren’t breaking any laws due to Acts and finding ways to cheat the system. Even though either one won in court, both played a major role in leaving a footprint when it comes to violating copyright laws.
A&M Records vs Napster was one of the biggest copyright infringement cases that later defined the legality of file sharing. It was a class action lawsuit that include over fifteen major record labels including Universal Studios, Warner Bros, and Sony Entertainment. The official case though is called A&M Records vs Napster. A&M Records sued Napster claiming they were infringing on their plaintiff's intellectual property. Napster was a peer to peer file sharing service. It was mostly used to share mp3 music files in mass volumes. This was right at the start of mp3 players. Music was starting to become easily accessible through digital copies.
Napster was eventually shut down after two years of being in
Napster, a free online file sharing network, allowed peers to share digital files directly with each other by way of connections through its software and system. The no cost peer-to-peer sharing gained popularity, particularly with trendy music. A&M Records took notice of the free digital music downloads and brought suit against Napster for direct, contributory, and vicarious copyright infringements (Washington University School of Law, 2013).
This paper is an analytical essay on global ethical issues on peer-to-peer (P2P) file-sharing. A history and background of peer-to-peer file-sharing will be given, as well as how it became an issue. This paper will explore what aspects of file-sharing are ethical and at what point it becomes unethical. An explanation of the laws will be described and whether the laws different from region-to-region around the world. The paper will include personal experiences with file sharing, as well as an in-depth analysis on the topic with high-quality industry and academic references to defend a particular moral/ethical position.
Napster provided users of the system with a platform to facilitate the transmission of digital forms of music files, called MP3 files. Napster’s platform primarily facilitates “peer-to-peer” file sharing, which allows users to present MP3 files stored on their personal computer to other users looking to copy the file, search for particular MP3 files, and transfer
In 1999, three young men who were passionate about computer programming created a website that would bring an entire industry to its knees. As the three boys, Shawn Fanning, John Fanning, and Sean Fanning, worked hard on their project, they could’ve never imagined that their invention, a peer to peer music file sharing service called, Napster, would effectively revolutionize the way an entire generation created, delivered, and received its entertainment. Since then, the internet, file sharing, and the music industry has changed drastically. Since Napster’s invention in 1999 we’ve had millions of different similar services come about such as iTunes, Rhapsody. Roxio, YouTube, Spotify and NoiseTrade. Napster’s creation and then subsequent demise in 2002, sparked a controversy that still exists today, the effects of music downloading on music industry revenue.
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
According to the text A Gift of Fire, Napster “opened on the Web in 1999 as a service that allowed its users to copy songs in MP3 files from the hard disks of other users” (Baase, 2013, p. 192, Section 4.1.6 Sharing Music: The
Napster was a music sharing software that was shut down because of copying and distributing unauthorized MP3 files that violated the United States and foreign copyright laws. One of the major reasons why Napster was shutdown is
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.
The question then became “Just because we can get the music we want without paying for it, should we?” (Tyson, 2000, p.1). This issue of illegal downloads, which is also referred to as piracy, has been a hot topic ever since the introduction of Napster. According to Recording Industry Association of America “In the decade since peer-to-peer (p2p) file-sharing site Napster emerged in 1999, music sales in the U.S. have dropped 47 percent, from $14.6 billion to $7.7 billion” (RIAA, 2014).
Napster, a free online file sharing network, allowed peers to share digital files directly with each other by way of connections through its software and system. The no cost peer-to-peer sharing gained popularity, particularly with trendy music. A&M Records took notice of the free digital music downloads and brought suit against Napster for direct, contributory, and vicarious copyright infringements (Washington University School of Law, 2013).
Digitalization, data compression, and the internet have affected the music industry significantly. These technologies have shifted the recording industries from hard-copy recordings to digital music distribution. This has made it easier for consumers to enter the music market through copying. Consumers have access to copying technology that allows them to obtain music without paying the record label. The situations clipped high in 1999 when Napster, a file-sharing service was launched. The service facilitated music file sharing on a wider scale. The consumers just download the music and transfer it to a digital music device. This has negatively affected the trade value of music sales, for instance in