регистрация / вход

The Federal Reserve System Essay Research Paper

The Federal Reserve System Essay, Research Paper Should Napster be prosecuted? Napster a free music sharing software is in the mist of being sued by many music corporation for copyright infringement. Napster users download and upload copyright music without the permission of the copyright owners which is illegal.

The Federal Reserve System Essay, Research Paper

Should Napster be prosecuted?

Napster a free music sharing software is in the mist of being sued by many music corporation for copyright infringement. Napster users download and upload copyright music without the permission of the copyright owners which is illegal. People who write, perform, and produce the music don’t even recieve a royality from there work which is considered stealing. Napster the internet piracy should be prosecuted to the fulliest because of its intentions to allow people to share copywritten music.

Napster

Napster (created by the tewenty year old college genius Shawn Fanning) is a program that allows people to take there music mp3 files and share them on the Napster web site with other Napster users. People get napster by downloading the free program on to their computers; they can then log on, type in the name of a singer or song, and from their anyone can be put in touch with other millions of napster users. (Perfect for music lovers 1) The problem with the Napster program is that it allows its users “the unauthorization worldwide distribution of copyrighted music and sounding recordings” (Document 3 of 4) to be “copied, downloaded, uploaded, transmitted, or distributed,” (Document 3 of 4) all without a charge. Mr. Fanning provides this for free so that it doesn’t seem like he’s making a profit. But what the public doesn’t know is that Mr. Fanning does make a profit from Napster. Document 3 of 4 from the U.S. District Court for The Northern District of California says that Mr. Fanning gets money from emails, advertising: commissions from the links to commercial websites: and direct marketing of CD’s, Napster products, and CD burners and rippers. How much money people may wonder? Well about 60 to 80 million dollars is made from all of these sources says Document 3 of 4. So Mr. Fanning is getting a very handsome sum out of this! And eventhough he is not charging his users for this technology it is still considered illegal by the Copying Control Service who says if the person that wants to use someone else’s music for example they must ask the owner for permission to use their property.

Another fact that the public doesn’t know is by the end of this year Napster will have over 70 million members who will be sharing about 80 percent of copywritten music.(Document 3 of 4)

Some people may argue that Napster is not illegal because it acts as a host to the users who do all the illegel sharing. Other people argue that Napster is a good thing because the music industry charges people about fourteen dollars a CD. And its true! If you are a music lover such as myself it becomes very costly to keep buying albumn after albumn. Some people go out every week to buy new CD’s. And at the end of the month they notice that they have spent over fifty dollars in something they may cost about two dollars a piece to make. It’s not fair that the music industry is making such a high profit! But if people keep up the demand like they are now the music industry will keep on being greedy like they are now!

What about the Royalities?

People forget about the musicians and the people that put the man power to make an albumn. Some musician’s work hour after hour to make their lyrics and beats sound like a million selling record. Some rappers come from different ghetto’s were they rap about some of the things they have done or saw. Madonna, who left her home as a teenager and had to struggle to get in the music industry. She had to do everything in her power to get where she is at today. Now look at her she is one of the top women singers of all time. Another example is Micheal Jackson, no one believed that Micheal would have never made it this big in the industry because he was one of the first black pop singers. Now look at him; besides the rumors he is know as the Knig of Pop. It all didn’t happen all in one night. It took many years. And Napster takes these musicians work and makes it seem like it is worth nothing.Like the blood sweat and tears were worthless. And Napster users make it seem like the time and effort these musicians put into there work is not worth a penny.

Piracy on the Internet

Should Napster be prosecuted is not a question. Napster should prosecuted without a doubt. Its intentions were never to introduce new artist like Napster claims. The whole New Artist Program was created in April of 2000 after they were sued the first time.(Document 3. 7) So they new in the first place what there users were going to do with the software. Napster probably thought that since its just a host that they weren’t going to get in trouble. But what Napster should have thought about wuz that they are aiding the people who are doing all the downloading which is still illegal.And if the music is not copywritten it still shouldn’t be done because it is still considered stealing and immoral!

If the courts do not rule that the copyrights do not block the exchange and copying of music or published materials, not only will alot of musicians find their revenue streams dry up but so too will any business that relies on making a profit! Pretty soon you will see everyone bootlegging music and artists will be regular Joe’s! I think that Shawn Fanning is a brilliant man for inventing something like this at his young age. But to allow stealing to go on is not the right way to run anything. My mother always told me that in this life when you work hard for something you’ll get it. But there’s always someone like Mr. Fanning who will let other people do the work in order to get the fame and glory!

Copying Control Services. Copyrightlaw.asp page. 28th November 2000. 27 November. 2000

Stephen, Andrew. “Perfect for music lovers–or thieves.” COPYRIGHT 2000 New Statesman, Ltd. 4 Sept. 2000. 27 November,2000 .

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA . Document 3 of 4. A&M Records and Other Plaintiffs vs. NAPSTER, INC., Defendant (s).August 10, 2000.

ОТКРЫТЬ САМ ДОКУМЕНТ В НОВОМ ОКНЕ

ДОБАВИТЬ КОММЕНТАРИЙ  [можно без регистрации]

Ваше имя:

Комментарий

Другие видео на эту тему