Feelings on Napster?

If it were illegal, Napster would be shut down. That is fact. Whining about it won't change it. I think it's time for full disclosure here, Hedge. Admit it, you work in the music industry, and are biased. You want to protect your high paying job, and your own bottom line.......................None of us are selling the files we share thru Napster, and we gain ZERO profit from it. It's not stealing. Radio and MTV pay royalties, BECAUSE THEY MAKE A HUGE PROFIT OFF THE USE OF THE ARTISTS' COPYWRITTEN MATERIALS (they certainly wouldn't have a business without the use of the material, it's the core of the product they deliver...no one would listen or watch, if there were no copywritten materials to hear or view). Endusers make ZERO profit off the use of, and sharing of, files thru Napster. The fact that you are upset about the existence of Napster, shows your bias undeniably clearly, and also makes you look pathetic and silly, since you have zero control over the whole issue. Your crying about what the presiding judge rules, whatever that is if it ever reaches finality, is rather humorous to me. It's not up to you, it's not ABOUT you, so get over yourself. In this country, we rely on the judicial system to interpret, and hence ENFORCE the rule of law. Whatever the ruling, we abide by it. We don't cry like a baby about it, or else we might be a laughing stock, and lose our credibility.

Pghedge: I'm primarily a jazz fan, and an avant-garde jazz at that, so there's basically nothing anything like that anywhere on Napster. However, there is plenty of material by the big name acts, like U2 and Santana. Does Napster hurt them? I don't know but it would hurt someone like Ken Vandermark - a superb tenor sax player out of Chicago. However, I do know that Vandermark and several other jazz musicians that I spoke with would not mind having their music available on Napster if it would mean more exposure. And that's the rub: exposure versus "stealing". The present music distribution really sucks unless your a big name artist.

I never made a "deal" with any record company. I never agreed how I would use any of thier stuff. I Never signed a thing. If the government doesn't have a law against it and they don't say it's wrong then dang it I'm going to copy the songs and share them on napster. And download songs from other people also.

Oh yeah. 64 million people use napster. If napster were hurting the industry then man we would seriously see it by now with this many users. Yeah sales are down a bit but they have normal market fluctuation like that all the time. I still see tons of people in the cd stores and I can gaurantee you they all have computers and they all have napster. And besides now maybe the record companies will think twice about putting out crappy one hit wonder cd's and charging an exorbant price for it while that one song is hot. yeah they promote it like crazy like the whole cd is the best thing in the world and make killer sales on it while the bands name is the "hottest" thing out there. No more getting caught in that trap anymore for me. The record companies only let the radio stations and mtv play the one good song on the album for the first few months or so for this very reason.

Kacz: You said it prefectly - and that's why the record companies had better stop complaining and find a way to deal with it. How about cutting the prices of new CDs instead of raising them? Another method could be on-line direct sales. There's a jazz label, OkkaDisc, which has their entire catalog available on-line and way cheaper than at any store or on-line vendor. But that's just wishful thinking - they'll just raise prices and come with some godawful watermarking scheme - less sound, more money.