To my knowledge, the only reason that Napster is getting hit is because they
became so huge. There are plenty of other ways that the same thing happens
without Napster. When Napster is finally defunct (either by law or it's
replaced by superior technology), something else will become number 1. Look
at the warez scene: there's no one stopping that. If the music industry had
taken the tact of selling individual songs for a fee, they would have been
making a fortune, instead of a lot of bad publicity. I've purchased some
"make your own" cd titles, but the selection has been limited. And I've used
Napster as well, for the songs I've worn out on vinyl. Is it against the law
for me to copy a song via Napster that I own the LP of, but I wore the
record out trying to figure out the guitar parts? And when I look at the
recent ruling against the major labels for price fixing, I think the pot is
calling the kettle black. I don't advocate stealing music anymore than I
would software, for many reasons, but the fact is, if you put out an album,
it will sell on it's own merits. I buy a licensed copy of the software I use
for many reasons, also. Foremost of them is I expect support and future
improvements. With music, I want to support the band. I play the guitar and
I record and one day hope to release an album. But I know what sells it will
be its own merits. The same goes for programs. I use dreamweaver (note to
Alan: I still have to do a lot with html, but it does come with Allaire
HomeSite, a good html edotor ;-) and I know that you can crack the demo and
get an unlimited version, but I'm using it for the custom built golf club
site for one of my net businesses, and I wouldn't think of tarnishing the
image of the business in any way. I pride myself on the quality of my
product and I think I have the best guarantee there is on the product I
sell. My integrity IS my business. All I ask is for customers to deal with
me earnestly, and in order for that, I believe I must conduct myself in the
same manner. Getting back off my soapbox, I have to say that going after
Napster will not change much, someone will take their place, probably, there
will be many like it springing up. Napster just became popular and was more
convenient than the binary newsgroups, where there is no one big target.
----- Original Message -----
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2001 12:29 PM
Subject: <ADM FWD> Re: [SaF] Excluded Music On Napster
> I don't have terribly HSA either, but.... you know.
>
> That's the point I was trying to make to a buddy of mine -- RE: "if you
> had Metallica files labeled Mozart's 5th symphony - they'd show up." But
> the searcher would have to KNOW that Metallica was all renamed Mozart.
> And odd thing is, all you have to do is make all your files unsearchable,
> and no one could "prove" anything. Right? The next step for the users is
> going to be to request from owners a zip of the files they want, but do it
> via an email request, or some other clandestine query. It's just too sad
> of a proposition -- I already own the music I want to download, but it's
> on cassette or vinyl, and to use a male to male plug and record as a wav,
> then encode to MP3 is just tooooooo much work to hear the music I already
> paid for in the past. And I know that's not what the hubbub is all about,
> but there are those of us out here who HAVE paid for the music :o(
>
>
> In a message dated 3/6/01 9:56:55 AM Eastern Standard Time,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
>
> > I don't think Napster is saying anything yet. > I am personally not
> > sure
> if such a scheme will work as from what I've > observed - Napster is based
> on file names not contents. So if you had > Metallica files labelled
> Mozart's 5th symphony - they'd show up. > > I observed on Saturday on a
> friend's machine (I don't have napster, do not
> have high speed access at home) Metallica files showing up in searches
> anyway. I don't know what happens if you try to download them.
>
