************************************************************** * * * CYBERSPACE * * A biweekly column on net culture appearing * * in the Toronto Sunday Sun * * * * Copyright 2000 Karl Mamer * * Free for online distribution * * All Rights Reserved * * Direct comments and questions to: * * * * * ************************************************************** MP3 for the Devil MP3.com had a good idea. Imagine being able to listen to your CD collection anywhere you want without having to lug around two hundred CDs. How many times do you get to work and think "darn this rain makes me want to fire up Sarah McLachlan's /Solace/ and veg out with a steaming mug of coffee"? But, alas, you left /Solace/ at home... MP3.com, the largest distributor of indie MP3 sound files, created a clever work around. It released a piece of software called Beam-It. At home you launch Beam-It and place your CD into your computer's drive. Beam-It verifies the CD is a legit copy and registers your ownership at its my.mp3.com site. At work, you log on to the my.mp3.com site. From there, you can access and play MP3.com's own digital copies of the songs you technically own. MP3.com thought this was a remarkable innovation. The music industry thought this was a crime, believing MP3.com's unauthorized copying of 45,000 commercial CDs and redistribution of those tunes was in violation of the Copyright Act. The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) filed a lawsuit in January 2000. On April 28, a New York court sided with the RIAA and issued a judgment against MP3.com. MP3.com argued that it wasn't violating artists' rights to profit from their work. The person downloading the song from the site was the legitimate owner of the CD. It's not a violation of the Copyright Act to make your own mix tapes or rip songs from the CD and dump them on your hard drive at work. MP3.com merely acts as a middle man, enabling consumers to access their music in new ways. RIAA didn't buy this dodge. A judge agreed that MP3.com simply could not take copyrighted works, make duplicates of them, and distribute them in any manner without authorization. Despite the court ruling, many applaud MP3.com's attempts to create a world where net users can get music on demand and artists' rights to profit from their works are respected. While the suit was being fought over, MP3.com urged the RIAA not to stick its head in the sand and ignore reality. Consumers will use technology to leap frog the music industry's seemingly plodding attempts at coming to terms with the net's potential and perils. The RIAA's victory over MP3.com is also a very loud shot over the bow of Napster (www.napster.com). RIAA is also going after the net's most popular system for swapping MP3 files. As I noted in my last installment of Cyberspace, Napster is a utility that links up the MP3 music collections of thousands of users. At the heart of the Napster utility is Napster's own servers. The servers link users together, builds directory lists (but not copies) of available files, and allow swapping of files. Under Napster's terms of use, it's the user's responsibility to comply with copyright laws. Unlike MP3.com, Napster doesn't make duplicates of copyrighted material. Certainly illegal material passes through its servers, but lots of illegal material gets passed over Bell's phone lines. You can't sue Bell. While Napster can defend itself on well-established common carrier laws, the RIAA argues Napster's raison d'etre is to facilitate the distribution of copyrighted material. In the US, you cannot market a device designed for the sole purpose of aiding in crime. However, the US Supreme court ruled in 1984 that a technology can't be outlawed if, in the face of its intended legitimate purpose, users have found illegal ways to use it. This ruling is the reason why we have VCRs with record buttons today. The RIAA might be able to argue that since the vast amount of files traded using Napster are illegal, it defies common sense that the system is designed for anything other than illegal purposes. If the RIAA takes down Napster, it has more problems on the horizon. A program called Gnutella (www.gnutella.com) takes the Napster model to its ultimate conclusion. Instead of allowing users to share and search for music files, Gnutella lets users make any kind of file available. You can use Gnutella to make anything from your scanned in photo album to your Star Trek fan fiction available. Of course you can use it to swap MP3 files. Even more frightening to publishers of all stripes, there's nothing preventing someone from putting an image of a Windows 2000 install CD or a hacked copy of /The Phantom Menace/ DVD. While Napster may be only useful for illegal swapping, Gnutella has remarkable potential for legitimate use. It would be nice to be able to access my home computer's hard drive from my girlfriend's laptop in Borneo and show her my baby pictures. But, hey, tell that to a judge. *********************** * Update May 15, 2000 * *********************** RE NAPSTER Napster is being sued by the heavy metal band Metallica as well. Metallica is experiencing a backlash from its fan base. There's a pretty amusing send up located here: http://208.55.130.93/cartoons/napsterbad/index.html