You know how it is: you're a grungy, disaffected teenager who plays a bit of a guitar. You fancy being a rock star and have sent off your demo tapes to all the record companies, but no one is interested. Somebody tells you about the Net and how you can put your musical doodlings up there for free and maybe someone might discover you that way. You write a bit of software so that people can find your work easily and quickly in the on-line world and then oops, you revolutionise popular music, become a multi-millionaire overnight, scare the bejaysus out of the major record companies and create your own post-copyright economy.
This is what happened to a 19-year-old US college drop-out earlier this year. Shawn Fanning's actions have led to a crisis in the music industry and the implications of his actions will dictate how we consume, access and pay for music, text, software and art on the Internet in the future. Already the subject of a US Congressional Committee investigation in Washington and on the receiving end of one of the biggest law suits ever taken by the combined forces of the major record companies, Fanning is the reason why some of the popular music bands in the world are now threatening to take their own fans to court. GUBU ain't the word.
What Fanning did, in his attempt to get his own music up on the Net, was to create a free piece of software called Napster. By going to www.napster.com you can download it in seconds. The software then links your PC to other PCs around the world, allowing you to download as much music as you want, for free. Want to have the new Madonna single, three months before it's released? Fancy some Moby, some Beatles, some Dylan, some Smiths, some Radiohead? It's all out there and you don't pay a penny for it. So far five million people have downloaded the Napster software since it went up on the Net last January and the company has now, officially, the fastest growing site in the history of the Internet.
Here's the science bit: It's all to do with a device called MP3 which allows you to copy music from a standard CD on to your computer hard drive. For a number of years now Net users have been putting MP3 files of various recordings into the public domain. This meant that you could trawl the Net looking for these "free records" but they were always difficult to find and even if you did find them, it was very difficult to download them for your personal use. Enter Shawn Fanning. His Napster software works like a giant library. Once you join the "Napster Music Community" you tell the company the location of your MP3 files (which are usually singles, not entire albums). These MP3 files now join the Napster global library and you have access to other such MP3 collections all around the world. You can enter whatever band's name you want into a Search box and Napster will then show you exactly where to go to download songs by Dylan, The Beatles or whatever you're having yourself. It takes seconds, and it's all free. For Shawn Fanning, "it's a cool way to build a community".
Not everyone sees it that way. The Record Industry Association of America is suing Napster for "contributory copyright infringement" saying that the MP3 files available through its website are "purloined". The battle over digital musical distribution has commenced and it will be fought on the issues of intellectual ownership and copyright on the Internet. The MP3 files that Napster helps you locate are in breach of all known copyright laws, but Napster's lawyers plan to argue in court that the company is merely an Internet service provider, or conduit, and therefore is not liable for "piracy" by any of its users.
Under US law, Napster is obliged to bar users if they are proven to have infringed copyright by downloading MP3 files - and the company has done this. But because of the nature of the Internet, users just log on to Napster again using a different log-on name. Easy-peasey.
The case has widened out even further in the last few weeks, with some music groups (whose music has been downloaded courtesy of the Napster software) now taking legal action against the company. The massively popular hard rock group Metallica, astonished their peers, by filing a multi-million dollar suit against Napster. The band, in a dramatic move, delivered 30 cardboard boxes to Napster's Californian headquarters containing the names of 335,000 people who had downloaded Metallica songs using the Napster software. "We take our craft very seriously" says Metallic band member Lars Ulrich, "and it is therefore sickening to know that our art is being traded like a commodity. From a business standpoint, this is about piracy - taking something that doesn't belong to you - and that is morally and legally wrong. This is, in effect, trading in stolen goods".
Such hard-hitting statements from a band who portray a rebellious "rock the establishment" image have raised more than a few eyebrows in the music world and now a clear divide has emerged between groups who are suing or threatening to sue Napster and those who are vocal in their support of the service it provides.
Supporting Metallica in their case are hip-hop star Dr Dre, Elton John ("there is no respect and compensation for creative work because of Napster's actions"), Lou Reed, and Puff Daddy ("Napster are abusing artists"). Glossing over the fact that Metallica are on-record, earlier in their career, for encouraging their fans to hometape their albums (which is no different, in essence, to what Napster are doing), the band are now in the remarkable situation of having to sue their own fans in order to get to Napster. Or, as Lars Ulrich told BBC2's Money Programme two weeks ago: "If we have to start knocking on doors and confiscating hard drives, then so be it."
The band's actions have been roundly condemned by a proportion of their fans and by other groups. Fred Durst, the lead singer with the big-selling US rap-metal band, Limp Bizkit, told a Newsweek reporter: "Obviously people who are worried about the Napster situation are people who are worried about their bank account." Other bands in the pro-Napster camp include the punk grouping, Offspring, whose singer, Dexter Holland says, "I support the exchange of MP3 files. Napster facilitates people being able to share music - it's like trading cards. And something like Napster is just like having a convention of people trading. It's not like taking money away from people. Last year, we were the most downloaded band on the Internet, but it certainly didn't hurt our record sales."
Chuck D of Public Enemy has called Napster "the radio of the future - so many artists don't get on the radio or MTV, this is a way they can be heard", while Courtney Love has said, "I'm not threatened by Napster. I'd rather have 100 million people hear a song than less-than-a-million through the old-school distribution system. How is Napster hurting the music industry?, it's not. The only people scared of Napster are people who have filler songs on their albums and are scared if people hear more than one single, they're not going to buy the record."
So Napster is either copyright theft or as Holland and Love have pointed out, a useful promotional device for bands, that allows fans to hear some of their songs for free and will, more likely than not, encourage them to buy the official release when it's available through traditional channels. In many ways, the Napster case is a re-run of the "Home taping is killing music" campaign of the 1970s, except this time the MP3 file provides a state-of-the-art sonic experience compared to the snap, crackle and hiss of the cassette tape.
With all eyes on the upcoming Napster court case, nobody seems to have noticed that the four major record companies, Time-Warner, Sony, BMG and Universal are already running their own trial pay-for-play digital distribution services - thereby "legitimising" the Napster experience, but staying within the copyright laws. "Napster could well become the music industry's best friend" says Bruce Haring, the author of Beyond The Charts: MP3 and The Digital Music Revolution. "The industry spends millions on radio promotion to get people to listen to songs - and Napster already does that."
The music industry will learn sooner or later to work with new technology rather than against it - due to the nature of the Net, it has little choice in the matter. As one of the pro-Napster websites puts it: "Every time a 42-year-old figures how to lock something up, a 14-year-old is going to figure out a new piece of software to unlock it."
Eamonn Shackleton of the Irish Music Rights Association - a body which looks after and protects musicians' copyright - says the Napster debate has placed the music industry in a dilemma: "I'm totally in favour of anything that helps people get access to music and in favour of a democratisation of the whole process, but it's a pity that companies like Napster can't respect and reward the musicians who create the work. I think the industry will have to look at a new form of income stream, so the artists concerned can be rewarded for work of theirs which is being downloaded from the Net."
