Slashdot Mirror
Napster, Gnutella, Bans, Lawsuits And More
It's been a busy week for Napster and Gnutella... mbell sent us an MSNBC story on Gnutella which gets a lot of stuff right, but spends more time proclaiming that it's all about kiddie porn to really give the point fair time.
the geek noted a wired bit about a San Diego ISP
banning Napster from their clients: this is because it's a "Server", not because it's controversial software tho, but it's at least nice to know your ISP is watching what you do. The thing that bothers me most is that accounts were threatened even tho they weren't exceeding bandwidth quotas. Seems harsh.
And finally
NeoMage pointed out that the once amazing (face it, Kill 'm All and Master of Puppets are amazing albums) Metallica has become the first 'big name' band to
sue Napster for copyright violations against the artists' music.
this has worked for me everywhere:
ssh to unix host in napster friendly network
tunnel socks thru ssh
tell napster you have socks5 on localhost
you might need to use a DNS server other than your ISP's too.
voila! instant policy subversion.
The suit says students who use Napster "exhibit the moral fiber of common looters."
How much more of a generalization could you make? This is like saying "everyone who owns a crowbar is breaking into someones house every night". There *ARE* people who use Napster for legit reasons. There *IS* a lot of stuff on Napster that you can't FIND anywhere else, because Napster is the only place it's distributed. There are plenty of uses for Napster, trading copyrighted songs is just one of them.
(and before all you yell at me, I *KNOW* the majority of people on Napster use it for "illegit" purposes, but there *ARE* people who don't)
-- Dr. Eldarion --
In a press release announcing the suit, publicists for the band and music companies even threw in a statement from Metallica drummer Lars Ulrich, who said it is "sickening to know that our art is being traded like a commodity rather than the art that it is."
Ahhh, yes the only way to enjoy art is to pay for it. Guess the idea of public art, street preformers, public art houses, and art accessability projects are bunk. Thanks for pointing this out Lars, otherwise I would have never have known that art is to be bought, and not enjoyed.
(mind you: I don't consider Metallica art, and I don't think the piracy of music is right. But making assine statements like Lars did deserive EVERYONES mocking laughter)
If it was said on slashdot, it MUST be true!
You are supposed to be a consumer, a black hole for goods, advertising and content. They only want to allocate enough upstream bandwidth for 10,000,000 buy buttons. Producing or sharing information is a subversive act and will not be tolerated.
Mea navis aericumbens anguillis abundat
Enter Napster -
Snag a file little one
don't forget, my son
to download every one
Download sin, download Fins
Download just for grins
Till the lawsuit comes
Browse with one eye open
Gripping your lawyer tight
Exit light
Enter night
Take my hand
Off to Napster lawsuit land
Something's wrong, I just might
Lose some moolah tonight
'Cause you're downloading sound bites
Dreams of power, dreams of ire
Dreams of songs on a wire
And of our Grammies past
Sleep with one eye open
Gripping your 'rm *' tight
Exit light
Enter night
Take my hand
Off to Napster lawsuit land
Now I lay me down to sleep
Pray the Lord my songs to keep
If they're downloaded before I wake
Pray the Lord my cut to take
Hush little Napster, don't send a byte
And don't issue a disk write
If you can kill with a hand saw
Then shouldn't they be against the law
Exit light
Enter night
Old hair-band
Exit light
Enter night
Freedom banned
We're off to Napster lawsuit land
Ahhh, yes the only way to enjoy art is to pay for it. Guess the idea of public art, street preformers, public art houses, and art accessability projects are bunk. Thanks for pointing this out Lars, otherwise I would have never have known that art is to be bought, and not enjoyed
Excellent point. Till now, performing art has enjoyed the special distinction of being an unending source of revenue for the artist, or at least, the artist's contract-holders. While non-performing artists have generally been rewarded with lump-sum payments for their work from collectors, museums, etc, deriving only a small part of their income from licensing of prints, photographic reproductions and so on.
I don't see that the fine arts world is any the worse for this, and we certainly don't seem to be short of artists. Should we now admit that what is happening is a fundamental, unstoppable, change in the way the business of music is done?
As a musician myself, I don't see that these changes are bad. What is really being torn down is the system of manufacturing stars - entirely a creation of the music industry. If there is an endless supply of bands just as talented as metallica, and believe me, there is, then what you'll see is the recording industry no longer being able to control the vast bulk of the supply of music by limiting the number of newly minted stars. What's going to happen? Obviously, once the chokehold on supply is broken, prices will fall. That's exactly what's happening, although in all the confusion, it's sometimes hard to see that.
What we're really seeing here is the beginning of a real flowering of art for art's sake, in much the same way as the current exponential growth of code hacking for code hacking's sake. It's not necessary to drive a Benz to be a functioning member of society as a musician. There are still many ways to be paid for the work, and to be paid well for great work, but one of them - the one that supports the recording industry's monopoly on talent and supply - is coming to an end.
--
Life's a bitch but somebody's gotta do it.