Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Napster Usage Quadruples

Posted by CmdrTaco on from the proving-a-point dept.

tewl noted a CNN story that says that Napster's usage has quadrupled... it stands among the fastest growing software apps ever. And since the record industry sold more CDs then ever last year, that of course proves what all these lawsuits are about *cough*.

8 of 196 comments (clear)

  1. Most MP3 files on Napster are tape quality. by yerricde · · Score: 4

    As I understand it, the main reason Napster is considered different is the fact that MP3s are (for all intents and purposes) lossless, CD-quality recordings of digital music.

    MP3 begins to approach CD quality only at 192 Kbps VBR with LAME or Fraunhofer (the best encoders AFAIK). But most of the files on Napster are 128 Kbit, which screams "tape" to my ears.

    If you tape a CD, then the tape is invariably lower quality, acoustically, than the original.

    If you encode a CD at 128 Kbit (especially with a bad encoder like Xing but there are lots of bad tape decks too), then the MP3 is invariably lower quality, acoustically, than the original.


    <O
    ( \
    XGNOME vs. KDE: the game!
    --
    Will I retire or break 10K?
  2. Re:*cough* by RickHunter · · Score: 3

    Its a tool not a torture device for RIAA goons.

    Awww.... Then why have I been supporting it? ;-)

    Seriously, the point that Napster is just a tool needs to be brought up repeatedly in this court case. After all, that's all the service is. If some Napster execs were encouraging people to illegally copy music, charge them. If some Napster users were illegally copying music outside of the bounds of fair use trading, charge them. (Although I'm sure the record industry will conveniently forget about the fair use aspect and just charge everyone)

    Napster can be used to legally or illegally exchange music. It can be used to promote individual artists or torture RIAA goons. Oh, wait. Those last two are synonomous. Oh, well. :-P


    -RickHunter
  3. Not really... by Floyd+Tante · · Score: 4

    And since the record industry sold more CDs
    then ever last year, that of course proves what all these lawsuits are about *cough*.

    The amount of CD's they have sold proves nothing. The only way to determine whether or not napster had an adverse efect would be to have an alternate universe in which Napster did not exist, measure CD sales there, and then compare it to our world. In absence of that, there is no rational reason to believe that Napster has caused CD sales to rise (by the same token, there is no reason to believe in the converse of that statement either).

    While I think that Napster presents a great leap in freedom for computer users, akin to the signifigance of Open Source, it is far too early to declare any sort of victory.


    -- Floyd

    --
    -- Floyd
    1. Re:Not really... by hey! · · Score: 5

      I was one of the people who was motiviated by the law suit to try out Napster. Being a middle aged fogey not plugged into the campus scene, I'd never heard of it until it started making legal headlines.

      I was completely floored by how easy to use and convenient it was.

      I suppose there's no way to know scientifically how Napster affects CD sales, but common sense suggests that it will help them at first but eventually hinder them as home networking and audio technology advances. Right now, I don't want to be bothered lugging my laptop to my stereo and plugging it in, and the limited storage of portable MP3 players makes the CD medium more convenient. BUT -- if I had an MP3 player on my stereo that was connected by wireless network to my computer I'd gladly never buy another CD again.

      The process of playback right now is inconvenient right now, but the process of selection is way more convenient with Napster than going to the record store, whose selection in my tastes is usually limited. It's silly these days for selection to be limited by the physical carrier of the information. I think it would be cool if I could go to a record store and have them custom burn CDs for me! That could be a interesting business plan for Napster -- provide distributed MP3 sharing for record stores, with royalties goint to the distributors of course.

      Right now, I haven't decided on the morality of the Napster service, so I haven't used it that much. When I was trying it out I used it to download stuff by long dead artists who were screwed by their labels to begin with, and things which were just not available through the normal distribution mechanism. It seems like the copyright system really protects the distributors of music rather than the artists, which tends to make me think, "screw 'em". However, I would be happier if I knew the artists were copacetic with my using their music that way.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    2. Re:Not really... by Lonesmurf · · Score: 3

      Or perhaps, when Napster gets pulled, and within that month or so in which all the clueless internet users fumble about trying to find a suitable replacement, the RIAA finds that CD and music sales dramatically plummet. I would say that this would be pretty conclusive evidence that the use of Napster is directly tied to the amount of CDs that are bought. That or millions of users go on a 'CD strike' and refuse to buy CDs based on the fact that the RIAA is a bullying monster.. but that will happen about the same time that pigs fly. The general populace doesn't seem to be smart enough to employ a boycott on it's own.

      Too bad, that.

      Rami
      --

      --

      rJames.org - illustration
  4. ...note to self... by Tony+Shepps · · Score: 4

    (...note to self... invest in stock of hard drive manufacturers.)
    --

  5. Re:Prove What? by ZanshinWedge · · Score: 5

    Almost all of the core of Intellectual Property law concerns profit (and not some concept of "infringement" of rights), if there is no financial damage to the copyright owner and no financial gain to the "copyright violater", then it becomes something very much different (and something much harder to stop through legal action). Additionally, in this case, if there is no loss of profit for the artists or record labels, then the claim that Napster represents "fair use" is strengthened a bit.

  6. Fantastic Advertising by grahamsz · · Score: 3

    It just proves that the RIAA have dont a phenomenal amount for napsters business.

    Just like gnutella would have probably quietly disappeared into the woodwork, when AOL pulled it off the site they catapulted it into the limelight.

    How many other software packages besides napster and windows 95 have actually made it into the mainstream press. There aren't many.

    Sadly what the RIAA dont realise is whilst they may well stop napster the product, they will almost certainly never stop the thinking behind it and the desire to trade in mp3s.

    Sadly for them, napster was probably their best chance at controlling it.