Slashdot Mirror
Napster Clawing Back
D Anderson n'Swaart writes: "As the BBC reports in this article, Napster is set to return shortly, as a subscription-based sharing service, a concept facing a less-than-rosy future. The report gives a brief history of Napster, and the current state of the various lawsuits that were brought against it. The briefs: Napster is going to have to fork over a total of around $36M USD, $10M of which is downpayment on future royalties." And whatAnotherAolUser writes that the company "agreed to pay $26 million to settle a copyright lawsuit with songwriters and music publishers, and to make royalty payments to the writers and publishers once it started a fee-based service." Guess it depends where you start counting.
producing the Pacer again
Thanks to file sharing, I purchase more CDs
Thanks to the RIAA, I buy them used...
So let's get this straight. In return for the money you pay to Napster, they're going to give you a catalogue of mp3s you can download, right...?
Nope, they're still going to let USERS, paying for the system provide the actual files - so the users will be providing the service. Napster will just be getting lots of money (at least that's what they want) for being a middle man.
Can anyone say 'pimp'?
How wonderful. So if they ever shut down enough of the good online file sharing systems, making life less convienent for the rest of us, you'll just go back to slicing the anti-theft tags of CDs at your local record store.
by burning their office buildings to the ground.....oops, i forgot it's not cool to say that anymore with all the terrorist shit that happened. okay, how about spray their buildings with liquid nitrogen?
Because it's legal.
It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
From the BBC article:
Under the NMPA settlement proposal, Napster would pay $26m for all previous unauthorised music that has been swapped using its software, as well as a further $10m in down payment on future royalties.
Does this mean that Napster has just agreed to pay the royalties on all the songs I've downloaded? Gee, thanks! What a swell bunch of guys!
You're using her as bait, Master!
...IF I had some kind of guarantee that there will be songs available. If Napster provided the songs to download, that'd be one thing. Relying on the selflessness of others, however, is not a winning service.
"The question of whether a computer can think is no more interesting than that of whether a submarine can swim" -EWD
No, you're not missing anything, but poor Beethoven hasn't seen one dime since Napster wrecked the late 18th-century music market. For how many more centuries will we allow his music to be just given away?
Robotiq.com is heavily tested on animals
And how is this a problem, exactly?
I don't care if it's 90,000 hectares. That lake was not my doing.
Possibly user-added ratings of some kind...? User commentary, something that would create a real community around the music. Or, some kind of mechanism for recommending music that you would like. For example, I like a particular style of Irish music. If Napster could come up with a way of RECOMMENDING music to me based on one particular song or set of songs, or perhaps based on the fact that I share certain likes with other people, that would be a worthwhile service. Then napster wouldn't be a file-sharing system... it would be a file-recommendation system... and with millions of files out there, a recommendation system would be worth its weight in gold. Its value would increase with every additional person in the system, too...
Possibly RIAA-added ratings of some kind. RIAA commentary, something that would create a fake community around the music. Or some kind of mechanism for recommending the music that the RIAA would like you to buy and upload. For example, I like this particular profitable music. If Napster could come up with a way of FORCING music on me based on one particular database or set of demographics, or perhaps based on surveillance of me and other people, that would be a profitable service. Then napster wouldn't be a file-sharing system... it would be a music-marketing system... and with millions of user-provided files out there, a marketing system worth its weight in gold. Its value would increase with every additional prisioner of the system too.
Those who would give up liberty in exchange for security and DRM should switch to Microsoft Palladium!
Don't you mean a lot of awful music?
It's pining for the fjords!
-- Veni, vidi, dormivi
Dude, I love it.
it is (almost) a freak of nature that people should have fallen so hard for the marketing scheme of Britney/christina et al. But in a way its great that they did. All these fucking idiots run out and buy Britney albums, Christina albums, Jewel albums, JEWEL POETRY BOOKS, and other crap, not because they really enjoy the music, but because they want to BONE these HOT BITCHES and on some unconscious level they feel that buying said product will bring them closer to that goal.
If these idiots had any sense at all, they'd realize they can get the same amount of MASTURBATION MATERIAL for FREE by flipping on MTV or BS1. But then, if they didn't buy all that crap those videos wouldn't be on MTV for everyone to enjoy. So it all works out. Welp, I'm gonna go stroke to that slutty moulin rouge video. Slaters.