I love napster, it's a great tool for finding hard-to-find music and for trying out new bands.
However, artists do need compensation. Using metallica and dr. dre were a poor choice by the industry to campaign against napster. I can see why they did it - because those bands are widely known and visible - but as we've all seen, lars ulrich admitted in an interview that he'd never even been *ON* napster before. They are also hugely rich and don't suffer much from downloaded MP3's. However, smaller artists *are* hurt by it. Artists such as MDFMK and other lesser known bands.
Napster truly does hurt them financially..BUT it also has the potential to help them by increasing their audience. This is why a small fee ($5-$10 a month) would be ideal for napster.
Don't think it hurts small bands financially? A friend of mine gave me Richard Cheese CD for xmas, and said "I don't know why you wanted this, this is the kind of band that I would just download..."
Slashdot Mirror
However, artists do need compensation. Using metallica and dr. dre were a poor choice by the industry to campaign against napster. I can see why they did it - because those bands are widely known and visible - but as we've all seen, lars ulrich admitted in an interview that he'd never even been *ON* napster before. They are also hugely rich and don't suffer much from downloaded MP3's. However, smaller artists *are* hurt by it. Artists such as MDFMK and other lesser known bands.
Napster truly does hurt them financially..BUT it also has the potential to help them by increasing their audience. This is why a small fee ($5-$10 a month) would be ideal for napster.
Don't think it hurts small bands financially? A friend of mine gave me Richard Cheese CD for xmas, and said "I don't know why you wanted this, this is the kind of band that I would just download..."