| Revision as of 20:35, 15 November 2013 editArdenHathaway (talk | contribs)671 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 20:57, 15 November 2013 edit undoNeilN (talk | contribs)134,455 editsm Reverted 2 edits by ArdenHathaway (talk): Unsourced + POV. using TWNext edit → | ||
| Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
| }} | }} | ||
| '''Napster''' is a name given to two music-focused online services. It was originally founded as a ] Internet |
'''Napster''' is a name given to two music-focused online services. It was originally founded as a pioneering ] Internet service that emphasized sharing audio files, typically music, encoded in ] format. The original company ran into legal difficulties over ], ceased operations and was eventually acquired by ]. In its second incarnation Napster became an ] until it was acquired by ] from ]<ref>{{cite web|last=Sisario |first=Ben |url=http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/10/03/rhapsody-to-acquire-napster-in-deal-with-best-buy/ |title=Rhapsody to Acquire Napster in Deal With Best Buy - NYTimes.com |location=United States |publisher=Mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com |date=2011-10-03 |accessdate=2013-06-13}}</ref> on December 1, 2011. | ||
| Later companies and projects successfully followed its P2P |
Later companies and projects successfully followed its P2P filesharing example such as ], ] and many others. Some services, like ], ] and the original ], were brought down or changed due to similar circumstances. | ||
| ==Origin== | ==Origin== | ||
| Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
| ==History== | ==History== | ||
| Although there were already networks that facilitated the distribution of files across the Internet, such as ], ], and ], Napster specialized in |
Although there were already networks that facilitated the distribution of files across the Internet, such as ], ], and ], Napster specialized in MP3 files of music and a user-friendly interface. At its peak the Napster service had about 80 million registered users.<ref>{{cite web|last=Gowan |first=Michael |url=https://www.pcworld.com/article/100004/article.html |title=Requiem for Napster | TechHive |publisher=Pcworld.com |date=2002-05-17 |accessdate=2013-06-13}}</ref> | ||
| Napster made it relatively easy for music enthusiasts to download copies of songs that were otherwise difficult to obtain, like older songs, unreleased recordings, and songs from concert ]s. Some users felt justified in downloading digital copies of recordings they had already purchased in other formats, like ] and ], before the ] emerged as the dominant format for music recordings. | Napster made it relatively easy for music enthusiasts to download copies of songs that were otherwise difficult to obtain, like older songs, unreleased recordings, and songs from concert ]s. Some users felt justified in downloading digital copies of recordings they had already purchased in other formats, like ] and ], before the ] emerged as the dominant format for music recordings. | ||
| These reasons aside, many other users simply enjoyed |
These reasons aside, many other users simply enjoyed trading and downloading music for free. They created a username and password and were able to make their own compilation albums on ]s, without paying any royalties to the artist/composer or the estate of the artist/composer. High-speed networks in college dormitories became overloaded, with as much as 61% of external network traffic consisting of MP3 file transfers.<ref>{{cite news | last=Fusco | first=Patricia | title=The Napster Nightmare | date=March 13, 2000 | publisher=ISP-Planet | url=http://www.isp-planet.com/politics/napster.html}}</ref> Many colleges blocked its use for this reason,<ref>{{cite news | last=Anderson | first=Kevin | title=Napster expelled by universities | date=September 26, 2000 | publisher=BBC News | url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/942090.stm}}</ref> even before concerns about liability for facilitating copyright violations on campus. | ||
| ===Macintosh version=== | ===Macintosh version=== | ||
| ] | ] | ||
| The |
The service and software program were initially Windows-only, but in 2000 ] wrote a Macintosh client called ]. Macster was later bought by Napster and designated the official Mac Napster client ("Napster for the Mac"), at which point the Macster name was discontinued.<ref></ref> Even before the acquisition of Macster, the Macintosh community had a variety of independently developed Napster clients. Most notable was the ] client called ], released by ] in early 2000 and Rapster, released by Overcaster Family in Brazil.<ref>. Applelinks.com (October 31, 2003). Retrieved on January 29, 2011.</ref> The release of MacStar's source code paved the way for third-party Napster clients across all computing platforms, which gave users advertisement-free music distribution options. | ||
| ===Legal challenges=== | ===Legal challenges=== | ||
| Line 51: | Line 51: | ||
| ] | ] | ||
| Along with the accusations that Napster was hurting the sales of the record industry, there were those who |
Along with the accusations that Napster was hurting the sales of the record industry, there were those who felt just the opposite, that file trading on Napster actually stimulated, rather than hurt, sales. Some evidence may have come in July 2000 when tracks from ] rock band ]'s album '']'' found their way to Napster three months before the CD's release. Unlike Madonna, Dr. Dre or Metallica, Radiohead had never hit the top 20 in the US. Furthermore, ''Kid A'' was an experimental album without any ], and received relatively little radio airplay. By the time of the record's release, the album was estimated to have been downloaded for free by millions of people worldwide, and in October 2000 ''Kid A'' captured the number one spot on the ] sales chart in its debut week. According to Richard Menta of ],<ref>{{cite news | last=Menta | first=Richard | title=Did Napster Take Radiohead's New Album to Number 1? | date=October 28, 2000 | publisher=MP3 Newswire | url=http://www.mp3newswire.net/stories/2000/radiohead.html}}</ref> the effect of Napster in this instance was isolated from other elements that could be credited for driving sales, and the album's unexpected success suggested that Napster was a good promotional tool for music. | ||
| One of the most successful bands to owe its success to Napster was ]. Being an independent band, it had no formal promotion or radio play, yet it was able to tour to cities they had never played and sell out concerts, thanks to the spread of their music on Napster. In July 2007, the band became the first independent band to ever headline ]'s ], selling it out for three consecutive nights. The band members were avid supporters of Napster, promoting it at their shows, playing a Napster show around the time of the Congressional hearings, and attending the hearings themselves. ], the founder of Napster, is a known Dispatch fan. | One of the most successful bands to owe its success to Napster was ]. Being an independent band, it had no formal promotion or radio play, yet it was able to tour to cities they had never played and sell out concerts, thanks to the spread of their music on Napster. In July 2007, the band became the first independent band to ever headline ]'s ], selling it out for three consecutive nights. The band members were avid supporters of Napster, promoting it at their shows, playing a Napster show around the time of the Congressional hearings, and attending the hearings themselves. ], the founder of Napster, is a known Dispatch fan. | ||
| Since 2000, many musical artists, particularly those not signed to major labels and without access to traditional mass media outlets such as radio and television, have said that Napster and successive Internet file-sharing networks have helped get their music heard, spread word of mouth, and may have improved their sales in the long term{{Citation needed|date=September 2007}}. One such musician to publicly defend Napster as a promotional tool for independent artists was ], who became directly involved in the 2000 A&M Records Lawsuit.<ref name="Declaration of D.J. Xealot in Supp. of. Napster">{{cite web |title=Case Nos. C 99-5183 and C 00-0074 MHP (ADR) |url=http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/napster/napster/dec_xeal.pdf |publisher=] |accessdate=February 12, 2009 }}</ref> ] from ] also came out and publicly supported Napster.<ref>{{cite news | title=Rapper Chuck D throws weight behind Napster | date=May 1, 2000 | publisher=Cnet News | url=http://news.cnet.com/2100-1023-239917.html}}</ref> Although some ]ians and ] have expressed support for Napster and the p2p model it popularized, others have criticized the unregulated and extra-legal nature of these networks, and some seek to implement models of Internet promotion in which they can control the distribution of their own music, such as providing free tracks for download or streaming from their official websites, or co-operating with pay services such as ], ] and ]'s ]. | Since 2000, many musical artists, particularly those not signed to major labels and without access to traditional mass media outlets such as radio and television, have said that Napster and successive Internet file-sharing networks have helped get their music heard, spread word of mouth, and may have improved their sales in the long term{{Citation needed|date=September 2007}}. One such musician to publicly defend Napster as a promotional tool for independent artists was ], who became directly involved in the 2000 A&M Records Lawsuit.<ref name="Declaration of D.J. Xealot in Supp. of. Napster">{{cite web |title=Case Nos. C 99-5183 and C 00-0074 MHP (ADR) |url=http://news.findlaw.com/hdocs/docs/napster/napster/dec_xeal.pdf |publisher=] |accessdate=February 12, 2009 }}</ref> ] from ] also came out and publicly supported Napster.<ref>{{cite news | title=Rapper Chuck D throws weight behind Napster | date=May 1, 2000 | publisher=Cnet News | url=http://news.cnet.com/2100-1023-239917.html}}</ref> Although some ]ians and ] have expressed support for Napster and the p2p model it popularized, others have criticized the unregulated and extra-legal nature of these networks, and some seek to implement models of Internet promotion in which they can control the distribution of their own music, such as providing free tracks for download or streaming from their official websites, or co-operating with pay services such as ], ] and ]'s ]. | ||
| History has refuted the theory that file copying on Napster (and its successors) would stimulate overall record sales, as actual sales plummeted by half 1999-2009. | |||
| ===Lawsuit=== | ===Lawsuit=== | ||
Revision as of 20:57, 15 November 2013
This article is about the defunct peer-to-peer service. For the modern service operating as Napster, see Napster (pay service).
| File:Napster corporate logo.svg | |
| Developer(s) | John Fanning, Shawn Fanning and Sean Parker |
|---|---|
| Initial release | 1999 |
| Operating system | Cross-platform |
| Available in | Multilingual |
| Type | Media player |
| Website | www |
Napster is a name given to two music-focused online services. It was originally founded as a pioneering peer-to-peer file sharing Internet service that emphasized sharing audio files, typically music, encoded in MP3 format. The original company ran into legal difficulties over copyright infringement, ceased operations and was eventually acquired by Roxio. In its second incarnation Napster became an online music store until it was acquired by Rhapsody from Best Buy on December 1, 2011.
Later companies and projects successfully followed its P2P filesharing example such as Gnutella, Freenet and many others. Some services, like Grokster, Madster and the original eDonkey network, were brought down or changed due to similar circumstances.
Origin
Napster was co-founded by Shawn Fanning, John Fanning, and Sean Parker. Initially, Napster was envisioned as an independent peer-to-peer file sharing service. The service operated between June 1999 and July 2001. Its technology allowed people to easily share their MP3 files with other participants. Although the original service was shut down by court order, the Napster brand survived after the company's assets were liquidated and purchased by other companies through bankruptcy proceedings.
History
Although there were already networks that facilitated the distribution of files across the Internet, such as IRC, Hotline, and USENET, Napster specialized in MP3 files of music and a user-friendly interface. At its peak the Napster service had about 80 million registered users.
Napster made it relatively easy for music enthusiasts to download copies of songs that were otherwise difficult to obtain, like older songs, unreleased recordings, and songs from concert bootleg recordings. Some users felt justified in downloading digital copies of recordings they had already purchased in other formats, like LP and cassette tape, before the compact disc emerged as the dominant format for music recordings.
These reasons aside, many other users simply enjoyed trading and downloading music for free. They created a username and password and were able to make their own compilation albums on recordable CDs, without paying any royalties to the artist/composer or the estate of the artist/composer. High-speed networks in college dormitories became overloaded, with as much as 61% of external network traffic consisting of MP3 file transfers. Many colleges blocked its use for this reason, even before concerns about liability for facilitating copyright violations on campus.
Macintosh version
The service and software program were initially Windows-only, but in 2000 Black Hole Media wrote a Macintosh client called Macster. Macster was later bought by Napster and designated the official Mac Napster client ("Napster for the Mac"), at which point the Macster name was discontinued. Even before the acquisition of Macster, the Macintosh community had a variety of independently developed Napster clients. Most notable was the open source client called MacStar, released by Squirrel Software in early 2000 and Rapster, released by Overcaster Family in Brazil. The release of MacStar's source code paved the way for third-party Napster clients across all computing platforms, which gave users advertisement-free music distribution options.
Legal challenges
| Peer-to-peer file sharing | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Networks, protocols |
| ||||||
| Comparisons of clients | |||||||
| Hyperlinks | |||||||
| Uses | |||||||
| Concepts |
| ||||||
| Internal technologies | |||||||
Heavy metal band Metallica discovered that a demo of their song "I Disappear" had been circulating across the network even before it was released. This eventually led to the song being played on several radio stations across the United States and brought to Metallica’s attention that their entire back catalogue of studio material was also available. The band responded in 2000 by filing a lawsuit against Napster. A month later, rapper and producer Dr. Dre, who shared a litigator and legal firm with Metallica, filed a similar lawsuit after Napster would not remove his works from their service, even after he issued a written request. Separately, both Metallica and Dr. Dre later delivered thousands of usernames to Napster who they believed were pirating their songs. One year later, Napster settled both suits, but this came after being shut down by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in a separate lawsuit from several major record labels (see below).*Giesler, Markus (2008). "Conflict and Compromise: Drama in Marketplace Evolution". Journal of Consumer Research. 34 (6): 739–753. doi:10.1086/522098.
Also in 2000, Madonna's single "Music" leaked out on to the web and Napster prior to its commercial release, causing widespread media coverage. Verified Napster use peaked with 26.4 million users worldwide in February 2001.
In 2000, the American musical recording company A&M Records along with several other recording companies, through the RIAA, sued Napster (A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc.) on account of contributory and vicarious copyright infringement under the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). Napster was faced with the following allegations from the music industry:
- That its users were directly violating the plaintiffs' copyrights.
- That Napster was responsible for contributory infringement of the plaintiffs' copyrights.
- That Napster was responsible for vicarious infringement of the plaintiffs' copyrights.
Initially Napster lost the case in the District Court but then appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Although it was clear that Napster could potentially have commercially significant non-infringing uses, the Ninth Circuit upheld the District Court's decision. Immediately after, the District Court commanded Napster to keep track of the activities of its network and to restrict access to infringing material when informed of that material's location. Napster wasn't able to comply to this and thus had to close down its service in July 2001. The following year, in 2002, Napster finally announced itself bankrupt and sold its assets to a third party. It had already been offline since the previous year owing to the effect of the court rulings.
Promotional power
Along with the accusations that Napster was hurting the sales of the record industry, there were those who felt just the opposite, that file trading on Napster actually stimulated, rather than hurt, sales. Some evidence may have come in July 2000 when tracks from English rock band Radiohead's album Kid A found their way to Napster three months before the CD's release. Unlike Madonna, Dr. Dre or Metallica, Radiohead had never hit the top 20 in the US. Furthermore, Kid A was an experimental album without any singles, and received relatively little radio airplay. By the time of the record's release, the album was estimated to have been downloaded for free by millions of people worldwide, and in October 2000 Kid A captured the number one spot on the Billboard 200 sales chart in its debut week. According to Richard Menta of MP3 Newswire, the effect of Napster in this instance was isolated from other elements that could be credited for driving sales, and the album's unexpected success suggested that Napster was a good promotional tool for music.
One of the most successful bands to owe its success to Napster was Dispatch. Being an independent band, it had no formal promotion or radio play, yet it was able to tour to cities they had never played and sell out concerts, thanks to the spread of their music on Napster. In July 2007, the band became the first independent band to ever headline New York City's Madison Square Garden, selling it out for three consecutive nights. The band members were avid supporters of Napster, promoting it at their shows, playing a Napster show around the time of the Congressional hearings, and attending the hearings themselves. Shawn Fanning, the founder of Napster, is a known Dispatch fan.
Since 2000, many musical artists, particularly those not signed to major labels and without access to traditional mass media outlets such as radio and television, have said that Napster and successive Internet file-sharing networks have helped get their music heard, spread word of mouth, and may have improved their sales in the long term. One such musician to publicly defend Napster as a promotional tool for independent artists was Dj xealot, who became directly involved in the 2000 A&M Records Lawsuit. Chuck D from Public Enemy also came out and publicly supported Napster. Although some underground musicians and independent labels have expressed support for Napster and the p2p model it popularized, others have criticized the unregulated and extra-legal nature of these networks, and some seek to implement models of Internet promotion in which they can control the distribution of their own music, such as providing free tracks for download or streaming from their official websites, or co-operating with pay services such as Insound, Rhapsody and Apple's iTunes Store.
Lawsuit
Napster's facilitation of transfer of copyrighted material raised the ire of the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), which almost immediately—on December 7, 1999—filed a lawsuit against the popular service. The service would only get bigger as the trial, meant to shut down Napster, also gave it a great deal of publicity. Soon millions of users, many of them college students, flocked to it. After a failed appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court, an injunction was issued on March 5, 2001 ordering Napster to prevent the trading of copyrighted music on its network.
Lessig claimed, however, that this decision made little sense from the perspective of copyright protection: "When Napster told the district court that it had developed a technology to block the transfer of 99.4 percent of identified infringing material, the district court told council for Napster 99.4 percent was not good enough. Napster had to push the infringements 'down to zero.' If 99.4 percent is not good enough," Lessig concluded, "then this is a war on file-sharing technologies, not a war on copyright infringement."
Shutdown
In July 2001, Napster shut down its entire network in order to comply with the injunction. On September 24, 2001, the case was partially settled. Napster agreed to pay music creators and copyright owners a $26 million settlement for past, unauthorized uses of music, as well as an advance against future licensing royalties of $10 million. In order to pay those fees, Napster attempted to convert their free service to a subscription system. Thus traffic to Napster was reduced. A prototype solution was tested in the spring of 2002: the Napster 3.0 Alpha, using the ".nap" secure file format from PlayMedia Systems and audio fingerprinting technology licensed from Relatable. Napster 3.0 was, according to many former Napster employees, ready to deploy, but it had significant trouble obtaining licenses to distribute major-label music.
On May 17, 2002, Napster announced that its assets would be acquired by German media firm Bertelsmann for $85 million. Pursuant to terms of that agreement, on June 3 Napster filed for Chapter 11 protection under United States bankruptcy laws. On September 3, 2002, an American bankruptcy judge blocked the sale to Bertelsmann and forced Napster to liquidate its assets according to Chapter 7 of the U.S. bankruptcy laws.
Current status
Main article: Napster (pay service)After a US$2.43 million takeover offer by the Private Media Group, an adult entertainment company, Napster's brand and logos were acquired at bankruptcy auction by Roxio which used them to rebrand the Pressplay music service as Napster 2.0.
In September 2008, Napster was purchased by US electronics retailer Best Buy for US $121 million.
On December 1, 2011, pursuant to a deal with Best Buy, Napster merged with Rhapsody. Best Buy will receive a minority stake in Rhapsody.
On June 3, 2013, Napster became available in 14 additional countries in Europe; it had already been available in Germany and the United Kingdom.
Media about Napster
There have been several books that document the experiences of people working at Napster, including Joseph Menn's Napster biography, All the Rave: The Rise and Fall of Shawn Fanning's Napster, John Alderman's "Sonic Boom: Napster, MP3, and the New Pioneers of Music," and Steve Knopper's "Appetite for Self Destruction: The Spectacular Crash of the Record Industry in the Digital Age."
The 2010 film The Social Network features Napster co-founder Sean Parker (played by Justin Timberlake) in the rise of the popular website Facebook.
The 2013 film Downloaded is a documentary about sharing media on the Internet and includes the history of Napster.
See also
References
- Sisario, Ben (October 3, 2011). "Rhapsody to Acquire Napster in Deal With Best Buy - NYTimes.com". United States: Mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com. Retrieved June 13, 2013.
- Pollack, Neal. Spotify Is the Coolest Music Service You Can't Use. Wired. December 27, 2010.
- Schonfeld, Erick. Shawn Fanning And Sean Parker Talk About Airtime And “Smashing People Together”. TechCrunch. October 6, 2011.
- Rosen, Ellen. Student's Start-Up Draws Attention and $13 Million. The New York Times. May 26, 2005.
- Bradshaw, Tim. Spotify-MOG battle heats up. Financial Times. February 28, 2010.
- Emerson, Ramona. Sean Parker At Web 2.0 Summit Defends 'Creepy' Facebook. The Huffington Post. October 18, 2011.
- Simon, Dan. Internet pioneer Sean Parker: 'I'm blazing a new path'. CNN. September 27, 2011.
- Menn, Joseph (2003). All the Rave: The Rise and Fall of Shawn Fanning’s Napster. Crown Business. ISBN 0-609-61093-7.
{{cite book}}: Cite has empty unknown parameters:|coauthors=and|month=(help) - Kirkpatrick, David (October 2010). "With a Little Help From His Friends". Vanity Fair. Retrieved July 1, 2011.
- Napster's High and Low Notes – Businessweek – August 14, 2000
- *Giesler, Markus (2006). "Consumer Gift Systems". Journal of Consumer Research. 33 (2): 283–290. doi:10.1086/506309.
- Evangelista, Benny (September 4, 2002). "Napster runs out of lives – judge rules against sale". San Francisco Chronicle. Retrieved October 18, 2011.
- Gowan, Michael (May 17, 2002). "Requiem for Napster | TechHive". Pcworld.com. Retrieved June 13, 2013.
- Fusco, Patricia (March 13, 2000). "The Napster Nightmare". ISP-Planet.
- Anderson, Kevin (September 26, 2000). "Napster expelled by universities". BBC News.
- Official Napster Client For Mac OS, OS X || The Mac Observer
- Eight MP3 Players For The Macintosh. Applelinks.com (October 31, 2003). Retrieved on January 29, 2011.
- Borland, John (June 1, 2000). "Unreleased Madonna Single Slips On To Net". CNET News.com. Archived from the original on June 28, 2012.
- Jupiter Media Metrix (July 20, 2001). Global Napster Usage Plummets, But New File-Sharing Alternatives Gaining Ground. Press Release.
- 17 U.S.C. A&M Records. Inc. v. Napster. Inc. 114 F. Supp. 2d 896 (N. D. Cal. 2000).
- .A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc., 239 F.3d 1004 (9th Cir. 2001). For a summary and analysis, see Guy Douglas, Copyright and Peer-To-Peer Music File Sharing: The Napster Case and the Argument Against Legislative Reform http://www.murdoch.edu.au/elaw/issues/v11n1/douglas111.html
- Menta, Richard (October 28, 2000). "Did Napster Take Radiohead's New Album to Number 1?". MP3 Newswire.
- "Case Nos. C 99-5183 and C 00-0074 MHP (ADR)" (PDF). FindLaw.com. Retrieved February 12, 2009.
- "Rapper Chuck D throws weight behind Napster". Cnet News. May 1, 2000.
- A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc., 114 F. Supp. 2d 896 (N.D. Cal. 2000), aff'd in part, rev'd in part, 239 F.3d 1004 (9th Cir. 2001)
- Menta, Richard (December 9, 1999). "RIAA Sues Music Startup Napster for $20 Billion". MP3 Newswire.
- 2001 US Dist. LEXIS 2186 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 5, 2001), aff’d, 284 F. 3d 1091 (9th Cir. 2002).
- Lessig, Lawrence (2004). Free Culture: The Nature and Future of Creativity. Penguin. pp. 73–74. ISBN 978-0-14-303465-0.
- http://www.theregister.co.uk/2001/07/23/napster_to_ditch_mp3/
- Evangelista, Benny (September 4, 2002). "Napster runs out of lives – judge rules against sale". San Francisco Chronicle.
- "Porno company offers to buy Napster". CNET News.com. September 12, 2002. Archived from the original on June 28, 2012.
- "The Next Chapter: Best Buy To Acquire Napste121 Million". paidContent.org.
- "Today is Napster's last day of existence". CNN. November 30, 2011.
- "Napster Expands Streaming Music in Europe". BLOOMBERG. June 3, 2013.
- "All the Rave: The Rise and Fall of Shawn Fanning's Napster".
- John Alderman (August 8, 2001). Sonic boom: Napster, MP3, and the new pioneers of music. Perseus Pub. ISBN 978-0-7382-0405-5. Retrieved January 29, 2011.
- Napster wounds the giant : Music. The Rocky Mountain News (January 5, 2009). Retrieved on January 29, 2011.
- Kirkpatrick, David. With a Little Help From His Friends. Vanity Fair. October 2010.
Further reading
- Carlsson, Bengt; Gustavsson, Rune (2001). "The Rise and Fall of Napster – An Evolutionary Approach". Proceedings of the 6th International Computer Science Conference on Active Media Technology.
- Giesler, Markus; Pohlmann, Mali (2003). "The Social Form of Napster: Cultivating the Paradox of Consumer Emancipation". Advances in Consumer Research.
- Giesler, Markus; Pohlmann, Mali (2003). "The Anthropology of File Sharing: Consuming Napster as a Gift". Advances in Consumer Research.
- Giesler, Markus (2006). "Consumer Gift Systems". Journal of Consumer Research. 33 (2): 283–290. doi:10.1086/506309.
- Green, Matthew (2002). "Napster Opens Pandora's Box: Examining How File-Sharing Services Threaten the Enforcement of Copyright on the Internet". Ohio State Law Journal. 63: 799.
- InsightExpress. 2000. Napster and its Users Not violating Copyright Infringement Laws, According to a Survey of the Online Community.
- Ku, Raymond Shih Ray (2001). "The Creative Destruction of Copyright: Napster and the New Economics of Digital Technology". University of Chicago Law Review. doi:10.2139/ssrn.266964. SSRN 266964.
- McCourt, Tom; Burkart, Patrick (2003). "When Creators, Corporations and Consumers Collide: Napster and the Development of On-line Music Distribution". Media, Culture, & Society. 25 (3): 333–350. doi:10.1177/0163443703025003003.
- Orbach, Barak (2008). "Indirect Free Riding on the Wheels of Commerce: Dual-Use Technologies and Copyright Liability". Emory Law Journal. 57: 409–461.
- Abramson, Bruce (2005). Digital Phoenix; Why the Information Economy Collapsed and How it Will Rise Again. MIT Press. ISBN 978-0-262-51196-4.
- Judge criticises both parties in Napster case
- "The File Sharing Movement" in Jack Goldsmith and Tim Wu, Who Controls the Internet: Illusions of a Borderless World Oxford University Press, 2006, pp. 105–125. ISBN 978-0-19-515266-1
External links
Template:Digital distribution platforms
Categories:- Companies disestablished in 2001
- Companies established in 1999
- 1999 software
- Companies that have filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2002
- Companies that have filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy
- Defunct digital music services or companies
- File sharing networks
- File sharing programs
- Internet services shut down by a legal challenge
- Mac OS software
- Virtual communities
- Windows software
- Metallica