The Napster Software: And The World’s Reaction to its First Widespread Peer to Peer Sharing ArchitectureNapster: From Where Did it Come?Napster: How it WorksThe DecisionWho Are the Stakeholders?HistorySlide 7Slide 8Copyright Law in the USPrevious Copyright Cases:Napster’s Peer-to-Peer file sharingAccusation Against NapsterDefense of Napster:Defense Against “Contributory Infringement”Defense Against “Vicarious Infringement”Additional DefenseAdditional Defense...The Other Side:MP3 Files Offered on NapsterCopyright LawRIAA’s ArgumentRIAA’s Argument cont...Slide 23RIAA’s Summary of AllegationsNapster and Music SalesRIAA vs NapsterRecord SalesNapster hurts CD sales (?) Napster increased music sales:Record Companies for NapsterNapster’s DefenseArtists For NapsterSlide 33Artists Against NapsterSlide 35Arguments of Napster UsersInternational Music CommunityService ProvidersCases:Summary of the Effects on StakeholdersConclusionsThe FutureReferences:The Napster Software:The Napster Software:And The World’s Reaction to its First WidespreadAnd The World’s Reaction to its First WidespreadPeer to Peer Sharing ArchitecturePeer to Peer Sharing ArchitectureCSE190/Spring 2002CSE190/Spring 2002Mostafa AziziMostafa AziziDevin Lee DrewDevin Lee DrewDaniel IssakharianDaniel IssakharianFelip Nelson UlipFelip Nelson UlipNapster: From Where Did it Come?Napster: From Where Did it Come?Though MP3 encoding available, it was difficult to find publicly distributed music on the internet. Small sites hosting public music would become uselessly slow once widely discovered.Peer to peer file sharing with a centralized server indexing user shared files surmounted these problems.Napster: How it WorksNapster: How it WorksThe DecisionThe DecisionThe architecture of the Napster software did not address copy protection in any way. –By design, Napster simply facilitated the sharing of mp3 encoded music and the discussion thereof.–This design propelled the eventual userbase of 30+ million.Who Are the Stakeholders?Who Are the Stakeholders?The driving force:–Joe computer-owning publicThose who responded to demand:–Shawn Fanning et al , creators and capital behind NapsterThe status quo dinosaur health care system:–RIAA, legal team, lobby teamThe creative foundation:–Makers of musicThe technical mortar:–Providers of Internet servicesHistoryHistory1877 -The first recording of a human voice~1960 -Personal tape recorders reach reasonable price~1970 -Predecessors of the Internet1972 -Copyright law extends protection to sound recordings1977 -PCs get (relatively) easy~1985 -2400baud modems, AOL, Microsoft goes public1990 -first World Wide Web browser1992 -MPEG-1 (MP3 superset) standard introduced1998 -DMCA becomes lawHistoryHistoryLate 90’s -A high school grad can easily afford a new computerMay 99 -Fanning et al create NapsterDec 99 -RIAA sues Napster just in time for ChristmasJuly 00 -District judge issues injunction which would shut down Napster service while case in progressJuly 00 -9th US court of Appeals (SF, CA) stays injunctionOct 00 -Bertelsmann initiates collaboration to make the next versionFeb 01 -9th rules district court injunction was overboardHistoryHistoryJuly 01 -District court revises injunctionFeb 02 -”Dead Napster Gets Deader” 9th upholds injunctionMay 15 -Sale falls through, employees offered unpayed vacationMay 17 -Bertelsmann buys NapsterCopyright Law in the USCopyright Law in the USPromotes progress of science and artsProtects all original works of authorship that last for the life of the author plus 50 yearsPrevious Copyright Cases:Previous Copyright Cases:Betamax case–Reject entertainment industry’s effort to keep the VCR off the market.–Supreme Court said: “Copyright is first and foremost about promoting progress in the arts and sciences. Monetary rewards are secondary.”–Napster believes this is the case with their peer-to-peer file sharing.Napster’s Peer-to-Peer file sharingNapster’s Peer-to-Peer file sharingNapster user A & B find each other using a directory maintained by Napster.User A copies digital music of user B.File is transferred over the Internet and NOT through Napster’s servers.Accusation Against NapsterAccusation Against NapsterContributory infringement–contributing to the direct copyright infringement of its consumer-users Vicarious infringement–profiting from infringing activity under its controlDefense of Napster:Defense of Napster:“staple article of commerce” doctrine–provider of technology is NOT liable if technology is capable of significant non-infringing use–VCR can be used both for copyright infringement and for legal non-infringing usesDefense Against Defense Against “Contributory Infringement”“Contributory Infringement”Capable of significant non-infringing uses–Distribution of songs for independent record labels–Introducing new artists–Free authorized distribution of songs–Sampling and “space shifting”Defense Against Defense Against “Vicarious Infringement”“Vicarious Infringement”There is liability if Napster has both:–(1) Ability to supervise activity of its users–(2) Direct financial interest in infringing activities• However, there is no way for Napster to distinguish between legal or illegal copying.Additional DefenseAdditional DefenseNapster users may have “fair use” defense to copyright infringement:–Most consumer copying is not for commercial purposes–Instead, most are for sampling or space shifting, which are “fair use”Additional Defense...Additional Defense...Audio Home Recording Act (AHRA)–Consumers have right to create and transfer music for non-commercial purposesNapster users typically share files for free–Copying is arguably for “non-commercial” purposesNapster users are therefore not direct infringersThe Other Side:The Other Side:RIAA sued Napster–Napster’s service enables piracy of music.–Millions of users may be logged onto Napster trading millions of pirated recordings.MP3 Files Offered on NapsterMP3 Files Offered on NapsterMajority are infringing–Court found that Napster knew, and even encouraged it.•Napster is enabling illegal copying.Copyright LawCopyright LawContributing to infringing activity is a copyright violation.Knowledge of infringing activity is a