Napster Good or Bad?

I wanna start some usefull () discussion about a couple things that are bothering me
And one of those "problems" is napster
Should it be allowed or not?
Is it fair towards the musicmakers>?
Do they actually miss income due to napstar and if they do is it really that much??

I don't think so
Or to Quote one of my favorite music makers Dave Grohl

"I think it's a good idea because it's people trading music. It has nothing to do with industry or finance, it's just people that want music and there's nothing wrong with that. It's the same as someone turning on the f****** radio, it's the same as someone putting a cassette in a cassette deck when the BBC plays a special radio session. I don't think it's a crime, it's been going on for years. It's the same as people making tapes for each other. The industry is more threatened by it because it's the worldwide web and it's a broader scope of trading, but I don't think it's such a f******* horrible thing. The first thing we should do is get all the f****** millionaires to shut their mouths, stop bitching about the 25 cents a time they're losing."

------------------

[adam warlock]

I think it's good because it gives me a chance to search for the songs that was evading me for years. When I find it, I go purchase the CDs.

------------------

[Black Knight]

Ringing in with my two cents . . . I think it is good and bad. I think the performers are getting screwed out of their money. You wouldn't expect a Doctor or a Lawyer or a Plumber or a Banker to give their services for free, but it is ok for Musicians to have to do it? On the other hand, if I am surfing Napster and find a couple of songs I like from the same group, maybe I'll buy their CD. And it is free advertising for the artists, too. And If I really enjoy them, I will go see them in concert/buy shirts/posters, etc. So they might be loosing money in the short term, gaining in the long term. So I'm very mixed on this issue. But that is my 2 cents.

BK

------------------

The Black Storm Cloud of the Night
Consort to a Queen
Champion of Truth, Justice and Cloudy's Way
Captain of the Knights of the Golden Dragons
Heart, Mind, and Soul
Offical Wizard and Warrior Questioner

[slackerboy]

i havent used it in a while since i have all the songs i could ever hope to listen to. but i believe it is a great thing.

------------------

[Yorick]

Originally posted by Rikard: Or to Quote one of my favorite music makers Dave Grohl quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "I think it's a good idea because it's people trading music. It has nothing to do with industry or finance, it's just people that want music and there's nothing wrong with that. It's the same as someone turning on the f****** radio, it's the same as someone putting a cassette in a cassette deck when the BBC plays a special radio session. I don't think it's a crime, it's been going on for years. It's the same as people making tapes for each other. The industry is more threatened by it because it's the worldwide web and it's a broader scope of trading, but I don't think it's such a f******* horrible thing. The first thing we should do is get all the f****** millionaires to shut their mouths, stop bitching about the 25 cents a time they're losing."

Interesting. Dave Grohl is a millionaire, he's bitching and he shouldn't open his mouth. (Unless he's singing)
It's fine for him. He's made his money. Let's hear what Anastasia said about it. Her first record lost hoards of sales through Napster. Sales=exposure/hype=career. Lucky she's still got one.

I still say it's up to the individual artist and whether they willingly allow music sharing. Taking something that is for sale and not meant to be free is, by definition theft. Of course we all want to get free stuff.

Grohls referral to tapes is horse----. That was considered theft in it's time as well (Though hardly enforcable). Some artists wondered why their own record companies made BLANK cassettes at all. I mean what did they think was going to be recorded on them? Anyhow there was a loss of quality with cassettes so it wasn't really an issue.

The radio is a means of PROMOTING music. You don't always get to hear the songs you want when you turn on the radio (some would say not at all ). If folks liked what they heard on the radio enough, they would buy it.

From Mr. Grohls lucid and illuminating posturing I think we can now take it that grabbing Foofighters Music is not Piracy. However from the lawsuit I suppose grabbing Mettalica's is.

------------------
O.K..... what do I do now?


A fair dinkum laughing Hyena!

[This message has been edited by Yorick (edited 04-09-2001).]

Originally posted by Yorick: Interesting. Dave Grohl is a millionaire, he's bitching and he shouldn't open his mouth. (Unless he's singing) It's fine for him. He's made his money. Let's hear what Anastasia said about it. Her first record lost hoards of sales through Napster. Sales=exposure/hype=career. Lucky she's still got one. I still say it's up to the individual artist and whether they willingly allow music sharing. Taking something that is for sale and not meant to be free is, by definition theft. Of course we all want to get free stuff. Grohls referral to tapes is horse----. That was considered theft in it's time as well (Though hardly enforcable). Some artists wondered why their own record companies made BLANK cassettes at all. I mean what did they think was going to be recorded on them? Anyhow there was a loss of quality with cassettes so it wasn't really an issue. The radio is a means of PROMOTING music. You don't always get to hear the songs you want when you turn on the radio (some would say not at all ). If folks liked what they heard on the radio enough, they would buy it. From Mr. Grohls lucid and illuminating posturing I think we can now take it that grabbing Foofighters Music is not Piracy. However from the lawsuit I suppose grabbing Mettalica's is.

Well for young artist
It's a nice way to get yourself known so it is promotion
And normally people download one or two songs and if they like it they buy the cd
Limp Bizkit record sells actually raised due to Napster
The real threat to the music industry is the CD writers and rewriters
That's my humble opinion

------------------

[Moridin]

I have to agree with Yorick. I think it should be up to the individuals/groups if they want their music traded freely or not.

A group or individual that is depending on the income generated from album sales is definately hurt from file sharing on Napster, however like BK said this could be a blessing in disguise as it may actually boost albums sales through 'free' promotions. I personally have bought entire albums b/c of individual songs that I have downloaded from Napster.

This is really an issue for the musicians and record companies. If Napster exists, of course I will take advantage of it. If it is legally shut-down or starts charging a fee for usage, then I will abide by that. For me, it is not a big deal one way or the other, for musicians and record companies it is!

------------------

It is better to keep your mouth shut and appear ignorant,
than open it and remove all doubt!

[Accord]

Never used it before, probably never will use it.

------------------
Long live H22A1!!!!!

[MILAMBER]

On Napster:

I love it! I am a musician and I am a firm believer that music is for everyone. I think it is meant to be shared. I like napster not because it is free, but because it is convenient. I wouldn't mind paying a monthly service fee for the ability to use napster. I have about 35 gigs of music right now. Much of it is my own that I ripped, but a lot of it is from Napster as well. I don't think the record companies are hurting from Napster, but if they can't see their way to stop bitching about it, don't close it down, let us pay you to use it. I easily spend $15-30 a month on cd's so I will just give it in form of a monthly payment instead of going and buying a cd. Whatever works for them is fine by me.

------------------
Tremble and despair, for I am power! All here are now judged, and are found wanting.

[Staralfur]

Napster is a great idea - it gives people a chance to find rare tracks that cannot be bought (or are collectors items, so cost a huge amount), or live tracks. Also, as everyone has said you can test music that, otherwise, you might not get to listen to. However, people don't just use it for that, and use it to obtain all their new music - which is the problem.

Personally I like to buy CDS (even though I think they're overpriced), because I like to have the proper case, booklet etc... .Also people should get payed for the music they make, (even if the rich ones have been slightly hypocritical about this whole thing), but I don't see why some bloke in an executives office should get money for music they've never heard or had input into. Isn't this why the record industry is trying to stop it; it's not the artists that will loose out in the long run, it's the record companies. If you have an mp3 all you need are the rights to listen to it legally - why couldn't these be bought amost straight from the artist. I'm sure more people would be happy to do this, as it would certainly be cheaper. You may not get the 'whole product', but not everyone wants to have another CD to clutter up their house.

I should also mention I have a few mp3s - Some of them are rare/live tracks that I had no other way to obtain other than downloading. The others aren't so hard to find, but most of them I fully intend to buy when I can afford it, (except 'I am the one and only' by Chesney Hawks).

Napster isn't ideal, but it is a fantastic idea, and it is a bad thing if it is lost.
I think the most ironic thing about all this is that the music industry will start to use something like napster to distribute music in the future. The difference is, they will be able to start charging even more for music than they do now.