Radio Waves

By Steve Sullivan

The year 2000 is upon us, and with that has brought a revolution in the music industry, Napster. The ultimate tool for music lovers to find new music. Over 20 million people have downloaded Napster's software with which users can share MP3 files. Within a matter of seconds while online with Napster you can search almost anything, and download it free. These MP3 files have CD quality sound and can be burned on to recordable CD's.

With the technology has brought much controversy in the music business. Is it right or is it wrong?? Recording artists such as Metallica, Dr. Dre are all against Napster, and feel that their fans should pay to own their music. They have sued the music sharing software-company for copyright infringements. Metallica and Dr. Dre feel that their fans should pay to own copies of their music, and that the music sharing software Napster is a form of piracy. After it's all said and done who is the winner?? Metallica or the fans??

Personally, looking at the whole situation I feel that Metallica and Dr. Dre have more to win than lose when suing Napster. As a fan of Metallica, I've lost a lot of respect. I get the feeling that they aren't in the music business anymore to make good music, but instead to make money. It should've never been about the money -it should be about the music and the fans. If you make good music, the money will follow. Let your fans share your music, and all you're going to do is make them happy. Bands like Eve6, Limp Bizkit, Hole, Motley Crue, Smashing Pumpkins, The Offspring, Kittie and Public Enemy have all been supporters of Napster. Courtney Love of Hole brought up a great point when she said, "I'd rather have 100 million people hear my songs than 1 million. It's not about the money." Once bands start to make it not about the music, but about the money, the music suffers.

So when I ask myself the question, is Napster all right, I find myself somewhere in between. I think for all the hard work our favorite artists put into their music, they should be getting something in return. On the other hand, it's not easy for your average music lover to buy every album they want, and at the same time pay some outrageous price to see their favorite act live. The music industry is thriving right now with or without Napster.

Chuck D from Public Enemy stated "Companies like Napster are creating new fan interest in the acquisition of music, as well as establishing an infrastructure that previously was non-existent for unknown artists. This is a prime opportunity for artists to understand that they can operate beyond the naðve slave or limited employment positions of the old music business templates." With Napster, it's easy to sample new music. Just point and click. No need to listen to the radio for hours, or buy an album for just one song. So if you like what you hear, you'll go buy the album. If not, you're just happy you downloaded it first. Metallica and Dr. Dre consider this piracy though. For years music lovers have been able to make copies of their favorite music with cassettes, now it's just digital and easier. Even if Napster is shut down forever, something else is going to come along, and people will go along with the technology. Billy Corgan of The Smashing Pumpkins also brought up a good point. "The thing is, you can go after them (Napster) and stop them, but how are you going to stop...it's like put out one fire over here, there's a thousand fires. Music is ultimately going to be free." Very true...how much do we pay to be able to listen to the radio??

It may sound like I'm totally for Napster. I'm not, and I feel guilty using it. I feel pretty strongly that the bands and acts we love worked hard to put out the music they made, and they deserve to be paid for it. I want the bands I enjoy to be able to make a living of their music, so they make more music. That's how they make a living -some better than others. It would be a lot different if you couldn't burn to a compact disc what you downloaded. That way you can take your music anywhere. As of right now, if it wasn't for the CD burners on computers you'd only be able to listen to your MP3's via your computer. You wouldn't be able to take them in your car, the beach or anywhere else. If that were the case, I'd really see no problem with Napster. It would be almost harmless. You'd download a song that you enjoyed, then you'd just itch to own it on compact disc. Maybe that would make you more likely to purchase that album, in turn increasing record sales.

Instead of getting rid of Napster as a whole, and ruining it for everybody, I'd really like to see the bands decide themselves if they'd like to have their MP3's online. If Metallica and Dr. Dre don't want their fans to be able to own their music via MP3, fine. Don't let their fans download their music. With or without Napster, Metallica or Dr. Dre fans will find new ways to sample their music. It's part of the business. As for acts like Limp Bizkit, Public Enemy, The Offspring among others, they'll keep their fans and themselves happy because their music will be available via Napster. It's the best solution because everybody's happy. Let's not ruin a good thing. I'd love to see Napster stay with either the bands getting some kind of profit from off it or the choice to have their music online or not. I want to be able to pay for my music. The internet revolution is here, and it's not time to stop it, but to grow with it.