From the publics point of view we think Napster should be able to offer a service to the public that lets us copy music for free. Unlike mp3.com, Napster doesnt profit from offering this service to the public. In mp3.coms case, by making us pay a fee mp3.com in return should also pay a fee to the licensed owner of the music. We feel that this would be fair to us and to the record companies. The record companies should also receive a share of the profits. If Internet companies are profiting from the music then the owners of the music and the bands should also profit too. The bands should get royalty checks from the record companies based on the percentage of the fees and how many times their music has been downloaded. The record companies are being denied their share of the profits from this new music phenomenon. Just because something is on the Internet doesnt justify ignoring the rules and regulations that a land based company have to follow.
This idea of offering free music to the public by a click of a mouse goes against every thing that the United States represents. If it werent for copyrights there would be no chances for the average person to receive the credit that he/she deserves. People would be stealing one anothers work and the more powerful would be credited for the idea. The record companies should have sole power and say on where the music is to be sold and how much it should cost. We propose to help and support these Internet companies to convert their sites to an online music store and then they could sell our music for an agreed price. This way everyone is profiting from this new age technology.
The Research paper on Digital Music Companies Distribution Artists
... an artist like Madonna simply by releasing music on the Internet.' A large portion of existing record companies' resources are dedicated to the manufacture ... this is not a matter of big business skimming profits or homogenizing public taste. This is marketing and promotion that adds value ...
Looking at this from the viewpoint of struggling musicians we feel that all of this free exposure is a blessing. If the public doesnt here our music then the record companies dont sign us. We can upload our music to Napster and now the whole world has our music available from a click of a mouse. This kind of exposure can not be bought. Why would someone buy our CD for fifteen dollars if they never herd of us? If they could download our song for free what would stop them. Then if they like it the word is passed on and now record companies are knocking at our door trying to have us sign a contract. We feel that Napster should be allowed to carry on with their service.
Napster feels that we are letting the real music fans express themselves by using our service. We are only a service that allows people to connect to others by using our wed page. By downloading their favorite bands and artists we allow music fans to communicate with other fans so music can be shared by everyone. The internet is about freedom to express ones believes and ideas. If services like ours are regulated this is the start of only more regulations to be put on the Internet. This will control free speech and the freedom to search online.
We propose no new ideas on how we will operate. We are going to fight for the freedom to keep Napster open. Like Napster mp3.com is offering a service to the public that allows them to download music from our web site. Unlike Napster mp3.com charges a fee to our customers and has advertisement that gives links to other web sites. This fee is minimal compared to the outrageous prices that are currently charged for a CD. The advertising is where we make out profits. We are willing to work with the record companies to pay a royalty for the use of their music.
We hope that this problem can be solved so that music can be offered to the public in cheaper ways.
