What was the lawsuit against Napster about?
Metallica alleged that Napster was guilty of copyright infringement and racketeering, as defined by the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.
Why did Metallica sue Napster?
On July 11, 2000, Metallica drummer Lars Ulrich read testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee accusing Napster of copyright infringement. He explained that, that year, Metallica discovered that a demo of " I Disappear ", a song set to be released with the Mission: Impossible II soundtrack, was being played on the radio.
What happened to Napster music copyright?
Napster loses net music copyright case. A federal judge in San Francisco yesterday ordered Napster, the internet service that allows the trading of MP3 sound files by linking personal computers, to stop permitting the exchange of copyrighted music owned by major music labels.
Did RIAA sue Napster for $20 billion?
"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.
See more
What Two artists sued Napster in the year 2000?
Ultimately, Napster settled their lawsuits with Metallica and Dr. Dre in July 2001. "I think we've resolved this in a way that works for fans, recording artists, and songwriters alike,” Lars would tell Billboard.
Who Sued with Napster?
MetallicaOn July 12, 2001 Napster reached a settlement with Metallica and Dr. Dre after Bertelsmann AG BMG became interested in purchasing the rights to Napster for $94 million. The settlement required that Napster block music being shared from any artist that did not want their music to be shared.
Who destroyed Napster?
Pursuant to the terms of the acquisition 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.
Did Dre sue Napster?
12, 2001. NEW YORK (CNNfn) - Online music downloading service Napster Inc. on Thursday settled legal disputes with the heavy metal rock band Metallica and rapper Dr. Dre as the company continues the transition from a free file sharing network to more traditional digital music sales.
Why did the RIAA sue Napster?
RIAA, a powerful trade group representing the major music labels, sued Napster in December 1999 for copyright infringement, alleging the popular music trading service helped facilitate massive piracy among its tens of millions of users.
Why did Napster fail?
Napster initially failed because it got entangled in a long-lasting legal battle with the RIAA and various music artists. The ongoing legal battles led to a temporary shutdown in 2001. The company went through a variety of ownership changes in the ensuing decades.
How Napster nearly killed the music industry?
Without the legal rights to songs, bands, and records, Napster severely damaged music sales. In 2000 alone, total recording sales decreased by 33%. [v] The black-market Napster created was active and damaging record labels and artists. Napster's danger to the music industry was fueled by its popularity.
Was Napster stolen?
In The Italian Job (2003), Lyle claims that his idea for Napster was stolen by Shawn Fanning when they were rooming together in college. In the background, there's a Metallica flag, the first music artist to sue Napster for copyright infringement.
Did Napster go to jail?
The FBI tracked him using his ISP, but since he was a minor, he was only sentenced to community service.
Did Napster lose the case?
Napster lost the legal battle in the end – unsurprisingly – and the Judge issued an injunction essentially obliging Napster to remove and prevent any of Metallica's music from being shared on its platform.
What company was sued by the RIAA?
NapsterIn late 1999, RIAA labels sued Napster for providing a peer-to-peer file sharing network for MP3 files.
How did Napster break the law?
The record companies' evidence showed that they owned approximately 70 percent of the files available through Napster. They also established that a majority of Napster users used the Napster system to download and upload copyrighted material. Napster argued that it had engaged in fair use of the copyrighted material.
Who won Metallica vs Napster?
Ultimately, Napster settled their lawsuits with Metallica and Dr. Dre in July 2001. Ulrich for one was satisfied with the outcome, Billboard reported: "I think we've resolved this in a way that works for fans, recording artists, and songwriters alike," he said.
Why was the Napster deal blocked?
This $94 million deal was blocked when Judge Peter Walsh ruled that the deal was tainted because Napster Chief Executive Officer Konrad Hilbers, a former Bertelsmann executive, had one foot in the Napster camp and one foot in the Bertelsmann camp. Napster was forced to file for Chapter 7 and liquidate its assets.
How long did it take for Napster to shut down?
The injunction, which was substantially identical to one ordered in the A&M case, ordered Napster to place a filter on the program within 72 hours or be shut down. Napster was forced to search its system and remove all copyrighted songs by Metallica.
What was the ruling in Napster v Metallica?
There were many people that were worried that the ruling in the Napster v. Metallica case would affect the future of P2P file sharing and other industries that stemmed from the growing popularity of MP3 music. In RIAA v. Diamond, the Recording Industry Association of America sued Diamond Multimedia Systems for producing a portable MP3 player called the Rio. The RIAA claimed that the Rio did not comply with the Audio Home Recording Act (AHRA), and thus its production should be halted. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Rio was not covered by the AHRA and that it was designed simply to enable users to easily listen to MP3 files that were already stored on their personal computers or on other personal storage devices. In the earlier case of Sony Corp. of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc., it was ruled that Sony's VCR, which allowed users to record live television onto cassette tapes to be viewed at a later time, did not violate copyright law.
How much did Metallica get sued for?
Metallica sought a minimum of $10 million in damages, at a rate of $100,000 per illegally downloaded song. Metallica hired NetPD, an online consulting firm, to monitor the Napster service. NetPD produced a list of 335,435 Napster users who were allegedly sharing the band's songs online in violation of copyright laws; the 60,000-page list was delivered to Napster's office. Metallica demanded that their songs be banned from file sharing, and that the users responsible for sharing their music be banned from the service. This led to over 300,000 users being banned from Napster, although software was released that simply altered the Windows registry and allowed users to rejoin the service under a different name. The lawsuit also named several universities to be held accountable for allowing students to illegally download music on their networks, including the University of Southern California, Yale University, and Indiana University.
How did Napster work?
The Napster program was originally a way for nineteen-year-old Shawn Fanning and his friends throughout the country to trade music in the MP3 format. Fanning and his friends decided to try to increase the number of files available and involve more people by creating a way for users to browse each other’s files and to talk to each other. Napster went live in September 1999 and gained instant popularity. Napster’s number of registered users was doubling every 5–6 weeks. In February 2001, Napster had roughly 80 million monthly users compared to Yahoo ’s 54 million monthly users. At its peak Napster facilitated nearly 2 billion file transfers per month and had an estimated net-worth of between 60-80 million dollars.
What did Metallica sue?
Metallica alleged that Napster was guilty of copyright infringement and racketeering, as defined by the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act. The lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California.
Why is napster so popular?
This is one of the major reasons Napster was so popular, it was easy to use and had a large number of files for download. Being one of the first of its kind, Napster made a significant contribution to the popularity of the peer-to-peer application structure.
What court case did Metallica v. Napster take place in?
That's the day Metallica v. Napster, Inc. was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California — a case that would come to national prominence, pave the way for Steve Jobs and Apple to create the iTunes and iPod juggernaut, and ultimately lock the tech and media industries in a battle that rages on to this day. When Taylor Swift complains about Spotify, the arguments are an echo of Metallica v. Napster. When Jay Z, Beyoncé, Kanye, Rihanna, and all of their friends go on about Tidal, that's an echo of Metallica v. Napster.
Is it illegal to copyright a tape?
This, of course, was illegal. You can't distribute copyrighted recordings, even if teenagers and music nerds have been making tapes and mixes forever. The difference was in scale; while handing out a few mixtapes to friends resulted mostly in the industry stamping "HOME TAPING IS KILLING MUSIC" on the backs of cassettes, Napster posed a very real existential threat: if everyone was getting and sharing music for free, no one would ever buy it.
Did Napster go bankrupt?
Napster lost, of course. It was always going to lose, even if the legal demands levied by Metallica and the RIAA were so onerous as to be impossible. (One hundred percent copyright filtering accuracy? Good luck.) In March 2001, Judge Marilyn Hall Patel ordered a preliminary injunction forcing Napster to filter music, and in July of that year a proposed settlement was thrown out because Napster's CEO used to work for the music industry, tainting the deal. Napster went bankrupt, and now it's gone forever, absorbed into Rhapsody after a series of deals. (If you want to know more about this, the excellent documentary Downloaded is on Netflix right now.)
When did Napster shut down?
However, at a hearing on July 11, 2001, Judge Patel's dissatisfaction with Napster's 99.4% efficacy in removing infringing material prompted her to order the service shut down until it could be 100% effective. In September 2001, Napster settled with songwriters and music publishers, agreeing to pay $26 million.
Who issued the preliminary injunction against Napster?
Judge Marilyn Hall Patel of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California granted the preliminary injunction, on the grounds that the plaintiffs demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of success. She issued an injunction which preliminarily enjoined Napster
Why did Napster argue that the record companies waived their rights to copyright protection?
Napster also argued that the record companies waived their rights to copyright protection because they "hastened" the spread of MP3s on the web and had their own plans to get into the digital market. Rejecting this argument, Judge Patel wrote, "This limited evidence fails to convince the court that the record companies created the monster that is now devouring their intellectual property rights." The Ninth Circuit agreed, and also rejected Napster's claim that, by creating and providing digital files via the Internet, the plaintiffs had granted Napster an "implied license". Finally, Napster argued that the plaintiffs were using copyright to control online distribution, which Napster considered beyond the scope of the limited monopoly provided by the Copyright Office. The court rejected this as well, finding that MP3s were the same works as those that appeared on CDs, just in a different format, thus the plaintiffs had every right to control their distribution of digital music files because they are the plaintiffs' copyrighted works.
How did Napster benefit financially?
Addressing the vicarious infringement claim, the court then considered the necessary factors: whether Napster benefited financially from the infringement and whether they were capable of supervising and controlling infringing conduct. The Ninth Circuit sided with the District Court, who held that the infringing activity was a draw to potential users and that, since Napster's future business model was predicated on expanding the number of users, Napster stood to benefit financially from the infringing activity. As for supervision, the Circuit court agreed in part with the District Court's finding that Napster had "the right and ability to supervise its users' conduct." However, the Ninth Circuit felt that Napster's ability to patrol and enforce infringing use was limited by the design of the system itself. The system was not designed to read the contents of MP3s or check for copyright ownership or permissions, only to index by name and ensure they are valid MP3 files. Despite this departure from the District Court's reasoning, they argued that these indices and infringing files were just as searchable by Napster as they were by the plaintiffs in locating infringing files for evidence in the case. Because of Napster's failure to police within its means combined with the financial interest factor, the Ninth Circuit affirmed the District Court's finding of vicarious infringement.
Why can't Napster impute knowledge?
First, the Ninth Circuit acknowledged that it could not impute sufficient knowledge to Napster "merely because peer-to-peer file sharing technology may be used to infringe plaintiffs' copyrights." Paraphrased Sony into its own words, the Ninth Circuit explained that if a defendant "made and sold equipment capable of both infringing and substantial noninfringing uses," that fact alone—i.e., "evidence that such machines could be and were used to infringe plaintiffs' copyrighted television shows" – would not be sufficient grounds to impute constructive knowledge to defendants.
How to prove contributory infringement?
In order to prove contributory infringement, a plaintiff must show that a defendant had knowledge of infringement (here, that Napster knew that its users were distributing copyrighted content without permission across its network) and that defendant supplied material support to that infringement.
What was the case of A&M Records v. Napster?
A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc., 239 F.3d 1004 (2001) was a landmark intellectual property case in which the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the ruling of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, holding that defendant , peer-to-peer (P2P) file-sharing service Napster, could be held liable for contributory infringement and vicarious infringement of the plaintiffs ' copyrights. This was the first major case to address the application of copyright laws to peer-to-peer file sharing .
How much did Napster pay for the case?
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, and as an advance against future licensing royalties of $10 million.
When did Metallica sue Napster?
On March 13, 2000, they filed 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 refused his written request to remove his works from its service.
How many users does Napster have?
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, such as older songs, unreleased recordings, studio recordings, and songs from concert bootleg recordings.
How did Napster survive?
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.
What are some of the best books about napster?
There have been several books that document the experiences of people working at Napster, including:#N#Joseph Menn's Napster biography#N#All the Rave: The Rise and Fall of Shawn Fanning's Napster#N#John Alderman's " Sonic Boom: Napster, MP3, and the New Pioneers of Music "#N#Steve Knopper's " Appetite for Self Destruction: The Spectacular Crash of the Record Industry in the Digital Age ." 1 Joseph Menn's Napster biography 2 All the Rave: The Rise and Fall of Shawn Fanning's Napster 3 John Alderman's " Sonic Boom: Napster, MP3, and the New Pioneers of Music " 4 Steve Knopper's " Appetite for Self Destruction: The Spectacular Crash of the Record Industry in the Digital Age ."
What is a napster?
For the defunct pay service, see Napster (pay service). Napster is a set of three music-focused online services. It was founded in 1999 as a pioneering peer-to-peer (P2P) file sharing Internet software that emphasized sharing digital audio files, typically audio songs, encoded in MP3 format.
When did Napster merge with Best Buy?
Napster became an online music store until it was merged with Rhapsody from Best Buy on December 1, 2011. Later, more decentralized projects followed Napster's P2P file-sharing example, such as Gnutella, Freenet, FastTrack, and Soulseek.
Who brought down Napster?
Hip-hop artist Dr. Dre soon did the same, but the case that eventually brought Napster down was the $20 billion infringement case filed by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA). That case— A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc —wended its way through the courts over the course of 2000 and early 2001 before being decided in favor ...
What court did Napster go to?
The decision by the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit rejected Napster’s claims of fair use, as well as its call for the court to institute a payment system that would have compensated the record labels while allowing Napster to stay in business.
How many people died in the ferry disaster?
Ferry sinks in Belgium, 188 people drown. A British ferry leaving Zeebrugge, Belgium, capsizes, drowning 188 people, on March 6, 1987. Shockingly poor safety procedures led directly to this deadly disaster. Lord Justice Barry Sheen, an investigator of the accident, later said of it, from top to bottom, the body ...read more.
When did Napster become popular?
Oh, but people enjoyed it while it lasted. At the peak of Napster’s popularity in late 2000 and early 2001, some 60 million users around the world were freely exchanging digital mp3 files with the help of the program developed by Northeastern University college student Shawn Fanning in the summer of 1999.
Who succeeded Stalin?
Georgy Malenkov succeeds Stalin. Just one day after the death of long-time Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin, Georgy Malenkov is named premier and first secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union.
Who dismantled the Sandy Hook Lighthouse?
A committee of the New York Provincial Congress instructs Major William Malcolm to dismantle the Sandy Hook lighthouse in the then-disputed territory of Sandy Hook, now in New Jersey, on March 6, 1776, telling him to “use your best discretion to render the light-house entirely ...read more
Who died in Santa Fe?
Georgia O’Keeffe dies. Georgia O’Keeffe, the artist who gained worldwide fame for her austere minimalist paintings of the American southwest, dies in Santa Fe at the age of 98. Born in Sun Prairie, Wisconsin, in 1887, O’Keeffe grew up in Virginia and first studied painting at the Art Institute of ...read more. 1980s.
When did Metallica sue Napster?
Twenty years ago today, on April 13, 2000, Metallica filed a lawsuit against Napster over its music-sharing service. The story immediately made headlines all over the world as Napster had become incredibly popular in a very short period of time and Metallica was (and still is) one of the biggest musical acts on the planet.
When did Napster close?
Unable to comply with the injunction any other way, Napster shuttered on July 11, 2001. Though it initially planned to keep fighting and return, that never happened. Napster, in its original form, was done. The company did settle with Metallica and Dr. Dre the next day, July 12, 2001.
How much did Metallica sue for I Disappear?
This prompted Metallica, in what Lars Ulrich would describe as an “impulsive” move, to file its now-famous lawsuit in March 2000. There, they sued not just for the infringement of I Disappear, but for a total of 100 tracks. They sought a minimum of $10 million in damages, amounting to $100,000 per song.
When did the napster shut down?
According to popular lore, this lawsuit was the beginning of the end of the original Napster, eventually forcing Napster to shut down on July 11, 2001. Many believe to this day that it was James Hetfield and Lars Ulrich themselves that dug Napster’s grave. However, that is not actually what happened.
What was the RIAA lawsuit?
However, back in 1999, the RIAA was a little-known trade group and a lawsuit by a group of record labels largely slipped under the radar. It was the Metallica lawsuit that grabbed both the headlines and the public’s imagination.
How many record labels own Napster?
Given that the lawsuit was filed by 18 record labels, they claimed to own some 70% of the music being shared on Napster at the time. This was a figure that the court agreed with when granting the injunction.
When did Metallica stop playing Napster?
While the record labels would file their lawsuit in December, Napster went unnoticed by the members of Metallica until some time in early 2000 when Metallica learned that a song they were actively working on, I Disappear, was being played on the radio.
