Behind all the legal controversy that surrounds file sharing and peer-to-peer technology are the artists themselves, whose creative works are at the root of the ongoing legal battles between software like Napster and the music industry’s major labels and organizations. As the debate over the legal implications of file sharing continues, recording artists are also taking sides by either becoming advocates of MP3 and file sharing technology and acknowledging its potential benefits to the industry, or by denouncing the technology and its users, focusing primarily on the issue of copyright infringement while perhaps restraining a greater concern for the technology’s affect on record sales and profit margins.
One of the largest and most publicized reactions from artists against file sharing technology came from veteran heavy metal band Metallica, who in May of 2000 accused Napster of copyright infringement through their software that allowed users to upload and swap illegal MP3 copies of the band’s songs. Fronted mainly by the band’s outspoken drummer Lars Ulrich, Metallica dumped an enormous amount of paper work on the doorstep of Napster’s office, which contained the names and online address details of over 335,000 Napster users who had made Metallica’s material available online (Borland, 2000). The band demanded that Napster block these users from its system, causing uproar from loyal Napster users, some of which had even been fans of Metallica.
File sharing technology has also had its share of support from artists in the industry. Chuck D, a rapper from politically orientated hip hop outfit Public Enemy, is an influential advocate of Napster and peer-to-peer technology, publicly announcing his support for the software and the opportunities it can provide for both signed and unsigned artists. High profile electronic artist Moby has also publicly expressed his support for file sharing technology and considers its affect on the music industry to be positive, if anything. “Most people I know who listen to a lot of MP3s will download a lot of different songs, and if they like the song they’ll go out and buy the album. The record company doesn’t want me to say this, but out of the millions of MP3 files that are out there, if someone chooses to download one of my songs or an album of mine, I’m very flattered.� (Quoted by Menn, 2003, pp. 136)
However, there has been speculation in the media behind some of the support that file-sharing software has received from high profile artists. It was found that Napster had quietly paid Chuck D over $100,000 for his public ‘support’, and that the company even went as far as spending $1.8 Million on a free tour in 2000 that was headlined by rap-metal group Limp Bizkit, an attempt to associate itself with the popular musicians and bands of the time, countering some of the negative perceptions that were arising with all the legal controversy.
REFERENCES
Borland, J. (2000) "Napster May Block Hundreds of Thousands of Fans," CNET News.Com, retrieved on 10 October 2004, from http://news.com.com/2100-1023-240074.html?legacy=cnet
Borland, J. (2000) "Napster Boots Dr. Dre Fans from Service," CNET News.Com, retrieved on 10 October 2004, from http://news.com.com/Napster+boots+Dr.+Dre+fans+from+service/2100-1023_3-241159.html
Borland, J. (2000) "Rapper Chuck D Throws Weight Behind Napster," CNET News.Com, retrieved on 10 October 2004, from http://news.com.com/Rapper+Chuck+D+throws+weight+behind+Napster/2100-1023_3-239917.html
Jones, C. (2000) "Metallica Rips Napster," Wired News, retrieved on 10 October 2004, from http://www.wired.com/news/politics/0,1283,35670,00.html
Cameron Hawes 19:08, 27 Oct 2004 (EST)
