Brained.com Forum - Napster Irrelevant - Filesharing Will Go On!

Napster Irrelevant - Filesharing Will Go On!

posted by Elmo on 2000-10-24 00:00:00

Hi Ho,

Kirmit the Frog here filling in for Elmo for this week's Weekly Rant. It looks like Elmo was so upset by some parody of his newsletter in a "Word of the Day" mailing from Jason Cansler that he has locked himself in his room with nothing but his Pocket PC and a water pistol. So I am taking over the Rant for this week. I want to start by printing the article in question so that all of Elmo's readers might know what has upset him so:

"Anyway.... so after a night of heavy drinking, defecation, and diablerie.... I decided to take it easy on Sunday... then of course I got a disturbing email from Oscar the Grouch or some other little useless cartoony character. I dont remember all the details (useless drivel slips from me faster than pride from a Bangkok whore.)... but he was apologizing to all his friends that he argued at them because they wouldnt vote for alternative candidates... like dead people. Then of course he very modestly bragged about his IQ... which was 30 points lower than Jason's was in 1st grade...[snip].... But I really cant remember how his little rant ended as I think I stopped reading when he said he loses respect for those who dont want people stealing their property and livelihood....... a weird one that muppet guy....."

Well, folks, I don't know about the rest of you guys, but I definitely don't want to know anything about defecation or diablerie--whatever that is! Hey, whatever floats your lily pad, dude! I won't mention the strong language either, even though I know Elmo had wanted to keep this newsletter G-rated. But I personally take great offense to the insult to my good friend Oscar the Grouch, as well as the implied insult to all of muppetkind in your last sentence. Do you think just because we are merely hand-puppets designed for the amusement of small children that we don't have feelings, Mister? Do you think that just because there are people hidden in the background controlling my every move and voicing my every word, that somehow makes me an inferior creature? How does that make me any different than Al Gore or George W. Bush, or Bill Clinton for that matter? And you silly humans elected him President!

But since I am not one of you oh-so-superior "politically correct" humans who wear your sensitivity on your sleeves, I feel no burning desire to sue you for species-ism or pressure your boss to fire you for that anti-muppet "hate rhetoric" of yours. If Al Gore and Bill Clinton have their way, I could charge you with a "hate crime"--but censoring other people's thoughts and opinions has never really been a high priority for this little green frog. And it is a good thing, because having read some samples of your Word of the Day from the past two weeks, I think it is quite odd that you would call Elmo's Rant "useless drivel". I would say that was "the pot calling the kettle black", but seeing as you humans are so eager to find racist overtones in everything a person says, I think I will pass. By the way, I was merely making a point about humans in general. I was not accusing Jason himself of falling prey to "political correction"... in fact, his recent essays on religion and homosexuality would indicate that he does possess a quality most rare among human beings--the ability to think for himself, and the courage to voice his opinions without worrying about whether it offends someone.

Maybe that's because his IQ is so much higher than poor Elmo, who takes pride in his intelligence the same way a star athlete might take pride in their game. The only sport he ever played in was the Academic Team, you know. It may not be that great in the scheme of things, but his mind is the best thing my friend Elmo feels he has going for him. He is 27 years old and still living his parents, after all. He still collects Transformers. He's even admitted to everyone that he is still a virgin, in a world where manhood is often measured by the number of "notches" on a man's bedpost. He says it's by choice and all, but Elmo is kind of nerdy looking, you've got to admit. The poor guy thought he was in love once, with the only girl who graduated higher in his high school class than he did, and he chased this tiny little brainiac girl for years before he finally realized that she would rather have a slow lobodomy than to go out with him. (Kind of reminds me of Miss Piggy, who still hasn't gotten the hint.) I think that broke his heart for a long time. And even though poor Elmo has finally found himself a sweet girl who loves him, she lives over 500 miles away and he never gets to see her. He would love to make up for it by showering her with romantic letters, but he barely even has time to put out this rant every week. Poor Elmo can't win for losing.

Well, um, I think I've already told you guys far more than I think Elmo would want you to know. So before he goes "postal" and starts taking people out with his water pistol, I'd better get on with the Rant that he left for me to deliver. The subject for this week is Napster. Before I deliver Elmo's words though, I just want to make it clear that I, Kermit the Frog, do not endorse Napster, nor the theft of any copyrighted material, nor any other kind of piracy. These are the words of Elmo and do not necessarily reflect the views of myself, Sesame Street, the Children's Television Workshop, or Jim Henson productions, who own both my trademarked name and that of Elmo. So without further adieu, here is Elmo's Rant:

For those who have lived in a cave for the past year or so, Napster is an online service that allows users to communicate with each other and download MP3 music files from each other's computers. They don't actually host any music material, but they do provide the search capability to find the songs you are looking for on other users' computers. In less than a year, Napster has acquired more than 10 million users. Few Internet technologies have become so popular so quickly--nor acquired such powerful enemies. Though it has yet to figure out how to make money, Napster is under attack by the music industry, which objects to its product being exchanged for free.

It amazes me how the record industry has come in masse to condemn Napster in what one critic has called "stealing their property and livelihood." Napster has claimed from the beginning that its service is not copyright infringement as the record labels claim, arguing instead that the service is "fair use" of intellectual property -- the same argument that allows people to make copies of music, documents and artwork for personal non-commercial use.

I say, if they want to ban Napster, why not ban playing songs on the radio? After all, with a simple tape recorder anyone can "steal" a copyrighted song and not have to compensate the owner. Poor quality, you might say. Well, why don't we ban CD writers then? They allow complete ripping of CD contents onto duplicate CDs without ANY loss of quality. That's even better than MP3's, which many praise for their quality but I can definitely tell the difference. While we're at it, let's ban all dual cassette tape decks, and all stereo systems that have both a CD player and a tape recorder. After all, these can be used by song thieves as well.

Of course, if you read the disclaimers on cassette tapes and cassette recorders, many say that they are not intended to be used to illegally copy copyrighted material. Napster has a similar disclaimer on their website as well. We don't hold blank cassette and CD manufacturers libel for any piracy their equipment may enable. So why should we hold Napster to a higher ideal? Why should the owners of Napster be required to play copyright cops for the recording industry, when they have more important things to do? Like promote the work of new unsigned artists, which is what the site is really all about.

Many artists, such as rockers Metallica and rapper Dr. Dre have come out against Napster, and have brought a billion dollar lawsuit against them. They claim that with Napster allowing them to download songs for free, people aren't buying CD's anymore and they're losing revenue. I personally haven't bought a new CD in years, but when they cost almost $20 for about 30 minutes or so of music, and usually only one or maybe two good songs on them, why should I? No doubt a lot of people are asking the same question.

Other great artists like Prince and The Smashing Pumpkins have fully embraced the MP3 medium. The Smashing Pumpkins recently bypassed their record label and released their 25-song new album straight to the internet to MP3. And the buzz is that this is some of their best work yet. Prince, likewise, had so much trouble with his record company trying to own him that he changed his name to that infamous symbol until his contract ran out. And he also releases all of his new music straight to the online market. I can sympathize with his struggle--I had that ex-employer that I told you all about who thought he owned my mind, until I put an end to it.

Anyway, I have about 3.5 gigabytes on my hard drive filled with MP3's, but I can honestly say that I didn't download any of them from Napster. Most of them came from CD's that I either own, or borrowed from friends. What is the difference? Are the copyright police going to come arrest me now for the heinous crime of having music on my computer? Children are abused and mutilated everyday. Women are raped and brutalized. Millions go hungry, and several die violent deaths. And all of these crimes go unpunished, yet they're going to arrest me for the awful crime of filling 3.5 gigabytes of space that I OWN on MY COMPUTER with ones and zeros of my choosing. When it comes down to it, that is all it is--ones and zeros. And they can be permanently erased with the press of a single key. Welcome to the digital age.

I have not "stolen" anything. For the MP3's that I have that came from CD's that I don't own (and didn't get ripped off by paying good money for), I can honestly say that the recording industry didn't lose one DIME by me having them. If I didn't have those MP3's, I simply wouldn't have the songs to listen to (unless I happened to hear them on the radio). My money is tightly budgeted these days and there is no room for useless expenditures like CD's of music that will just go out of style in a couple of years anyway. But the record companies actually benefit by me having these MP3's, because I may tell others about some of the songs that I have that I really enjoy, and I may let them listen to them. And they may like them (and have more money to throw away than I do) and actually go buy the CD. Hence, I just made them money that they wouldn't have otherwise made. Word of mouth is the most effective advertising tool known to man, and the only one that many intelligent people trust.

Well, it doesn't matter if they shut down Napster or not because the genie is out of the bottle. There are newer technologies available, such as Gnutella, that do the same thing Napster does without having a centralized location that can be shut down. Music sharing will go on. They can either embrace it and find ways of using it to their advantage (like the "Bare Naked Ladies", who have flooded the net with MP3's of their songs with voice-over advertisements for their album), or they can fight it and lose a good chunk of their following like what is happening to Metallica and Dr. Dre.

Even though I am a computer programmer by trade, I feel the exact same way about the software industry. Perhaps if they didn't want hundreds (or thousands) of dollars each for CD's containing nothing but another bunch of ones and zeroes, and only cost about 25 cents to produce, I might be more inclined to pay money for their product. But the whole licensing thing is utterly ridiculous to me. If I pay money for a program, why can't I install it on every computer I own? Why should I have to pay those greedy jerks the same amount for every computer I install it on? What business is it of theirs anyway? The LINUX-driven open-source movement is the wave of the future and as my former co-worker Jay used to say on the matter, "resistance is futile."

Hi Ho,

Kermit the Frog again. Well, there you have it folks. Elmo's Rant for this week. Hopefully he'll have calmed down and will be out of his room in time to do next week's Rant. But until then, it's been real folks. Bye Bye everybody!

Kermit the Frog

Click here to return to the previous page.