Riaa's reposnse to napsters stay plea

Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: Tom Whore (tomwhore@inetarena.com)
Date: Wed Aug 02 2000 - 10:33:20 PDT

(now officaly in the liability[1] camp, napster is handing the fight to
the RIaA.)


Some quotes

"Napster is facilitating copyright infringement on a massive scale,
causing an entire industry of music copyright owners -- artists,
songwriters, record companies, and music publishers -- extensive harm.
Given Napsters explosive, unprecedented growth, that harm will increase
dramatically if the District Courts Order is stayed.

 Every minute, 14,000 recordings are downloaded using the Napster system
(see generally Olkin Rpt., p.6); every day, using Napsters own numbers,
between 12
million and 30 million downloaded copies of recordings are made on the
Napster system.

When this action was commenced in December 1999, there were only some
200,000 Napster users. By now, the number of Napster users has grown, by
its estimate, to 20,000,000; by the end of this year, unless enjoined,
Napster estimates that it will have 75,000,000 users. 1
Richardson Depo. 318:19-319:1, Ex. 166 at 2725.

"Napster is causing a vast number of consumers to believe that free music
on the Internet is an entitlement. Teece Rpt., p. 16 (R544); Dreece Decl.,
6; Valenti Decl., 7; Frackman Decl., Ex. F. Napster encourages literally
millions of Napster users, who never would consider taking a CD from a
record store without paying, to commit infringement by downloading music
from the computer hard drives of strangers without paying. Thus, as one
Napster user posted on the Napster website: We all know its illegal. We
just dont think its wrong. Frackman Decl., Ex. K, at p. 8. This view
subverts the very purpose of copyright law, to the long
term detriment of the public. See Jackson v. Axton, 25 F.3d 884, 890 (9th
Cir. 1994)."

"Moreover, [e]ven if sampling did increase CD sales, it would still
infringe plaintiffs right to licensing fees, to control their work to
derivative markets, and so forth. And if users can sample songs for free
on Napster, theyre unlikely to purchase individual songs from the online
sites affiliated with plaintiffs. Tr. 76:2-7 (R144). (5) See, e.g., UMG
Recordings, Inc. v. MP3.com, Inc., 92 F. Supp. 2d 349, 352 (S.D.N.Y.

(5) Indeed, the Copyright Act prohibits unrestricted sampling using
streaming technology (in which a song is digitally performed, but no copy
ordinarily is made) without a license. 17 U.S.C. 114(d) et seq.

Oh it goes on and on and has great RIAA Slanted references but the long
and short of it is the RIAA wont stop till napster is dead.

Which im all for..napster the company should die..publicly visably and
with much blood shed. let anyone who thinks of making this a commerical
venture get the point....DONT

then the RIAA can figuireo ut how to move against gutella:)- Man I cant
wait to get tham back in the bush.

never get off the boat never get off the boat.


Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Wed Aug 02 2000 - 10:36:02 PDT