Software History
Napster was developed by Shawn Fanning with the help of Sean Parker. It was launched in June of 1999 while Fanning was attending Northwestern University.
An unreleased version of Metallica's "I Disappear," started circulating around the Napster network and was later played on radio stations. This brought the attention of the Napster network to Metallica, and subsequently; they filed a lawsuit in 2000 against the napster service. At the time, the lawsuits were opposed by Napster users and supporters. To them, it seemed that file sharing was inevitable on the Internet, and it was not Napster's fault that people used the service to share copyrighted files. These users viewed Napster as a simple search engine. Many argued that any attempt to shut down Napster would simply lead to people using a different medium to exchange files over the Internet. Similarly, many supporters of Napster were concerned about the media's constant use of the word "site" to describe the service, a word which seems to imply that Napster was distributing files itself rather than facilitating their exchange.
After a failed appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court, an injunction was issued on March 5, 2001 ordering Napster to prevent the trading of copyrighted music on its network. In July 2001, Napster shut down its entire network in order to comply with the injunction. 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, as well as an advance against future licensing royalties of $10 million. In order to pay those fees, Napster attempted to convert their free service to a subscription system.
On May 17, 2002, Napster announced that its assets would be acquired by German media firm Bertelsmann for $8 million. Pursuant to terms of that 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 according to Chapter 7 of the U.S. bankruptcy laws. Most of the Napster staff were laid off, and the website changed to display "Napster was here".
After a $2.4 million take offer by the Private Media Group, an "adult entertainment company", Napster's brand and logos were acquired at bankruptcy auction by the company Roxio, Inc. which used them to rebrand the Pressplay music service as Napster 2.0. As of 2005, this new service has met with moderate success.
Original Program Information
Napster is a search engine that allows you to find and download MP3 audio files. It eliminates the problems of conventional FTP transfers by using cutting-edge technology to ensure the completion of each MP3 download. When searching online for songs, you can specify the minimum server ping (response) times, as well as MP3 bitrates and frequency.
Napster essentially provides a virtual community of MP3 fans, in that each Napster user "shares" his or her MP3 collection with everyone else running Napster, ensuring a vast collection of MP3s for download. All results are verified to allow you to find the fastest server, and all searches are in real time, so the list of available songs you receive is consistently reliable. The program also features Automatic Hash Resuming, which lets Napster find the next-fastest server that has the same song and automatically complete the download if you should lose your connection. The easy-to-use Napster interface features its own chat system that allows users to chat with each other in a number of different forums, based on music genre. Also included with Napster is an internal MP3 player, although you can choose to specify an external MP3 player. Its Hot List feature helps you keep track of your favorite MP3 libraries by notifying you when they are online and accessible.
Versions 2.0 beta 10+ feature a new acoustic fingerprinting technology which can read sonic characteristics of songs to better protect copyright holders.
Note: Napster listed here is the original Napster that was eventually shut down. Napster was relaunched in Novemeber 2003 as Napster 2.0, a paid service.
Here we go again (Score:3)by EricWright ( 16803 ) writes: on Wednesday May 03, 2000 @06:57AM (#1094310)Journal Jon, do you just not get it? This has nothing to do about the freedom to pursue cultural identity, or any other such crap. It's about breaking the law. Granted, you may not like the law. I don't like the law. I do know that if I break the law, there may be 'consequences and repercussions' to those actions. Deal with it.
You don't like current laws? Work to change them. This isn't working to change them. This is much more like preaching to the choir.
You don't like current music distribution mechanisms? Work on changing that, too. I will warn you that encouraging people to steal from artists isn't the best way to convince those artists to part with the fat cats of the recording industry. They may only get 50 cents per disc, but when someone downloads music via Napster, Gnutella, etc. the artist gets squat.
And another thing: How is monitoring someone's network use invasion of privacy? I didn't realize there was any such thing as personal privacy when one is in public. Believe me, the internet/WWW is most certainly public. It's not like they sent the feds into someone's house and took a small boy at gunpoint... oh, wait. That's another thread! Anyway, when you have a central server like Napster, you have to assume that any traffic across it is open to scanning.
Now get off your high horse, quit whining about persecution of criminals and do something useful with your time (like buying off a few sympathetic Congressmen :)
EricSharetwitterfacebookIs this crazy? (Score:2)by fishCannon ( 17545 ) writes: This is going to be the most painless Boycott in history. I mean, it's not like I'm going to ever buy a Metallica CD anyway when I can just download it from Napster.
Down with Music! Power to the people!For once I disagree (Score:3)by tweek ( 18111 ) writes: on Wednesday May 03, 2000 @06:58AM (#1094315)HomepageJournal Jon,
I am usually one of the people that supports your opinions for the most part. There have been a few times (regarding religion) where I disagree and this is one of them.
I am all for anonimity on the internet but lately I have been struggling with people who claim anonimity as the cure all and anything otherwise is an invasion of privacy. I am truly tired of people not taking responsibility for thier own actions. I understand that most of these people on napster are high school kids or college students but enough is enough.
I use napster. All the time. I want to hear an album before i buy it. I want to know if all the songs are what I want to hear or just one good song. Eight times out of ten I buy the album if I like it enough. I have no problem paying for stuff. Not if it's worth it. But there are people who have completely stopped buying cds and are flocking in droves to napster to download album after album with no concern for the artists welfare. I used to be one of those people. To some extent I am. Maybe it's because I'm getting older but some things are just wrong. Mp3's in and of themselves are not illegal ( despite what the RIAA says ) but copyrighted music being distributed via mp3 without the sanction of the artist IS. There is no way around this. Whatever you think about copyright laws, it is just plain illegal.
Stop trying to get something for nothing. Grow up and take some fucking responsibility for your actions. When i was a child i spake as a child and all that.
And for those of you thinking I'm trying to make a point about opensourse software with that last comment about something for nothing you can blow it up your ass. I'm a rabid opensource advocate but this is something completely different. Don't read more into it. Flames and comments welcome.
Sharetwitterfacebookhysterical (Score:2)by frinky ( 35152 ) writes: >There is no reason to go after some of the Net's >most vulnerable users -- kids --
Oh won't somebody think of the children!!I never though I'd say it, but... (Score:2)by elfbabe ( 99631 ) writes: Katz is right. Sort of. While I agree that Metallica's behavior toward Napster users is rather sickening and should not continue, we ought to be careful not to act like we have the legal (or even moral) high ground here.
Going after users who appear to be offering Metallica MP3s that they might have a legal right to have isn't diplomatic. In fact, it's also very stupid, as the vast majority of Metallica fans aren't law-abiding citizens deeply concerned about the protection of intellectual property - at least, none of the ones I happen to know. But it is a legal action to take against people who are possibly violating the law.
Napster Vpn Apk Latest Version Download
Download File 🔥 https://urloso.com/2y2Gfj 🔥
People who pirated (technically) the mp3, but own the CD already (for me, its faster to napster a copy down than it is to rip a copy of a CD)
It's often portrayed, either out of ignorance or for PR value, that the users pirating copies of a song are, in fact, costing each artist $16 each time, and obviously that's not nearly true. Such information might help convince artists to get online in a productive way. ff782bc1db