Response to Metallica's Napster Lawsuit

413 Words2 Pages
In 2000 the band Metallica filed a lawsuit against Napster alleging that Napster allows and supports illegal downloading. The lawsuit also went after some major universities but none of them were sued. Napster feels that if the band itself rather than the bands management would have contacted Napster then they would have understood the value of Napster like other bands have. Metallica takes great pride in their art and feels that illegal downloading is in fact stealing. I myself have used Napster in the past and have found several ways in which it can benefit bands. In this day in age when cd’s can cost between 15 and 20 dollars downloading music can only help bands. People don’t want to go out and spend that much money on a cd when they may have only heard one or two songs and are unsure if they like the artist. If people are able download an artist’s music they can hear the songs and in my experience if they like the band they will still go out and buy that bands cd. I know I have a collection of cds that I paid 15 dollars for only to actually like one song on the cd. I have found several new artists that I would consider my favorites through downloading and I have gone out and paid money for their cds. "We take our craft -- whether it be the music, the lyrics, or the photos and artwork -- very seriously, as do most artists. It is therefore sickening to know that our art is being traded” If Metallica is a group of artist isn’t the art greater than making money? Metallica makes millions of dollars off of their music. I cannot imagine they have lost a great deal of money off of illegal downloading. There does not seem to be a way to completely stop illegal downloading, for this reason Metallica just needs to be quite and be happy with the millions of dollars they have. They live a life that most people can only imagine living and as so called artists they
Open Document