Copyright Ownership or Just Downright Greed: the Napster Case

This past week I read three articles on the RCAA vs. Napster music download website case now before the Senate regarding Napster's misappropriation of music copyrighted by various recording artists, who, I remind you, are not merely "creative" entities--they are primarily corporate entities (something most rock/rap fans forget when they idolize these so-called "rebels").

The link found in last Thursday's "http://www.lewrockwell.com" for an editorial article by Michael Ybarra on Napster vs. Metallica is enlightening. It seems that back in their struggling days Metallica used to copy and/or bootleg tapes of other recording artists for income as well as trade out their own demo tapes. The corporate entity Metallica, in a sure move smacking of hypocrisy, now wants the royalties they lost from Napster's freebie and is part of the suit against the web site.

Make no mistake about it: Metallica is entitled to their royalties. But it is interesting that they are now practicing what it seems they never would have preached had they not "made it." The irony on Ybarra that yesterday's "rebels" are today's corporate suits must not be lost.

On the same day I saw an article in "http://www.csmonitor.com" (the front page of the Christian Science Monitor) made points for both sides of this issue. Again, recording artists ought to get their royalties. Napster is probably wrong in allowing access to free downloads of copyrighted materials (after all, "fair use" is not an option here, and no permission from the artists is granted). Also wrongfully, Napster considers this a "free speech" issue. It is not.

As a writer of copyrighted material I can see that this is not a free speech issue. Imagine how mad I would be if my two novels (listed on "http://www.omegaserv.com/omegabooks.html") were available for "print-on-demand" or "electronic download" at any of the many e-publishers, were downloaded, and I didn't get payment or a royalty on their sale.

I understand how those rockers feel as recording artists and songwriters.

But as corporate entities their position is harder to sympathize with--and perhaps that is why Napster--though they are definitely wrong to screw around with other folks' copyrights--might win the day. (And imagine how "suit-y" Metallica will look testifying before a Senate sub-committee! Rebel rockers my foot!)

Go To Page: 1