The Napster case: a test case where intellectual property rights protection stands against the freedom of consumers to copy for their own private use

News category: management and protection of intellectual capital

The Internet has provided millions of consumers with the possibilities to share music songs among each other. The Napster Music Community allows its 20 million members to download MP3 music files directly from each other computers and share a “library” of all MP3 files stored on the community member’s PCs. Because MP3 files where not stored on servers at Napster itself, there was no way so far for the music industry to stop Napster’s web based copy services.

This has changed on Wednesday, July 26, 2000, when U.S. District Judge Marilyn Patel ruled that Napster must stop allowing its users to share copyrighted music. Since the program has no way to distinguish between music that's copyrighted and music that's not, her injunction would have effectively shut down the site. Nine hours before it would have been forced to shut down its music-swapping service, Napster has won a temporary reprieve. Before the court of appeals was prepared to put Napster out of business, these very serious issues had to be resolved: Can a consumer have a right to copy? Can you use the Internet for sharing information? Is Napster entitled to protection under the Digital Millennium Copyright Act?

Peer-to-peer technologies have become extremely popular among college students and other music lovers as an easy way to find and download MP3 files from the Internet. This technology is increasingly applied also to share other items which could be subject to Intellectual Property rights such as research results from genetic research, articles, book chapters and entire books. The final ruling of the court may change the role and business of classical Intellectual Property middle man such as the music industry, publishers or other IP right marketing and sales agencies and can adapt the older practice to a New Economy standard which enables more easily flow of knowledge and information on a global basis.

In the case of Napster, supporters across the USA banded together, pledging not to buy CDs from labels affiliated with the Recording Industry Association of America (which sued Napster). More than 100,000 people have signed on to one site, adding their names to a list and mostly promising to stay away from record stores while Napster's site is down. The decision late on Friday, July 28, 2000, by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals allows Napster to remain in operation. In its two-page order, the court said Napster "raised substantial questions (on) both the merits and the form of the injunction." The court also granted Napster's request for an expedited appeal. The company is required to file a legal brief with the court by Aug. 18; a responding brief by the music industry is due Sept. 8. After the briefs are filed, the court will schedule oral arguments. The decision does not address the merits of the case. Rather, it only maintains the status quo until the case receives a full hearing, which is likely to occur this fall.

More …(Court grants stay of Napster injunction)

More… (Napster: not just for the music)

... feedback

Back