Napster illegal according to users

I just posted the article Napster illegal according to users….

Source: The Register

Napster users think napster is illegal…

Napster’s argument that its music sharing service doesn’t violate copyright laws is fooling no one, least of all its users. That at…

Read the full article here:  [](

Feel free to add your comments below. 

Please note that the reactions from the complete site will be synched below.

I find napster the program isnt iligal,it are the files who beeing traded…

Same if you say is my kitchen knife a iligal weapon?no only if you walk around on the street…

Bye the way still grabbing all my good stuff from ftp

The program itself is illegal? That a question for the philosophers. Do we look to the intention (sharing files) or the result (illegal usage of the program, spreading copyrighted files) ???

I would say it is legal…If I hear a song (on radio) I download it and if I find the artist good I buy the whole cd.


who carez !

I totally agree with RDJ
Now back to my fraggin’

Yah, dood i only use napster to trade the legal mp3’z which are sadly only 3 megs all togaher but my other 7 gig is stored on my E drive which consists of masses of Illgal songs*. If mcdonald can be sued for not putting a warning that this cup holds hot liquids, then why cant napster make a legal point that in the agreement it said only use for legal file sharing?

Napster isn’t illegal at all, its just what people do with it. The original intentions for Napster was to swap songs that artists gave permissions to so they can distribute their songs to get noticed or just simply to share.

The pen is a weapon in the wrong hands… Same thing applies here As RDJ said.

Its not the gun that kills,
its the one who pulls the trigger…

Bas the big philosopher

More Examples for anyone that thinks the Napster program is illegal (which of course it isn’t!!!)

The VCR (how many movies have you copied since it was released??? - is the VCR to blame? nup, it’s the user!)

The Tape Deck (how many of the artists complaining about Napster have in the past copied another artists songs onto tape and swapped it between friends??? at a guess I’d say about 98% of them - of course that was ok back then - it wasn’t their music was it? - was it the tape decks fault? nup, the user again!)

The CD-Recorder (ahh now this is my favourite, so are we gonna start sueing companies now for releasing this little magic device for copying music we have retrieved from the net??? I doubt it, everyone is too busy blaming Napster - is it the devices fault? nup once again, the user!)

God this debate is becoming boring, when will they just give up and work out a new way to distribute music? maybe then and only then will the artists get alot more money than they are seeing from their promoters at the moment…

As above, I too will buy a cd that I have downloaded only when I get one which is of top quality and deserves the $$$ - it’s making the artists work alot harder and earn our money, no more of these bullshit cd filler tracks!!!

Napster is like a beefed up Radio Station… What can stop me from grabbing a Cassette and recording from the Radio any song that’s playing out there?

The only difference is that Napster allows me to choose the song which I want to listen…

Plus, Radio stations make huge profits throwing advertising between songs…

The way I see it, if they close Napster, close all the Radio Stations in the world too!!!

Just my 2 cents…

Oh how I love these discussions…

1 thing up front:
The Americans are sue-crazy, they like to sue for everything…

The service Napster provides is, in my humble opinion, not illegal. Sharing MP3 files can be as legal as sharing your bike, car or anything else you own.

The problem arises when you are sharing files to which you don’t own the copyright of. (duh ) Everybody knows you should have that particular song on an original CD, where royalties to the writer and performer have been paid, when downloading a MP3-song (or the song should be royalty free).

In what way can Napster be held responsible/accountable for what users actually use this ervice for? As long as this service (in casu Napster) has put effort in trying to prevent illegal use of the service, I don’t think they can be held responsible/accountable for what users are using the service for.

In this regard you cannot hold the manufacturer of cars (eg Ford) accountable for every death caused by its driver. As long as the manufacturer tries its best to prevent this from happening (brakes for instance. When a car wouldn’t have brakes (or malfunctioning ones) the manufacturer would be responsible and accountable for every death caused by that car).

The fact that people use this service, the fact that copying has always took place (remember tapes, being it audio or those old computer systems Commodore and MSX) doesn’t make it legal. I think that a lot of people will download and/or copy music (or software for that matter) that they wouldn’t have bought anyway, though the threshold to buy the album had become higher. A budgetary aspect plays a role as well…once you can afford to buy more you will most likely do so (personally I buy more original cd’s now because i can easily afford to).

Yes, the downfall of a sharing service like Napster would be loss to the internet community. Napster is a great way to listen to songs in a private environment before deciding whether to buy the album or not. Also a service like napster enables people to share their homemade files easily, or starting groups who want their music to be known, hoping to get a record contract somewhere. But let us not forget that violating copyrights is still illegal, what would you do if it was your work that was being ripped and ‘stolen’ like this?

Even though I am not a napster user (and that I am riding a high horse on this one), I do hope the service will continue.

Signing off…

The guy above wrote so much I probably get ignored, but…Back in the 70’s (or whatever) the recording industry sued the radio stations and tape recorder manufacturers, same shit as napster. The result was, the courts ruled, that radio station must pay big money, and listeners can legally make ONE copy of any song for personal use. That’s what Napster is using in court. Does anybody actually read up on this shit?

Think it’s illegal too.
Why else would I love it so damn much

they misdefine-

NAPSTER is not illegal,
though people who ‘misuse’ it act illegally. just like knives are not illegal, but stabbling someone is. (please note i am NOT comparing copyright violation to stabbing)