Right Click: On The MP3dom

EDITORIAL - We’ve all heard enough about it, Napster, MP3.com, Metallica, and the RIAA. Unfortunately the latest craze in the internet-computer revolution is legalism, and why not? There sure is a lot of money out there and if you don’t have the creativeness, or the knowledge needed to make money in this new world like Bill Gates, Justin Frankel, Marc Andreessen, or even our own Nate Mook, why not sue someone? This indeed is what many have feared in the so-called “commercialization” of the Internet.

Are they wrong?

Does the RIAA have the right to seek out copyright infringing MP3ers? Sure they do. However that is not the issue, are they going about it the wrong way? Yes. 

Music artists have approached the Internet, and the craze of the MP3 in two distinct ways. Some
artists, such as the heavy hitting, old school rockers Metallica see the MP3
portal Napster as an almost evil, something that will ruin them and leave them without a source of money for all their work. Yet still others, such as the head-spinning rhyme spewing Limp Bizkit see the MP3 as a means for their fans to experience their music, and trust that if people like the music they hear in MP3-form, they will be willing to stand in line for Limp Bizkit’s next album.

Is Napster evil? 

The striking contrasts come into play when we examine the different mind-sets of Limp Bizkit and Metallica.

"We're suing Napster for one reason and one reason [only] because they exist to pirate music, nothing more, nothing
less." Proclaims Metallica's 'Lars' on the bands website, which recently added an
'FAQ' on their website explaining Metallica’s suet against Napster. 

While Limp Bizkit’s Fred Durst calls Napster "an amazing way to market and promote music."

This is the vital point the RIAA seems to be missing; perhaps an embracing of the MP3 media would be to their advantage. In fact it may have been already, the music industry made about $1,400,000,000 more in 1999 then the year before.

The bands themselves may also find that programs such as Napster may help them promote their music for free if some sort of happy medium is found.

What do the bands say?

"We could care less about the older generation's need to do business as usual. We care more about what our fans want, and our fans want music on the Internet."
Offers Limp Bizkit’s Durst. 

Even Metallica says they don't hate MP3's, as Lars states on
Metallica's website:

"It's important to understand this is not about MP3 as a format. It's a vehicle that carries music, like a CD. It's not about MP3, it's about who controls the format. We have no problem with MP3. We realize that we will reach fans through these vehicles. It's about who’s
[this should be whose, but this is how it appeared
on the Metallica website] conditions and who controls
it."

Yet this is coming from the same guy who offers in one of
Metallica's songs: 

"Doesn't matter what you see
Or into it what you read
You can do it your own way
If it's done just how I say"

In fact that quote from a Metallica song appears on the front-page of their website.

Well where do we draw the line?

Sure its unfair, and illegal to take copyrighted works and copy them, but
that's not the big picture. The RIAA is more then likely scared of
losing their foothold in the music industry. 

The ones getting rich off CD sales are far too often not the artists themselves. The music industries moguls are beginning to see the risk that the Internet and
MP3s are to them, why would a band need to make expensive CDs (compared to the cost of making an MP3) and have a big time company promote them when all they need is a computer and a website?

What do you think, are MP3s evil? Has the RIAA gone to far? Could you care less about MP3s? Tell us what you think.