your net:// MP3 rings legal bells

By PETER SINCLAIR

This MP3 thing - what's it all about, really?

Basically it's about music - the way we get it, the way we play it, how much we pay for it or whether we pay for it at all. It's also about morality, ethics, and whether the internet has turned current law into an ass.

MP3, aka MPEG Audio Layer III, isn't the music itself. It's just computer code, a format, which can squeeze large songs into small files.

This is done by stripping a CD of its music and ruthlessly squashing it (a 12:1 compression ratio) by removing all the sound your ears can't hear. The result is near-perfect - we're not talking Donald Duck quality here - and free to anyone with a computer, an internet connection and space on his hard-drive. This is how a scrap of binary code can carry within it the seeds of destruction for a major industry.

The story so far: when private German company Fraunhofer-Gesellshaft released the format, it swiftly caught on. By 1997, thousands of music-lovers were turning their CD collections into MP3 files so they could swap songs with others.

For new artists, getting a major-label record deal wasn't necessarily the ultimate any more. The internet, an equal-opportunity jukebox, was a new way of making a reasonable income from a fairly small base of fans. Websites were specially set up for the purpose. The first, Michael Robertson's pioneering MP3.com, grew into an empire of artists who let their work be downloaded free.

That was fine. But then Robertson started his My.MP3.com service, which let users store their entire music collection online. Hmm. The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) started getting distinctly grumpy. Worse was to come.

Even at MP3.com, locating and downloading the exact song you wanted wasn't easy or quick. But by this time computer hard-drives were getting bigger, and it wasn't long before US student Sean Fanning came up with the idea of a 'distributed network' across which individuals could directly search each other's computers for music they wanted through a central server.

He called it by his own facetious college nickname - Napster.

Uproar! This simple utility, as I predicted at the time, turned out to be "the kind of seminal software - like Visicalc, the first spreadsheet, or Mosaic, the first graphical browser - which divides the future from the past, altering the way we do business and the way we live."

I wish all my predictions were so spot-on! With this delivery-system in place, MP3 exploded. Today, less than a year later, record companies and distributors - the middlemen of music - feel Napster rocking the foundations of their monopolies.

Last month, using threats and bribery, they browbeat MP3.com into submission. As I write this, their lawyers have dragged music site Scour into court to join Napster on a variety of ugly charges (racketeering, facilitating music piracy), and they've unleashed a few tame megastars: notably Lars Ulrich of Metallica, Alanis Morrisette, Barenaked Ladies, rapster Dr Dre, and Madonna.

Shoulder to shoulder with Napster are renegades like Limp Bizkit and thousands upon thousands of protesting Napsterists. Who's right? The megastars argue that Napster is depriving them of their creative rewards and the millions who use it are common thieves. According to the RIAA, Napster is "causing irreparable and ongoing harm to plaintiffs, to CD sales, to the emerging legitimate market for downloading music, and a devaluing of music itself."

Those on the other side claim Napsterists buy more rather than fewer CDs, that overall CD sales have increased, that swapping music you own is ethically sanctioned by tradition, and that Napster doesn't host music on its servers anyway.

It's worth noting that the attitude of the Australasian Performing Rights Association (Apra) differs markedly from that of the global music industry, perhaps reflecting New Zealand's isolated talent and small market: "MP3 allows emerging acts the opportunity to direct-market their music and offers acts with a fan base the chance to set up exclusive subscription services. Napster ... suits the www anarchist but it won't kill the music industry," says Apra's director of NZ operations, Mike Chunn.

Where do you stand? Both ethics and legality are in this case the murkiest of grey areas. Time for situational ethics - you must decide the issue for yourself. If you subscribe to the RIAA view, visit MP3.com for its now "legitimate" material, or newer, cooler venues like the Internet Underground Music Archive, Virgin JamCast, Garageband.com and FarmClub. Coming soon: Napster's "legal," multi-purpose Applesoup. If you think swapping music is okay, see "Joining the Music Revolution" for what to do next.

Who'll win? I won't take sides, beyond observing that genies are notoriously reluctant to re-enter bottles. And didn't the RIAA try to get the cassette tape banned on the same grounds years ago? Besides, there's other software which now does a more thorough job than Napster and doesn't use a central server for the RIAA to shut down.

The forces of yesterday's law'n'order are clearly ranged against the outlaw spirit of the net. It's high noon in cyberspace.

Links:

Limp Bizkit

Internet Underground Music Association

VirginJamCast

GarageBand

FarmClub

AppleSoup