NAPSTERBusiness Law

BriefingShannon Brown

Robyn McGonigleErika L. LaMarch

Christine PediconeKelly Ann Baker

29 November 2006

Introduction Shannon Brown

Background

Robyn McGoniglePlaintiff Case

Erika L. LaMarchDefendants Case

Christine PediconeOutcome

Kelly BakerImpact

Background Napster Current Standing Biography:

Publicly traded on NASDAQ as NAPS ticker symbol

Currently 145 Employees Formerly called Roxio 500,000 subscribers Music licensed from 2 million record companies

http://www.hoovers.com/napster/--ID__102418--/free-co-factsheet.xhtml

Technology 1987 MPEG-3 by

Moving Picture Experts Group

Ripping Computer CD

MusicShare linkage through the internet

Issue Is peer to peer file transfer infringement?

Fact Industry data for CD’s since before and after

Napster’s inception.

Introduction Shannon Brown

Background

Robyn McGoniglePlaintiff Case

Erika L. LaMarchDefendants Case

Christine PediconeOutcome

Kelly BakerImpact

Prosecutors Facts Case Law: Fonovisa Incorporated vs. Cherry

Auction Incorporated Decision: one cannot sell copied recordings at a flea

market. Direct Infringement through reproducing and

distributing copyrighted material Does RIAA vs. Diamond Multimedia Systems Inc.

provide that; “Napster was designed for the purpose of facilitating

piracy, and…it’s users are using its service overwhelmingly to trade MP3 files.”

RIAA point: Napster’s link to music provides “substantial ongoing control.”

Introduction Shannon Brown

Background

Robyn McGoniglePlaintiff Case

Erika L. LaMarchDefendants Case

Christine PediconeOutcome

Kelly BakerImpact

Defendant’s Facts Sony Corporation of America vs. Universal

City Studios Incorporated Taping TV programs is noninfringing

AHRA Audio Home Recording Act Personal use of digital copies

Defense: Fair use definition Every search engine could be liable “[providing a link] is not enough to render the

provider of the link contributorily liable for the content at the linked location”

BREAK

Agenda Shannon Brown

Background

Robyn McGoniglePlaintiff Case

Erika L. LaMarchDefendants Case

Christine PediconeOutcome

Kelly BakerImpact

Decision Ninth court Judge Marilyn Hall Patel of the Northern District

of California Supports RIAA vs. Diamond Multimedia Systems Inc. Found the defense’s use of case law to be, “perplexing”,

“irrelevant”, and “explicitly excluding PCs”. Refers to Copyright Law statutes in response to Fair Use

definition. Disapproves of the centralized search

Napster’s linking service is found indirectly infringing District Court finds direct infringement by Napster’s users Preliminary court moves for injunction to stop the transfer

of music. Ninth Circuit affirmed preliminary court’s decision

Agenda Shannon Brown

Background

Robyn McGoniglePlaintiff Case

Erika L. LaMarchDefendants Case

Christine PediconeOutcome

Kelly BakerImpact

Following Lawsuits Scour.com provides videos and music and

is simultaneously sued by Motion Picture Association of America in Southern District of New York.

Napster’s Current Standings Music licensed from 2 million record

companies Publicly traded on NASDAQ as NAPS ticker

symbol Currently 145 Employees Formerly called Roxio 500,000 subscribers Competition

Apple RealNetworks

-60

-40

-20

0

20

40

60

80

100

2004 2005 2006

Net IncomeRevenueProfit

For more information contact us Shannon Brown

sbrown@studentmail.immaculata.edu

Robyn McGoniglermcgonigle@studentmail.immaculata.edu

Erika L. LaMarchelamarch@studentmail.immaculata.edu

Christine Pediconecpedicone@studentmail.immaculata.edu

Kelly Bakerkbaker1@studentmail.immaculata.edu

References “Napster’s Last Stand?” by Alan Sutin and

Wayne Josel www.hoovers.com/napster/--

ID__102418--/free-co-factsheet.xhtml “Ninth Circuit Upholds Napster Injunction,

Narrows Scope Slightly” by Aspen Publishers

QUESTIONS