Annotated Bibliography
Primary Sources
Boehlert, Eric. “Send Lawyers, Guns and Money.” Salon. N.p., 6 Nov. 2003. Web. 7 Dec. 2013. <http://www.salon.com/2003/11/06/cd_sales/>. This article has helped with the understanding of how Napster’s file sharing became such a large problem and how it has helped with the enforcement of the copyright infringement. It also shows how Napster has caused decreases in sales for the music industries although no direct evidence of file sharing.
Boldrin, Michele, and David K. Levine. “Why Napster Is Right.” Economic and Game Theory. N.p., n.d. Web. 23 Dec. 2013. <http://levine.sscnet.ucla.edu/general/intellectual/napster.htm>. This source is a critical source because it shows how on the Napster’s side that the lawsuit made against them makes no sense. It explains in detail and also gives examples and proves how absurd some of the lawsuits that the RIAA makes against Napster are. This source however has a bias favoring Napster however the points that are made are solid ones that show that the lawsuits against Napster make no sense.
Borland, John. “Musicians Launch National Anti-Napster Campaign.” Cnet. N.p., 11 July 2000. Web. 30 Dec. 2013. <http://news.cnet.com/2100-1023-243021.html>. As we get further into our research we learn of one of the main anti-Napster programs, Artists Against Piracy. It was created by musician and they spread awareness to people about the value of music and how it must mean a lot to the musicians. One other important fact that I learned was that not all musicians thought that Napster was bad for their business. Some of them were delighted with it and thought that it would be great for their business.
- - -. “Napster: Downloading Music for Free Is Legal.” Cnet. N.p., 3 July 2000. Web. 18 Dec. 2013. <http://news.cnet.com/2100-1023-242742.html>. As we get deeper into how Napster defends itself against lawsuit we were able to learn valuable information from this source that could ultimately help Napster win its lawsuits. This source is biased for Napster but the author uses the laws to back up the statements that he is talking about. And this source basically describes loopholes that could help Napster win so therefore this is some critical information for my group’s research.
Borland, John, and Evan Handsen. “Napster Lawyers Prep Defense in Music Battle.” Cnet News. Cnet, 3 July 2000. Web. 11 Dec. 2013. <http://news.cnet.com/2100-1023-242700.html>. This source helped us understand what both side, Napster and the RIAA did in the first few cases. The RIAA said that Napster hurt it’s CD sales while Napster says that it helped not popular musicians become more famous.
Clement, Douglas. “Was Napster Right?” The Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis. N.p., 1 Sept. 2002. Web. 23 Nov. 2013. <http://www.minneapolisfed.org/publications_papers/pub_display.cfm?id=3401>. This source really helped us in the early stages of our research because it talked about the whole idea of internet downloading and also how it was illegal It gave examples that included Napster and if what it did was legal. This information was useful for my group to get an understanding on how the time period was when Napster existed and what led up to the creation of the software.
“Court Cases.” University of Texas. N.p., n.d. Web. 31 Dec. 2013. <https://webspace.utexas.edu/rra56/cases.htm>. This website was helpful toward our research about the lawsuits against Napster. It provided short and brief summaries of the lawsuits, which gave us an overall understanding of each lawsuit and what how they attacked Napster.
Doan, Amy. “Metallica Sues Napster.” Forbes Apr.-May 2000: 1. Web. 24 Nov. 2013. <http://www.forbes.com/2000/04/14/mu4.html>. This article from Forbes magazine contributed to our research by providing a look on the conflict from Metallica, one of the bands that was enraged by Napster and sued the company. It was especially helpful for our “Against” page on our website, as it provided a negative bias toward Napster. This website helped us on our research because it had information on the side that was against the program.
Douglas, Guy. “Copyright and Peer-To-Peer Music File Sharing: The Napster Case and the Argument against Legislative Reform.” Murdoch University Electronic Journal of Law. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 Dec. 2013. <http://www.murdoch.edu.au/elaw/issues/v11n1/douglas111.html>. This source was very formal and it talked about about the copyright law and how it affected Napster and other websites like it.
Gillespie, Tarelton. “Why SDMI Failed.” Wired Shut: Copyright and the Shape of Digital Culture. By Tarleton Gillespie. Cambridge: MIT, 2007. 137-65. Print. This chapter was helpful for our group’s understanding of both sides of the controversy. It mainly explained what the Recording Industry and government were trying to do to stop the piracy of Napster, and the pros and cons of their actions.
Gomes, Lee. “Judge Orders Napster to Stop Downloads of Copyrighted Music.” University of Dallas. N.p., 27 July 2000. Web. 23 Dec. 2013. <http://www.utdallas.edu/~liebowit/knowledge_goods/napstergomes.html>. This Primary Source told us that when Napster went to court early on they were forced to shut down their website by Judge Patel and also that she rejected all of their arguments. She also showed a very biased attitude toward the case. It was almost like she was against Napster from the start. And that even though there were some legal parts of Napster must Judges looked past it since they thought that the illegal part was the major part of Napster.
Greenfelf, Karl Taro. “Meet the Napster.” CNN. N.p., 25 Sept. 2000. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. <http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/time/2000/10/02/napster.html>. This website showed us that Shawn Fanning's side of the argument. It had vital information that helped us realize that Shawn Fanning didn’t try to produce something illegal.
Greenman, Catherine. “Taking Sides in The Napster War.” The New York Times [New York] 31 Aug. 2000: n. pag. Print. As we dug further into our topic, we thought we needed to find information from both sides of the Napster conflict. This article from the New York Times was a great starting point for this as it provided interviews from the people that were supportive/against of Napster. This article was a great source for finding information from people of society that were against/supportive of Napster.
King, Brad. “The Day the Napster Died.” Wired. N.p., 5 May 2002. Web. 7 Dec. 2013. <http://www.wired.com/gadgets/portablemusic/news/2002/05/52540?currentPage=all>. This source gave us an overall summary of Napster all the way to the year of 2002. Around this time the original creators of Napster left the company because of the amount of lawsuits and how large the fines would be.
- - -. “Gov’t Says Napster Violates Law.” Wired. N.p., 9 Aug. 2000. Web. 20 Feb. 2014. <http://www.wired.com/techbiz/media/news/2000/09/38692>. This web article helped us understand what laws Napster broke, contributing to the against side of the argument. Knowing what laws were broken is extremely helpful to our research and project because it helps us take a side in the argument.
- - -. “Judge: If You Own Music, Prove It.” Wired. Condé Nast, 22 Feb. 2002. Web. 24 Nov. 2013. <http://www.wired.com/gadgets/portablemusic/news/2002/02/50625>. This source was important in helping us identify the flaws of the RIAA. A judge told that during a case that both sides The RIAA and Napster were dirty but what Napster did was small compared to the things that the RIAA did like cut of other distribution of music.
Kinsella, Stephan. “Napster and against the Second Homesteading Rule.” Lewrockwell.com. N.p., 4 Sept. 2000. Web. 23 Dec. 2013. <http://www.lewrockwell.com/2000/09/stephan-kinsella/go-napster-go/>. This source was based and supported Napster however it informed us about specific laws that say that technically what Napster is doing is not illegal. This is important to our research so that we can understand what the laws are that prevent copyrighting and such.
Kravets, David. “Napster Trial Ends Seven Years Later, Defining Online Sharing along the Way.” Wired. N.p., 31 Aug. 2007. Web. 18 Dec. 2013. <http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2007/08/napster-trial-e/>. This source was one of the first ones that we looked at that talked about how the Napster Cases finally got done. We also learned from this source that the main creators of the website Shawn Fanning and Sean Parker had left the company and did not bother supporting it through it’s cases.
Macdonald, Tim. “Napster Morally Right, but Legally Wrong.” E Commerce Times. N.p., 31 July 2000. Web. 2 Jan. 2014. <http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/3904.html>. Our group needed more information on concepts that supported Napster. This website was especially helpful for that aspect as it provided detailed information and answered our questions about what Napster used in court.
Sellers, Dennis. “Napster CEO: We’ll Follow the Court’s Order.” Macworld. N.p., 7 Mar. 2001. Web. 23 Dec. 2013. <http://www.macworld.com/article/1020675/napster.html>. This source was important to us in the beginning of our research and the time we started learning about he lawsuits and how Napster did in court. It helped tell how Napster dealt with the court and whether or not it complied to the courts order. This helped us learn how Napster Company was trying to make it legal by cleaning up Napster. This is greatly important because now we know how Napster’s company reacted to the court orders.
Boldrin, Michele, and David K. Levine. “Why Napster Is Right.” Economic and Game Theory. N.p., n.d. Web. 23 Dec. 2013. <http://levine.sscnet.ucla.edu/general/intellectual/napster.htm>. This source is a critical source because it shows how on the Napster’s side that the lawsuit made against them makes no sense. It explains in detail and also gives examples and proves how absurd some of the lawsuits that the RIAA makes against Napster are. This source however has a bias favoring Napster however the points that are made are solid ones that show that the lawsuits against Napster make no sense.
Borland, John. “Musicians Launch National Anti-Napster Campaign.” Cnet. N.p., 11 July 2000. Web. 30 Dec. 2013. <http://news.cnet.com/2100-1023-243021.html>. As we get further into our research we learn of one of the main anti-Napster programs, Artists Against Piracy. It was created by musician and they spread awareness to people about the value of music and how it must mean a lot to the musicians. One other important fact that I learned was that not all musicians thought that Napster was bad for their business. Some of them were delighted with it and thought that it would be great for their business.
- - -. “Napster: Downloading Music for Free Is Legal.” Cnet. N.p., 3 July 2000. Web. 18 Dec. 2013. <http://news.cnet.com/2100-1023-242742.html>. As we get deeper into how Napster defends itself against lawsuit we were able to learn valuable information from this source that could ultimately help Napster win its lawsuits. This source is biased for Napster but the author uses the laws to back up the statements that he is talking about. And this source basically describes loopholes that could help Napster win so therefore this is some critical information for my group’s research.
Borland, John, and Evan Handsen. “Napster Lawyers Prep Defense in Music Battle.” Cnet News. Cnet, 3 July 2000. Web. 11 Dec. 2013. <http://news.cnet.com/2100-1023-242700.html>. This source helped us understand what both side, Napster and the RIAA did in the first few cases. The RIAA said that Napster hurt it’s CD sales while Napster says that it helped not popular musicians become more famous.
Clement, Douglas. “Was Napster Right?” The Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis. N.p., 1 Sept. 2002. Web. 23 Nov. 2013. <http://www.minneapolisfed.org/publications_papers/pub_display.cfm?id=3401>. This source really helped us in the early stages of our research because it talked about the whole idea of internet downloading and also how it was illegal It gave examples that included Napster and if what it did was legal. This information was useful for my group to get an understanding on how the time period was when Napster existed and what led up to the creation of the software.
“Court Cases.” University of Texas. N.p., n.d. Web. 31 Dec. 2013. <https://webspace.utexas.edu/rra56/cases.htm>. This website was helpful toward our research about the lawsuits against Napster. It provided short and brief summaries of the lawsuits, which gave us an overall understanding of each lawsuit and what how they attacked Napster.
Doan, Amy. “Metallica Sues Napster.” Forbes Apr.-May 2000: 1. Web. 24 Nov. 2013. <http://www.forbes.com/2000/04/14/mu4.html>. This article from Forbes magazine contributed to our research by providing a look on the conflict from Metallica, one of the bands that was enraged by Napster and sued the company. It was especially helpful for our “Against” page on our website, as it provided a negative bias toward Napster. This website helped us on our research because it had information on the side that was against the program.
Douglas, Guy. “Copyright and Peer-To-Peer Music File Sharing: The Napster Case and the Argument against Legislative Reform.” Murdoch University Electronic Journal of Law. N.p., n.d. Web. 18 Dec. 2013. <http://www.murdoch.edu.au/elaw/issues/v11n1/douglas111.html>. This source was very formal and it talked about about the copyright law and how it affected Napster and other websites like it.
Gillespie, Tarelton. “Why SDMI Failed.” Wired Shut: Copyright and the Shape of Digital Culture. By Tarleton Gillespie. Cambridge: MIT, 2007. 137-65. Print. This chapter was helpful for our group’s understanding of both sides of the controversy. It mainly explained what the Recording Industry and government were trying to do to stop the piracy of Napster, and the pros and cons of their actions.
Gomes, Lee. “Judge Orders Napster to Stop Downloads of Copyrighted Music.” University of Dallas. N.p., 27 July 2000. Web. 23 Dec. 2013. <http://www.utdallas.edu/~liebowit/knowledge_goods/napstergomes.html>. This Primary Source told us that when Napster went to court early on they were forced to shut down their website by Judge Patel and also that she rejected all of their arguments. She also showed a very biased attitude toward the case. It was almost like she was against Napster from the start. And that even though there were some legal parts of Napster must Judges looked past it since they thought that the illegal part was the major part of Napster.
Greenfelf, Karl Taro. “Meet the Napster.” CNN. N.p., 25 Sept. 2000. Web. 22 Nov. 2013. <http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/time/2000/10/02/napster.html>. This website showed us that Shawn Fanning's side of the argument. It had vital information that helped us realize that Shawn Fanning didn’t try to produce something illegal.
Greenman, Catherine. “Taking Sides in The Napster War.” The New York Times [New York] 31 Aug. 2000: n. pag. Print. As we dug further into our topic, we thought we needed to find information from both sides of the Napster conflict. This article from the New York Times was a great starting point for this as it provided interviews from the people that were supportive/against of Napster. This article was a great source for finding information from people of society that were against/supportive of Napster.
King, Brad. “The Day the Napster Died.” Wired. N.p., 5 May 2002. Web. 7 Dec. 2013. <http://www.wired.com/gadgets/portablemusic/news/2002/05/52540?currentPage=all>. This source gave us an overall summary of Napster all the way to the year of 2002. Around this time the original creators of Napster left the company because of the amount of lawsuits and how large the fines would be.
- - -. “Gov’t Says Napster Violates Law.” Wired. N.p., 9 Aug. 2000. Web. 20 Feb. 2014. <http://www.wired.com/techbiz/media/news/2000/09/38692>. This web article helped us understand what laws Napster broke, contributing to the against side of the argument. Knowing what laws were broken is extremely helpful to our research and project because it helps us take a side in the argument.
- - -. “Judge: If You Own Music, Prove It.” Wired. Condé Nast, 22 Feb. 2002. Web. 24 Nov. 2013. <http://www.wired.com/gadgets/portablemusic/news/2002/02/50625>. This source was important in helping us identify the flaws of the RIAA. A judge told that during a case that both sides The RIAA and Napster were dirty but what Napster did was small compared to the things that the RIAA did like cut of other distribution of music.
Kinsella, Stephan. “Napster and against the Second Homesteading Rule.” Lewrockwell.com. N.p., 4 Sept. 2000. Web. 23 Dec. 2013. <http://www.lewrockwell.com/2000/09/stephan-kinsella/go-napster-go/>. This source was based and supported Napster however it informed us about specific laws that say that technically what Napster is doing is not illegal. This is important to our research so that we can understand what the laws are that prevent copyrighting and such.
Kravets, David. “Napster Trial Ends Seven Years Later, Defining Online Sharing along the Way.” Wired. N.p., 31 Aug. 2007. Web. 18 Dec. 2013. <http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2007/08/napster-trial-e/>. This source was one of the first ones that we looked at that talked about how the Napster Cases finally got done. We also learned from this source that the main creators of the website Shawn Fanning and Sean Parker had left the company and did not bother supporting it through it’s cases.
Macdonald, Tim. “Napster Morally Right, but Legally Wrong.” E Commerce Times. N.p., 31 July 2000. Web. 2 Jan. 2014. <http://www.ecommercetimes.com/story/3904.html>. Our group needed more information on concepts that supported Napster. This website was especially helpful for that aspect as it provided detailed information and answered our questions about what Napster used in court.
Sellers, Dennis. “Napster CEO: We’ll Follow the Court’s Order.” Macworld. N.p., 7 Mar. 2001. Web. 23 Dec. 2013. <http://www.macworld.com/article/1020675/napster.html>. This source was important to us in the beginning of our research and the time we started learning about he lawsuits and how Napster did in court. It helped tell how Napster dealt with the court and whether or not it complied to the courts order. This helped us learn how Napster Company was trying to make it legal by cleaning up Napster. This is greatly important because now we know how Napster’s company reacted to the court orders.
Secondary Sources
David Goldman. “Music’s Lost Decade: Sales Cut in Half.” CNNMoney. CNN, 3 Feb. 2010. Web. 18 Dec. 2013. <http://money.cnn.com/2010/02/02/news/companies/napster_music_industry/>. This source showed us how the RIAA viewed the years 199-2010. They thought that music sales declined heavily because digital music became the popular way to listen to music. But the great depression could have also been as huge factor in the decline.
Dodge, Don, Mr. “How Napster changed the world - A look back 7 years later.” Don Dodge on the Next Big Thing: Thoughts about Business and Technology. Don Dodge, 30 Mar. 2007. Web. 6 Nov. 2013. <http://dondodge.typepad.com/the_next_big_thing/2007/03/how_napster_cha.html>. This website was helpful for our research as it was a primary source. As it was written by a man that actually joined the Napster crew and he helped the development of the program, it helped us take sides to the conflict created by it. He explained how their simple program became a monster that angered the music industry, and how his company reacted to it. This website was overall a great primary source that helped us understand what Shawn Fanning and his colleagues were planning to do, and how they went too far and changed the economy of the music industry forever.
Graham, Jefferson. “10 Years after Napster, Online Pirates Alive and Well.” ABC News. ABC, 24 June 2009. Web. 2 Jan. 2014. <http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=7913205&page=2>. Now that we have finished researching how Napster got shut down we can learn about it’s legacy and influence on digital music after it got shut down. And how did music sales go once the enormous file-sharing company got shut down.
Kravets, David. “Dec. 7, 1999: RIAA Sues Napster.” Wired. Wired, 7 Dec. 2009. Web. 6 Nov. 2013. <http://www.wired.com/thisdayintech/2009/12/1207riaa-sues-napster/>. This source helped us learn more information about the end of Napster and how it got closed. We were able to learn that Bertelsmann was forced to pay a lot of money in the millions to settle all the claims of copyrighted music.
Lamot, Tom. “Napster: The Day the Music Was Set Free.” The Guardian. Guardian News and Media Limited, 22 Feb. 2013. Web. 25 Nov. 2013. <http://www.theguardian.com/music/2013/feb/24/napster-music-free-file-sharing>. This article, written by an average consumer at the time of Napster, helped us understand the topic at a different perspective. The author describes how he and society thought of the Napster program, how he felt when Napster went down, and how the program impacted his life. This helped us on our research because it brought in another perspective of Napster.
Litman, Jessica. “The Copyright Wars.” Digital Copyright. Pbk. ed. Amherst: Prometheus, 2006. 151-65. Print. This book was helpful for our research because it provided vivid details about the conflict that Napster brought upon society. It argued on both sides, which helped us know more about the war over the program. It also showed what happened in the lawsuits that Napster was accused of.
Masnick, Mike. “The Aftermath of Napster: Letting Incumbents Veto Innovation Slows down Innovation Drastically.” Innovation. TechDirt, 29 May 2013. Web. 23 Dec. 2013. <http://www.techdirt.com/blog/innovation/articles/20130525/03082423211/aftermath-napster-letting-incumbents-veto-innovation-destroys-innovation.shtml>. This source clearly explained why sites sites like iTunes, Pandora and Youtube got famous for other artists content kind of like how Napster did. These sites all provide easy access and convenience. And also that the RIAA does not recognize this and continuously treats technology like an enemy.
Owsinski, Bobby. “The Lie That Fills the Music Industry’s Paranoia.” Forbes. N.p., 27 Nov. 2013. Web. 26 Dec. 2013. <http://www.forbes.com/sites/bobbyowsinski/2013/11/27/the-lie-that-fuels-the-music-industrys-paranoia/>. This source informed us about Music Piracy overall and how it still affects the Music Industry in 2012. We also understood from this source that this took of greatly a few years before Napster started and once it started it just got more and more popular. We learned that the RIAA blames it on Napster and that they started they Music Piracy and they back it with statistics and numbers.
Sydell, Laura. “What Today’s Online Sharing Companies Can Learn from Napster.” NPR. N.p., 11 Nov. 2013. Web. 7 Dec. 2013. <http://www.npr.org/blogs/alltechconsidered/2013/11/11/244568849/what-todays-online-sharing-companies-can-learn-from-napster>. This source showed us not everyone with political power hated Napster. They used a tactic to get a congressman on their side. This source is one of the vital sources that we have to prove that there were some political support for Napster.
Tyson, Jeff. “How the Old Napster Worked.” How Stuff Works. Discovery, n.d. Web. 8 Oct. 2013. <http://computer.howstuffworks.com/napster.htm>. We used this source as a starting point for our research as it provided vivid details and explained many of our questions that we first had in mind as we were deciding our topic. It explained how the actual Napster website worked, how and why it was founded, and the conflict that came along with it. In a nutshell, this website was a great place to start as it had detailed information.
Ugwu, Reggie. “Q&A: Sean Parker and Shawn Fanning on ‘Downloaded,’ the Napster Revolution.” Billboard Biz. Billboard, n.d. Web. 13 Nov. 2013. <http://www.billboard.com/biz/articles/news/digital-and-mobile/1552508/qa-sean-parker-and-shawn-fanning-on-downloaded-the?page=0%2C1>. This website helped us learn what Shawn Fanning and Sean Parker thought of their invention, how they fared after their creation, and also how they lived after Napster was shut down. It provided a interview of Fanning and Parker, and in it they explained how they thought that the program was a good idea but things changed rapidly as things went the wrong direction. This helped us understand the topic more as it provided a different perspective on the conflict from the minds of the creators of Napster.
Dodge, Don, Mr. “How Napster changed the world - A look back 7 years later.” Don Dodge on the Next Big Thing: Thoughts about Business and Technology. Don Dodge, 30 Mar. 2007. Web. 6 Nov. 2013. <http://dondodge.typepad.com/the_next_big_thing/2007/03/how_napster_cha.html>. This website was helpful for our research as it was a primary source. As it was written by a man that actually joined the Napster crew and he helped the development of the program, it helped us take sides to the conflict created by it. He explained how their simple program became a monster that angered the music industry, and how his company reacted to it. This website was overall a great primary source that helped us understand what Shawn Fanning and his colleagues were planning to do, and how they went too far and changed the economy of the music industry forever.
Graham, Jefferson. “10 Years after Napster, Online Pirates Alive and Well.” ABC News. ABC, 24 June 2009. Web. 2 Jan. 2014. <http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/story?id=7913205&page=2>. Now that we have finished researching how Napster got shut down we can learn about it’s legacy and influence on digital music after it got shut down. And how did music sales go once the enormous file-sharing company got shut down.
Kravets, David. “Dec. 7, 1999: RIAA Sues Napster.” Wired. Wired, 7 Dec. 2009. Web. 6 Nov. 2013. <http://www.wired.com/thisdayintech/2009/12/1207riaa-sues-napster/>. This source helped us learn more information about the end of Napster and how it got closed. We were able to learn that Bertelsmann was forced to pay a lot of money in the millions to settle all the claims of copyrighted music.
Lamot, Tom. “Napster: The Day the Music Was Set Free.” The Guardian. Guardian News and Media Limited, 22 Feb. 2013. Web. 25 Nov. 2013. <http://www.theguardian.com/music/2013/feb/24/napster-music-free-file-sharing>. This article, written by an average consumer at the time of Napster, helped us understand the topic at a different perspective. The author describes how he and society thought of the Napster program, how he felt when Napster went down, and how the program impacted his life. This helped us on our research because it brought in another perspective of Napster.
Litman, Jessica. “The Copyright Wars.” Digital Copyright. Pbk. ed. Amherst: Prometheus, 2006. 151-65. Print. This book was helpful for our research because it provided vivid details about the conflict that Napster brought upon society. It argued on both sides, which helped us know more about the war over the program. It also showed what happened in the lawsuits that Napster was accused of.
Masnick, Mike. “The Aftermath of Napster: Letting Incumbents Veto Innovation Slows down Innovation Drastically.” Innovation. TechDirt, 29 May 2013. Web. 23 Dec. 2013. <http://www.techdirt.com/blog/innovation/articles/20130525/03082423211/aftermath-napster-letting-incumbents-veto-innovation-destroys-innovation.shtml>. This source clearly explained why sites sites like iTunes, Pandora and Youtube got famous for other artists content kind of like how Napster did. These sites all provide easy access and convenience. And also that the RIAA does not recognize this and continuously treats technology like an enemy.
Owsinski, Bobby. “The Lie That Fills the Music Industry’s Paranoia.” Forbes. N.p., 27 Nov. 2013. Web. 26 Dec. 2013. <http://www.forbes.com/sites/bobbyowsinski/2013/11/27/the-lie-that-fuels-the-music-industrys-paranoia/>. This source informed us about Music Piracy overall and how it still affects the Music Industry in 2012. We also understood from this source that this took of greatly a few years before Napster started and once it started it just got more and more popular. We learned that the RIAA blames it on Napster and that they started they Music Piracy and they back it with statistics and numbers.
Sydell, Laura. “What Today’s Online Sharing Companies Can Learn from Napster.” NPR. N.p., 11 Nov. 2013. Web. 7 Dec. 2013. <http://www.npr.org/blogs/alltechconsidered/2013/11/11/244568849/what-todays-online-sharing-companies-can-learn-from-napster>. This source showed us not everyone with political power hated Napster. They used a tactic to get a congressman on their side. This source is one of the vital sources that we have to prove that there were some political support for Napster.
Tyson, Jeff. “How the Old Napster Worked.” How Stuff Works. Discovery, n.d. Web. 8 Oct. 2013. <http://computer.howstuffworks.com/napster.htm>. We used this source as a starting point for our research as it provided vivid details and explained many of our questions that we first had in mind as we were deciding our topic. It explained how the actual Napster website worked, how and why it was founded, and the conflict that came along with it. In a nutshell, this website was a great place to start as it had detailed information.
Ugwu, Reggie. “Q&A: Sean Parker and Shawn Fanning on ‘Downloaded,’ the Napster Revolution.” Billboard Biz. Billboard, n.d. Web. 13 Nov. 2013. <http://www.billboard.com/biz/articles/news/digital-and-mobile/1552508/qa-sean-parker-and-shawn-fanning-on-downloaded-the?page=0%2C1>. This website helped us learn what Shawn Fanning and Sean Parker thought of their invention, how they fared after their creation, and also how they lived after Napster was shut down. It provided a interview of Fanning and Parker, and in it they explained how they thought that the program was a good idea but things changed rapidly as things went the wrong direction. This helped us understand the topic more as it provided a different perspective on the conflict from the minds of the creators of Napster.