CROSSVILLE CHRONICLE Opinion   S.E. Wood "A Conservative Viewpoint" Napster is a good deal gone sour Napster is very much in the news these days. If you are more than 17 years of age you probably think a Napster is someone who falls asleep on the job. So here's the deal. Napster is an Internet connection that enables users to exchange music recordings. The recording industry has gone to court, accusing Napster of stealing its copyrighted material. You be the judge. Let's say you are playing your favorite recording on your CD player in the living room. But you want to listen to that recording while you are playing with your computer in the bedroom. No problem. With most computers you can slip your music CD into the computer slot, and the music will come out through the computer. Neat, huh? It gets even better. While you are listening to your music through your computer, you can also make a duplicate copy right in your computer's hard drive. So the next time, the computer can play the song from its own recorded copy. Now suppose your friend down the street - or in Australia, for that matter -- also wants to hear your song. That's where Napster comes in. Go to the Internet, and Napster will make the connection so your friend can also hear your song, and make himself or herself a copy if they want to. So what's the beef? Members of the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) say you are violating their copyright protection when you lend your recording to someone else, and have asked the 9th District Court of Appeals to stop the practice. It's a controversial issue. So you will have to make up your own mind, depending upon your point of view. But one thing to consider. The original recording was bought and paid for. All artist fees, copyright fees and tax impositions were paid for at the time of purchase. If it's your property, shouldn't you be able to lend it to someone else if you want to? Not so, says the RIAA. They want to be paid again each time you let someone else use your property. And since it's not practical to go after each person who is lending recordings, they are going after Napster. Let's make a comparison. Suppose you own a new Pontiac. Payment for the services of all those who built and transported the car to you were included in your purchase price. It's yours. You paid for it. But your neighbor wants to borrow it. Should you be required to pay General Motors again before lending it to him? That is the issue the courts are asked to decide, and I guarantee you Napster will lose. Why? You don't think the entertainment industry supports all those political action groups for nothing, do you? But it's an exercise in futility anyhow. A similar operation is already set to begin operations on an island off the coast of England, out of the reach of the U.S. court system, but just as accessible to you and me. Such is the worldwide miracle of the Internet.. Use your browser's back button to return to the previous page