LEGAL BATTLES    

A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc. 

On July 26, 2000, the Honorable Marilyn Hall Patel, the chief judge of the United States District Court in the Northern District of California heard the case of A&M Records, Inc, A Corporation; Et Al., vs. Napster, Inc., A Corporation.

RIAA says:  there are no royalties being paid to anyone and they want Napster to be required to obtain permission before downloads occur.

Napster says:  it’s impossible to sort by word, complied with the DMCA, Napster has attempted to inhibit illegal downloads, and Sony, one of the record companies in the suit developed the MP3s in the first place

Judge ruled in favor of RIAA

“According to the court, contributory liability may potentially be imposed to a file-sharing technology provider who: 

1.    receives reasonable knowledge of specific infringing files;

2.    knows or should know that such files are available on the system;

3.    and fails to act to prevent viral distribution of the works.

The Napster trial was the first of its kind and will most likely become a precedent for future court proceedings.  The outcome of the A&M Records, Inc. vs. Napster, Inc. has sparked more legal proceedings concerning specific music groups and corporations prosecuting Napster, Inc. and individuals guilty of downloading music from Napster and similar programs.

Metallica v. Napster, Inc.   

        On April 13, 2000, the music group Metallica filed suit against Napster and three universities for copyright infringement and racketeering.  Dr. Dre gave Napster a deadline to remove his songs from the program.

        Both Metallica and Dr. Dre gave Napster lists of names of people who had illegally downloaded their music from the program.  They demanded these people be removed from the service and directly threatened their fans with litigation

        The result of the RIAA and Napster trial has also led to more threats of litigation from the RIAA concerning CD manufacturers.  The RIAA instituted new guidelines and threatened that if they were not followed, legal action would follow.  These guidelines included the verification that all “recorded material had been “cleared” or licensed by the copyright owners.”  These guidelines are much stricter than those previously issued and are under strong surveillance from the RIAA