2000IEEE MicroRequires access

Napster: a walking copyright infringement?

R.H. Stern

Open publisher page 26 citations

Abstract

The case of the CD music publishing industry against Napster (A&M Records, Inc v Napster, Inc, ND Calif) has now been argued before the US Court of Appeals in San Francisco and awaits decision. In a curious reversal of customary judicial procedure, the district court has now issued its opinion ("sentence first, verdict afterward") explaining why it previously decided to order Napster to shut down operations. However, the court of appeals stayed that order in late July just hours before the order was scheduled to go into effect. Although the formal opinion is in the nature of assault and battery upon a dead horse, the opinion is nonetheless informative because it explains why the district court thought Napster's system shouldn't be permitted to operate.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

The case of the CD music publishing industry against Napster (A&M Records, Inc v Napster, Inc, ND Calif) has now been argued before the US Court of Appeals in San Francisco and awaits decision. In a curious reversal of customary judicial procedure, the district court has now issued its opinion ("sentence first, verdict afterward") explaining why it previously decided to order Napster to shut down operations. However, the court of appeals stayed that order in late July just hours before the order was scheduled to go into effect. Although the formal opinion is in the nature of assault and battery upon a dead horse, the opinion is nonetheless informative because it explains why the district court thought Napster's system shouldn't be permitted to operate.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 26 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

The case of the CD music publishing industry against Napster (A&M Records, Inc v Napster, Inc, ND Calif) has now been argued before the US Court of Appeals in San Francisco and awaits decision. In a curious reversal of customary judicial procedure, the district court has now issued its opinion ("sentence first, verdict afterward") explaining why it previously decided to order Napster to shut down operations. However, the court of appeals stayed that order in late July just hours before the order was scheduled to go into effect. Although the formal opinion is in the nature of assault and battery upon a dead horse, the opinion is nonetheless informative because it explains why the district court thought Napster's system shouldn't be permitted to operate.

Key concepts: Order (exchange), Law, Sentence, Publishing, Verdict, Political science, Copyright infringement, Majority opinion

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Napster: a walking copyright infringement? — Research Paper | ScholarLens