Popular Culture Review 30.2
In this article , I will challenge the widespread cultural belief that file sharing is neither illegal nor immoral . Writing from the perspective of a life-long metalhead and former entertainment lawyer , I will debunk the progressive , anti-copyright ideologies that have fostered and encouraged the practice of digital theft , resulting in the steady demise of original and creative musicianship . Operating within the context of the competing philosophies of collectivism and individualism , I will show that , sadly , it was Metallica ’ s fans and not the members of the band who failed not only their metal heroes , but also the music community as a whole , during and after Metallica v . Napster . In short , I will provide both the legal and philosophical reasons that Gene Simmons was correct to say that the fans�with the assistance of file-sharing companies like Napster�have effectively killed the music industry .
THE DAWN OF FILE SHARING
It all started in the late ’ 90s , when Northeastern Massachusetts University student Shawn Fanning , his uncle John Fanning , and friend Sean Parker co-founded Napster , the pioneering peer-to-peer ( P2P ) file sharing network system that allowed its online subscribers to connect with other members . Fanning claimed in a 2000 Newsweek article that Napster ’ s original aim was “[ t ] o build communities around different types of music ” ( Zaleski ). Napster ’ s subscribers were able to “ share ” their favorite music by utilizing the company ’ s proprietary software to upload , download , and store MP3 files�the digital copying platform that became obsolete almost as quickly as it did revolutionary in the ’ 90s�on their own home computers . By tapping into high-speed Internet systems , fans were able to obtain , with the click of a mouse , any song ever created�and for free . It was thus not surprising when Napster became not even an immediate , but an in-
4