Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Businesses Music

Napster Being Shut Down 213

Posted by Soulskill
from the seth-green-unavailable-for-comment dept.
helix2301 writes "Napster was one of the earliest and most popular P2P music-sharing services. After a long legal battle that saw Napster slowly gutted in the face of infringement lawsuits, it was reinvented as a legitimate music download service. The resurrected Napster is now being shut down. Rhapsody has completed its purchase of Napster and will be absorbing its subscribers and assets."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Napster Being Shut Down

Comments Filter:
  • by elrous0 (869638) * on Friday December 02, 2011 @01:21PM (#38239614)

    The music industry had to be dragged kicking, clawing, and screaming into the 21st century. If it weren't for Napster and iTunes we'd all still be driving down to the record store to buy $15 CD's, just to get the one or two songs you actually want and the 10 other songs that are complete filler. It's sad that Napster had to be a sacrifice on the road to the industry finally waking up and realizing that people actually want digital music and they want it at a reasonable per-song price--that we'd had enough of getting gouged under the old LP/CD system.

    Of course, they're still grumbling about it--and many of them still want to slap DRM on their music. But at least Napster (and later Kazaa) were there to scare the industry and make them realize that people want to download digital music, and iTunes was there to show them that, yes, you can still make money off it (but we're not buying your overpriced albums anymore for one song).

    Of course, I'm sure the arrogant stoner at my local record store hates this, as he no longer gets to snort at my record choices and tell me about how *HIS* taste is so much more hip than mine.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Except now you're paying $15 for a digital copy, and $10 for the CD, or $1.99 for that "just one track".

      • by ackthpt (218170) on Friday December 02, 2011 @01:32PM (#38239826) Homepage Journal

        Except now you're paying $15 for a digital copy, and $10 for the CD, or $1.99 for that "just one track".

        I am completely fine with $1.99 for one track, if the rest of the album isn't of any interest. I'm an old Album Rock dude, but will be among the first to recognize how many one/two hit wonders there have been where I won't want the whole CD.

      • by Myopic (18616) on Friday December 02, 2011 @02:48PM (#38240982)

        Wow, really? I buy CDs for one, two, or sometimes three dollars used. My favorite site is Half, but there are many others. Consider using them -- it really sounds like you are still purposely repeating behavior which results in you getting screwed. I can only imagine that you do that in order to preserve your plausible claim to the right to complain, but if you ever feel like actually solving the problem of overpriced music, you can do that easily.

        • by sapgau (413511)

          You weren't supposed to share your "secret" if you wanted to pay up to $3 for used CDs.
          Supply and demand my friend.

      • What's wrong with paying $1.99 for one track when you would have had to pay $5-10 for the one or two tracks you wanted anyhow?

        Just because it had a better cost to track ratio before doesn't mean you were getting a better deal if you never listened to the other tracks. You were essentially paying more for bonus material you didn't care about.

      • You should probably check out iTunes or Amazon, since their mp3 albums are only $10 (for between 15 and 30 songs), and their individual tracks only $1. Sounds like youre getting ripped off.

        Some of the prices are dropping below $1, actually.

    • by jaymz666 (34050)

      What's a local record store?
      Even without download services, sites like AMazon, CDNow, Music Boulevard and their ilk were eating away at the local record store business.

      • by elrous0 (869638) * on Friday December 02, 2011 @01:28PM (#38239754)

        I'm not sure where the arrogant stoner went after the local record store closed. But if I had to guess, I would imagine he's in his Mom's basement right now listening to a post-pre-punk ska glam fusion band on vinyl and longing for the days when he could spend all day telling customers how much better his tastes were than theirs.

      • by mcavic (2007672)
        We still have a local record store. It's called Borders.

        Oh, wait.....
    • by masternerdguy (2468142) on Friday December 02, 2011 @01:26PM (#38239720)
      If your smart you grab the CD and rip it, then store the CD in a safe place. You save money and have no DRM.
      • by jaymz666 (34050) on Friday December 02, 2011 @01:28PM (#38239762)

        And a backup! Oh, and liner notes and pretty pictures.
        Try selling a used download at the local Half Price Books & Music.

        • by kiwimate (458274) on Friday December 02, 2011 @02:17PM (#38240510) Journal

          This. I haven't lived in New Zealand for a few years, so I don't know if Real Groovy Records on Queen Street in Auckland still exists. But it was amazing. A room full of used albums, many of which were genuine rarities that you couldn't find anywhere else.

          And that includes on-line. There are albums that I cannot buy on-line. The mega-stores don't carry them. They're not available from the artist directly. But I can sometimes find them at the local used music store.

          Or I could, before they went out of business because nobody buys albums any more. I do care about the mega-stores going out of business, because there are people who work there who are without a job (I'm talking about the high school kids who had a weekend job there, that kind of person). But I care more about the independent shop that was started with someone's life savings because he loved music. He's the guy who'd find the rarities. And he's the guy who lost his life savings.

      • by icebraining (1313345) on Friday December 02, 2011 @01:43PM (#38239998) Homepage

        If you're smart you download that rip and buy some merchandising from the artist. You save money, have no DRM, probably pay more to the artist and get some nice t-shirt or similar besides the music.

        • Musicians usually don't make much, if any, money at all on merchandise. The merch contracts are usually set up by the labels and make sure that everyone gets their cut off the top, leaving the artists with the scraps. If you haven't read Steve Albini's "The Problem With Music" [negativland.com], he explains how merch works (as well as a ton of other ways the labels screw their artists).
      • If your smart you grab the used pre-2000s era CD and rip it. Many CDs sold after 2000 have undergone new "remastering" that have suffered because of the loudness war. So let me repeat that. You're source CDs should either be from a flea market or other pre-owned music store. All other newer CDs may burn in a ball of fire. God willing.

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by DogDude (805747)
      Speak for yourself. Instead of buying overpriced, poor quality, DRM'ed music, I DO go to my local CD store, buy $10-$15 CD's, rip them for my own use, AND I contribute to my local economy.
      • by elrous0 (869638) * on Friday December 02, 2011 @01:38PM (#38239900)

        AND I contribute to my local economy.

        Buying from my local record store was only helping keep the local weed dealer in business. But to each his own.

        • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

          by Anonymous Coward
          You don't seem to understand the economics of dealing weed. I used to make several hundred dollars per day just dealing to friends; selling records would have been a pain in the ass and cut into my profit margin.
      • I DO go to my local CD store, buy $10-$15 CD's, rip them for my own use, AND I contribute to my local economy.

        I've never understood how buying anything that is not produced locally benefits the local economy. The money was already in the local economy (you had it). When you buy a CD some of it stays local and some of it goes off to the record company some where else. The net result is that money is removed from the local economy. Now if you purchase from local bands that produce their own CDs that would keep the money local. Even better if someone from a nearby town comes over and buys from your local band.

        • by cforciea (1926392)
          The fallacy you are falling for is that having a healthy economy is about moving money in. An economic ecosystem that imports exactly as much value as it exports can still be anything from completely horrible to stellar, and a lot of it has to do with how quickly money is moving around. I mean, when people talk about the economic crash of 2008 destroying x number of dollars of wealth, they aren't claiming that dollar bills spontaneously combusted.
        • Yes, if the CDs were manufactured locally, if the instruments and equipment used in the production were manufactured and sourced locally...

    • by Pope (17780) on Friday December 02, 2011 @01:40PM (#38239934)

      If it weren't for Napster and iTunes we'd all still be driving down to the record store to buy $15 CD's, just to get the one or two songs you actually want and the 10 other songs that are complete filler..

      They really shot themselves in the foot with the whole CD single thing, that was gouging pure and simple. I still have an old '45 from 1980 with the original price tag still on it: CAN$1.49. That was when LPs were 40 minutes or less with 8 songs, going for around CAN$9.99.

      • by Dogtanian (588974)

        They really shot themselves in the foot with the whole CD single thing, that was gouging pure and simple.

        CDs always used to be grossly overpriced in the days before the original Napster and online retailers like Amazon selling them much cheaper. But CD singles were the worst of all, in the UK at least.

        Circa the mid-90s, while you used to sometimes be able to get them for £1.99 on the first week (when they wanted them to get into the charts), they were usually £3.99 otherwise.

        They usually included more tracks than a traditional vinyl single, but those were still essentially B-sides (occasional h

    • by rednip (186217)

      I'm sure the arrogant stoner at my local record store hates this, as he no longer gets to snort at my record choices and tell me about how *HIS* taste is so much more hip than mine.

      When in 'reality' we know that your taste is so much more hip than anyones. I'll bet that that they see you growl at the their suggestions seemingly out of habit.

      However, were you even alive in the days when there really was a record store culture? It wasn't the internet that killed off the independent record store, but the chain retailer. Well that and CDs, because as you didn't have to buy your tenth copy of 'Dark Side of the Moon' once it couldn't as easily wear out.

      • by elrous0 (869638) * on Friday December 02, 2011 @01:59PM (#38240262)

        When in 'reality' we know that your taste is so much more hip than anyones.

        I listen to bands so niche that even they haven't heard their music.

        • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

          by Anonymous Coward

          I listen to bands so niche that even they haven't heard their music.

          I like Beethoven too.

      • "However, were you even alive in the days when there really was a record store culture?"

        I'm 55, and only vaguely recall the record stores. As you say, the chain retailers took over. I was in junior high school when the "Town Mall" was built, complete with a music outlet. That business was so profitable, that the town soon had several stores competing, only to see them all snowballed by the larger retailers. At that time, it wasn't WalMart, but K-Mart. Then it was "Adios, record stores!"

    • People were downloading music long before Naptster...
    • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

      If you were buying albums with 1 good song for every 5 bad ones, then yes, the local store's stoner's taste is probably better than yours.

    • ... to buy $15 CD's, just to get the one or two songs you actually want and the 10 other songs that are complete filler...

      I always preferred buying the whole album and still do. But if you bought a whole CD for one song, more fool you. There were these things called singles, they've been around since music became commercialized. I don't get why people perpetuate the myth that individual song purchase was bought about by the digital age!

    • I see nothing wrong with having to still buy CDs. The prices of them were the problem. Sell a CD for $5 or less, and people would have bought them. The tools to rip your own collection then would have evolved to be easier/faster/better. Cdex on windoze isn't too bad. Personally I wrote some perl scripts to do this long long ago, and they still serve me well today .

      You then have
      1) uncompressed masters
      2) the ability to re-encode as technologies evolve
      3) the ability to put the stuff on ANY device you want

    • by FunkyELF (609131)

      Steve Jobs did not change the music industry, Napster did

    • by geekmux (1040042)

      ...Of course, they're still grumbling about it--and many of them still want to slap DRM on their music.

      While I'm certainly not standing on the side of MPAA/RIAA here, the reason for DRM is very simple and straightforward from their point of view, as a means to keep the product distribution legitimate and ensure a revenue stream and profitable business model. Yes, I know that "profit" can be demonized here as we all listen to the 1% rapping about the glory of being the 1%, but try and draw an agreeable line between "profitable" and "greedy" with ANY business...it's not that easy, as you'll always find people

      • by cforciea (1926392)
        "And of course the irony of us bitching about things like DRM is you have to wonder how many businesses today would have gone the way of Napster had it NOT been for some sort of electronic countermeasure to prohibit (or at least deter) theft and protect their revenue source enough to stay operational."

        It is a nonzero number, but probably not for the reasons you are thinking. It has nothing to do with keeping people from piracy. I'd be highly surprised if anybody sold copies of music in excess of the cost
    • It's sad that Napster had to be a sacrifice on the road to the industry finally waking up...

      I agree with your general points, although I carry no emotional attachment to the service. I'm thinking of a football metaphor: Napster was the lead offensive blocker; iTunes Music Store was the running back that established the ground game. Amazon, Google Music and any number of other services are the wide receivers who are now able to come into play.

      I'm sure that some people would disagree with what services played what roles, and I don't feel strongly enough about it to argue the details, but my mai

    • by Hatta (162192)

      If it weren't for napster, I'd still be downloading albums over IRC.

    • Actually it's thanks to Napster that I started buying CDs, before that I was listening to what my friends had and ripping the music I really liked. My friends' albums were fine, but now I could find stuff that suited my unique preferences and tastes without pretense. Radio only provided generic songs that were catchy but got old fast and had no real staying power. Napster was a way to easily listen to stuff neither my friends nor the radio could offer, but was even more suited to me. And I wanted more.
  • Who cares ? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by mbone (558574) on Friday December 02, 2011 @01:22PM (#38239638)

    Really, who cares ? The original Napster is long gone; this is just a corporate entity that bought the name.

  • How did they stay in business as long as they did?
  • I didn't know that Napster still existed...
  • by sandytaru (1158959) on Friday December 02, 2011 @01:27PM (#38239738) Journal
    I'm happy with my free podcasts. Over a gigabyte of fresh, free music weekly, and the artists putting out the podcasts/radio shows encourageyou to download them. ("Put it in your playlist and listen to it nonstop for the rest of the week" Above& Beyond chimed in a few weeks ago during "Trance Around the World.")
  • Columbia PC was the first to do battle to defend their right to manufacture PC clones. Don't hear much of them now, do you?

    I wonder what they'll do with the Cat with headphones logo.

  • Repost (Score:5, Funny)

    by Joe Jordan (453607) on Friday December 02, 2011 @01:27PM (#38239742) Journal
    Come on guys, this was posted 11 years ago [slashdot.org] now.
    • Napster, as it stood back then, is long dead. The Napster being discussed now is (was?) a music store that was formed from the ashes of the old music-sharing service. The second sentence of the summary even explains it.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Napster [wikipedia.org]

      How you people get informative mods, I'll never understand.

      • by mrogers (85392)
        Similarly, after LimeWire was shut down the brand was relaunched as a monthly subscription service for slowing your computer down and giving you viruses.
  • NAPSTER BAD [youtube.com]

    MP3 DOWNLOAD GOOD! [youtube.com]
    • Thanks for that second link. I didn't know that Lars had ever admitted that he and the boys were wrong about their stance on Napster.
  • At least it will be remembered via "The social network". I was feeling quite old when my highschool students responded "napster?" while mentioning it in computing class until recently.
  • I wonder if they will bring "ded kitty" back?

    The first time Napster died:

    http://news.dmusic.com/article/5385 [dmusic.com]

  • I am curious when we're going to see the story "All corporations in North America now owned by Exxon-Mobil-Time Warner-Comcast-Microsoft-Clear Channel-AT&T-Verizon-Bank of America". It's inevitable if someone doesn't stop the rampant "I'll just buy my competition" strategy.

  • Napster still existed in the first place?? I'm a huge nerd and seriously had no idea they were still around (in the legal form or otherwise). I can't be the only one so I'm feeling like whatever Rhapsody paid was too much!
  • Yea Lars as in Lars 'the yellow nightingale of cash' Ulrich. You bitched and moaned so much about NOT having enough millions over the countless millions you had and spearheaded the first crusade of the content monopolists against the internet in the persona of napster - so much that, it has become normal to do what you did.

    thank you. shove your extra millions you still not have been able to get, up your ass. and no, your half assed apology and admittance, does not cut it.

    its sad to remember that i onc

HELP!!!! I'm being held prisoner in /usr/games/lib!

Working...