Napster for sale -- potential buyers include "a Western telecommunications giant and a brand-name 'pure' Internet service provider."
posted by johnb (9 comments total)
Why should anyone pay for the company? You can just download it off the net for free, can't you? posted by hijinx at 6:11 AM on October 5, 2000
NPR incorrectly described Napster as a "web site that allows users to share music files".
If that's the case, then Linux is a "web site that allows its users to have an alternative operating system on their computer".
Close but not quite. posted by ethmar at 6:50 AM on October 5, 2000
Hijinx - you can download the program for free, but the servers are owned by Napster.
Does anyone really think that people will sign up for an ISP just to stay on Napster? Am I going to give up, say, AT&T Broadband to get Mindspring/Earthlink and my MP3 fix?
It's faulty reasoning. And furthermore, such an offer closes Napster off from the rest of the Internet. People who aren't with that ISP won't be able to download Napster, unless they license the software and sell subscriptions.
I don't see it happening, but what do I know? posted by solistrato at 8:52 AM on October 5, 2000
hijink: you're clever. :-)
solistrato: YHBT. YHL. HAND. posted by cCranium at 9:14 AM on October 5, 2000
It's not just NPR. Most major media insists on referring to the Napster program and network in terms of a website or web pages. They don't quite have the semantic grasp on Internet technologies to be able to properly describe what it is.
As for buying up Napster, who cares? There are free servers and free clients (not to mention old clients) that will always work freely. So there you go. posted by daveadams at 10:18 AM on October 5, 2000
cCranium: ah, fuck. I should know better. posted by solistrato at 7:48 PM on October 5, 2000
Subscribe
posted by hijinx at 6:11 AM on October 5, 2000