Mp3.com to charge artists to get paid. Though only a handful of artists have made a lot of money from this exposure, it was a good place to start out and the model was intriguing. But this smells like record company tactics, and probably spells the end of an era.

Some kind of file-sharing forum for new artists will spring up I guess. Where the money/remuneration fits in , I don't know.
posted by aflakete on Mar 23, 2001 - 3 comments

Napster retains (ahem) counsel. The right move I think. Along with the DeCSS case, this may be setting the precedent for what "intellectual property" and "public domain" mean in the 21st century. Hopefully, things will turn out better than in Sterling's "Distraction". Either way, things will never be the same.
posted by aflakete on Jun 18, 2000 - 1 comment

RIAA, mp3.com & Jack Valenti gang up on napster Media racketeers flex their collective muscle. As long as napster is outside the ring, it's a movement symbol as much as a corporate entity. Where's the money? Where's the music? When will artists just start selling mp3s?
posted by aflakete on Jun 13, 2000 - 11 comments

Napster hits the cover of Newsweek Not a bad overview and presents both sides fairly (IMHO). Also some background on Shawn. Apparently Billy Corgan is napster-friendly.
posted by aflakete on Jun 2, 2000 - 0 comments