Napster Fans Mull Having to Pay for Online Music

It’s going to take months before the music industry unravels all the implications of Napster’s pending alliance with one of the world’s recording superpowers, but Paul Breckow already knows how he feels: The 17-year-old from La Crescenta is disappointed.

“[Napster] is going to turn into some big corporate thing that will charge,” said Breckow, who downloads 10 to 15 major-label recordings a week for free from the online service.

The teenager is among thousands of Internet denizens who have registered their dismay on message boards and in chat rooms about Napster’s announcement Tuesday that it is teaming with Bertelsmann to create a paid file-swapping service. Bertelsmann is the parent company of BMG Entertainment, whose various labels release music by such pop acts as the Dave Matthews Band, Santana and Christina Aguilera.

These are the music fans of the Internet generation, 38 million registered Napster users accustomed to an online bazaar where recordings are exchanged effortlessly through the cyber-ether. With all that free access now being threatened, the knives have been drawn.

“This has gotta be the dumbest move Napster has made,” wrote a message board poster nicknamed “ScotTrick03.” “Hooking up with Big Business is not good. You guys are selling out BIG TIME.”

“The Internet is free and sharing music should be free,” wrote “zuma5155,” who complained that the music companies have taken enough of the fans’ money.

“TechnoDroid” was more resigned: “It had to end sooner or later.”

The $14-billion-a-year record industry--including many artists as well as executives--has feared ever since Napster arrived 18 months ago that millions of dollars could be lost to what it sees as online piracy. Through Napster, anyone can download virtually every recording that is available commercially--from classic Beatles tracks to obscure cult artists’ works.

A federal judge issued a preliminary injunction against Napster in July for violating copyrights, but that injunction has been on hold while the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals reviews the case.

“All things in the United States are paid for,” Sean Ryan, president of Listen.com, an online music directory, said this week. “This is just an acknowledgment that in order to provide a compelling service, there should be some kind of payment involved.”

Even so, Shawn Fanning, the 19-year-old who invented Napster last year, said Thursday he understands the online reaction. “A lot of people feel passionate about the service,” he said. “They don’t want to see it change in any way that will be negative to the user experience or the community.”

Napster chief executive Hank Barry said this week that the Napster/BMG service could cost around $4.95 a month for unlimited access to material owned by BMG.

“I’ll pay for Napster if it stays the same,” wrote “DJKJuicy.” “But I fear that Napster will probably be extremely limited, as BMG will surely not allow copyrighted material other than its own.”

(BMG is hoping to persuade the other major companies to join its partnership with Napster.)

*

Both anti-Napsterites Metallica and file-swapping advocates the Offspring were unavailable or declined to comment on the Napster announcement. Indeed, the general tendency among recording acts has been to shy away from the whole Napster controversy, for fear of alienating fans.

“Certain artists have no problem being outspoken and expressing their views,” said Howard King, the attorney representing Metallica and Dr. Dre in lawsuits against Napster. “But a much larger majority of artists and their managers feels more comfortable--regardless of what they believe--not being in the glare of the limelight on this issue.”

Although Napster has been built on the swapping of music without any compensation to artists or record companies, not all Internet users feel music should be free. Many have made plain in message-board postings their desire to see recording artists get paid.

A subscription-based version of Napster has always been the answer, wrote “DuckWing.” “Artists will get their money this way and people still have to pay for music they want. . . . I think this is win-win.”

Some music fans wonder if fledgling acts who are willing to have their music downloaded free in hopes of building a fan base will still be able to use Napster as a promotional vehicle.

Fanning said that many of the details about the service’s future still need to be worked out, but that the company will use its alliance with Bertelsmann to improve Napster’s reliability and user experience. “We will always have the user’s best interest in mind,” he said. “At the end of the day, Napster does not matter without its users.”

But some disgruntled Napster users are already thinking about alternative ways to keep hitting the free-music buffet.

In a Napster-run chat room, “DestinationHorizon” wrote that he will start using other file-swapping tools, such as Gnutella and Scour, even though he feels they are less efficient.

High school student Breckow, a techno fan who rarely buys CDs, said he wants to continue avoiding having to pay for what he now gets free.

“If all services like Napster shut down, I’d start paying,” Breckow said. “But I think I would always look for the free stuff first.”