Rogerian Argument - ProNapster essays

Rogerian Argument - ProNapster essays Lately, there has been a significant amount of concern regarding software programs that promote the sharing of songs at a minimal cost to the consumer. These networks allow users to swap computer files in the form of MP3s among one another via the World Wide Web. In return, this allows for users to download music for free. One such music service that has become the subject of debate was developed by Shawn Fanning and was made available to the public in 1999. This program is better known as Napster. As a result of these debates, Napster critics carry with them several valid points in their claim against these software programs. One such argument is that users should not be allowed to obtain music from the artists and songwriter for free. They claim that Napster should pay royalties to the recording artist in an effort to make up for the loss in potential CD sales. Moreover, they claim that artists have no say as to whether or not their music can or cannot be traded within the network. More specifically, artists say that their music is just automatically made available to the public, without the written or lawful consent of the artist themselves. Furthermore, critics claim that recording songs off the radio is totally different than that of the service provided through networks like Napster. They say that music from the radio is not as easily obtained and the quality is not even remotely similar to that of an MP3 file. They also claim that because of Napster, artists have no say as to where on the Internet their music can be made available, which may draw away crowds from a certain bands website which is their means of advertising. This may have an ultimate effect on new releases and concert announcements. All of these valid concerns are frustrating to those who oppose Napster, and as a result, they have taken action in court. But then again, I have found common ground and can actuall ...