The year 1999 became the reigning year of Napster as communities of music producers and listeners were introduced to Internet peer-to-peer file sharing. The historical growth of Napster users soon troubled the record industry. Numerous record labels quickly filed suits claiming Napster file sharing violates the copyright laws of their intellectual property. After an extensive legal battle the ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in favor of the record companies. The termination of Napster incited the production of a seemingly endless list of alternatives. These new generations of file sharing networks are not quite clones of the pioneering Napster. Their structural modifications removed the necessity of a central database. Certain applications do not even require users to log in using a screen name or any other identifying information. Since such altered characteristics decelerates the industry’s depletion of free peer-to-peer music networks the RIAA is in pursuit of any opportunity to slander them. One of the most common accusations is that file sharing is resulting in a decline of CD sales. The industry’s allegations that file sharing weakens CD sales

Arguments claiming that file sharing reduces CD sales are illogical when the similarities between peer-to-peer networks and radio are considered. Music files downloaded for sampling is just like listening to the radio. In many cases, downloads are a result of suggestions from friends and family or could have been a sparked interest after hearing other works by the artist. Radio functions in the same manner. Radio is used as a promotional medium that allows potential consumers to listen to songs for free and figure out what they would like to buy. The record industry’s tendency to advocate homogeneous artists and songs has drastically limited play lists. In further promotional efforts to ensure record sales, almost every song on commercial radio is paid to play (Snyder and Snyder). This leaves new musicians behind and more difficult to find. This is the result of Clear Channel’s near monopoly of radio stations. Recently, people have been creating their own “radio” on their computers, “and if the labels were smart, they’d be doing everything in their power to be on those play lists, just like they do everything in their power to be on the play lists of radio stations”(Snyder and Snyder). Clear Channel owns approximately 1,000 American radio stations which might play an estimated 10 songs an hour for an uncommonly low 12 hours a day. This yields 120,000 free songs heard on the radio owned by Clear Channel alone. Using Bricklin’s figure of 50,000 listeners per station amounts to roughly 6 billion songs given for free. This number of free radio songs does not seem alarming to record labels since they emphasize paying radio stations and acknowledge it’s influence on CD sales. Therefore, if the record industry has no complaints of free radio then it is contradictory to claim that free file sharing diminishes sales.

The statistics presented by the music industry to display the correlation between file sharing and decreasing CD sales are deceiving. Hilary Rosen claims in the RIAA’s 2001 year-end shipments report that, “a large factor contributing to the decrease in overall shipments last year is online piracy and CD burning” (Rosen). However, the RIAA’s very own statistics do not support this conclusion that downloaded music is responsible for the industry’s alleged slump. Compact disc unit sales for the years 1999 in which Napster was introduced were reported as 938.9 million, reported units sold in 2000 were 942.5 million, reporte

Some topics in this essay:
RIAA Sales, Using Bricklin’s, Snyder Snyder, Forrester Research, Court Appeals, Lovers” Bernoff’s, CD’s Calculations, CD Sales, Rosen RIAA’s, Imagine” MercyMe, file sharing, cd sales, record industry, snyder snyder, percent population buy, radio stations, percent cd’s, population buy, percent population, record companies, demand cd’s, downloads rips burns, companies money release, cd sales 1999, power play lists,