Looking at Mill’s Utilitarian principle we see that it is the greatest happiness for the greatest amount of people. Mill’s probably would have agreed with Napster because a lot of people were happy with it. Considering how many people used it. Mill’s also implicates the defense of liberty. Such as freedom of speech, free market, and freedom to unite. Napster provided a free market of songs over the internet. Some say it was illegal others think it was other. In Mill’s eye’s it probably would have been alright to share the music because it made more people happy then mad.

In Kant’s End Principle he states that you should always treat people as you want to be treated. In other words it is referring to the Golden Rule of “Due unto others as you would do to them.” So I guess the owners of Napster would let people have the keys to there house or cars readily

Some topics in this essay:
Realistically Napster, Kant Napster, Retributive Justice, Mill’s Utilitarian, Rawls Napster, Golden Rule, Principle Rawls, Kant’s Principle, United Government, , morally wrong, artist money, retributive justice, owners napster, people napster, morally wrong owners, committing crime, kant’s principle, wrong people, free market, mill’s utilitarian principle, music users,