washingtonpost.com  > Technology > Tech Policy > Copyright

Quick Quotes

Artists Break With Industry on File Sharing

Some Musicians Say Web Services Can Be Valuable Means of Distribution

By Jonathan Krim
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, March 1, 2005; Page E05

A prominent group of musicians and artists, breaking with colleagues and the major entertainment studios, is urging the Supreme Court not to hold online file-sharing services responsible for the acts of users who illegally trade songs, movies and software.

The group, which includes representatives of Steve Winwood, rapper Chuck D and the band Heart, said in court papers to be filed today that it condemns the stealing of copyrighted works. But it argues that popular services such as Grokster, Kazaa and others also provide a legal and critical alternative for artists to distribute their material.


Rapper Chuck D is among a group of artists who argue that Web sites for file-sharing allow musicians to reach a larger audience. (Eric Gaillard -- Reuters)

_____Story Archive_____
Digital Copyright Disparate Cast Lobbies Court To Restrict File Sharing (The Washington Post, Jan 26, 2005)
U.S. Asks High Court to Curb File Swapping (The Washington Post, Jan 25, 2005)
Tech Firms to Seek Legal Protection From Pirating (The Washington Post, Jan 24, 2005)
High Court To Weigh File Sharing (The Washington Post, Dec 11, 2004)
Appeals Court Ruling Favors File-Sharing (The Washington Post, Aug 20, 2004)
File-Swap Sites Not Infringing, Judge Says (The Washington Post, Apr 26, 2003)
_____Case Documents_____
Archive FindLaw collected briefs, previous rulings, profiles and commentary on one Web page.

_____Digital Rights_____
Downloading: The Next Generation (washingtonpost.com, Feb 28, 2005)
High-Tech Tension Over Illegal Uses (The Washington Post, Feb 22, 2005)
Disparate Cast Lobbies Court To Restrict File Sharing (The Washington Post, Jan 26, 2005)
More Stories

"Musicians are not universally united in opposition to peer-to-peer file sharing" as the major records companies claim, according to a draft of the group's court filing. "To the contrary, many musicians find peer-to-peer technology . . . allows them easily to reach a worldwide online audience. And to many musicians, the benefits of this . . . strongly outweigh the risks of copyright infringement."

The arguments are a stark counterweight to an aggressive push by the major recording and movie studios, and hundreds of musicians, actors and composers, to persuade the Supreme Court that file sharing damages the livelihoods of artists by robbing them of proper compensation for their work.

Specifically, the studios want the court to rule that Grokster is liable for the file sharing by many of its users because it is primarily used for piracy and because it does not take steps to prevent it. The court is scheduled to hear the case March 29.

But the artists opposing the industry's position said shutting down the major file-sharing services, which are used by tens of millions of people worldwide, would instead rob them of a chance to gain exposure and income.

Before online file sharing, "distribution of recordings to retailers was controlled largely by a few large national record companies and by several 'independent' labels," they argue. "Young people aspiring to be musicians faced daunting odds of ever being signed by a record label."

One musician, Jason Mraz, said half of the fans who pay to see him in concert heard about him through illegal downloading, according to the court filing.

Meanwhile, file sharing gives accomplished artists, such as Janis Ian, a chance to control distribution of their work that might no longer be deemed worthy of commercial promotion and sales, the group said.

Attorneys for Grokster argued in its court filing that file-sharing services are used extensively for distributing works legally, either by permission of the artist or because copyrights have expired or were never sought.


CONTINUED    1 2    Next >

© 2005 The Washington Post Company