Chat Transcript on May 25, 2000

May 25, MTV News aired a special report on the Napster phenomenon entitled "Napster: Grand Theft Audio?" Immediately following the program, show host and MTV News reporter Brian McFayden discussed Napster in a live online chat, along with show producer Jim Fraenkel. The following is a transcript of the event.
MODERATOR: Welcome to MTV News' chat event discussing Napster, the controversial technology that has the music world in an uproar. Here to discuss the issue with you (fresh back from the MTV News Now special report "Napster: Grand Theft Audio?") are MTV News Reporter Brian McFayden and MTV News Producer Jim Fraenkel, producer of "Grand Theft Audio?"
Jim Fraenkel: Hey everyone... fire away!
Brian McFayden: What's up, guys? Bring it on... let the questions begin.
MODERATOR: Let's get started with the first question from the chatroom!
eric74: How can Metallica let people bootleg their shows but get upset when people want to download their music?
Brian McFayden: Here's what Metallica says: They love it when people bootleg their shows. What they're upset about is people are actually trading "master recordings" through Napster, studio recordings which were specifically made for sale, which they say is theft.
Saboteur: Do you feel that Napster is killing record sales?
Brian McFayden: No... I don't think Napster is hurting sales. Sales records are being broken almost weekly. Britney Spears breaking Mariah Carey's record this week... selling over 1.3 million copies of "Oops!..." 'NSYNC shattering the Backstreet and Garth Brooks' records in their first week. Plus, people love to buy CDs.
Ashedarkthorne: Do you think that this will hurt Metallica's next album sales?
Brian McFayden: Jim, what's your take?
Jim Fraenkel: I think that Metallica has an incredibly strong fan base that will always stand by them. However, there certainly seems to be a formidable backlash mounting against the band, and it will undoubtedly affect sales to a certain extent.
gfrocco: Do you think that Napster is a good way to expose a band that doesn't get a chance to be on TV and exposed?
Brian McFayden: I think it's great for unsigned bands... because it cuts out the middleman and lets bands communicate with their fans directly, and I think it's another way for record companies to FIND bands that they haven't heard.
nattymat: Brian... think about 'NSYNC... Britney Spears' fan base... I personally don't see any of them using Napster in the first place... I think we'll see Napsters effect when the new Limp Bizkit comes out. Brian McFayden: Great point... but overall record sales are at extreme highs even with MP3 technology now available.
HarleyQuinn6378: What about artists like Ani DiFranco and other popular but not necessarily "mainstream" all-day-on-"TRL" acts? Do you think it helps them more?
Brian McFayden: Ani DiFranco loves it when people tape her shows. I can't speak for her about Napster. Jim, what do you think?
Jim Fraenkel: Again, I think it absolutely helps artists like Ani DiFranco because it allows her and other bands another outlet for reaching fans without requiring the music biz machine.
KitCannon M1977: I hope you didn't believe it when he said that it wasn't about the money... what was your take on that?
Brian McFayden: You're referring to Lars, I assume. He claims Metallica is doing it because they have the clout to help small bands and that they're the spokespeople for them. Do I believe him? I believe he wants to have control over everything that they've ever recorded in the studio.
Queen_B: Do you feel Napster is the scapegoat for artists who are looking for someone to blame for poor record sales and not just because their album sucked?
Jim Fraenkel: There are albums that suck, but I don't feel that Napster is simply a scapegoat. I do think artists are genuinely concerned about the future of their livelihood and while record sales may not be hurt today or tomorrow, they are looking more long-term and thinking about what their careers may be like five or ten years from now.
MoHaKhA: What is your take on what Billy Corgan said about music being free? Do you believe that record companies will one day be eliminated allowing musical groups to solely profit from the music they make through banner ads, and live performances?
Brian McFayden: You can't deny the technology that's out there... the record companies will have to make adjustments. Due to the technology, the labels will have to change from being a product-based company to a service-based company. Remember in the '80s, the motion picture industry wanted to ban VCRs because they thought it would hurt box office numbers. Just the opposite happened... they're making more money than anyone could have possibly fathomed.
SwedishRadio: Don't you think WE should pay some kind of price to get the music... and shouldn't it be up to the artist if they want to distribute their music for free instead of someone else that came up with a FREE music site and distributing someone else's music. They didn't ask them if it's okay... It's not their music. I think it should be at least some kind of price for getting the music. Web points, whatever...
Brian McFayden: You should call Lars Ulrich and have a cappuccino!
Jim Fraenkel: Philosophically, yes. But now that the technology is out there, artists have to find a way to deal with it, like Wes Borland from Limp Bizkit said, you better find a way to make it work for you, rather than against you.
scott1028: CD prices have gone up 10% in the last year. Who is really getting ripped off? The artists or the fans? The music industry is forcing people to get music underground.
Brian McFayden: Now the artists are being taken advantage of on two fronts... by their record companies (since they're the ones making the increase) AND by fans who are downloading free music instead paying for it. Artists are NOT making out. They sign a contract for a small percentage of the record sales... like a dollar per CD.
JenAngel: When people find songs and artists that they like through sites such as Napster, it is only going to help the artist, not hurt them -- they have the music to listen to and so do their friends, and that is more than is available just on the radio. Besides, who is going to go out and buy a CD that they have never heard any of the songs on it before?!
Jim Fraenkel: I would say that right now, that's probably true. However, as technology progresses, downloading entire albums will become just as simple as downloading individual songs and at that point, I believe it could, in fact, hurt record sales. But of course, all of these questions are the $64 million ones.
worth: My question is, how is it that trading your music for free over the Internet makes it a simple commodity, but selling it for far too much money though record companies and stores makes it somehow "art?" It seems to me that by selling your music at the high prices that most music CDs go for these days makes it more of a commodity than giving it away for free. A CD probably costs you about $2 once you take into account the cost of materials, of manufacturing, of distribution, and of actually making it...
Brian McFayden: What's your point? It's a commodity AND art.
MrTasherre: So what measures do you think a record labels need to take now?
Brian McFayden: I think they need to do what the motion picture industry did years ago and learn to work with this technology, because it's out there. If they shut down Napster, there are other companies out there, such as Gnutella. Five years from now we'll be talking about something else.
TheRasslerDotCom: What are the cons of Napster?!
Brian McFayden: Just the cons? It poses a threat to artists' livelihood. People will become lazy and not go to record stores. We'll have overweight people not buying CDs because of Napster. Seriously though, I say use Napster and then get off your butt and buy your favorite CD, because I don't know about you, but it's so much cooler to have a CD in your collection, to have the tangible item, than a digital file.
VooDoo: Do you guys use Napster?
Brian McFayden: For this story we did.
Jim Fraenkel: We usually can't get in because the server's always so crowded. Jeff: With everything else that is being pirated over the net (games, movies, applications, you name it) why do you think the focus has centered around music? These other pirated things are just as easy, if not easier, than Napster.
Brian McFayden: That's a great question. Because Napster is so visible and pervasive, and there is an actual entity to go after legally, they are taking a lot of heat.
SatiricIntent: Brian, what is the likelihood of a compromise being reached that would satisfy the artists and Napster users?
Brian McFayden: I think it's probable. From what I've gathered, Napster is trying to figure out a way to make this work for the artists and labels.
Dgrunge: Do you think that because of this whole Napster thing the media has kinda "advertised" it to people who never even heard of it?
Brian McFayden: Absolutely. That's the nature of success... it breeds more success. I'm sure the founders of Napster aren't having a hard time finding a date, either.
SyCoDaWg: Has your opinion towards Metallica changed at all now because of this?
Brian McFayden: No, at all. This is a business issue. There are a lot of artists out there that I may or may not like personally, but I love their music.
ilovebrian: Don't you think Napster will help raise sales... open people to more kinds of music?
Brian McFayden: I like Lars Ulrich, I want to say. He's a great guy. But when it comes to business, stay out of his way. Maybe. That's the Million-Dollar Question. There might not be a lawsuit against Napster if we knew.
codeman: Brian, don't you agree that this shouldn't be an issue if people aren't profiting from it?
Brian McFayden: Fans may not be profiting from it, but artists are potentially being hurt by it. It's time to get going... I've got some fish to fry! Thanks a lot for joining us... this was fun. Great questions!