Back before Napster and Spotify, we toured to promote record sales. Now we make records to promote tour dates.
Ever since Napster I've dreamt of building a product similar to Spotify.
When you think of Napster, you think of music. But the first thing that struck me was that this was an important case not only for the music industry but for the whole Internet.
I challenge record companies to show me evidence of a single penny they've lost due to Napster.
Napster works because people who love music share and participate.
This kid came up with Napster, and before that, none of us thought of content protection.
Napster is essentially using the music to make money for themselves and that's the part that's both morally and legally wrong. That I think is more relevant than whether or not I'm losing money.
Napster's only alleged liability is for contributory or vicarious infringement. So when Napster's users engage in noncommercial sharing of music, is that activity copyright infringement? No.
Napster was predicating its business model on violation of copyright.
I think Sean Parker damaged the music business with Napster.
I hate to say Napster kind of killed our business, but what can I tell ya?
The business model of Linux distribution is broken; it's like the business model of the dotcoms. Running your company on Linux is like running your company on Napster.
