<p>Innehåll: Uppsatsen tittar på hur de senaste årens tekniska utveckling har påverkat musikbranschen och hur musikbolagen bör utforma sin affärsstrategi för att klara av dessa förändringar. En litteraturstudie har genomförts för att diskutera begreppet affärsstrategi på ett teoretiskt plan, och två fallstudier tittar närmare på musikindustrin. Fallstudierna behandlar MP3.com och Napster, två företag som såg de nya möjligheterna som Internet förde med sig, medan de traditionella musikbolagen fortfarande var fast i gamla mönster. Slutsatsen är att de traditionella musikbolagen fortfarande är alltför rädda för riskerna med piratkopiering för att våga satsa fullt ut på kundorienterade lösningar.</p> / <p>Content: This report examines how the technological developments over the last few years have affected the music industry and how the record labels should formulate their business strategy to cope with these changes. A literature study has been conducted to examine the term business strategy on a theoretical level, while two case studies give a closer look at the music industry. The two cases are MP3.com and Napster, two companies that realised the new potential that the Internet brought, while the traditional record labels were still stuck in old patterns. The conclusion is that the traditional record labels are still too afraid of the dangers of illegally copied music to fully go for customer oriented solutions.</p>

Innehåll: Uppsatsen tittar på hur de senaste årens tekniska utveckling har påverkat musikbranschen och hur musikbolagen bör utforma sin affärsstrategi för att klara av dessa förändringar. En litteraturstudie har genomförts för att diskutera begreppet affärsstrategi på ett teoretiskt plan, och två fallstudier tittar närmare på musikindustrin. Fallstudierna behandlar MP3.com och Napster, två företag som såg de nya möjligheterna som Internet förde med sig, medan de traditionella musikbolagen fortfarande var fast i gamla mönster. Slutsatsen är att de traditionella musikbolagen fortfarande är alltför rädda för riskerna med piratkopiering för att våga satsa fullt ut på kundorienterade lösningar. / Content: This report examines how the technological developments over the last few years have affected the music industry and how the record labels should formulate their business strategy to cope with these changes. A literature study has been conducted to examine the term business strategy on a theoretical level, while two case studies give a closer look at the music industry. The two cases are MP3.com and Napster, two companies that realised the new potential that the Internet brought, while the traditional record labels were still stuck in old patterns. The conclusion is that the traditional record labels are still too afraid of the dangers of illegally copied music to fully go for customer oriented solutions.

When Napster was first launched on the Internet in August of 1999 by young programmer, Shawn Fanning, the intension was that the platform would easily link Internet users with the free MP3 downloads they sought out on the web. By the time an injunction against the platform was granted and upheld by a state then federal court, Napster had made a far bigger impact than simply linking music listeners with free downloads. The proceedings of A & M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc. through the District Court Northern District of California then the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit acted to test the applicability of copyright protections that had been legislatively heightened throughout the 1990’s and built the framework for specifications for copyright protection on the Internet. Even after fifteen years of being offline, the peer-to-peer platform still remains a household name due to the influence Napster had on shaping music consumers’ expectations of access to digital music as well as distributors’ practices. Through a review of A & M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc. in the district and appellate courts I will explore the workings of the Napster platform and the legal issues surrounding it - with an emphasis on vicarious copyright infringement, contributory copyright infringement, the application of the DMCA, and the application of the substantial non-infringing use doctrine to software technologies, as established by Sony Corporation of America v. Universal City Studios, Inc. I conclude that Napster has had a resounding legal, psychological, and technical impact on both the distribution and consumption of music in the digital space.

Several studies have tracked the rise in music piracy following the creation of Napster, analyzing the attitudes and behaviors associated. But new developments, such as streaming services and social media, have transformed the relationship between creators and users. This paper seeks to revisit the topic, reexamine past results, and evaluate public opinion in this current technological landscape. Understanding the new attitudes and behaviors associated with illegal music downloading through a questionnaire reveal important implications for the future of intellectual property legislation. These findings give some insight into the perceptions of ownership over intangible property to hopefully improve consumer and industry interactions.

This paper attempts to unpack a few of the vast array of assumptions implicit in how "the technology" known as Napster was understood by several of its key constituencies. Our approach examines discourse about Napster in several areas - legal, economic, social, and cultural. This approach enables us to understand "the technology" as an ongoing encounter, rather than the accomplishment of any one inventor, team of inventors, dominant institution, or rule of law. We do not offer proscriptive advice. While there is value in other research that has tried to determine the "impact of Napster on" a particular market or industry, we argue that a multidimensional understanding is necessary both as a foundation for such research as well as in its own right. In only the past four years, dominant interpretations of Napster have not only emerged, but also have been inscribed into laws, business plans, and purchasing decisions, in effect, determining what "tools" - precedents, myths, data sets, prior objects, capabilities - will be available in the future. Our paper tries to show how and why certain (subjective) significations increasingly have taken on the status of truth, while other (equally subjective) discourses have been pushed farther and farther out to the fringes

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of California, San Diego, 2002. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 528-550).

The Napster case has created a frenzy of controversy and confusion. The Peer to Peer technology developed by Napster creator Shawn Fanning, has forced the courts, the legislature, corporations, and individuals to reconsider the use of the Internet. Peer to peer networks create new challenges for the application of copyright law. However, these challenges are not that different from those which copyright law has evolved to accommodate in the past. Copyright law is intended to balance the interests of the creators and the public to promote the progress of science and useful arts. The premise behind copyright protection is to ensure that people continue creating, and that the public continues to enjoy those creations, through the mechanism of rewarding the creators with a temporary monopoly over their works. This balance of interests is fundamental to the interpretation of copyright law by the United States Congress and the Courts. This thesis focuses on the application and interpretation of copyright law through a case study of the law in the United States, in particular the Napster case. Although it now appears that the Internet can be subject to some form of regulation with the aid of technological innovation to enforce the regulation, the Courts in the Napster case have misinterpreted the previous judicial consideration attributed to copyright law. In essence, the fundamental principle of the balancing of interests has been lost. We are now left with an unequal balance in favor of large media conglomerates. It can be argued that the media conglomerates have used Napster as an example of their power to control the technology of peer to peer networking as a model of distribution. Napster demonstrates that peer to peer is an effective way of sharing information with an extremely large amount of people. This has the music industry scared, resulting in their legal battle to shut down the Napster technology. The claims of copyright misuse raise awareness of the need for regulation and a reassessment of copyright application in a digital age. There is a need for regulation. However, any attempts at further application of law and regulation to the Internet concerning copyright protection should consider the intent of the constitutional founders of the United States -- copyright law is intended to protect the interests of both the artists, and the public.

The Napster case has created a frenzy of controversy and confusion. The Peer to Peer technology developed by Napster creator Shawn Fanning, has forced the courts, the legislature, corporations, and individuals to reconsider the use of the Internet. Peer to peer networks create new challenges for the application of copyright law. However, these challenges are not that different from those which copyright law has evolved to accommodate in the past. Copyright law is intended to balance the interests of the creators and the public to promote the progress of science and useful arts. The premise behind copyright protection is to ensure that people continue creating, and that the public continues to enjoy those creations, through the mechanism of rewarding the creators with a temporary monopoly over their works. This balance of interests is fundamental to the interpretation of copyright law by the United States Congress and the Courts. This thesis focuses on the application and interpretation of copyright law through a case study of the law in the United States, in particular the Napster case. Although it now appears that the Internet can be subject to some form of regulation with the aid of technological innovation to enforce the regulation, the Courts in the Napster case have misinterpreted the previous judicial consideration attributed to copyright law. In essence, the fundamental principle of the balancing of interests has been lost. We are now left with an unequal balance in favor of large media conglomerates. It can be argued that the media conglomerates have used Napster as an example of their power to control the technology of peer to peer networking as a model of distribution. Napster demonstrates that peer to peer is an effective way of sharing information with an extremely large amount of people. This has the music industry scared, resulting in their legal battle to shut down the Napster technology. The claims of copyright misuse raise awareness of the need for regulation and a reassessment of copyright application in a digital age. There is a need for regulation. However, any attempts at further application of law and regulation to the Internet concerning copyright protection should consider the intent of the constitutional founders of the United States -- copyright law is intended to protect the interests of both the artists, and the public. / Law, Peter A. Allard School of / Graduate

Purpose - The purpose of this research is to explore disruptive innovation and to determine whether Christensen’s latest version (2015) of the disruptive innovation theory can explain the success of multisided platforms in the music industry. Thus, we analyze three cases studies based on the theory: Napster, Spotify and Apple Music. At the end, we present our results concerning Christensen’s theory’s capability to explain the recent success stories of digital multisided platforms. Research Question - “Does the theory of disruptive innovation explain the success of Multi-sided Platforms in the music industry?” Methodology - A comparative case study with three levels of success gives us a width that we think is necessary in order to draw conclusions. Spotify is considered to be a global market leader while Apple Music is highly successful and market leader in the US. Napster, however, is not considered successful due to the legal issues it has encountered. Secondary data is used on all cases, and an in-depth literature review of the theory which supports the theoretical framework that we use to compare the cases. Findings - This research explores Christensen’s theory that is widely misinterpreted and misapplied in the recent years. Christensen’s theory is heavily built upon a technology factor that drives disruptive innovation, however, this can not explain for instance Spotify’s success, which is according to the original theory is not disruptive. We argue that business model innovation is the driver of disruption in some cases where technology is merely an enabler for business to reach disruptive effects. We would like to propose a stronger categorization of disruption types, such as “technology driven disruption” or “business model driven disruption” in order to identify disruption with different roots. / Syfte - Syftet med denna forskning är att undersöka disruptiv (omstörtande) innovation och att avgöra om Christensens senaste version (2015) av den disruptiva (omstörtande) innovationsteorin kan förklara framgången med flersidiga plattformar inom musikbranschen. Således analyserar vi tre fallstudier baserade på teorin: Napster, Spotify och Apple Music. I slutet presenterar vi våra resultat avseende Christensens teoris förmåga att förklara de senaste framgångshistorierna för digitala flersidiga plattformar. Forskningsfråga - “Förklarar teorin om disruptiv innovation framgången med flersidiga plattformar i musikbranschen?” Metodik - En jämförande fallstudie med tre nivåer av framgång ger oss den bredd som vi tycker är nödvändig för att dra slutsatser. Spotify anses vara en global marknadsledare och Apple Music är mycket framgångsrikt samt marknadsledande i USA. Napster anses emellertid inte framgångsrikt på grund av de rättsliga problem som uppstått. Sekundär data används i alla exempel, samt en djupgående litteraturöversikt av teorin som stöder den teoretiska ramverk som vi använder för att jämföra fallen. Resultat - Denna undersökning utforskar Christensens teori som är brett misstolkad och felaktig tillämpad under de senaste åren. Christensens teori bygger starkt på en teknikfaktor som driver disruptiv innovation, men detta kan inte förklara exempelvis Spotifys framgång, vilken enligt den ursprungliga teorin inte är disruptiv. Vi argumenterar för att affärsmodellinnovation driver störningar i fall där tekniken bara är en katalysator för att verksamheten når disruptiva effekter. Vi skulle vilja föreslå en starkare kategorisering av disruptionstyper, till exempel “tekniskt driven disruption” eller “affärsmodelldisruption” för att identifiera disruptioner med olika rötter.

In 2007, Radiohead released a downloadable album, In Rainbows, allowing consumers to pay what they thought the album was worth. The band responded to a moment of change in the music industry. Since then, other bands, like Nine Inch Nails and Coldplay, have made similar moves. Radiohead's capability to release an album and let the fans decide its worth relied on the image they built, which foregrounded their commodification. The historic move redefined the boundaries between art and commodity, a well know tension in popular music studies. The thesis focuses on popular music as communication in the changing industry. Using Radiohead’s album as a case study, it looks at the changing boundaries in the tension between art and commodity. The thesis examines Radiohead's performance, its mediation by the press, and what the album’s distribution method meant to the fans.