Media Q&A for Questions Relating to Napster's Proposed Modified Preliminary Injunction

March 2, 2001

What was the purpose of today's hearing?

Federal District Judge Marilyn Patel called a "case management conference" to discuss the status of various ongoing issues in the A&M Records, Inc. v. Napster, Inc. litigation, including proposals that she requested from both sides on how to modify her initial preliminary injunction in accordance with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals' decision on February 12, 2001.

What were the key points of Napster's proposal for a modified preliminary injunction?

In accordance with the Ninth Circuit's ruling that the record industry "provide notice to Napster of copyrighted works and files containing such works available on the Napster system." Napster is proposing that the record industry provide the following information, via electronic delivery for each copyrighted work:

  1. The title of the Work ("Title")
  2. The name of the featured recording artist performing the Work ("Artist Name");
  3. The name(s) of one or more files available using the Napster system containing such Work ("Noticed Filename");
  4. A certification that Plaintiffs own or control the rights allegedly infringed, and a description of such rights.
Napster would then exclude files with those names from the Napster index, preventing access for the purpose of file sharing.

What if file names that are on the Napster service are saved with different versions of the actual song title or artist's name?

Napster has proposed to cooperate with the plaintiffs in developing variations of song names and artists' names that might refer to the copyrighted work that is on the Napster service and exclude the names of those files as well. Napster has asked for the appointment of a Special Master to facilitate that process.

If the record industry provides the above information, how long will it take Napster to remove the material?

Napster's proposal provides for three business days from the receipt of the information to remove the material from the Napster search index. By removing the works from the search index, Napster would prevent users from accessing the material.

What kind of ongoing dialogue is Napster proposing to have with the record industry?

Napster has proposed to meet and confer on a bi-weekly basis on any issues that might arise in the implementation of this proposal. Napster also will prepare and file a monthly report on the status of its operations.

Does Napster have the technical ability to prevent access to copyrighted works?

Napster is ready to implement this proposal within three business days of this order.

If it's so easy to exclude files, why didn't Napster institute this earlier?

It's not easy; it is a complex technological solution that is very taxing to the system and will degrade the operation of the service. In addition, it will result in the exclusion of a great many files that are authorized as opposed to unauthorized. It has involved a significant investment of time and resources. However, we believe it is superior to shutting the service down and disbanding the community during the transition period to the new membership-based service.