> > You seem to be under the impression that Napster publishes free music. What Napster does is allow for people to trade music files without paying a royalty to the copyright holder.
>
> Oh wow, so then I guess AOL should be sued because I can trade music files without paying a royalty over AIM! Hell, my ISP should be sued as well; I'm using their service.
>
> Napster simply allows people to share MP3s. They can't really be held responsible if their users decide to do illegal things with their service. If I were to send pirated CDs to friends via the postal service, nobody would sue the USPS for facilitating that piracy...
>
> This isn't a First Ammendment issue in ANY WAY (that question on the survey still confuses me), but finding service providers liable for content on their network is a very scary precedent indeed.
>
> Stephen

The First Ammendment question is there because Napster in its court case said it was a First Ammendment issue. I wondered if other people thought that was true. As for my survey's biased-ness, I don't actually use Napster even though my sister does, so I don't really know a lot about the program. I'm still doing research on it in fact, and I suppose if it pertains to the issue I'll have to look it up... Thanks for your honest opinions though. I'm so glad that so many people answered my post. Yay!!! Thanks to everyone who did.

Melanie