Napster is a computer program that connects the user's computer to other computers on the Internet that are running a Napster server program. These "servers" in turn connect to still other computers that are running the Napster program and permit each of the computers so connected to search for and, if desired, download all of the music files in specified directories or "folders" on all other said computers.

Various elements of the music industry have sued in an effort to close down Napster thereby preventing what they call the "theft of intellectual property". At this writing, one judge has issued a temporary injunction against Napster, but was overturned, at least temporarily, on appeal. The case is still active.

The music industry, the legal profession, and just about everyone else has, in my incredibly arrogant opinion, missed the boat on this one. As usual, they are focusing on one (and only one) of the means (Napster) through which the undesirable outcome (theft of intellectual property) is accomplished, rather than on the true issue -- the outcome-- itself.

The game was effectively over --the music industry having "lost"-- when the average home computer user gained the ability to digitize and store music on his computer. This milestone occurred sometime in antiquity, perhaps as long ago as the early 1990's.

Once the user has committed the music to a digital file stored on his computer, or on a removable storage device (e.g., floppy disk, CD, zip cartridge, etc.), that user is able to convey that file to any other computer user in any of several ways, e.g.:

• Via the Internet, using World Wide Web browsers such as Internet Explorer and Netscape Navigator.
• Via the Internet, using programs and protocols such as FTP and Telnet.
• Via the Internet, using peer-to-peer (i.e., direct computer-to-computer) connections with programs such as AOL Instant Messenger and Microsoft Netmeeting.
• Via direct dial-up (one user's computer connecting through normal phone lines directly to another's without going through the Internet) with such programs as PC Anywhere, Closeup, Laplink, and Carbon Copy.
• Manually transferring files from one computer to another using removable media (e.g., floppy disks, zip drives, magnetic tape, CD's, etc.)
• Via server-mediated peer-to-peer connections between one user's computer and another, with programs such as Napster.
• And, perhaps best of all, using browser-based unmediated peer-to-peer connections using Freenet or similar.

In other words, taking Napster "off the air" will not eliminate the problem that the recording industry fears. It will, however, probably cause a brief reduction in the frequency with which music files are copied or moved from one computer to another and, again only briefly, require the expenditure of creative energy by those wishing to share their music files with others.

Of course, sharing of copyrighted materials via digital, electronic media will not be (already is not) limited to music. Movies, photos, books and artwork, among other potentially copyrightable materials, can be shared using any of the above-mentioned methods. And, although technologically-based attempts to defeat such copying, via encryption, copy-proofing, or other methods, will certainly be (already are being) tried, they are ultimately doomed to failure.

So the question that the music industry and others who profit from the marketing of copyrightable materials should be concerned with is not how to defeat Napster and its ilk --that game is already lost. What they should be concerned about is how to profit in a future in which the ability to copy copyrighted materials will be ubiquitous.

Author Stephen King has taken a somewhat innovative approach to solving this problem. His most recent work, The Plant, is being published in serial form exclusively on the Internet. King's method of profiting from this is simple: If he receives enough money on the "honor system" from people downloading his work, then he will publish the next installment of the serial. If not, not. King's approach is just a variation on the shareware concept, which has long been used by software developers.

I am confident that, if the resources presently being expended (wasted) on defeating Napster and its relatives were diverted to devising methods through which copyright owners could continue to profit in the digital future, there would soon exist a plethora of such methods, and both the consumer and the copyright owners would be better off.