Court orders Napster to filter specific files

Napster, the Internet file-sharing service that has come under fire since it became popular last year, was dealt another setback last week when a court ruling restricted files that can be shared through the site.

The injunction requires copyright holders to inform Napster of which files they wish to be removed from the site, according to the service’s website. The name of the artist, the song’s title, the name of the file on the Napster service and certification that the work is indeed copyrighted.

Once they have been notified of which songs artists wish to exclude from the site, Napster “filters” the work from its index, the company explained. It is also Napster’s responsibility to filter works listed under more than one title.

The site contends its file filtering system was in place even before the ruling and vowed to obey the injunction. Napster also promised to continue working toward reaching an agreement with artists and the recording industry that “benefits the Napster Community.”

Students comprise a large portion of the more than 50 million Napster users and said the new guidelines are a minor inconvenience.

“I haven’t really noticed a difference,” said College of Arts and Sciences freshman Ellen Kitzer. “The artists I download aren’t the ‘big-time Eminem’ numbers.”

Although Napster will still allow listeners to share material without a copyright, many users, such as College of Communication freshman Katie Gainer found themselves denied access following the ruling.

“It allows me to log on,” she explained, “but then it gives me a warning. It says I’m not allowed to access because I have copyrighted music.”

According to the Napster site, because the system is so large, filtering it may slow the system and thus cause problems when trying to log on. Each user’s entire file index will be screened when they log on, so the process may take longer, depending on the number of shared files in the user’s directory and the speed of the user’s processor.

The site maintained, however, it will block only filenames, and “does not associate blocked files with individual user accounts.” Although, in accordance with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, Napster will continue to block repeat copyright infringement offenders.

Without the option of Napster, many BU students who wish to keep the music they downloaded before Napster’s compliance have tried alternative file-sharing services. Kitzer has turned to Audio Galaxy.

“There’s not as much control,” she said. “It’s a much slower process with Audio Galaxy. It’s not as easy to use, but it’ll do.”

COM freshman Jacob Boxer tried Gnutella, and was also disappointed. “It’s harder to connect, and the selection is not as good,” he said. However, Kitzer did say Audio Galaxy offers some options are unavailable through Napster.

“You can click on your type of music, and it gives you a list of recommended artists,” she said. “That way, you can just click and find artists, rather than going to a chat room [on Napster] and asking, ‘Who should I listen to?’”

For those who continue to use Napster, another way students have found to get around the injunction is renaming their copyrighted files.

“I heard people are just adding numbers to the ends of Eminem songs,” Kitzer said. Other methods of cheating the system include file scrambling, converting artists’ names to Pig Latin and simply misspelling artists’ names.

“All you have to do is change the file name, and the company won’t know if it’s their file,” Boxer said. “People can develop a code system — anything Beethoven, not copyrighted, could be Barenaked Ladies, which is.”

At Boston University, there’s one more Napster alternative that will always be available.

“The BU network is really good,” Boxer said. “It takes awhile to understand, but it’s worth it.”