Metallica is one of the biggest bands of all time and that comes with a history of highs and lows. While the 80s and early 90s were success after success, the coming years proved to be a lot more chaotic. In that regard, the napster situation in the early 2000s was perhaps a key moment in the band’s legacy throughout the years.
For younger generations, Metallicaled by drummer Lars Ulrichsued a platform named napsterwhich focused on making illegal downloads of a lot of artists’ music. While that has become the norm these days, it was revolutionary at the time. However, it also robbed musicians of their well-earned money and Ulrich was one of the first to realize that. That started the suit and something that hurt the band’s public image for a long time.
The Context At The Time
To understand the ramifications of the napster situation for the band, it’s important to understand the context of Metallica. While the band had been a successful metal outfit in the 80s, 1991’s self-titled record, often known as the “Black Album“, made them superstars. During almost three years of touring, they traveled the world and arguably became the most successful metal band of all time in the process.
However, the following years saw a change in the band. Long gone was the long hair and wearing shirts of their favorite metal bands. Now they were wearing fashionable clothes and were even seen wearing makeup for the promotional shoot of the “Load” album. This last part might seem unimportant but it is worth remembering that Metallica constantly mocked glam metal bands for using makeup in the 80s.
The “Load” and “Reload” records saw the band moving away from their signature metal sound to a more hard rock-focused direction and some alternative influences. Furthermore, musicians such as drummer Lars Ulrich and guitarist Kirk Hammett He began to reject the metal genre, offending the fans in the process. From citing the New Wave of British Heavy Metal to the likes of Oasis and Bob Seger.
There is nothing wrong with changing influences and trying to experiment but Metallica went about it the wrong way. The musicians were seen as rejecting their origins and coming off as hypocrites to a degree. And then the napster situation happened in 2000.
What was Napster?
The napster platform was founded in 1999 by Shawn Fanning and Sean Parker as an independent peer-to-peer file-sharing service. It allowed people to transfer MP3 files, giving music fans the chance of getting the music they wanted for free. There were similar services starting online during the late 90s on the internet but napster became the main platform.
A reason why napster proved to be successful was because it was user-friendly. It even had as much as 61% of external network traffic consisting of MP3 file transfers. Things began to change in 2000 when Lars Ulrichby his own admission, noticed this platform. That was because he saw that a demo of their single “I Disappear” was leaked online.
Metallica filed for a lawsuit on April 13, 2000, against the file-sharing company. This would begin the situation as most people know it.
The Reasons why Metallica went after Napster
The Metallica v. Napster, Inc. case was filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California on April 13, 2000. There were some musicians, such as Dr. Dretesting the waters for a lawsuit but Metallica was on its own. Most musicians were afraid of taking this stance because it could alienate a lot of fans, which happened to Ulrich, James Hetfieldand the rest of the band.
“From a business standpoint, this is about piracy – taking something that doesn’t belong to you. And that is morally and legally wrong,” Ulrich said in the trial. “The trading of such information – whether it’s music, videos, photos, or whatever – is, in effect, trafficking in stolen goods.”
Ulrich‘s motivation was clear since he and Metallica wanted napster to share their music illegally. While that was understandable, Ulrich had a list of 300,000 accounts and requested the platform to eliminate them. This also rubbed people the wrong way, as a lot of fans felt they were being greedy.
The controversial drummer also made a bizarre anti-napster commercial in the 2000 MTV VMAs. It basically features Ulrich making a mockery of the file-sharing service and how it goes against the law. This is certainly true but the Danish did so in a way that feels entitled, which was a bad PR move.
The Outcome of the Trial
Metallica‘s case argued for copyright infringement, racketeering, and unlawful use of digital audio interface devices, which ultimately made them win the trial. This was confirmed in March, 2001, when the judge issued a preliminary injunction in Metallica‘s please pending the case’s resolution. napster was ordered to remove all of the band’s content from the platform or be shut down.
This resulted in the aforementioned Dr. Drerecord companies, and other artists filing lawsuits, which would end up taking napster to bankruptcy. After several legal shenanigans, the file-sharing service was forced to file for Chapter 7 and liquidate its assets.
It seems that Lars Ulrich won this case and things would go back to normal but that wasn’t the case. On the contrary, the ramifications of the napster situation remain to this very day.
The Ramifications of the Napster case
napster disappeared in 2001 after several lawsuits but its consequences still live on. As mentioned earlier, this platform wasn’t the only one sharing MP3 files for free and was a symptom rather than a disease. In a way, it could be argued that Metallica reached this topic far too late, and what they did with the lawsuit wasn’t enough.
Despite this attempt, file-sharing continues until today, with people often times downloading a new song or album the day it comes out for free. This has taken a major toll on the bands’ business and the income has reduced greatly. Some fans have argued that record sales were never the biggest income for bands and that could be true but groups nowadays don’t make anything from sales.
If anything, this also started the era of streaming services, which only became normalized throughout the years. Spotify is the main platform these days and bands don’t even make a lot of money with this service. Lars Ulrich was fighting a losing battle since the napster situation perhaps only delayed what was inevitable.
The Aftermath for Metallica
It is safe to say that Metallica‘s reputation suffered a major hit because of it. A lot of fans hated them for the lawsuit, calling them greedy and selfish. Older fans also pointed out how the group gained a following in their early days thanks to tape trading. Others had more superficial reasons, claiming that suing and going to court wasn’t truly “metal”, with Ulrich getting most of the insults.
However, recent years have softened the metal community’s views on the matter. The decline of the music business shows that Ulrich had a point regarding this situation. As mentioned earlier, he might have been delaying an inevitable fight but still chose to preserve a musician’s copyright. When making commercial art, the artist is selling a product as well and deserves to be remunerated since that is the very nature of commerce.
Metallica might be a metal band but these musicians are also workers and napster was messing with their income. A lot of groups have come out to defend the band in recent years, with Slipknot‘s Corey Taylor claiming that Ulrich was right in many instances. It is something where the drummer saw the writing on the wall and tried to prevent a situation that has become almost impossible to solve these days.
The several decisions Metallica made in the 90s did play a role in the aftermath of this situation. For a lot of people, this was the breaking point and the steady decline of a band consumed by the “Hollywood lifestyle”. This didn’t help the optics at the time but that doesn’t mean that this group didn’t have a valid reason to protect their assets.
Conclusion
The napster situation could be viewed as the Ground Zero situation for the debate on illegal downloads. While it was already happening, this was the moment it gained mainstream attention. Furthermore, this was a situation that led a lot of fans to move away from Metallicaalthough many have admitted they were wrong.
There is also the fact that, looking back now, Lars Ulrich was defending the right cause. Perhaps he did to protect his own interests but this situation involved the entirety of the music business. It is a moment in music history that defined the coming decades and people are still influenced by this event.
