Call#: Van Pelt Library PN1995 .G663 2006
Blockbusters: A Reference Guide to Film Genres, by Mark A. Graves and F. Bruce Engle, is a book that outlines all the different genres of film, their respective places in film history, and the most notable films of each genre. In chapter 7 dedicated to Musicals, Graves and Engle differentiate between six subcategories of the musical: The Backstage Musical, The Revue, The Showcase or Star Vehicle, The Screen Adaptation, The Dance Musical, and The Animated Musical. The Showcase or Star Vehicle, described by Graves and Engle, is a film that’s purpose “is to showcase the talent of a musical personality whose success has already been achieved in radio or through recordings.” As an example of such musical films, they refer to A Hard Day’s Night, the first film by The Beatles, an already established musical group that was using film to further launch their career. They also go on to discuss the history of musical film in the 1960’s claiming that the large-budget musicals, such as Mary Poppins (1964), were now becoming rare and were instead being replaced by “smaller-budget films [that] exploited the popularity of rock-and-roll music.” A Hard Day’s Night is a prime example of the popular musical that started emerging in the 1960’s.
To make a valid argument that A Hard Day’s Night was the first film to successfully unite the popular cultures of film and music, and therefore the first true rock and roll film, I must be able to claim what the popular culture of film was at the time of its release. According to Blockbusters: A Reference Guide to Film Genres, the musical of the 1960’s was often infatuated with the new emergence of the rock and roll popular culture of music. A Hard Day’s Night therefore, has a subject matter very representative of its time in film history, but as I have learned from my other sources, portrayed the pop culture of music in a way that was unique (showing a day in the life of The Beatles rather than The Beatles acting as other fictional people in a fictional story in the same way Elvis did). Consequently, this source is instrumental to my thesis, as it supports the claim that A Hard Day’s Night was not only representative of music’s pop culture, but also film’s pop culture of the sixties.
“The Address Supporting Organization (ASO) is one of the supporting organizations that the ICANN Bylaws say should be "formed through community consensus". The purpose of the ASO is to review and develop recommendations on Internet Protocol (IP) address policy and to advise the ICANN Board. In July 1999, the three existing Regional Internet Registries (APNIC, ARIN, and RIPE NCC) submitted a proposal to form the ASO on the basis of a Memorandum of Understanding. ICANN accepted this proposal on 26 August, 1999."
The following is an abstract concerning the functions of the ASO, “Each of the Regional Internet Registries appoints three members of the ASO Address Council. Two members are selected by the regional policy forum of each of the RIRs and one member is appointed from the Executive Board of each RIR. The purpose of the AC is to oversee recommendations on IP address policy. This will include the management of policy development activities. The other major aspect of the role of the Address Council is the appointment of Directors to the ICANN Board of Directors.”“The ASO was formed on 19 October 1999, when the MoU was signed by representatives of APNIC, ARIN, and RIPE NCC and ICANN. This happened during the ARIN Open Policy Meeting in Denver, USA. LACNIC signed the MoU in 30 October 2002 following its official recognition as an RIR. A new Memorandum of Understanding between ICANN and the Number Resource Organization, on behalf of the Regional Internet Registries, was signed on 21 October 2004 at ARIN XIV in Reston, Virginia. Upon recognition by ICANN as a Regional Internet Registry, AfriNIC signed an MoU with the NRO on 24 April 2005 to become the NRO’s 5th member.”
In this case, a number of different record companies came together to sue Napster. Their claim was that Napster’s peer-to-peer file sharing service was liable for “contributory and vicarious” copyright infringement. The district court ruled in favor of the recording studios and issued a preliminary injunction against Napster. Napster had to police its servers and remove all copyright infringing material. The district court monitored Napster’s progress and after three months, determined that Napster was not satisfactorily complying with the injunction. Then, the district court required Napster to shut off its peer-to-peer servers until it met certain conditions.
The recording companies argued that Napster should have to search for and block all files that infringed on copyrighted material. They transferred responsibility for locating infringing files to Napster. However, Napster argued that this modification to the injunction was vague with respect to how Napster should monitor its servers.
The court ruled with the district court and affirmed the decision to shut Napster down unless it could abide by the modified injunction.
Importance to Thesis:
This case is important to my thesis because it helps develop my second argument, which is that recording companies today are making the same strategic mistakes that movie studios made in response to the VCR. The first mistake they are repeating is that they are acting as an industry, not as individual companies. It is evident from the fact that five separate lawsuits were consolidated into this case that all the recording companies decided to deal with the peer-to-peer threat the same way; namely, litigiously. The second mistake they are repeating is focusing narrow mindedly on the current perceived threat without considering how this new technology may change the competitive landscape. By modifying the injunction such that Napster must police itself, the recording studios purposefully made it impossible for Napster to comply, which led to its eventual closure. This indicates that the recording studios strategy was to eradicate peer-to-peer networks entirely.