{{Short description|File-sharing service}} '''Madster''' (initially called '''Aimster''')<ref name="biz_review"/> was a peer-to-peer file sharing service.<ref name="wash_post">{{citation |url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/politics/2001/02/25/going-napster-one-better/af12b53a-db73-44a4-90cd-b9c1f95ebc4e/ |title=Going Napster One Better |last=Klein|first=Alec |newspaper=The Washington Post |date=2001-02-25 |accessdate=2010-11-17}}</ref> It was released in Napster's wake in August 2000 and shut down in December 2002 as a result of a lawsuit by the Recording Industry Association of America.<ref name="mcgeorge_law_rev_vol35">{{cite journal |year=2004 |journal=McGeorge Law Review |url=https://scholarlycommons.pacific.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2303&context=mlr#page=9 |volume=35|issue=2 |title=Litigation as a Tool against Digital Piracy|first=Grace J|last=Bergen |page=188 |accessdate=2013-12-31}}</ref>
==Origin== According to John Deep, a professor at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute,<ref name="mcgeorge_law_rev_vol35"/> the Madster software was originally inspired by his daughter's use of instant messaging software.<ref name="wash_post"/> His idea was to combine instant messaging with file sharing.<ref name="wash_post"/> John Deep's daughter Aimee had an interest in providing privacy to her online friends; instant messaging was lacking when it came to privacy protection.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://news.cnet.com/2009-1082-258155.html |title=Last of the free song traders|author=Borland, John |publisher=CNET News |date=2001-05-23 |accessdate=2010-11-17|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110809210427/http://news.cnet.com/2009-1082-258155.html|archive-date=2011-08-09|url-status=dead}}</ref>
==Features== [[File:Madster-screenshot.png|thumb|right|alt=A screenshot from the Madster software showing the Control Panel and File Search windows.|The Control Panel and File Search windows in Madster showing search results after a search for "Bob Dylan".]]The Madster service was initially called '''Aimster''', but it was later renamed to Madster due to concerns that the Aimster name infringed AOL's AIM (AOL Instant Messenger) trademark.<ref name="biz_review">{{cite web |url=https://albany.bizjournals.com/albany/stories/2002/01/21/daily58.html |author=D'Errico, Richard A. |date=2002-01-25 |accessdate=2010-11-24 |publisher=The Business Review |title=Aimster changes name to resolve AOL suit}}</ref> The Madster software allowed users to share files via instant messaging services.<ref name="biz_review"/> In particular, users could share files specifically with users who were included on a "buddy list" with the advantage of privacy.<ref name="cnet_riaa_suit">{{cite web |title=RIAA sues Aimster over file swapping|author=Borland, John |publisher=CNET News |date=2002-01-11 |url=https://news.cnet.com/2100-1023-258259.html |accessdate=2014-04-07|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230813192113/https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/riaa-sues-aimster-over-file-swapping/|archive-date=2023-08-13}}</ref>
Around March 2001, support for encrypted network communications was included in a new release of the Madster software (at the time, the Aimster name was still in use.)<ref name="cnet_fuel">{{cite web |url=https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/aimster-fights-record-industry-with-its-own-fuel/ |title=Aimster fights record industry with its own fuel |date=2001-03-02 |publisher=CNET News |accessdate=2010-11-24}}</ref> Among other things, the Madster service hoped that the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act would have the effect of prohibiting others from monitoring the encrypted Madster network communications.<ref name="cnet_fuel"/> In addition, the Madster operators argued that the encryption meant that they could not be aware of any copyright infringement that took place.<ref name="7th_appeals_court"/> Later on, around April-May 2001, a service was introduced wherein a network including tens of thousands of people could be searched for music and other content and new users would by default be added to this network although users could choose to instead restrict trading to buddy list members.<ref name="cnet_riaa_suit"/> At one point, the company announced a premium service that was available for US$4.95 per month.<ref name="biz_review"/>
''PC Magazine'' gave Madster a 1 out of 5 rating of "Dismal," based on interface design, partner advertising, and content selection.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,12053,00.asp |title=Madster Review & Rating |work=PCMag.com |date=2002-03-12 |author=Metz, Cade |accessdate=2014-04-07 |publisher=Ziff Davis}}</ref>
==Recording industry collaboration== In 2000, for a short time, Capitol Records authorized Madster (which was called Aimster at the time) to provide some Radiohead video files on the service's Web site and to release a skin for the Madster software that had a Radiohead theme.<ref name="capitol_promo">{{cite web |url=https://www.cnet.com/tech/services-and-software/major-label-breaks-file-trading-boycott/|title=Major label breaks file-trading boycott |date=2000-09-26 |author=Borland, John |accessdate=2010-12-07 |publisher=CNET News}}</ref> This collaboration was done for the purpose of promoting a new Radiohead album.<ref name="capitol_promo"/>
==Legal problems and shutdown== In December 2002, the company was ordered by a federal judge to disconnect its computer systems from the Internet.<ref name="high_court">{{cite web |url=https://www.cnet.com/tech/tech-industry/high-court-turns-deaf-ear-to-aimster/ |title=High court turns deaf ear to Aimster |author=McCullagh, Declan |publisher=CNET News |date=2004-01-13 |accessdate=2010-11-17 |authorlink=Declan McCullagh}}</ref> Earlier on in September, the court stated that Aimster had knowledge of copyright infringements, including a Web-based "Aimster Guardian" tutorial that showed copyrighted materials and the tracking of popular songs on the service via "Club Aimster"; the latter also indicated contribution to infringing activity and the monthly fees for the service indicated a financial interest for the Aimster operators in conjunction with infringing usage.<ref name="aba_law_2003-08-09">{{cite web |url=//apps.americanbar.org/buslaw/newsletter/0017/materials/domains.pdf |title=Digital Entertainment and Intellectual Property Law 2003 |pages=34–35 |publisher=American Bar Association |date=2003-08-09 |author=Ballon, Ian C. |accessdate=2014-04-07|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140408222821/http://apps.americanbar.org/buslaw/newsletter/0017/materials/domains.pdf|archive-date=2014-04-08}}</ref> The requirement for users to sign up and log in to use the service meant that Aimster was in a position to control the activities of its users.<ref name="aba_law_2003-08-09"/> The injunction to disconnect was upheld in June 2003 by the decision in ''In re Aimster Copyright Litigation'' of the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.<ref name="7th_appeals_court">{{cite web |url=https://www.cnet.com/culture/court-anonymous-p2p-no-defense/ |title=Court: Anonymous P2P no defense |author=Festa, Paul |publisher=CNET News |date=2003-06-30 |accessdate=2010-11-24}}</ref> In particular, it was found that Madster's support of encrypted file sharing was "willful blindness" and was not a valid defense with regard to copyright infringement.<ref name="7th_appeals_court"/> At the same time, a company could avoid copyright liability if it was "highly burdensome" for the company to detect and prevent copyright infringement.<ref name="7th_appeals_court"/> In January 2004, the US Supreme Court refused without explanation to hear an appeal of the lower court's ruling.<ref name="high_court"/><!-- In June 2009, after years of litigation by one defendant pro se, all claims were dismissed as to whether there is contributory or vicarious copyright infringement. The injunction was made permanent, as it is now moot. The record and movie companies agreed to bear their own attorneys' fees and costs, and to vacate a contempt judgment issued against defendants in 2003. -->
Madster was represented in court by Boies, Schiller & Flexner, the same law firm which defended Napster.<ref>{{cite web|archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20010505052415/http://www.mp3newswire.net/stories/2001/aimstersue.html |title=Aimster Sues the Record Industry |date=2001-03-03 |publisher=MP3 Newswire |author=Menta, Robert |url=http://www.mp3newswire.net/stories/2001/aimstersue.html |archivedate=2001-05-05 |url-status=dead }}</ref> In 2005, Deep sued Boies for malpractice and misappropriation, but lost the case in 2008.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.nyrealestatelawblog.com/Manhattan-Litigation-Blog/2008/October/AN-AIMSTER-MISSES.aspx |title=AN AIMSTER MISSES |date=2008-10-01 |publisher=NY Real Estate Law Blog |accessdate=2013-12-10}}</ref>
==References== <references />
==External links== * [https://web.archive.org/web/20130501053451/http://www.musicpundit.com/ A 'blog' ostensibly written by Madeline Deep]
{{File sharing}}
Category:File sharing software Category:Windows file sharing software Category:Discontinued software Category:Internet services shut down by a legal challenge