I. Introduction

II. Factual Background

III. Legal Background ... A. The Fair Use Doctrine ... 1. Purpose and Character of the Use ... 2. Nature of the Copyrighted Work ... 3. Amount and Substantiality of the Work Used … 4. Effect Upon Potential Market or Value ... B. Contributory Copyright Infringement ... C. Staple Article of Commerce Doctrine

IV. Analysis ... A. Napster Users Were Not Engaged in Fair Use ... 1. Use Was Not Wholly Private and Had No Transformative Value … 2. The Copyrighted Work Was Creative in Nature ... 3. Napster Users Took the "Whole" and "Heart" of the Work ... 4. Napster Use Was Likely to Adversely Affect the Market for the Copyrighted Works ... B. Napster's Contributory Liability ... 1. Napster Had Reason to Know of the Infringing Conduct of Its Users ... 2. Napster Materially Contributed to the Infringement Committed by Its Users by Consciously Providing a Forum for Infringement ...3. Staple Article of Commerce Doctrine Inapplicable to Napster Because Service Was Used Primarily for Infringing Activities and Napster Exercised Control Over the Service

V. Conclusion