Legislators Looking At Peer to Peer Monitor 393
rocketjam writes "According to CNET News, a California based software company has developed a song-identification technology which could be incorporated into file sharing software. It would then monitor music being downloaded or made available in a shared folder, identify songs by a process which examines their 'psycho-acoustical' properties and then compare them to a copyright database and stop them from being traded if a match is found. Audible Magic, has been demoing its technology before legislators and regulators in Washington D.C for the past month. The RIAA is greatly enamored of the concept and has helped the company get access to government officials. However, the technology would obviously require the makers of file swapping software to add it into their products either voluntarily or through legislation."
This, or vigilantism (Score:2, Insightful)
Out of the pan, into the fire.
Re:This, or vigilantism (Score:5, Insightful)
This is hypothetical since I don't use music swapping programs. I only rip CDs I purchased and don't make them publically available.
Re:This, or vigilantism (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't rip music, as I don't buy CDs. I don't download music either (well, not often anyways). Instead, I use shoutcast radio and listen to one of the thousands of radio channels that are available. I subscribe to www.di.fm, so I get a 192Kbit stream. Not too bad at all.
I will NEVER buy a CD again... because it's too expensive, and since they started with the "copyprotection"... well.. f-off... If it can't be played on my computer.. I don't want it!
In regards to copyprotection software like the one in the article... being implemented in client-side P2P software... well... good luck.
I would like to see how my bittorrent client will recognize mp3's, as there is no file to compare to until I have the entire file downloaded.
Re:This, or vigilantism (Score:3, Insightful)
Right... because ALL peer-to-peer software is written in the US, right? Congress never ceases to amaze me with its stupidity.
Attention all Congresspeople & Senators (since I know so many read
You have *NO* control over software written in other countries (ie. non-USA). You can't even determine who wrote many pieces of software (ie. virii). What makes you think that people will license this technology anyway?
Re:This, or vigilantism (Score:5, Funny)
Nope. Andrew S. Tannenbaum, Computer Networks, Section 2.2.1., "Magnetic Media"
The exact quote:
I only know that, because the book was sitting right next to me. Still...
"Slashdot: Exact quotes provided by anal dickheads while you wait."
Works in the lab, never in reality. (Score:4, Insightful)
So, you could say such technology, or at least some way to stop users from sharing illegal-to-share songs is already required for any service that operates in the USA. It was found out that nearly 100% of Napster's traffic was illegal, because once they actually blocked the illegal stuff there wasn't much if any traffic left.
Of course, the Kazza's of the world are never going to comply with that, but they already exist in a semi-outlawed state by being forced to incorperate in outside-of-US-reach locations just like online gambling sites do. They're already doing their best to avoid US laws of any kind. Since the barn door's already open on this type of program, I'm not sure there's anything US law can do to truely stop illegal music sharing.
So, this piece of technology might be a great technical discovery, but it's got no use in the real world. It's been tried before. The people who want their copyrighted music for free will just go to systems US laws have a hard time controling... and this system is no solution to that problem.
Re:Works in the lab, never in reality. (Score:2, Troll)
They just need to help the message pass through: Piracy is bad.
Now that I've helped them, I'll just close my Kazaa to show people that this can be done.... hmmm, my KazaaLite doesn't want to stop... Wow... My antivirus is going crazy... wait! piracy is bad!!! Arrrrrrrrrgh
Foreword:
Piracy is bad. KazaaLite is worse.
Re:Works in the lab, never in reality. (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't think the answer is in the technology. By definition, technology can be defeated.
By definition? What, did you read that in the dictionary.
I'm not going to argue that *this* technology can't be defeated, but presuming that *all* technology can be defeated is a bit of a stretch.
-a
Re:Works in the lab, never in reality. (Score:3, Insightful)
a. It is a matter of time, but we'll get there
b. Ratio complexity/interest to defeat the technolgy is too high. But this is not a technical limitation.
The specifity of software, is that the complexity can never be too high (Or at least it's never been). And the specifity of piracy is that the interest is very high. So the ratio complexity/interest is always going to be ultr
Re:Works in the lab, never in reality. (Score:3, Interesting)
Actually stopping sharing is not that hard. All you need is a technology that pushes the cost of file sharing/swapping above the market
Re:Works in the lab, never in reality. (Score:3, Informative)
The one-time pad [wikipedia.org].
Of course, defeating the measure described in the article would be trivial: simply don't use a client that uses their filtering technology. (No really, no need to thank me.)
But on the issue of technological countermeasures, let's consider the most extreme scenario: the government compels every ISP to install software that scans traffic for certain patterns of data in an attempt to detect copyright infringement. Even the
Fits nicely (Score:3, Insightful)
I think the quote you are looking for is this one:
- Edwards' Law
Re:Works in the lab, never in reality. (Score:4, Insightful)
I think it's beyond dispute that most of Napster's traffic was in the realm of copyright violation within the meaning of current copyright law, but the above statement relies on the assumption that the intervening technology "blocked the illegal stuff" ignoring the not-illegal stuff it may have also blocked.
One major concern with these interference technologies is that they will block files (in this case music) which are not illegal and thus hose "legitimate" uses of p2p technology, of which there really are a ton. Which is to say, even though Napster traded in primarily (c) violating content that doesn't also mean that the filtering tech put in place wan't also massively over-inclusive in what it filtered, and if it was, well, that just really sucks.
Re:Works in the lab, never in reality. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Works in the lab, never in reality. (Score:4, Informative)
But then you'd have to have it put into every web browser and FTP program and hey why not cp and mv while we're at it..
Heck, you know it just looks like this won't work without locking down the hardware, and I won't buy such non working stuff. So they'd have to legislate the hardware too, and then we're screwed. But I have some faith we won't get there. Er, hope at least...
Re:Works in the lab, never in reality. (Score:4, Insightful)
The really significant thing about Open Source is that it puts the power back in your hands. A government can mandate (use coercian) that a private company should include if(legal==false){call(RIAA);} but with open source then anyone can modify that code.
The four ways in which this can be stopped are:
1. Restrictions on knowledge (e.g. do you have a licence to study C++)
2. Restrictions on tools (do you have a licence for gcc)
3. Threats of extreme force (mandatory eight years in prison for uploading copyright material etc.)
4. Restricting Open Source software. This last one depends on the first three again.
I'm addressing an audience of programmers and engineers so I'll skip explaining what's wrong with each of these tactics; except to comment that anyone of these can work in a closed society, but it cripples a nation with competitors. Also on number 3, have you ever noticed that the crimes with the harshest punishments are not neccessarily those that do the most harm but those that show defiance of the government's authority?
Altogether now - download "Take the Power Back," by RatM!
Crimes with the worst punishments. (Score:3, Interesting)
Recently a study in the State of California showed that despite the appeal of the "3-strikes you're out" law id has had a negligable (possibly even harmful) effect on crime. It has also cost the sate so much
Re:Works in the lab, never in reality. (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Works in the lab, never in reality. (Score:3, Insightful)
And the trivial solution, should this nonsense ever present a problem, is to use encrypted mediafiles, so that the p2p-app won't recognise any of the data. You know, like NOT or ROT13-encryption or anything equally adavanced :)
However, I don't think that'll ever be necassery.
Re:Works in the lab, never in reality. (Score:2, Interesting)
I agree that this will be bypassed. Unless there is a mandate for all ISPs to filter everything coming into the US using these "psychoacoustical filters", then music and movie swapping will continue.
Also, I claim a patent on the "psychoacoustical filter router module". Cisco and Juniper can contact me for terms.
It seems to work here (Score:5, Interesting)
You can then go to the above web site and buy the music you played down the phone. It's stunningly and sometimes disturbingly accurate. It's recognised every piece of music I've played at it, even the theme tune from "The A-Team". I don't know where they get their database from, but it's massive.
Re:It seems to work here (Score:3, Insightful)
A real world use I would like to see is a service offered based on this technology, that will go through all the music on my harddrive and tag and rename it correctly. I have a lot of songs that unfortunately in the early days of ripping CDs I was very lax in naming. Now I don't have the time or the energy to go through them all to update them.
Re:It seems to work here (Score:3, Insightful)
I think that the recording industry is missing the boat on this whole issue. They could offer the above mentioned service and then provide links where you could order music by the same artists or artists with similar styles. They could offer information about the songs, who first recorded them, who else has covered a particular tune.
Neuros (Score:4, Informative)
Wonder how well that will work after (Score:4, Insightful)
2. You add a header to the beginning that says "REMOVE THIS HEADER"
3. You zip it
4. You tar it
Or any other of an uncountably infinite number of transformations.
There's nothing they can do about it technologically unless they lock it down at hardware level (and I won't buy a machine like that). Everthing else is just fooling around...
Re:Wonder how well that will work after (Score:3, Informative)
2: The header would either do the same, or result in a file that audibly matched.
3 and 4: Software exists that can recognize a
Of course, such a service would have to resemble the original Napster, which was intentionally limited to MP3 files, so everything had to be audio and not data files.
Re:Wonder how well that will work after (Score:4, Insightful)
Worst case, it just gets encrypted. Can't pick that lock in any reasonable period of time. See:Freenet.
And in all these examples I gave the data is still audible you just have an extra decoding step. All you have to do is stay one step ahead of the machine. See all the spam in my mailbox...
Re:Wonder how well that will work after (Score:2, Interesting)
The same thing actually applies to any such transformation. The end-downloader needs to know how to play the file. There is no method that I can imagine to tell the downloader (random joe on the internet) without als
Re:Wonder how well that will work after (Score:2)
Or you create keys that only work in combination with n other trusted keys and you create a web of trust er wall of trust using some reasonable method. Conceivable. Requires collusion though to build the trusted keys but it would work... to become a Debian Developer for example you have to have at least one other DD sign your key. In order for another person to be willing to sign it they have to meet me in person.This would create si
Re:Wonder how well that will work after (Score:3, Interesting)
Make the guy on the other end pass a turing test in order to get your key. Or you create keys that only work in combination with n other trusted keys and you create a web of trust er wall of trust using some reasonable method.
I think the RIAA would love for you to use such a scheme. For one thing, you've just displayed consciousness of guilt. Plus, you've gone out of your way to subvert a copy protection scheme. Now, they could probably sue you for 10 times as much.
-a
Re:Wonder how well that will work after (Score:2, Insightful)
The software protection arms race seems to have gone pretty comprehensively in the crackers' favour so far...
Re:Wonder how well that will work after (Score:4, Funny)
This kind of software is too prone to denial of service to be deployed on public networks. As a trivial case zip a file containing the string 'pwned' 100 million times or more, the file will compress at about 1000:1 and probably crash the process that tries to uncompress it to examine it.
Re:Wonder how well that will work after (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Wonder how well that will work after (Score:2)
Why publicly? The session between two p2p nodes is a private matter of those two nodes, and the "transformation" (generally known as encryption) can also be decided between this node and that node when they establish a session. It does not need to be elaborate; but if it is, then it is unbreakable.
As a simple example, you send your session key to the server, and the server sends everything to you encrypted with that key. If you are the man in the
Re:Wonder how well that will work after (Score:5, Insightful)
"The password is *** where the first star is the first letter of the first word in the filename, the second star is the third letter of the second word, and the third star is the second letter of the fourth word"
Or "The password is the last word in Slashdot's slogan"
Or "The password is the month in which Christmas occurs"
etc.
Or even (Score:2)
well duh (Score:2, Funny)
Re:well duh (Score:2)
Don't forget "just use Ogg"
Oh, they'll add it alright... (Score:5, Funny)
-Adam
Re:Oh, they'll add it alright... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Oh, they'll add it alright... (Score:5, Funny)
Examining songs acoustical properties (Score:2, Interesting)
Secure sockets aren't exactly transparent (Score:4, Interesting)
Right now the masses might be using FastTrack or gnutella, but the tide is sure to shift as soon as these networks are crippled or shut down.
The future of P2P clearly involves strong encryption, and is also likely to employ some "invite-only" attributes. That future software is here today; all that is lacking is the user base.
Trying to "filter out" or "regulate" file sharing is akin to trying to "filter out" or "regulate" voice over IP. Or, if you prefer, like trying to deliver content to me for my viewing while simultaneously attempting to prevent me from duplicating it - flatly impossible.
So I ask the "inventors" of this media-analyzing software, can you make my encryption transparent? Can you "peer" inside my tunnelled session and identify the content by artist and title?
This will turn out exactly the way every other bogus "piracy prevention" fiasco has.
1) Company releases "copy protection" product which flatly falls on its face (that is it purports to accomplish the impossible).
2) Company sues pre-existing services and products for "patent violation" (after all, these pre-existing products clearly violate the new patent if they are able to "circumvent" the system, right?)
3) Some service gets shut down, ten others replace it.
You forgot #4: (Score:3, Insightful)
===---===
Seems this would be easy to get around (Score:3, Insightful)
The problem then becomes a matter of distributing these utilities. I know, P2P!
Re:Seems this would be easy to get around (Score:2)
Songle, a optimist's view. (Score:5, Interesting)
I've long thought about a sort of whistle-me-a-Google/name-that-tune search engine, where you know a snippet or melody of a song that has no lyrics or you have no idea what the lyrics are, and it peruses a vast collection of songs...
Could this be the answer, these 'psycho-acoustical' properties?
Re:Songle, a optimist's view. (Score:3, Informative)
in fact, then, what this suggests is that there was no market for what you are calling Songle, so the technology wound up being perverted for use in DRM enforcement...
Re:Songle, a optimist's view. (Score:3, Informative)
In the UK there is a service called Shazam [shazam.com]. You dial 2580 on your mobile, hold the phone up to the music source and 20 seconds late the call will automatically end.
After about 30 seconds, it'll send you a text message with the name of the track and the artist.
Provided the
This will never work. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:This will never work. (Score:5, Interesting)
I hate to say it: (Score:5, Insightful)
This of course launched Itunes and the rest of the online music stores. Now you ask... what does this mean to me?
I don't know about the rest of you, but I myself have a rather large CD collection. In that collection, there are some CD's you can listen to from start to finish. Others I'm not so lucky. There are the two hit tracks that we all heard on the radio, and the rest is bullshit. Buffer material to fill up the CD.
Well, much like other folks, I grew tired of being anal raped by the Record Industry. I grew tired of shelling out my hard earned cash for buffer material.
I like to think that Itunes will cause artists to recognize that they can no longer get by on bullshit CD's. I like to think that artists will be forced to make better music in hopes that the consumers will purchase more of their songs, thereby making them more money.
File sharing changed everything... and in the end... it's for the better.
Cheers!
Re:I hate to say it: (Score:5, Insightful)
No. What they will be forced to do is make nothing but "hit singles."
In past eras when the hit single was king it produced the maximum amount of Britney Spears type pop crap in the minimum amount of time.
This time will be different though. Now they have computer programs to analyze hits and pump out more just the same.
So things are looking up, eh?
KFG
Re:I hate to say it: (Score:5, Interesting)
This time will be different though. Now they have
computer programs to analyze hits and pump out more
just the same.
No, now the LISTENERS have computer programs that they can use to find more esoteric music, that appeals to a narrower audience.
p2p is the antidote to the problem you are describing. (Pop music becoming so lame and artificial)
Besides making then fully redundant, non-centralized distribution channels also take away the major labels ability to print money in the form of artificial bands.
stupid and impossible to enforce (Score:5, Insightful)
you can't make information "not exist"
Comment removed (Score:3, Funny)
ID3 tagging? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:ID3 tagging? (Score:2)
Re:ID3 tagging? (Score:3, Insightful)
I suspect they'll have to - when the program claims it is an illegal file, while it actually isn't you'll need some way to dispute that claim "This file has been falsely identified as being song X of artist Y, copyright registered by holder Z". How else would the system work? "I can't let you do that, Dave"?
Kjella
Plus (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Plus (Score:3, Interesting)
Lessons never learned (Score:2, Interesting)
Gosh, that would be effective! Almost as effective as that striking success of limiting spam by legislative fiat.
Or trying to outlaw crypto years back.
When will people learn that perhaps there's money to be made by giving people what they want, instead of trying to hinder them by laws which will be ignored?
No, the Universe doesn't revolve around Washington D.C., regardless of the distended view our out-of-touch legislators have d
Re:Lessons never learned (Score:4, Insightful)
Not the Universe, but the planet.
Doubt it, just think about the situation in the Middle East, Saddam Hussein violated 1 UN resolution, that got him deposed because that's what Washington DC wanted. Israel is in violation of 69 UN Security Council resolutions, the only bombs going off there are homemade by Palestinians because the US would kick ass if the UN even thought about using force against Israel.
The US wants DMCA like laws around the globe, countries that were holding out are dropping like flies as world governments cave in to the demands of Washington.
Less than half of all registered voters in the US actually go to the poll, not even all eligible people are registered. Washington DC is enslaved to the people who donate the much needed money to their campaigns, because they have to fight all the harder to get the votes of the few citizens who vote.
LK
So you cannot compile a client yourself anymore... (Score:3, Interesting)
Crappy technology shoved down our throats (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Crappy technology shoved down our throats (Score:5, Insightful)
other, equally valid points]
I want to expand on this, just a bit, to highlight the problem here.
It seems highly unlikely that the RIAA would allow the end-user to download their database of "song signatures" or hashes or whatever implements this, so that the end-user could filter songs locally, deleting unauthorized songs on the honor system. After all, if the RIAA trusted its customers -- and if the customers were trustworthy -- but that's all water over the dam, isn't it?
So clearly this means uploading either the whole song, or some derived signature, to RIAA, every time you want to trade the file. This means uploading not just music, but any traded file.
And this introduces a chilling effect on free speech. Because the files I might be trading -- or the samizdat that secret Falun Gong supporter Won Ma might be sending to his fellow Chinese dissidents -- might not belong to the RIAA, but might invite government scrutiny for being unpopular dissent.
Certainly, knowing that everything that was traded, from bootleg Pete Seeger protest songs [ohio-state.edu] to homemade iMovies juxtaposing images of George Bush and chimpanzees [bushorchimp.com] to recordings of parody songs about John Ashcroft's resemblance to Darth Vader [tripod.com], was reported to a central repository -- the RIAA copyright detecting server -- could make that repository an irresistible target of monitoring by unscrupulous government agencies interested in tracking dissent [cbsnews.com] -- whether those agencies are in Beijing or Washington D.C.
Would a government employee or contractor, worried about maintaining a security clearance, feel as free to engage in lawful and even patriotic dissent if he was worried his bosses might be able to monitor the his trading, from his home, excerpts from the documentary Guns & Mothers [pbs.org] to which the he had added his own commentary defending his Second Amendment rights? Of course he'd worry -- and thus be discouraged from exercising his constitutional rights under not only the Second but the First Amendment as well!
Might a closeted homosexual worry that trading documentary films about Mattachine Society founder Harry Hay [frameline.org] could reveal his sexual orientation and make him subject to blackmail?
Might Christians living in a Muslim theocracy fear persecution for trading Bibles or Christian devotional music [biblenetworknews.com]?
Having any central server aware of all file trading gives whoever controls -- or can subvert the security of -- that central server a far too broad window into the demographics, politics, proclivities, and beliefs of anyone trading files. While this would be a boon to marketeers, governments, and anyone else whose goal is manipulation and control, it must be anathema to anyone who values privacy and liberty -- from left wing "hippie" to right wing "gun-nut", from closted homosexual to crypto-Christian.
Whatever your politics, whether you trade files or not -- and, no, I don't --, this is something you must oppose, for it threatens the liberty of all of us.
Questions (Score:5, Interesting)
For example: just how computationally intensive is the Audible Magic "listening" algorithm?
If it occurs client-side, does that unfairly mandate a higher caliber of hardware for a user to partake in file-sharing? How easy would it be to hack or fake out this kind of software? The better question may be: is it easy enough for the kind of non-technical mass user that has made P2P such a success?
If it occurs server-side (at least, as much as this term is accurate in the case of file-sharing paradigms that have supernodes or the like), who's responsible for setting up and maintaining it? Does file-sharing become impossible if these things go down?
The article mentions the Napster era of faking out filters by simply changing file names. Could you fake this out by changing your audio files to have extensions that identified them as something other than audio files? If not, does that mean the software will be stupidly trying to "listen" to pictures I'm sharing of my last kayaking trip?
Ultimately, if this is somehow legally mandated it'll probably kill Kazaa etc. the same way the courts effectively killed Napster. Hopefully that won't happen, but it's interesting to examine the airtightness of the solution nonetheless.
How computationally intensive? (Score:2)
psycho-acoustical what? (Score:3, Interesting)
Dear downloader of our new P2P software: (Score:4, Funny)
No effect at all (Score:5, Insightful)
Make it illegal to distribute any software in non-compliance? Download it from a server in Japan or Europe.
Make it illegal to use software that isnt compliant? Now instead of the RIAA suing 12 year, the FBI arrests them.
More election year rhetoric? perhaps...
Will it include? (Score:2)
2 major problems with this idea (Score:5, Interesting)
2) Most P2P applications support resuming from partial downloads. If the monitoring software cuts you off partway through a download, just continue downloading from the point where you were cut off.
Of course, there's also the fact that getting this attached to every P2P program is a Herculean task, but I don't count on that stopping our Legislators from passing a law mandating it.
What a brilliant idea! (Score:2)
> the makers of file swapping software to add it
> into their products either voluntarily or through
> legislation.
I'd like every financial transaction in the world to result in $1 being added into my bank account. All I need to do is convince financial institutions to add that functionality into their products, either voluntarily or through legislation.
Has it somehow escaped the attention of these people that P2P applications aren't able to be r
Meaningless... (Score:2, Interesting)
I am certain that they are well aware of how difficult (impossible) this is. There must be some other motive behind this move.
Making noise ? Trying to mask the fact that copyrights are too hard to enforce in an environment where information exchange is happening at uncontrollable rates an
Re:Meaningless... (Score:4, Insightful)
The only purpose of this tool/technique is to push legislators to pass such laws. The sideeffect this will have that p2p technology will evolve to make this even harder (mute, freenet are still evolving, so is gnutella).
Name that tune! (Score:5, Interesting)
So, effectively, they'll be asserting through de-facto law made through government mandate, that stopping the transfer of anything that sounds like what they are looking for can take precidence over the free trade of information.
Fine. Really - highly annoying, and a misuse of power, but fine. If they want to take the time to listen to a small percentage of those files, suing people and publicising it, fine. Let the reign of terror continue. I honestly don't listen to their music anymore anyway.
As a consequence, however, software which will encrypt content and sender/reciever identification will become much more robust and ubiquitous. That I wouldn't mind seeing.
I empathise with the music "industry" - many of these people are acting out of a motive of self-preservation. But they make their living by offering a service - they can't just threaten people into choosing that service. Here, they are demanding the whole nation change it's rules of conduct to meet it's desires... they may get their rule change, but they won't change people's conduct, nor will they convince people to pay for their services this way. They have to provide better services for that to happen.
Hopefully the music industry will wise up to their real source of self-preservation - dissolving the RIAA as a legal-punishment agency, and turning it into a real service-enchancement agency. Make us want you, don't keep trying to force us to need you!
Ryan Fenton
Forget about client side (Score:2, Insightful)
If AOL, Earthlink and MSN were to make such a deal with the RIAA, it'd take a huge bite out of P2P songswapping.
Just wait until... (Score:2, Insightful)
related technology (Score:5, Informative)
The more people that use it, the more accurate and complete it becomes. It is basically a free CDDB replacement (the biggest one I think) but kind of works in reverse as well (matches mp3s to their associated CDs).
Kinda cool, check it out.
Re:related technology (Score:2)
Why the hell would I want something like that? (Score:3, Funny)
share music like you'd buy/sell weed (Score:4, Insightful)
Think about how you might buy or sell weed. If you go downtown and buy it from a bum, chances are that you'll eventually get busted in a sting (in addition to getting some crappyass weed). If you buy from someone you know fairly well, then you're cool.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
My thoughts.. (Score:2, Insightful)
The first step in outlawing open source code (Score:5, Interesting)
Of course, there would be no point in putting this code in the p2p software if someone could just comment it out before they recompiled it. So evil open source code must be outlawed. Hail Microsoft.
Open source prohibition-style DIY (Score:3, Insightful)
Even if the government did by some act of legislation, the RIAA, and the gestapo, get all P2P software to incorporate it, open source programs could have a little readme that says "DO NOT delete line 276, it calls the copyright-protection function."
In conclusion, there is absolutely no way in h3ll the government, the RIAA, or even the gestapo can enforce this (dumb) idea.
what about....? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:what about....? (Score:3, Insightful)
No, it wouldn't. It would give a true positive.
I can totally understand the RIAA (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, after the band had it's first hit, the president of their record company invited them for a lunch, where he told them: give me one more song like this, and I guarantee you that you will not have to work for the rest of your life.
The band did just that, and the president has kept it's promise.
The other day I read in Time Magazine that Sting still gets over $US 2000 a day as royalty for Don't stand so close to me.
I do love Sting, as anyone else... but the wealth distribution system has some serious flaws here, obviously.
Does a hit really have such impact on society, humanity that demands such financial rewards?
These numbers can shed some light about the length, how far the beneficiaries of this system would be willing to go to keep up with the status quo.
In the real world this is called prior restraint (Score:5, Insightful)
But hey, maybe on the 429th page of the "no gay marriage ammendment" they can throw in a few things making prior restraint legal then not only can they monitor your downloads but they can cut off your kids limbs at birth to ensure they never hurt anyone.
Open source (Score:3, Insightful)
And for each iteration the software will move more and more towards secure crypted and hard to trace methods of sharing. Making it easier and easier to use for far worse purpuses than downloading music. A very real life example would be the spreading of child porn.
easy to break (Score:4, Insightful)
That's as stupid as expecting to completely protect music against copy without noticing that one just has to copy the analog signal sent to the speakers, and there's nothing to do against this. They are amazingly clueless about what technology can and can't, they never realize that the problem with human being is that they can and will adapt themselves to new technological constraints...
They really beblieve Santa Claus will bring them a Monopoly Enforcment Unbreakable Device for Xmas!
file sharing (Score:3, Insightful)
However, it probably would break down with encrypted file transfers; and in many jurisdictions, it is against the law to attempt to decrypt something unless you are the intended recipient {hence DeCSS is fine, because the owner of a DVD is the intended recipient of the encrypted data}.
I personally use apache-ssl for all my file sharing needs, mainly because the client is so readily available. Although I haven't paid for a proper SSL certificate, that doesn't mean the transfers aren't encrypted
And if someday, somebody does decide to include some sort of song-identifying bit in their file sharing software, then what exactly is there to stop me from just downloading the
The RIAA et al must face facts. Their business model is dependent on an assumption which time has given the lie: that the equipment needed to manufacture high-quality recordings was beyond the reach of the lumpenproletariat. It was great while it lasted, but it has come to an end, and only a fool could have failed to see that this would be the case. The only way there is any money left to be made is by selling stamped CDs cheaper than burned CDs {the cost of which includes bandwidth, time and hassle} -- after all, whoever saw a bootleg copy of a book?
I swear (Score:3, Funny)
Useful! (Score:3, Interesting)
Surly a PERL script could fix all of MP3's in a matter of months. Then we'd all be sharing files on alternate networks with correct tags. FINALLY!
Voluntary or Legislative enactment? (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't see how this would work on an open-source P2P project. As a project manager, I would require that the code be included, if mandated by law. However, because I'm open source, you as a consumer could remove said code and recompile. Voila. No more bloated code. Let them "legislate" the inclusion. The Open Source movement won't care, we'll include it, and then let you remove it if you want.
Perhaps, this scenario would provide those who fail to see the value in Open Source to "come around". Trying to legislate open source is like trying to legislate a persons thoughts. Can't be done reliably.
Re:What's next (Score:2)
GW: It is not a rumor, it is a fact. That twelve-year-old boy does have weapons of mass deeeestruction. We must protect ourselves against this threat to our nation's security.
Boy: Yeesh. I knew Eminem sucked, but I destroyed that CD years ago.
GW: We have invaded Greenfield, TN. Most of the locals cheered as we toppled the bank sign, but were a little puzzled why the military vehicles went through their stop light and didn't slow down for the speed trap that followed. In any ca
Re:Why peer-to-peer? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:It's a network appliance (Score:3, Insightful)