Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Movies Piracy Music Open Source The Courts Your Rights Online

LimeWire Lives Again 278

Posted by Soulskill
from the there's-a-lesson-here dept.
Slayer Silver Wolf writes with this excerpt from TorrentFreak: "'On October 26 the remaining LimeWire developers were forced to shut down the company's servers and modify remote settings in the filesharing client to try to harm the Gnutella network. They were then laid off. Shortly after, a horde of piratical monkeys climbed aboard the abandoned ship, mended its sails, polished its cannons, and released it free to the community.' And so, LimeWire Pirate Edition (LPE) was born. Based on the LimeWire 5.6 beta that was briefly released earlier this year and then withdrawn when Lime Wire LLC lost its lawsuit, LPE is now in the wild. In many ways, it is better than the version killed by the RIAA."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

LimeWire Lives Again

Comments Filter:
  • Why (Score:5, Insightful)

    by deathtopaulw (1032050) on Tuesday November 09, 2010 @08:16AM (#34172470) Homepage
    Limewire has been so painfully irrelevant for the past 8 years now that it laughable to even still hear the name. It's like when an old man mentions "That damn Napster" as a free music service. I can only imagine the people who still use this thing are admins just wanting to test their corporate anti-virus.
  • by captainpanic (1173915) on Tuesday November 09, 2010 @08:21AM (#34172514)

    Shut down a losing concept, and another improved version will take its place.

  • Re:Limewire??? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by PARENA (413947) on Tuesday November 09, 2010 @08:25AM (#34172554) Homepage

    Specifically Spotify: because it's only available in a few countries, duh.

  • by eldavojohn (898314) * <eldavojohn AT gmail DOT com> on Tuesday November 09, 2010 @08:28AM (#34172576) Journal

    Why would anyone use that virus-ridden "piece of eight" when you can listen to almost any piece of music you like, legally, on Spotify? (Legal film equivalents are being worked on too).

    Because you don't live in the very small section of the world where Spotify is allowed [wikipedia.org]? Also, LimeWire is GPL where as Spotify is proprietary (what are they storing about you?).

    But yes, I avoid LimeWire like the plague after several spyware debacles and am kind of curious why, if LimeWire's servers are down, you would use it over Gnutella when the networks it is connecting to are (I assume) all of Gnutella's servers?

    Hell, I would assume FrostWire is still a viable and better choice ...

  • chop off its head, and ten grow back

    the only way to destroy filesharing is to destroy the internet. since that's not going to happen, and because you would need more money controlling and monitoring traffic (effectively) than any money you profit off of media, guess what: game over

    simple economics 101 have spoken: filesharing is here to stay, and the only thing that will die is distributors who make money off of distributing content. boo hoo

    economics is about supply and demand. the internet is disruptive media. it is disruptive, because it changes the basic technology, and therefore the basic economics, of media distribution: one teenager in 2010 has more global reach and distribution power than bertelsmann, time warner, sony, etc., in 1985

    so when the cost associated with supply = $0, demand follows to that natural economically determined price point, and no other price is possible. you can't enforce a marketplace form a dead technological era on us

    people will still make money off of music, movies, etc.: ancillary real world revenues. like concerts, like cinema houses. avatar is the most profitable movie ever made... all in movie houses. concerts reap millions for artists. but DVDs, CDs... it's all going away. artistry is not dying, only the useless middleman. do not weep for him and do not believe his trollish pronouncements about hurting the artist. sure it will take time, and the death throes will be mighty, but the writing is on the wall. game over

    there is nothing for you to do, dear old school media distributors, save one thing: just hurry up and die already

  • by betterunixthanunix (980855) on Tuesday November 09, 2010 @08:31AM (#34172624)
    This sort of evolutionary jump is precisely what happened when they sued Napster. These people must think that there is some sort of upper bound on technological development, and that if they keep suing, eventually file sharing will die.

    Of course, these are the people who tried to block FM radio, so I guess I should not be too surprised.
  • Re:Why (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Tx (96709) on Tuesday November 09, 2010 @08:32AM (#34172632) Journal

    Having an ecosystem of different file sharing software and protocols is valuable insofar as it makes it harder to prevent all file sharing. Assuming you don't want to shut down all file sharing of course. The authorities tend to focus on whatever are the protocols du jour (at the moment bittorrent and rapidshare-type file lockers), but meanwhile you have all sorts of protocols from the past like gnutella, dc++, edonkey etc still happily working away mostly under the radar. I'd guess if you're sharing stuff you'd be less likely to land an enforcement notice if you're using a more obscure protocol. Maybe you might escape notice of deep packet inspection systems and so avoid throttling by your ISP, if they have implemented that.

    Just guessing, but in any case it seems sensible not to just assume that bittorrent is the apotheosis of file-sharing, and that nothing else will ever be useful.

  • by betterunixthanunix (980855) on Tuesday November 09, 2010 @08:43AM (#34172742)
    Hm let's see...proprietary...proprietary...proprietary...I think we can see what the problem is here.

    Proprietary software is designed to keep people divided like this.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 09, 2010 @09:01AM (#34172972)

    Someone should create a service that matches Americans who want access to iPlayer with Brits who want access to Hulu. Each user would send data to their peers and receive data from their peers, and everyone would get to watch what they wanted. We could call it... I don't know... peer to peer?

  • Re:Why (Score:5, Insightful)

    by 91degrees (207121) on Tuesday November 09, 2010 @09:06AM (#34173040) Journal
    I make digital content.

    I don't think they steal.

    I'd rather they but the stuff, certainly, and would encourage then to do so but it turns out a lot of them actually do buy a decent amoutn of media as well as pirating.
  • Re:Why (Score:5, Insightful)

    by MightyYar (622222) on Tuesday November 09, 2010 @09:16AM (#34173146)

    Boo-hoo... the filthy pirates are taking away my government-granted monopoly!

    Seriously, could we all grow up a little? We can have an honest discussion about copyright without resorting to name-calling.

  • Re:Why (Score:5, Insightful)

    by MBGMorden (803437) on Tuesday November 09, 2010 @09:23AM (#34173252)

    exactly... you can't catch me I'm the Gingerbread Man

    Gingerbread Man or something similar would actually be a decent name for a new P2P system (if/when we ever move past Bittorrent).

    It is definitely fun though seeing these groups futility playing their little game of whack-a-mole.

  • Re:Why (Score:3, Insightful)

    by NotBornYesterday (1093817) on Tuesday November 09, 2010 @09:56AM (#34173746) Journal
    Democracy doesn't mean that the majority is right, just that they are in power.
  • Re:it's been said (Score:4, Insightful)

    by debrain (29228) on Tuesday November 09, 2010 @09:59AM (#34173770) Journal

    that an infinate number of monkeys, working for an infinate amount of time will eventually recreate the works of shakespere

    Wouldn't an infinite number of monkeys instantaneously recreate the works of Shakespeare, or one monkey working for an infinite amount of time?

    Two infinites does not a greater infinite make.

  • by Thud457 (234763) on Tuesday November 09, 2010 @09:59AM (#34173776) Homepage Journal
    are piratical monkeys mortal enemies of robotic ninjas ?!
  • musicians make music because they love music. they do it for that reward alone. any money beyond that fact is just icing on the cake. no one goes into music saying "i have to generate a positive net cash flow in the third quarter." no one writes songs like that, well, no songs you want to listen to anyways. maybe some say "i'm going to write music to impress chicks and get in their pants", but again, that's not money. ego, fame, charisma: that's what makes music. removing money from the equation changes nothing. maybe makes it better

    besides, even if you did look at music as only a financial spreadsheet, you are not thinking like a true capitalist. you are thinking like a communist: that we are COERCED to pay for the development of music up front, regardless of quality. a true capitalist says "i think this is a good spot to invest in a restaurant" or "i think we should shovel money into developing this business avenue". risk... and reward. sometimes in capitalism you take risk and there is no reward, you lose money. but there is no such thing as "pay up to support this, you are forced to."

    likewise with music: you invest in making a song, and MAYBE someday later you get money for the effort. no guarantee. heck, there was no guarantee before the internet: there were always starving artists, and always will be. you give your songs out for free. if they are liked, you make money touring. THAT'S the new world. and its the same as the old world, before the mid1800s, when corporatism (not capitalism) made music an enforced payment affair

    regardless, you are simply putting out the standard middleman distributor troll that filesharing hurts artists. no, it only hurts middleman distributors. fuck them. there will always be music, most of them will be starving artists, as they always have been, and a few will find fame and fortune touring or advertising, same as it always has been. the only thing that changes, is the middleman dies. good riddance

  • Re:Why (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday November 09, 2010 @11:37AM (#34175004)

    Interesting... [wikipedia.org]: 'The Gingerbread Man (also known as The Gingerbread Boy) is the anthropomorphic protagonist in a fairy tale about a cookie's escape from various pursuers and his eventual demise between the jaws of a fox.'

A language that doesn't have everything is actually easier to program in than some that do. -- Dennis M. Ritchie

Working...