Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Mercora - New Radio P2P Network

Posted by Hemos on from the excellent-ideas dept.

jtids writes "The maker of P2P Client, Shareaza, is working on a new Radio P2P project called Mercora. This network gives users the ability legally webcast music to other users on the network. Users can also share images, send instant messages, and join groups where they can participate in forums and chatrooms. Although the program itself is still in beta, the project looks promising."

113 comments

  1. To Trade by thebra · · Score: 4, Informative

    Mercora, a derivation of a Latin word meaning "to trade" and is run by Chief Executive Srivats Sampath, former CEO of McAfee.com

    Wired ran an article on this last year here.

    1. Re:To Trade by sjwt · · Score: 3, Funny

      But the real question is how dose one trade p0rn with this??

      I meen are we goign to be limited to p0rn sound tracks on this new p2p?

      =>

      And how long before the record industry trys to kill it off becase it can be used to send out copyrighted songs.

      --
      You have 5 Moderator Points!
      Which Helpless Linux zealot/MS basher do you want to mod down today?
    2. Re:To Trade by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

      If ever I saw a reply that ought to have been posted anonymously...

    3. Re:To Trade by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This thing is crap. It won't minimize and the music is from old hookers with a few mp3's. Only for sickos

    4. Re:To Trade by focitrixilous+P · · Score: 1
      Actually, they also have an image client of some sort
      Share pictures with friends and family using Mercora P2P Pictures

      * Create albums and pictures on your local computer for friends to see
      * Decide which of your friends gets to see your various albums using privacy settings for each album


      sounds like it could share your precious pr0n to me.
      from their about page
      --
      SAILING MISHAP
    5. Re:To Trade by Kpt+Kill · · Score: 1

      uh, yes, it does minimize and the very first station i picked was playing linkin park and incubus right off the bat

  2. No linux client by barcodez · · Score: 5, Informative

    If you are running linux, bsd, mac or anything but windows you're out of luck there is only a windows client. I don't care enough to get this working under wine.

    --

    ----
    1. Re:No linux client by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its GPLed, so just need to wait till someone port it to Linux/Gtk :)

  3. legally? by fozzmeister · · Score: 5, Insightful

    doesn't that depend on what you broadcast?

    1. Re:legally? by Frequanaut · · Score: 4, Informative

      Not only on *what* you broadcast, but also *when* you broadcast.
      From the legal disclaimer: You may not "Webcast specific sound recordings within one hour of the request by a listener or at a time designated by the listener"

    2. Re:legally? by challahc · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yeah it says it's ok to broadcast music ripped from cds, and downloaded legally from places like iTunes.

      Does anyone use this yet? I was wondering if you have the ability to mix songs and use a microphone to talk, or if its just like a playlist. I'm guessing it's the second option here, in which case this idea isn't really new. I remember using this to do the same type of thing with winamp.

      --
      01100010 01101001 01110100 01100101 00100000 01101101 01100101
    3. Re:legally? by Rydia · · Score: 3, Informative

      What they say and what is true are two entirely different things.

      The rules of ownership (I have this, I can do what I want with it, and give it to my friends as fair use in a limited domain) are completely different from the rules of broadcast (I have this thing, and I'm going to do what I want with it and give it to anyone that is even remotely interested).

  4. What about royalties? by roche · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I thought it was ruled a year or so back that all webcasts have to pay royalties to the artists if they boradcast the music over the net. How can this be legal if that is still the case?

    --

    roche
    Bah Humbug!
    1. Re:What about royalties? by The+Hobo · · Score: 3, Informative

      It looks like they do pay royalties to a certain group that represents many artists: Or so they say here

      We'll know if it's right by the RIAA factor, being how fast they can get a subpeona out to these guys.

      --
      There is another kind of evil which we must fear most, and that is the indifference of good men. -- Boondock Saints
    2. Re:What about royalties? by eSims · · Score: 5, Informative
      From the FAQ:

      Is broadcasting music on the Mercora network legal? Yes. Mercora has obtained the necessary licenses so that you can broadcast music on the Mercora Network legally.

      Specifically, Mercora enables the webcasting of music according to the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, 17 U.S.C. 114 (required Adobe Acrobat to read). Mercora has obtained the statutory license for the non-interactive streaming of sound recordings from Sound Exchange, the organization designated by the U.S. Copyright Office to collect and distribute statutory royalties to sound recording copyright owners and featured and non featured artists. Mercora has also taken care of all U.S. musical composition performance royalties through its licenses with ASCAP, BMI and SESAC. Most song writers are represented by these agencies but there are some who are not affiliated with them, and you will need to obtain their permission before you can webcast their music. Mercora also ensures that any broadcast using the Mercora client adheres to the sound recording performance complement as specified in the DMCA. Read more about broadcasting on the Mercora Network.

      --
      I .sig therefore I am!
  5. Free webcast? by The+Hobo · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I thought free internet died with the proverbial dot com fallout.. it will be interesting to see the sustainability of this project. This might also hurt online radio like shoutcast.

    --
    There is another kind of evil which we must fear most, and that is the indifference of good men. -- Boondock Saints
  6. Legal ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful


    legality is based on country of origin and content broadcasted, not the technology

  7. In other words... by spacefight · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Let your friends stream all their sound to you, rip it from the source, tear it apart and create a legal song archive. No, no profit here ;)

    1. Re:In other words... by millahtime · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Let your friends stream all their sound to you, rip it from the source, tear it apart and create a legal song archive. No, no profit here ;)

      If they are my friend why not give them a special ftp account or web access to do so. Or why not burn them to cd or dvd and give them that. Seems to much easier and they get the songs they want

      --
      Evolution or ID?
    2. Re:In other words... by John+Hurliman · · Score: 3, Insightful

      More interesting would be tuning in to a station (or a category of stations), lets say classic rock and using a plugin that rips the streams to disk and checks for duplicates. Run it for a few days and you have a nice [category here] collection. This has already been done with Shoutcast, so we might as well adapt to new technology! The RIAA doesn't really care about this happening with FM radio, because the quality is sub-par, but if a web station is streaming at 160kpbs or greater...

    3. Re:In other words... by toooldforthiscrap · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Have you tried stationripper??

  8. bandwidth vs quality? by Prince+Vegeta+SSJ4 · · Score: 3, Interesting
    How could a single user broadcast a radio with a typical cable/dsl connection?

    Would this basically suck up all of the upstream bandwidth, so that basically the quality would suck, or you have an audience of 4.

    1. Re:bandwidth vs quality? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      MULTICAST!!!

    2. Re:bandwidth vs quality? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      its p2p idiot

    3. Re:bandwidth vs quality? by millahtime · · Score: 1

      It would suck your upstream bandwith. You'd have to have a super fast conection to really stream just like any other streaming service.

      --
      Evolution or ID?
    4. Re:bandwidth vs quality? by spacefight · · Score: 1

      Hm? It's p2p which most probably means that the stream gets forwarded/multiplied by nodes within the network itself.

    5. Re:bandwidth vs quality? by Otto · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So what? If you're the original source, and you're wanting to send out 128kbits/sec, then you have to have 128 kbits/sec of bandwidth to send it out, at least. You may not need to support multiple users with this, but you'll still need to be able to stream at a good chunk of speed. Most cable modem/DSL users don't have that much upstream. So unless this thing reencodes at a lower rate, online streaming radio from these people will still suck.

      --
      - Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set him on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
    6. Re:bandwidth vs quality? by TLSPRWR · · Score: 2, Interesting

      At one of the few Sonic Fan gaming communities, we have a bi-yearly week long 'E3'-esque expo (S.A.G.E., not currently in operation), online only. Along with that, we do radio broadcasting during that week. Typically, we only have like 2 or 3 computers with DSL or Cable streaming out the cast including the computer doing the webcast. With enough distribution (say, on a P2P network) you could keep the quality high, and have more than 4 listeners on the webcast (At most, we usually had 20, pretty low-key operation, but you'll see my point, keep reading).

      We had to set all that up ourselves, but with this program, it seems to (/could) do it automatically. As a listener ( IP 1.1.1.2) joins the Station (IP 1.1.1.1), they both become distributors of that station's broadcast. So, when the next few listeners come in, they're getting distribution from 1.1.1.1 and 1.1.1.2, plus they distribute that same signal themselves.

      Everyone listening through Mercora duplicates the signal and becomes a node to distribute the bandwidth load (or at least has the potential to be).

    7. Re:bandwidth vs quality? by TLSPRWR · · Score: 1

      Granted, the webcasts won't be CD quality, (or 128 kbits/sec [which is still feasible]), but it wouldn't be horrible quality, like FM or anything. You underestimate the power of broadband.

    8. Re:bandwidth vs quality? by thebes · · Score: 0

      why did this get modded down? This makes sense, since that's the usefulness of multicast. In a related idea, how do you think you can image 100+ computers with a 15 GB disc image, over a 100 mbit network which is usually at least 20% in use, all by an old server with one hard drive sitting in a closet, all in about an hour and a half? It's called multicasting, and that's how you would do it. It would be similar to how regular radio works. One source broadcasts, while many clients simply receive the packets if they're tuned in.

    9. Re:bandwidth vs quality? by Afty0r · · Score: 1
      you have to have 128 kbits/sec of bandwidth to send it out, at least. You may not need to support multiple users with this, but you'll still need to be able to stream at a good chunk of speed. Most cable modem/DSL users don't have that much upstream.

      Yes, most of them do, however I assume you're talking about cable modem/DSL users in the USA?
      If that's the case maybe you need to change or lobby your provider to increase upstream bandwidth.
    10. Re:bandwidth vs quality? by FrO · · Score: 1

      You could probably do something long the lines of what BitTorrent does. Use pieces from different clients on the network to aggregate your total bandwidth.

    11. Re:bandwidth vs quality? by Otto · · Score: 1

      Yes, most of them do, however I assume you're talking about cable modem/DSL users in the USA?
      If that's the case maybe you need to change or lobby your provider to increase upstream bandwidth.

      I personally have many times that in upstream bandwidth, however, not everybody has my cable company. I've seen faster, I've seen slower. Very frequently I've seen slower, as if you only use the network for surfing and playing games and such, 768k down and 64k-128k up is perfectly fine for most people's current needs. Only us power users really can take advantage of 4meg down and 512k up or something similar.

      And don't forget that there's a choke point as well. As cable modems expand, available bandwidth to those cable modems decrease. DSL has a potential huge amount of bandwidth on each line, but every person connected to the CO is sharing a single network pipe or two leading upstream from there. At some point you always reach critical mass.

      --
      - Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set him on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
    12. Re:bandwidth vs quality? by Otto · · Score: 1

      Granted, the webcasts won't be CD quality, (or 128 kbits/sec [which is still feasible]), but it wouldn't be horrible quality, like FM or anything. You underestimate the power of broadband.

      No, you overestimate it. Okay, so 96k isn't bad.. a lot like a radio quality. Especially in newer formats like AAC and using good encoders.

      But if everybody and their dog is trying to stream up 96k streams to elsewhere, the network will totally choke on it. Every pipe is oversold. That's how the network works.

      There's perhaps 120 cable modem users on my segment. Probably less, considering my area. My old apartment had almost 400 cable modem users on the segment. And while there was a good 25 megabits running down to those 400 users, it wasn't bidirectional and there was only 2 or 3 megabits up. Now, while the cable modems themselves were limited to 256kbits, during peak usage, upstream could drop as low as 64 kbits or so for me. Especially when the jerks were doing P2P.. the traffic generated by eMule/eDonkey can almost be considered a DOS attack...

      So while I had 256k upstream, it was not guaranteed to be that fast. The bandwidth was oversold, like all bandwidth everywhere is. You have an upstream cap, but that amount is not dedicated to you and only you. And it will run out with too many people using it for high bandwidth stuff like this.

      --
      - Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set him on fire and he's warm for the rest of his life.
    13. Re:bandwidth vs quality? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like buffering hell, what happens to 1.1.1.3 when 1.1.1.2 has buffering problems? P2P works because you dont really care about the order in which you get fileblocks, as long as sum of available parts equals the complete file everyone is happy.. This would require the blocks to be streamed IN ORDER. Very big difference.
      (note to self, must read tech doc on p2p streaming radio)

    14. Re:bandwidth vs quality? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1
      I doubt any broadband provider (broadband in this case meaning satellite, cable, or DSL) in the USA provides less than 128kbps peak upstream. Comcast's default deal is now 3 or 4Mbps downstream (depending on where you live) and 384kbps upstream. Some areas may not have been moved to these caps. I'm not aware of anyone providing less than 128kbps upstream on DSL or cable.

      Lobbying your provider to increase bandwidth is useless. The only thing you can do (where available) is change providers to someone who has more upstream, and eventually everyone else will increase upstream as well. Until people do this there is no proof of a market for higher-upstream connections.

      Comcast probably only bumped from 256k to 384k because they didn't want to lower prices to DSL standards - they charge about $60/mo right now, and DSL seems to have dropped to roughly $40/mo, but that's for 1.5/128 for the most part. I was more or less happy paying my $60 for 1.8/256 but I'm much happier (and thus less likely to switch to DSL if it finally appears in my area) now that I have the 4/384.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  9. Howard Stern by th1ckasabr1ck · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Hopefull now everyone will be able to listen to Howard Stern again,

    1. Re:Howard Stern by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everyone who wants to can. The whole government censorship thing is yet another Stern marketing/publicity stunt, so don't be foolish and buy in to it.

  10. Hmmm by in7ane · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It seems it's a legal loophole project which relies on the fact that you can broadcast (since they got the license) music that you legally own (so what happens when I transfer over my collection from Kazzaa? - who is liable?). There seems to be little useful technology as such. And it's not anonymous, so basically 1st (can't really do multiple sources for broadcasting of things you own and so ripped yourself, can you?) p2p with a an IM/etc. layer tagged on.

    And if it catches on there will likely be a patch so save the streams... bringing on a lawsuit or continuos updates/kracks.

    1. Re:Hmmm by aminorex · · Score: 1
      Hardly a loophole. It's quite carefully and
      explicitly written into the law, after extensive
      lobbying, negotiating, and politicking by the
      representatives of the involved commercial
      interests.


      I don't think (IANAL) that you would incur any
      added legal liability by broadcasting content
      obtained by copying a source which the copyright
      holder did not explicitly grant permission to you
      to copy. If you think you would, please post a
      citation.

      --
      -I like my women like I like my tea: green-
  11. A quick question by GillBates0 · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Why is it that webcasts/streaming MP3s are legal, when (as far as I know) none of the private "radio" stations listed on Shoutcast etc have licenses to broadcast? Are they (RIAA etc) banking on the client software to not allow stream ripping?

    I remember that webcast sites (in essence indexes to internet radio stations) were attacked by the BIG R sometime back...anybody have an update on that?

    It seems streaming MP3/RealAudio(lower quality ofcourse) would be the next way to share music, what with Kazaa etal becoming extinct. Ofcourse, Bittorrent, and these webcast stations have the same problem - they need to have an index page to publicize the tracker/links.

    --
    An Indian-American Hindu committed to non-violent thought/speech/action alarmed by the global explosion of radical Islam
    1. Re:A quick question by TheSync · · Score: 1

      Just FYI, to be fully legit, Webcasters must pay fees to copyright holders BMI, ASCAP, and SESAC, as well as to the RIAA.

    2. Re:A quick question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      have you tried station ripper or streamripper?

      station ripper seems to miss many splits... streamripper was told to FOAD by live365.com.
      For shoutcast, many/most places have fades between the end of the previous and next -- so the splits are messy, at best... you get (1) missed beginnings, (2) missed ends and (3) fade outs and talk overs at the begining and ending of songs

      On the other hand, if you don't care.. then you can get most of the stuff. For things like ambient, it doesn't matter... it seems to only be an issue for short files -- such as rock, etc.

      I do find it amusing that live365 thinks that no one is recording its streams.

    3. Re:A quick question by Chanc_Gorkon · · Score: 1

      ASCAP and BMI were wanting extra fees. The attack had nothing to do with BIG R. Clear Channel wanted to stream all of their stations, but now only stream Talk Radio and insert different ads over the local ads (THIS item is mostly a BIG R thing....local mom and pops did not want to pay the extra ad money to be streamed).

      --

      Gorkman

    4. Re:A quick question by sirshannon · · Score: 1

      for $10 a month, I already prefer Rhapsody over Kazaa. It is MUCH faster, has more selection, and higher quality. It is streaming, but on demand. There are also stations that I occassionally listen to, but the on-demand is the deal.

      --
      The truth doesn't care what I think.
  12. P2P Webcasting? by lharmon · · Score: 5, Informative

    Sounds like Konspire2b, but not open source, and only for windows.

    Besides, the guy who wrote konspire is also the guy who wrote MUTE, so I think he knows a thing or two about P2P.

    --
    From the Gentoo desktop of Luke Harman
    1. Re:P2P Webcasting? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Error. It is like PeerCast, www.peercast.org

    2. Re:P2P Webcasting? by IdntUnknwn · · Score: 1

      Er, the guy who wrote Mercora wrote Shareaza and designed the Gnutella2 protocol, so I'm pretty sure he knows a thing or two about P2P as well?

    3. Re:P2P Webcasting? by IdntUnknwn · · Score: 1

      Actually, I wasn't sure if Mercora was actually written by the same guy who wrote Shareaza, despite what it says in the Slashdot summary. So I looked at the Company Info page and found this: "Mercora has been founded by an executive and technical team that previously was instrumental in building companies such as Netscape and McAfee.com, and developing innovative products using peer-to-peer protocols and web based security services." So supposedly they should know the P2P stuff as well :P

    4. Re:P2P Webcasting? by jtids · · Score: 1
      I think it is made by him. Heres a quote from the guy who made Shareaza on the forums, its from a post that explains the features from Shareaza 2:

      "I also put in a button which links to my new social / community / chat / P2P radio streaming project Mercora. Basically the entire "buddylist" concept which keeps coming up around here. I felt this deserved its own project rather than trying to put everything into Shareaza"

  13. legal ? go read the small print on your CD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting


    All rights reserved of the producer and of the owner of the recorded work reserved. Unautorised Copying, Public performance, Broadcasting, Hiring or rental of this recording is prohibited

    APublic. (noun)

    1. The community or the people as a whole.
    2. A group of people sharing a common interest: the reading public.
    3. Admirers or followers, especially of a famous person. See Usage Note at collective noun.

    now IANAL but it seems pretty clear to me its illegal

    1. Re:legal ? go read the small print on your CD by karmatic · · Score: 3, Informative

      First off, the small print on the CD doesn't mean anything, it's Copyright Law that matters. The small print simply tries to explain it (while conveniently neglecting to mention fair use).

      Second, the Mercora people have a contract with SoundExchange, AZCap (royalty clearing house), etc. Note: it says Unauthorized. They are paying royalties on it, so it's legal.

    2. Re:legal ? go read the small print on your CD by Dibson · · Score: 1

      uh oh, i guess we better tell all the radio stations to stop broadcasting now

      --
      -- Why keep us waiting? We are not made of time.
    3. Re:legal ? go read the small print on your CD by sabNetwork · · Score: 1

      Yeah, the copyright owner does not have the power to limit your legal rights to fair use, only extend them.
      --

    4. Re:legal ? go read the small print on your CD by dave420 · · Score: 1

      Yes, the rights are reserved by the owner of the record, however mercora has sought the rights to broadcast from the very same owner. The "all rights reserved" thing doesn't mean broadcasting is always prohibited, but that you don't intrinsically get the right to broadcast just by buying the tracks.

  14. Excellent by thedillybar · · Score: 4, Interesting
    I listen to music (usually with Shoutcast) at work everyday. Some of the best stations I have found are often small and full during the day. I've always thought it would be nice if I could lend some extra bandwidth to keep the station going. The station itself should only stream to users who will re-broadcast the stream. And whoever will rebroadcast using the most bandwidth has the highest priority. If you can't rebroadcast, you simply end up somewhere farther down the food chain, but in the end more people get to listen.

    It seems like warez channels have been doing this forever. Once someone gets something, it spends a few days getting passed around all the high-bandwidth providers before it goes to the "public."

    I'm glad to see more legal, but free (as in beer) music available. But how long before someone writes a "MyTunes" (or something similar) that allows you to download music (illegally, I'd imagine), off of this service?

    1. Re:Excellent by Trigun · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Then the MyTunes software is illegal, not the broadcasting software.

    2. Re:Excellent by thedillybar · · Score: 1
      Oh, no doubt, but that doesn't stop people from getting pissed off and the RIAA going after the company that distributes the broadcasting software.

      We've seen this before. The threat of a lawsuit from the RIAA can often shutdown an organization like this long before it gets to court.

  15. What's the catch by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's run by some corporation, and all corporations are only in it for the money, so what's the catch here?

  16. No big deal ... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Most *nix users can't configure ALSA correctly

  17. and the difference to the RIAA is? by Bog+Standard · · Score: 1, Interesting

    So transmitting an MP3 for this legal, but transmitting an MP3 for sharing purposes is not? Even thought the contents of the data stream are the same? I can't really see how this is going to work. BS

    1. Re:and the difference to the RIAA is? by karmatic · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "I can't really see how this is going to work."
      Maybe it's because you are an idiot, or maybe you didn't RTFA.

      The reason this is legal is because they are licensing the music. For every song that plays, they pay. For example, ASCAP is one of the big licensing groups. To play 1,000,000,000 (1 billion) songs, of which 1/3 are theirs, only costs $40,200 if you use fee schedule C.

      The question remains, how do they plan on making money? Do they?

    2. Re:and the difference to the RIAA is? by FrYGuY101 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Two ways, from what I can gather.

      First is that they plan on selling songs at 99 cents a pop, ala Napster and iTunes. Only they plan on doing it using network capacity, rather than having a big huge expensive central server, meaning while they charge the same, their costs are much less.

      Second, they plan on selling non-personal network information (average user listening habits, popular songs, etc) to the labels (They're being payed royalties, and paying right back for info on what the royalties are for... marketing research at its finest!).

      --
      "If we let things terrify us, life will not be worth living."

      - Seneca
  18. Wonder how long this will last.... by karlandtanya · · Score: 3, Insightful
    How do I share pictures on Mercora?
    You share pictures on Mercora right from your local directory on your computer. You "tell" the Mercora client about which pictures you want to share and with whom (people on your friends list, etc.) and those pictures can then be viewed by those people when you are both online on the Internet. People who have the permission to view your pictures will also have the ability to download those pictures.


    Hmmm...look--somene is sharing Harry_Potter_the_Everlasting_MoneyMill.jpg.


    This should be interesting.

    --
    "Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, it doesn't go away." - Philip K. Dick
    1. Re:Wonder how long this will last.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      If all you can complain about is the spelling, everyone assumes you support the content.

      Actually, I assume it means the reader couldn't get far enough past the technical failures of the post to even consider the content. Spelling is important, despite popular belief on Slashdot.

  19. Rules of Webcasting...it's basically useless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    The website gives you the impression that you can webcast the files you have to your friends. However, the restrictions on this (to be legal) make it basically useless to how the majority of people would use this anyway. Read below for the restrictions:

    You are not allowed to do any of the following things:

    * Publish advance program guides or use other means to pre-announce when particular sound recordings will be streamed or the order in which they will be streamed (this is because we are a non-interactive webcasting service)
    * Webcast specific sound recordings within one hour of the request by a listener or at a time designated by the listener
    * Webcast audio content for which you do not have the legitimate legal rights for use (music you have ripped from CDs that you own or music you have downloaded from a legitimate online music store like Apple iTunes is considered legitimate, music downloaded using file-sharing programs like KaZaA are not legitimate)

    1. Re:Rules of Webcasting...it's basically useless by CrosbieFitch · · Score: 1

      But someone could do the following:

      1) Publish the fact that they possess a particular CD.
      2) Accept requests to stream this CD no sooner than 60 minutes after it's been requested.
      3) Declare that it's a CD they legitimately obtained.

      So this is just like Kazaa except guaranteeing you won't get your stuff sooner than an hour.

      Very little difference really.

    2. Re:Rules of Webcasting...it's basically useless by Rick.C · · Score: 2, Funny
      You are not allowed to do any of the following things:
      * Webcast specific sound recordings within one hour of the request by a listener or at a time designated by the listener

      So at 14:00 I'll request, "Please play Song-A at any time ~except~ between 16:00 and 16:05. TIA" and I'm legal, right?

      --
      You were 80% angel, 10% demon. The rest was hard to explain. - Over The Rhine
      "Math in a song is good."-Linford
    3. Re:Rules of Webcasting...it's basically useless by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yep. Make the request at 14:00 and it cannot be played until 15:00.01 at the earliest.

      16:00 is an extra hour beyond that so, no problem.

  20. Like Peercast by iantri · · Score: 5, Informative
    This sounds something like PeerCast.. is that true?

    I've tried PeerCast before -- neat idea, but it simply isn't practical -- not many people have enough bandwidth to relay a 128kbps stream realiably, and every time I tried it I got nothing but stuttering and skipping.

  21. How is this different from PeerCast? by Kaimelar · · Score: 4, Informative
    The maker of P2P Client, Shareaza, is working on a new Radio P2P project called Mercora. This network gives users the ability legally webcast music to other users on the network.

    How is this different from PeerCast? I glanced at the Web site, and didn't see anything that was revolutionary -- looks like PeerCast combined with IRC to me.

    Though, perhaps they have fixed the problems PeerCast seems to have with bandwidth -- I've used it off and on, but it seems to always suffer from lag. Perhaps that would go away if there were more users, or perhaps it's just inherent in the design of the network -- I've never bothered to look at the technical details.

    Anyway, I think the more exposure Webcasting has, the better. More variety, smaller players that can appeal to niche audiences, and lack of corporate interests playing to the lowest common denominator for the highest advertising profits are all advantages Webcasting has over traditional, ClearChannel-dominated radio. At the moment, at least. :-)

  22. Its not a new network or technology. by Adolph_Hitler · · Score: 3, Informative


    The network is nice, I admit I use it myself but its not new technology. This also is not a new network because I've been using it for a while. I don't know why this site decides to post this to the top of the page when other P2P news far more important is not posted.

    Did you know MUTE developer Jason Rohrer will be speaking at the 5th International Free Software Forum in Porto Alegre, Brazil?

    View some slides Slide1
    and notes Slide2

    Lets also not forget that Shareaza is open source now.

    --
    People don't exist to serve systems, systems exist to serve people.
  23. The Most Important Question! by Cpt_Kirks · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Can you get pr0n off it?

  24. What's Needed for Licensed Broadcasters... by infofreako · · Score: 3, Insightful

    At this point there is giant void between 'hobby' P2P webcasting solutions like this and PeerCast and P2P-Radio (http://p2p-radio.sourceforge.net/) and the professional applications like Abacast, ChainCast and the others. The hobbyist applications fail to deliver the counting tools needed for us to report our listenership numbers appropriately to ASCAP, BMI and the others and still have some flaws in terms of functionality. The proprietary options have these tools available but they are currently not much of a savings compared to the traditional bandwidth options.

    What's needed is something like Shoutcast which provides a professional means of distribution, but built on a P2P architecture. To my knowledge that simply doesn't exist, but I have my fingers crossed. As a new webcaster who sees his listenership growing week after week, there may come a time when I can no longer afford to be popular without a REAL P2P webcast solution.

    -pjc

    --

    Broadcasting LIVE from a Bonus Room Over the Gara
    1. Re:What's Needed for Licensed Broadcasters... by CrosbieFitch · · Score: 1

      Check out RawFlow

  25. radio broadcast by vmircea · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This is definitely a promising idea, but it would get really complicated, I for one at home only have about 30kilobytes a second upload, which is barely enough to radio one song to one person, and would also severely lag me. This kind of thing would probably end up having the people with larger connections all serving the people with smaller pipes, and the people with smaller pipes not giving back (mostly because it is hard). And also, the media industries will probably jump on the legality of this because they don't like these kind of things... because noone will actually serve only music that they legally own, they will also serve music that they downloaded from kazaa and other variations, because not that many people use itunes compared to the people who get songs illegally.

    1. Re:radio broadcast by dave420 · · Score: 1

      30KB/s is 240Kb/s, which is more than enough to stream a 128kbit MP3, still leaving you with enough upstream to use the internet...

  26. How these people get money? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How these people get money?

    Are they using spyware or adware, or what?

    1. Re:How these people get money? by jtids · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I dunno. I don't think the program contains Ad-ware or spyware though. Perhaps they are just decent people ;D

  27. Related Links by BiggyP · · Score: 1

    Here are some Projects that may be of interest to readers.

    Streamer P2P Radio
    AudioScrobbler
    Last FM

    --
    Software Freedom Day!.
  28. How do they plan to finance the network operation? by OmniGeek · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Presumably, Mercora will pay some sort of royalties on the Webcasts. Even if they get a free ride somehow, they will still have to administer the network (there *does* seem to be some form of central admin for the system) and pay for bandwidth and hosting. What's their business model for supporting the project? I see no visible source of revenue there. If there is no business model, will it all be run from a residential DSL account somewhere, with attendant performance and scaling problems?

    --

    "My strength is as the strength of ten men, for I am wired to the eyeballs on espresso."
  29. Re:How do they plan to finance the network operati by beegle · · Score: 1
    What's their business model for supporting the project?

    According to the Wired News article linked to above, they're going to sell DRM-encoded songs but ship them from end-users' hard drives rather than from a central server.

    Looking at the Mercora web site, they seem far more p2p-oriented. I'm guessing that, like Kazaa, they plan on making extra money by installing a metric ton of spyware on your PC.

    --
    --
  30. It does depend on what you broadcast by doodlelogic · · Score: 1

    Broadcast rights have been reserved by the record companies since when they well, just made records (of the round black variety).

    That said, historically the record companies have as often been complicit in illicit broadcasting as they have been desparate to shut it down; in the UK for instance to get around the quota system for live vs. recorded music, pop records were beamed over from Luxembourg and even 'pirate ships' in the North Sea . More recently, much "urban" music owes its intital sucess to underground radio stations like the now-legal Kiss 100.

  31. I rather doubt that... by Illissius · · Score: 3, Interesting

    ...seeing as this is from the same guys who made Shareaza, which is the very likely the best P2P app out there right now. It's the first one where I didn't have to fight the program to get it to do what I wanted, it's rather user friendly, has undetectable amounts of bloat (by me, anyways), and installs a total of 0 third party programs (= spyware). And now version 2.0 is open source.
    So I'd be inclined to expect good things from them :).

    --
    Work is punishment for failing to procrastinate effectively.
  32. The edna project. by Koatdus · · Score: 2, Interesting

    http://sourceforge.net/projects/edna/

    Edna is a py script that will stream MP3 files over a network or the internet. It has a nice web front end and if you scan the cover art and drop it into the directory it will display in the web page. The main difference though is that there is no easy way to find your edna server on the internet ... you have to know where it is.

    At home I have ripped almost all of my and my kids CD's and can listen to them on any PC in the house. Streaming 2 or 3 songs at once doesn't seem to tax the network.

    One of my future projects is to put together a (silent) media room PC so that I will be able to pipe MP3's through my main stereo and play them on the speakers in the back yard. (Pool Party!) Right now I have to go inside every once in a while and feed new cd's into the changer.

    I can also listen to my entire collection at work, ether by opening up a port to my home network DMZ or by tunneling via SSH or VPN.

    It works pretty well. My DSL connection can stream a 128mb MP3 file ok. If I try to stream 2 files however at the same time my DSL line can not handle the upload without pauses. Downloading 2 streams at once though the DSL

    One of my co-workers set up an Edna server at home. Listening to 2 streams at once over his cable modem connection works just fine, no pausing.

    I also know someone who is putting together a wi-fi enabled system to go in his car. When that is done he will be able to park in his driveway and sync his MP3 collections between his car Edna server and his home Edna server. (hopefully he is reading up on iptables)

    --
    Every wrong attempt discarded is a step forward - T. Edison
  33. All "Hey Ya", All The Time? by writertype · · Score: 1

    Are there provisions to prevent "microstations" from springing up? If I don't take requests, but people know they can listen to "Hey Ya" or some other dreck all the time, it's essentially peer-to-peer file sharing, right?

    For example, if the client is small enough, I may be able to run five instantiations of the server through different ports, playing five different songs over and over. Then, if someone could come up with an intermediary service to check what songs people are advertising that they have available, users could be "assigned" to broadcast songs, theoretically providing one or several songs to each person to continuously broadcast all the time.

    Which might be kind of cool.

    "Hey, who are you on Mercora"?
    "Dude, I'm "Smells Like Teen Spirit"!
    "Sweet! I landed "Tangled Up in Blue."
    "Steve, who are you?"
    "Batdance."
    "..."

  34. Super Annoying Program. by crhylove · · Score: 1

    It runs every time Winblows starts, and there's no turning it off short of uninstalling. That's a deal breaker for me. Now I need a reformat. *sigh*

    --
    I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
    1. Re:Super Annoying Program. by dave420 · · Score: 0, Flamebait
      If you can't stop a program starting up when you turn your windows box on, you don't deserve a computer (and how you've managed to type on slashdot without braining yourself on your keyboard or choking on your mouse is incredible).

      start -> run -> msconfig, or start -> run -> services.msc

      I know it hurts, but please try and use your brain.

    2. Re:Super Annoying Program. by crhylove · · Score: 1

      Shut up ass. I know that. I just don't like that it didn't have a setting in the options. To me that is trash software. *sigh* again.

      --
      I hold very few opinions. I hold information based on observation and fact. If you wish to disagree, please use facts.
    3. Re:Super Annoying Program. by dave420 · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      Of course you know that. You just like hanging out on forums making yourself look like a dunce. I understand.

  35. BT? by SoLoatWork · · Score: 1

    Sounds like BitTorrent

    --
    John Susek
  36. One thing by Bilange · · Score: 1

    Bittorrent seems to pick random pieces, which is impossible to use in a live streaming environment. You have to get the bits in the order like it was written in the original file.

    Source: bittorrent's economic paper

    --
    "...a generation of kids has grown up thinking Trance is the shittiest music since country and western." - Paul van Dyk
  37. Its not GPLed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    http://www.mercora.com/legal/eula.asp

    http://www.peercast.org/ is