Slashdot Mirror
Next-gen Copyright-aware P2P System Whitepaper
meier73 writes "A whitepaper has just been released detailing a secure (OpenSSL/digital signatures), copyright-aware P2P network. The paper claims that this system enables legal file trades, something that isn't guaranteed by Kazaa, Morpheus or eDonkey. The whitepaper goes on to state that the long-term goal of this system is to catalog
every human creation in existence that can be expressed by a digital medium. Project stats: a super-computing cluster that will scale to more than 900TB of storage, 300M transactions per day and trade music, television, movies and books.
Doesn't this constitute a responsible and legitimate use of P2P?"
Because here's a hint: make the protocol open, and people will re-write it to exclude the copyrights.
:P
Oh, it's server-based and not 'true' P2P...my mistake.
No one will use it
I see that BitTorrent wasn't listed along with Kazaa, eDonkey and Morpheus.
Strange, as it was recently used as an example of "a responsible and legitimate use of P2P" by distributing Microsoft's Windows XP SP2.
I don't suppose this has anything to do with the SP2 torrent seeds being 'pulled' from the organizer's website at Microsoft's request (read:order) ?
...and still no Metallica?
Small potatoes make the steak look bigger.
I suspect we like our non-copyright aware distribution channels too much ;)
I don't read your sig, why do you read mine?
Um. No you didnt. Heh.
Gnomoradio is also a legitimate use of P2P, though its catalog is much smaller at the moment...
A whitepaper alone doesn't say much. Trying to scale to that level hasn't been done before and is very ambitious for it to do. It could possibly be done but the better question is when.
My UID is prime is yours?
Why would I want to stop using current systems? FastTrack, Gnutella, and OpenFT let me exchange any files I want, and there just doesn't seem to be any reason I would want to switch.
This is great and all, but I think the stat we *really* want to know is... how many Library of Congress' will this thing hold?
OF course it won't fly... the good of mankind is dwarfed by the needs of a few to make and control trillions of dollars.
but mine is concentrated mostly on pr0n.
Even if they catalogue everything, they could still have the same problem that viagra spam filters have.
so what exactly is a copyrighted work? when i worked in a copy shop, we were told anything created (in our examples: photos) were automatically protected as property of the creator for such and such a time frame.... what then, would be able to be sent, besides GPL stuff?
I thought one of the main purposes of P2P was that it is decentralized. A supercomputer cluster is hardly decentralized.
Also, how will it "detect" copyrighted works? I can just zip up my favorite illegal MP3s and give them a name like "good.zip" and it would have to be manually flagged as "bad".
You basically admitted that nobody will use it because copyrights are enforced. Heaven forbid people respect copyrights. You know, like we demand with the GPL. I actually got accused of trolling the other day because of my sig.
http://www.bitmunk.com/images/tutorial/payment.png <-- That sums if all up right there.
/. geek in the bottom right-corner, left out.
=(
Note the
Now we know who the secret customer of the petabox really was!
However, in addition to technical and scale issues mentioned elsewhere, I can see some points of controversy:
Hmm... Come think of it, there's something fishy here. Let's say I download the song and I get to play it as much as I want. Let's assume I can't share it over non-protected P2P, but hey, I can sell it again when I no longer want to listen to it (as if there's no way to copy to another, unencumbered format, but bear with me...) Why on earth should the artist get a piece of it every time the same copy is sold? I understand they are trying to appease to RIAA & Co with this but this is not fair. It's not like they get a dime if I re-sell my CDs.
Furthermore, it may well be that the label claims copyright over the songs, thus keeping any proceeds from methods like this and not really helping the artist.
Very interesting - I would really like to see it or some equivalent take off, but until then I'll wait with plenty of healthy skepticism.
The revolution will not be televised.
I would rather like to see every public domain human creation in existence that can be expressed by a digital medium to be archived. A Project Gutenberg so to speak, but for not just books but also images, audio and video as well. For example, there are veritable treasure troves of old films just lying around degrading and collecting dust in television archives around the world but even if they were all digitized (as is being done with some extra valuable movies in danger of degrading to unusability) I doubt we would see them offered for free to the general public. The bandwidth costs would just be too big for any company/state television attempting it. A distributed P2P system however would be ideal for this.
In the meantime, there are a few sites attempting it on a smaller scale - the Prelinger Archives over on archive.org are definitely worth a look for anyone interested in old American war, educational and propaganda films for example (like the (in)famous "Duck & Cover" movie)...
is that some sort of problem? I'd consider it a feature.
Guess which P2P no one will be using? ;)
So, I guess the slackjawed guy in the hoodie that needs to pull up his pants that is in the "no" circle would be the consumer, and the guy with the waxed mustache and jail stripes must represent the RIAA, as they are only receiving a big fat bag of cash, and not putting anything else in.
Yup. That's a pretty accurate representation of this system.
Slashdot still doesnâ(TM)t support Unicode after it was added to the HTML standard in 1997.
But it offloads the some or all of the actual downloading with the ability to compensate download source. That sound close? If i buy some shareware stuff currently they send me to one of several places to download it. I assume those places get compensated someway currently. Same idea but i could be one of those places i guess. Just a plan/hope to scale it through the roof. Sounds like i could decide how much i want to be compensated? Too much to read too late in the day too this late in the week ;)
Didnt get to the part of how they apply watermark and what guarentees a legit file.
If that worked a single source would be convenient. Unless of course it costs the same as picking it up next time i am at Walmart, which seems to be the desire of the ??AA types however.
HOW DO I MAKE PARAGRAPHS HERE????
.... and that didn't work out too well....
http://xanadu.com/
http://www.iath.virginia.edu/elab/hfl0155.html
The only people I can think of that might want to use this, are people who are selling huge amounts of data, but really, really cheap. It has to be a huge amount so that they would want to bother using p2p (to shift expense to someone else), but so cheap that they're not making enough money to be able to afford web hosting. Is there anyone whose business is like that?
And then there's the usual problem: if you're charging people for something, then what is your customers' incentive to stay on the p2p network to help distribute it to other customers? Are you gonna give 'em a rebate or something? Maybe, but remember: this whole thing is for people who are too dirt poor to be able to afford web hosting.
Something doesn't add up. Who is this for? It sure as hell ain't the RIAA/MPAA members.
As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
First: This ain't a whitepaper - it's a sales pitch.
Second: How is this P2P when there's a big centralized "Authorization service" in the middle?
And guess who is supposedly running that service? Why the paper's authors..
What happens when it becomes self-aware?
Carousel is a lie!
So, what about public domain works? They have no copyright to sign them, and it is impossible to sign and register them all -- can they not be distributed by such a system?
If not, then it will create a situation in which only works approved (directly or indirectly) by a cenralized signing authority can be distributed. Bad if such systems become legally mandated.
On the other hand, if unsigned PD works can be distributed, then there's not much point -- you can (via analog holes if nothing else) strip the signature from a copyrighted work and distribute it that way. So there wouldn't be much point.
DNA just wants to be free...
The whitepaper goes on to state that the long-term goal of this system is to catalog every human creation in existence that can be expressed by a digital medium.
Umm, yeah, except those which are copyrighted.
What's the point of this? First, its not true P2P if a central server is involved. It has been proven that no watermark system can work no matter how much funding is pumped in. It has also been shown that any watermark can be detected and stripped out, even if it is encrypted, due to the nature of how watermarks actually work. All DRM will fail in the end as will DMCA and any other laws trying to protect it. Forget it.
Most people will pay for something they really want anyways. Most 'pirated' matterial is ditched. There are cryptographic methods to make micro-payments that don't require a 'bank'. This whole method may look clever to some, but absolutely __nothing__ is new! Don't forget the rule is "try before you buy". This is a general principle of copyright law (fair use) and its not likely to change anytime soon. Internet is 'airplay', 'airplay' is good advertising. When did that change?
ahahahaahahahahahha OH hahaahahhhahaaaha please!! ahahahaha i cant hahaha air hahahahahahahahah need air! ahhahaha ROFL ROFL ROFL hahahahahahahahahahahahhaa.
This comment does not represent the views or opinions of the user.
How about anonymous P2P instead?
We have secretly replaced these Slashdot mods' sense of humor with a rusty nail. Let's see if they notice!!
Offtopic! This guy just doesn't learn!
I know of a number of people who won't use P2P as it is now for the very reason that you don't know if you're breaking copyright laws or not.
Furthermore, there are a heck of a lot of applications for such a system in the commercial art & design world.
copyrighted works -
(real world definition:) Works owned by entities with lawyers . . .
The SNR should be much higher on this type of 'network' - that alone would be worth it for me.
Politicus
Probably because it is based on/inspired by BitTorrent. Look at the diagram on page1 (introduction).
The "System load balansers" ARE trackers. The clients can share content, but only under the control of the tracker. What is new is that all connections are encripted.
You can see that if you want to distribute something you should make contract with them (probably not more sophisticated than eBey) and upload the content on their server. Probaly they will water_mark it.
I must say that I admire them. They are willing to support all platforms and that is already good start. They are more probably not going at the BIG FAT movie and music distributors. Instead they will collect more copyrighted works from individuals or smaller entitels that are ready to take risk. If they keep the prices low and deliver content fast, they may succeed. Wish you luck boys.
And something more - 900TB are good start but are not enough. The local content server of my ISP is about that size and it is still growing. I'm sure you guess i'm not from US and i'm not going to tell you more. Taina maina.
The good of mankind is pir^H^H^Hstea^H^H^H^Hcopyright infringement ?
Not that you directly state that, but it is implied.
If you meant the good of mankind would be served by a more free (as in speech) exchange of intellectual property, then you should engage to act to change the laws and regulations governing, in this case, copyrights - rather than implying the good of mankind lies in breaking those laws and regulations.
( civil disobediance only goes so far, and tends to apply to government )
- What happens to all the creations in the public domain? Are those unable to be traded on Bitmunk?
- Can a person who has copyright over a work register while asking for no royalty?
- What happens when the Bitmunk database is overburdened with requests? Will there be another database, or is this a false P2P?
I'm also not sure that simply giving a credit card number (see second to last question) is enough to guarantee authenticity of ownership.This sig space intentionally left blank.
watch him dance
There were other compressed audio formats, and even if they weren't as good as MP3 they were good enough... the problem was that any of them (including MP3) needed a faster computer to decode in real-time in the background than most people had. MP3 happened to come on the scene at the right time to take off... or MP3 happened on the scene because it was the right time.
A P2P-aware Copyright system?
<p> around the paragraph </p>
... just publish it and release it yourself? It's digital, it doesn't get much easier than that to publish, and you can contract dvd or cd burning and packaging yourself, or even do that yourself.
To me, and I'm not a downloader of anything that is gray market, music movies or games,so I got no dog in this fight, I just wonder why they charge those ridiculous prices, when they could severely drop the prices to very cheap and make it on volume sales. Like today, there's no reason music cds couldn't be 3 bucks retail at the store, they don't need to be 10 to 20 dollars. The companies would most likely even make more money and there would be less pirating/copying/trading going on if they had kept dropping prices as the technology let them. Instead, the rest of humanity noticed that "copies" were extremely cheap, that the technology had arrived and was universally avaialable, then they looked at the rip off prices still being charged, got pissed off, and went "screw it, they want to rip me, I'll rip them back first" and this stoopid digital war started. That's exactly what happened, and it never had to happen in the first place.
Now, it's up to the content producers to take charge of their own productions and start to cut the middleman skimmers out of the deal and go direct to the end user with your product, at very reduced rates. It has to be cheap enough and clean enough to let people get the content they want, yet still make ya'all a few coins. Seems like a happy medium would be possible, as long as you cut the middle man profit skimmers out of the transaction. IMO, that's about the only practical way this dilemma will be solved, unless we go to a totally regulated internet and a bunch more stupid draconian laws applying to everyone and with future hardware and software.
<not-so-subtle irony>
Apparently Slashdot is just a bunch of over-zealous Microsoft nuts.
</not-so-subtle irony>
Isn't that what Lenin said? Or was it Trotsky?
Anyway, I hope the Big Corporations ARE able to control p2p so that copyright material cannot be traded (even though I am a world-class Kazaa and usenet binaries dog myself). Because they once the corporate capitalists have it rigged so that distribution of audiovisual entertainment is all done by networks, client server and p2p, then that will set them up for a Big Fall.
The only reason that America is in the grip of corporate capitalism is that mass media has been able to propagate top-down, business friendly memes into American living rooms. Their community has become hollowed out, and is the domain of the corporations. THat is why we work like dogs compared to citizens of the other western nations.
But when the p2p networks cannot be used to trade copyrighted material for free, then that vacuum, that demand for free movies, documentaries, sitcoms will be filled by "amateurs". And ya know what? With a little practice, and using cheap digital cameras and editing software, and free music, amateur actors, we leftists can crank out entertainment with leftist, bottom-up memes, anti-corporate sentiment, and toss it out on the p2p networks at very little cost.
You think 200 channels of cable tv is a lot? Wait until there are a million channels on the net 4 years from now, when wireless broadband has forced broadband prices down to where 70% of America has broadband.
Steven Spielberg on the upcoming changes:
"Steven Spielberg has forecast that the Internet will eventually become the primary source for entertainment. Appearing on NBC's Today show on Thursday, Spielberg told cohost Katie Couric: "I think that the Internet is going to effect the most profound change on the entertainment industries combined. And we're all gonna be tuning into the most popular Internet show in the world, which will be coming from some place in Des Moines." When Couric remarked, "Great, I'm gonna lose my job," Spielberg interjected, "We're all gonna lose our jobs. We're all gonna be on the Internet trying to find an audience.""
Give Americans a few years where they are not subjected only to top-down corporate memes, and then see where the political direction goes. I think we will head in Sweden's direction....and the Big Corporations will have brought it on themselves through their own greed....
eat shiat and bark at the moon
I'm left with only one question: what is stopping you from doing this now? Why do you have to wait for corporations to take away all their media before you work on constructing your own?
Consider it a challenge.
There is much pleasure to be gained in useless knowledge.
Nothing quite pisses me off like the so-called free speech zones. I thought this whole country was a free speech zone. Didn't you?
Win a signed Stephen Carpenter ESP Guitar from the Deftones: http://def-tag.com/?r=0008781
"The whitepaper goes on to state that the long-term goal of this system is to catalog every human creation in existence that can be expressed by a digital medium."
...
This is being done to squeeze yet more money out of "consumers" for the copyright creators.
I don't overly fault the creators for doing this. I do fault ourselves for not finding a way to do something similar, although for different ends.
Specifically, referencing page 126 of Lawrence Lessig's Free Culture
"Perhaps the single most important feature of the digital revolution is that for the first time since the Library of Alexandria, it is feasible to imagine constructing archives that hold all culture produced or distributed publicly. Technology makes it possible to imagine an archive of all books published, and increasingly makes it possible to imagine an archive of all moving images and sound...
But Kahle and the Internet Archive suggest what the future of libraries or archives could be. When the commercial life of creative property ends, I don't know. But it does. And whenever it does, Kahle and his archive hint at a world where this knowledge, and culture, remains perpetually available. Some will draw upon it to understand it; some to criticize it. Some will use it, as Walt Disney did, to re-create the past for the future. These technologies promise something that had become unimaginable for much of our past--a future for our past. The technology of digital arts could make the dream of the Library of Alexandria real again.
Technologists have thus removed the economic costs of building such an archive. But lawyers' costs remain. For as much as we might like to call these "archives," as warm as the idea of a "library" might seem, the "content" that is collected in these digital spaces is also someone's "property." And the law of property restricts the freedoms that Kahle and others would exercise."
Fight for sensible copyright laws. Donate to the EFF. Or do both.
But we must stop doing nothing.
- Neil Wehneman
My legal education, in nifty podcast format
That's a mistake, really. I bought D3 when it came out and love playing it. While you can't use CD emulation cd software to pretend the cd is in the disk is a moot point, even trying to copy the cd doesn't work. {I've tried this with several programs and in linux using bit-for-bit copies, still never worked- let me know if i was doing something wrong.)
= 9&t=4091 or you can search google for that tutorial that allows you to play w/o the cd in the drive. (sorry I couldn't find a link for it, could someone kindly post it for me?)
So I found a tutorial on the internet on how to effectively use a HEX editor on doom3.exe to essentially remove the software protection, or copyright (whatever it was called, I cannot remember)
You can learn how to run Doom3 on Windows 98 Systems (which is something you can't do normally) using this tutorial: http://www.flexbeta.net/forums/index.php?act=ST&f
Anyways, just because _you_ can't run the game without the CD in the drive is your own shortcoming and not the reason for pirating the software. It's just a justification for your act of piracy and don't try to delude yourself or others into believing that this is in any way a correct cource of action.
Besides, this is a minor annoyance to have a cd check of any kind. But havn't ID in the past, provided a patch that removed the cd check as a convienence factor for us? Come on.. just lighten up a little and do some hard work by hexing it yourself, or finding someone who can do it for you.
p.s. I've scanned those doom3.exe no-cd cracked files you can download, and they're almost all serial stealers that use a quick hash and send it off to somewhere on the net. Especially off p2p networks; they're usually worms etc.
--zoloto
.
..."every human creation in existence that can be expressed by a digital medium" has to include all the pornography, all the erotica, all the erotic pictures, all the works in private collections, all the usenet posts, and all the email written.
Ain't gonna happen...
jon
As I understand it, the system is not designed to emulate physical sale transactions. When a seller sells a song, for example, the seller is not then deprived of that song. In other words, the seller is not selling the song, but rather their time and bandwidth. This gives users of the system the insentive to continue using the system and help to distribute media because for every song they download, they can make money back on it by selling it to others. If a song only costs $1.00, for example, and a seller can get $0.10 every time someone buys from them, then they only have to sell the song 10 times to break even.
Also, a lot of people reacted by saying "It has a centralized database and transaction system! That's not P2P!" That's a non-thought-out reaction, if I've ever heard one. P2P networks work well because digital media is very large. In this system, the transmission of the media itself is still done from user to user, thus preserving the important part of P2P networks. The comparitively small data exchange between user and centralized system is negligable. Therefore the creators of the system have thought out a rather well balanced system topology.
If p2p software respect the copyright, no one would be interested in it, let's be honest.
In addition to a per-transaction fee (a sample one is given as $0.15 on a song perchase), there is this paragraph at the very end of the How It Works Seller document:
You can use the money you earn on Bitmunk to buy digital files that you want, or you can transfer the money in your Bitmunk financial account to a banking institution of your choice. It can take anywhere from two days (if you're a highly trusted seller) to one month (if you're new, are selling newly registered creative works, or have complaints logged against you) to withdraw your money to a banking institution.
So Bitmunk also makes money on interest. Not unreasonable in principle. For example, it defeats the purpose of micropayments if someone's credit card is hit on each purchase. On the other hand, 2 days to 1 month sounds long to outrageously long for a modern system. And much like a brokerage account, one might additionally expect interest for funds held there over some length of time.
Couldn't you defeat a digital signature by resigning after slight modifications? Or would you only allow downloads with a few specific signatures?
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
France, though it's not so easy to come here. (I was lucky enough to get a temporary contract, so I worked my ass off and they were so happy with my work that they brought me over. At this point, I have an unrestricted work permit, and even if I were to lose my job, I could still find another, or go on unemployment if necessary.)
If you want to try a European country, Ireland is one of the easiest at this point, though if you have any ancestry to call upon, that country usually becomes easier.
I've heard that Japan is pretty easy to go to (besides being like Mecca :), and if nothing else, there's a demand there for native english speakers for teaching english.
But... Ireland is also 0wned by american corporate interests. Irish government policy is basically "whatever microsoft and intel say it is, and would they like a rim job with that?".
And wonderful human creations like sandcastles and orchestral productions and a good meal have their beauty in their transience.
The three examples you mentioned have transience, but only food has obligatory transience. Sandcastles can be photographed from multiple angles, converted to a mesh using stereo image analysis, and reconstructed digitally using a 3D printer. Orchestral productions can be recorded in Ambisonics (intensity, dx, dy, dz).
Nothing you read on Slashdot is legal advice. The following discussion refers to the federal laws of the United States of America; other jurisdictions' laws may vary.
You go to the Louvre and take a picture of the Mona Lisa, the Mona Lisa may well be in the public domain, but your picture is your intellectual property.
If your photo is a substantially faithful reproduction of a pictorial work such as a painting, then no, it isn't original enough to count as a distinct copyrighted work. However, if you use photographic filters to make a significant change to the expression, then yes, your picture is a new work to which you own a copyright from the moment your work is fixed in a tangible medium until roughly a century after the Supreme Court invokes the three-strikes rule implied in its Eldred opinion and overturns a successive copyright term extension.
But what happens when you copy a work of public domain literature? Did you copy the original, or a copy of the original? Your work may well be explicitly in the public domain, and yet still violate the copyright of the copy you copied from.
A new edition of a public domain work created through spell-check isn't a new copyrightable work either. From a Copyright Office circular on derivative works: "Making minor changes or additions of little substance to a preexisting work will not qualify the work as a new version for copyright purposes. The new material must be original and copyrightable in itself."
I'm going to be a senior at an art college and for my senior project I'm considering starting an online tv network of sorts. The way I see it now, my main competition are sites like atomfilms.com, etc.
I'm curious what business models people think will work for this sort of thing. I was thinking of embedding short, TASTEFUL (think cartoon network style) ads, about 10 seconds or less into the episodes of shows, and maybe at the beginning of movies. I was also thinking maybe instead of that, offer the most current stuff for streaming for free, and offer a small subscription fee for access to the archive and the ability to pay for a DVD to be burned+shipped.
The test material for this will be stuff made by students at my school and anybody else I can work out a deal with, but I'm curious as to what people think works with this and what doesn't.
Also, I think one of the big issues of amateurs doing this is copyrights. For example, I currently need to find out whether or not I'll be held liable if someone's show that I distribute on my network uses copyrighted material they weren't granted usage of.
Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
i've had no problem with alcohol, pargon cd emulator, nero's drive image etc.
I'm not seeing where others have had the problem, and I did a normal install.
We also make sure that you're the actual owner of whatever works you claim
How do you do that? How can a songwriter know that the songs he has written weren't subconsciously copied from something he heard on the radio?
IT WAS A JOKE.
You could write a song, record it, upload it, and the record companies have been totally cut out of the loop.
True, but the music publishers haven't been cut out, as they could sue you for subconsciously copying part of your song from something you heard on the radio. Go search for Bright Tunes v. Harrisongs . Thus your "current copyright holders" retain their lock on the music business.
or at least owe them a fee for producing your own content (by a levy on blank media payed directly to them
Independent record labels are interested copyright parties and thus can apply for a cut of this same fund.
So, what about public domain works? They have no copyright to sign them, and it is impossible to sign and register them all -- can they not be distributed by such a system?
Project Gutenberg will probably collect them, fix them into compilations of about 700 MB each (thus obtaining a copyright), and register the compilations with Bitmunk.
The system described in the whitepaper has been implemented - its purpose is to enable anybody on a P2P network to support the artist while trading files legally with their friends and other people on the net. We have a very difficult balancing act to perform: help the artist and fan without removing any of their rights.
The protocol is open because we want to enable software interoperability (we don't want to lock anybody out of the network using special file formats or nasty DRM - we believe in protecting fair use).
Here is how the system works, in a nutshell:
- Artists register a creative work for sale on Bitmunk - they set a royalty, each time a file sale happens, a royalty is distributed to them. Lets say 30 cents (almost 3 times as much as the artist gets from iTunes or similar services).
- Somebody comes along and has an MP3 or FLAC or OGG of the creative work registered by the artist and wants to provide it on the network. They setup a sales server and want a cut of the sale whenever somebody buys it from their sales server. Lets say their cut is 20 cents. Bitmunk's cut is 15 cents (for providing the service).
- Somebody searches the network and finds the seller and the creative work they are selling and buys it for 65 cents.
- The person that just bought the file can then turn around, set their own sales server up and (since they like the artist, and also have a slower connection) charge 10 cents for re-distributing the song on their sales server. Now people have a choice between buying the song for 55 cents or 65 cents.
What incentive do people have for using such a system? Here are a couple:- Its legal - you don't have to worry about a lawsuit.
- You can support the artist more directly, and make money doing it. You can then use that money to buy other stuff off the network, or transfer it directly to your bank account.
- We don't use DRM for copyright enforcement. The system doesn't treat you like a criminal.
- The financial aspects of the network operate on efficient market theory - it is incredibly efficient at finding the perfect price for the artist and the buyer (this means cheaper music, with more money going to the artist). If you look at a supply/demand curve - the network finds the equilibrium point very quickly.
None of the online music stores do this. In the iTunes world, it is a corporation selling to you. On Bitmunk, it is your peers selling to you and vice-versa with most of your money going to the artist.Bitmunk is a network where you are (along with the artist) in control of setting the prices. We're not trying to emulate a "true P2P" network as you put it - we're trying to do something that is far more important - help artists and fans. This isn't marketing BS speaking - we are putting everything we have into making a system that works for everybody.
If you would take the time to look over the site, you would see that we are making a very serious attempt at solving the current problems with digital media distribution. Go to the forums, ask some questions - I guarantee that we can answer them.
Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny, G+: +Manu Sporny)
Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
On the other hand, 2 days to 1 month sounds long to outrageously long for a modern system.
It takes human musicologists a lot of time (which is money) to verify that a songwriter's newly registered song is in fact an original work and was not in fact subconsciously copied from a song he had heard on the radio ten years ago.
It would not run for me while I had cloneCD's cd emulator or cloneCD installed. Needless to say I was a bit irked by this.
Why don't we try this instead?
A proposal for a collective licensing scheme, complete with technical infrastructure.
Criteria:
1. minimizes the changes required to existing and future software
2. capable of being securely implemented in software released under open-source licenses.
3. runs on existing hardware and networks without modification
4. preserves the capability to innovate new software and hardware
5. provides consumers with the digital content access to which they have become accustomed with file sharing
6. provides publishers and artists with the access to consumers and promotion to which they have become accustomed (whether they admit it or not).
7. fairly compensates publishers and artists for providing digital access to their works based on popularity of the works.
8. does not interfere with consumer's established fair use rights, including those of first sale, or the abilty to make copies for purposes of research, education, citation, review, format, device- or time-shifting, or data backups.
9. is reasonably robust against technical attack.
Send me some feedback.
How would one watermark vector graphics, MIDI files, XML files, or any other file containing discrete expression rather than expression derived by sampling a signal?
I'm one of the primary architects behind this system, we've poured all of our energy into this system in an attempt to find a balance between all the conflicted parties (DRM vs. P2P)... this isn't FUD, it is a very concentrated attempt to create a system that works for everybody. Please, read on...
Their system doesn't "guarantee" it either -- for example even "copyright aware" tech can't know if Linux is covered by SCO copyrights without help.
Sorry, but you're dead wrong - our system does guarantee legal file trades. You're making the false assumption that we use some sort of file detection software to figure out if something is copyrighted or not - which is not the case (you might want to read over our website before making statements like this).
We clear each and every creative work on the network. When you select a creative work (such as The Beatles, Penny Lane) and associate it with a file (such as an MP3) - that creative work has been cleared for sale on the network by the artist.
Absurd. Personally, I wouldn't want to give them a license to distribute all my copyrighted works.
Which is perfectly fine, the only people that really should be interested in registering their creative work with us, are those artists that want to make a living doing what they love. If you want to give your stuff away, put it up on a website or another P2P network. We're trying to help artists make a living doing what they are driven to do.
Similarly, lots of stuff from the public domain will be registered on our network. We will be charging money for them because it is worth $2 to somebody to aquire quality recordings of old Appalachian folk music, or classical music, or a TV show in the public domain. Those that don't want to pay $2 for 20 songs can go to any of the P2P services and spend countless hours trying to find a good recording.
For more information on how this whole process works, you might want to take a look at our website:
http://www.bitmunk.com/help.php?action=fulldisplay &term=bitmunk_introduction
Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny, G+: +Manu Sporny)
Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
Perhaps files could be submitted to them reviewed and then authorized to enter the network. If it really took off they wouldnt even have to host much on their servers after the initial seeding was completed
Yep, it is Clone CD that is usually the problem. I don't know about Doom III, but this same issue exists with several other games nowadays (and it is always Clone CD). All it does is hurt legitimate users. It is not like a crack will somehow miss removing this part if it is suppposed to be run this way. Stupid.
Spine World
The entire article is a troll.
... ?
See any technical details other than '900TB enough to hold every DVD etc EVAR'
Look at the 'references/related works' page - not one technical reference, or related work. Just a bunch of RIAA propoganda about filesharing supposedly hurting the record industry.
The author calls DiVX an open standard. DiVX is MPEG4 - they start making money off this 'open standard' without paying license fees, and all they are gonna be doing for a while is serving as the front page of the MPEGLA publicity section (ie mainstream press).
well you could have at least posted something original
i have that as well, i just checked. not sure why it worked for me and not others. perhaps there is something else going on ? anything you guys may have missed?
IF people pay for it willingly. Apple has demonstrated that paying for things you download can be worth it for all involved. As I was saying earlier to somebody i like mutually beneficial relationships. If its worth paying for, or is legally shared by artists (such as live music .shn files) then HELL YEAH.
As long as they are going to screw us then the feeling will be mutual. Simple as that.
411 Y0UR 8453 4R3 8310NG 70 U5!! -NSA
Did I just read 900TB of storage, 300M transactions per day and trade music, television, movies and books?
Makes me want MULTIMEDIA WIKI NOW. Edited / uploaded by everyone, for everyone. Like the articles on the normal wiki, just with image, sound, videos and everything else.
All we need is some geek to setup one of those popular wikis with a donate now button. I'm confident donations would pay the bandwidth..
9/11: Never forget it was a false-flag operation
current copyright law tends to protect the corporations that collect, hoard and exploit information of any kind. This kind of protection inevitably leads to monopoly control and abuse of this power.
There must be a balance against information monopolies currently protected by government.
The reaction could be:
-complain loudly enough so the goverment changes law to greatly limit the period over which a corporation can expoit information. ha.
-throw the tea back. Don't drink the tea, or download the tea and don't pay the corporate tarrif.
-invent a new tea that the corporation does not have claim. allow free distribution of new-tea, but disallow infinite corporate exploitation.
I find the whole Copyright debate laughable. Copyright is a commerical protection, that is its sole purpose so that originality is rewarded by stopping others plagiarising work and making money from stealing ideas, rather than creating them. If we all stole, we'd never innovate as there'd be little incentive.
However, these days Copyright is often used as a means of being greedy. It isn't a protective means any more but a empire building, ring fencing approach. The recent extensions granted to Disney are the obvious example. After 70 years of protecting their works, haven't they had enough time to make enough money? Or will the US introduce a persistent copyright for Disney in a few years time?
I can't find the exact dates but I seem to recall that the US only introduced Copyright legislation in the mid 1900s after they've already plagiarised European works with the excuse of "having to educate a nation". Therefore, it's an excuse that any under-developed nation should be able to use. The only problem I see now is that the US has built itself up on such practices that they've now moved into an empire building, protectionist approach which is counter-productive. Now we have everything, we must protect it and stop others stealing our work. Hmmm... the Europeans were like that 80 years ago. So if the US sticks to this policy, we can expect China and other Asian countries to come to the fore by stealing and innovating and the power will shift from the US to Asia.
The Internet and the technologies surrounding it came to fruition due to the American ethos of freedom, and now that same country is trying to kill these off or shackle them. It's highly amusing from my point of view watching a country create a revolution and then try to stop it when it starts to harm them.
Countries should concentrate on innovation, creativity and the future, not the past and holding on to it. A man with his house and possessions on his back will never be as nimble as a man with just a backpack.
It's not P2P at all. It's a futile attempt at slapping together some industry-friendly buzzwords in order to get some venture capital to burn for the purpose of building something which will never work in practice.
I guess they were aiming to put the P2P part into a superdistribution of sorts. But still, this is stupid. There should NEVER, EVER be a single point of payment or anything for any kind of system of this magnitude with this purpose. IF the people are paying for the bandwidth and processor usage of the system in the form of P2P, why should there be payment in the first place? If you as a corporation want people to pay for your stuff, then build your own damn sales infrastructure, or PAY the people to provide it. Market economy works both ways! Otherwise shut up.
I've heard that Japan is pretty easy to go to
But the language isn't exactly a walk in the park, I'm learning it now, so I can tell you, it's hard.
As am I. You should try French, it's worse. Japanese doesn't have some of the really disgusting tenses and conjugation that French does, and the pronunciation is much easier. (At least for American speakers, the French wouldn't agree) Watashiwa nihongoga scoshi wakarimaska. (Terrible spelling, I know...)
Possible, but not likely as the symptom is:
* Can't run game because it complains about CD/DVD emulation software.
* Turning off, disabling autostart, etc etc etc does not make one bit of difference. Tried lots of things.
* Other similar programs does not affect game.
* Uninstalling CloneCD makes it work.
I suppose it could be different versions of CloneCD though. Can't look it up right now either, because this was on my brothers computer.
Spine World
If that is the case, FileTopia and BitTorrent itself are the first 'Next-Gen' P2P Systems! Because They both support strong EC ciphering and there are lots of options already presented for further development of BitTorrent as a secure P2P system, for use it either as a public or a private system
Many times we wasted our times on what is called "Paralleled Projects". Developers scattering around in different projects that ultimately all deliver one thing. Once again, Why not just work together and instead of spending 4-5 years here on this project, just try to participate in BitTorrent project and contribute as much as you like.
But to be able to read a newspaper in Japanese, you need to remember roughly 2000 symbols, something which I doubt French requires.
BTW, did you mean I think that Japanese is simpler? I can't remember what sukoushi means, it's simple isn't it?
Motto kanji wa ikunai desu.
It does seem like a lack of confidence of ability to compete on his part, but superior marketing beats superior content every time. I honestly don't think corporate interests will be stupid enough to turn the screws far enough to allow alternative media to take hold.
CEE5210S The signal SIGHUP was received.
Sukoushi veut dire 'un peu'. (Sukoushi means 'a little'.) No, you're absolutely right, there, reading Japanese is much more difficult. I was talking about gaining the confidence to speak, and the ability to converse with native speakers. In French, for example, you have 'moi', 'moins', 'moine', and 'mois'. To an American, they all sound almost exactly the same, and context is needed to decipher which, while the French can distinguish them on sound alone. (After awhile, an American will as well, but it definitely takes time.) The same is true for 'rue' and 'roue'... Not to mention, learning the French 'r'.
Nobody will give away his/her freedom using that kind of program. The only way to stop file sharing programs will be a complete monitoring of internet (bwahahahahha.... sniff... sorry, where was I?). The other way is to monitor users with protection schemes in the OS (Windows probably, Linux I doubt it) or by hardware (i doubt it too, remember the problem Intel had years ago with it's "96-bit Processor serial number"?). There's not a way to stop file sharing now, except to enforce a global internet monitoring (ISP's blocking number of connections per second? I dunno...) There's not a easy way out of this problem to IP companies in my point of view except to impose 1984-like rules or to try to compete in price with file-sharing. This kind of file sharing program was born dead. :-).
(Sorry about my english, i bet it's better than your spanish
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former" - Albert Einstein.
possibly. i have the latest version of that software to date. maybe previous versions are at fault :(
Once you have distributed the multimedia to enough people via the wiki, clients should be able to get it off of the p2p system.
And as a BIG bonus, once people start making their own movies, documentaries, etc., the pro-corporate, pro-business, top-down memes will have some competition from bottom-up memes. THat should change our conformist, political culture here in the USA.
eat shiat and bark at the moon
Thing is, more than just the tax tables change each year. Forms are adjusted, laws change, deductions are added and eliminated. While it might look the same, they have to rebuild the system each year, and that costs money, thus charging for an update.
But yes, at $10 a year, it's not too bad if it includes free federal and state returns.
And given it's fast obsolesence, all you'd need would be to require a key code to file electronically, and you'd keep a handle on pirates. That way people would be able to file after the fact.
I don't read AC A human right
It checks whether HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\SlySoft\CloneCD exists in the registry. If you temporarily rename this key - maybe write a little script that renames the key prior to and after running Doom - then it will run.
Of course it runs NetBSD. BTC: 1NT7QvbetmANwaMzhpVL6
Why do you persistently ask such tough questions ;)?
Because this Bright Tunes issue is the one thing that has kept me from writing my own music for my own video games.
I was amused by this quote from the second page:
So they're saying ... that their project is the
greatest obstacle to the digital media industry ?
Regarding the "catalog [of] every human creation in existence that can be expressed by a digital medium" -- there's already an open source, open data collaborative project to build that: Bitzi, "the free universal media catalog."
very awesome.
It checks whether HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\SlySoft\CloneCD exists in the registry. If you temporarily rename this key - maybe write a little script that renames the key prior to and after running Doom - then it will run.
thank's for finding that.