Official BitTorrent Search Opens

starrsoft writes "The official BitTorrent search has debuted. The search engine was built by BT inventor Bram Cohen. The question? Will he get sued? The BT search seems to be down right now. (It'll really be down after this story is posted...) Spiegel has more (En): "Naturally other sites such as Bitoogle, Isohunt, SuprNova or Torrentspy have tried before, but either they became fast a goal of legal attacks on the part of the industry or they furnished rather durchwachsene [??] results. BitTorrent search however proves with first tests [that it is] as...Google...fast. The results come from a large number [of] more well-known and unknown... sites, and...permits sufficient restricting to the inquiry, in order to obtain really relevant results.""

Comments

I think he'll get sued but...

[CSMastermind]

I don't think the legal efforts against him will be successfull. Here's why:

When Napster was sued they actually had content in their possession. Not the case here. Even if they were able to prove that you could get content from the network, you aren't technically scearching for the content you get. You're scearching for torrents, which are small files with no real copy righted data in them. They're little road signs that point you where to go. It would be like getting arrested for creating a phone book just because you might be able to find the number of someone who has drugs in the book.

Re:I think he'll get sued but...

[mpcooke3]

Metaphor Error.

You can't ask the phone book for class A drugs and get a valid number you can ask a torrent search site for a particular copyrighted film and get the right torrent.

Therefore the phone book is not helping you engage in an illegal activity but the torrent site might be.

Re:I think he'll get sued but...

[kfg]

I really understand what you're saying, but you are not entirely correct. The phone company doesn't do much to vet the listings. You tell them a name you want your home number listed under and they'll print it. Haywood Jablome, for instance, lasted for some years in my local phone book.

More pertinent to your premise a local chain competing with Radio Shack operated for 10 years or so selling drugs over the counter at retail.

There are these things called "code words", which, as it happens, were included in their Yellow Pages ad. People were, indeed, able to look them up in the phone book and determine that they purported to be a source for illegal drugs.

Massage parlors, the already mentioned escort services and a small host of other businesses that are known to, occasionally, offer illegal goods and services, use the phone book in a like manner and if you know the local lingo you can often determine which ones actually offer such services from their phone book ads. Once one goes deep into the dark side certain unusal names attached to home phone numbers function as code words. Hermine Xenophone, just to make up a possible example on the spot.

There are all sorts of goods that are legal in one context but illegal in another, kinda like some content files (it's perfectly legal to download it for free from this site, but not from that one), and these businesses operate right out in the open in the phone book using "code words" like "Guns," or "Supermarket."

More relevant to the current discussion, the phone numbers you can look up to acquire tools and goods to commit copyright infringement are legion. Your local library, prominantly listed, will not only supply you with the copyrighted goods, but the machinery with which to infringe at only ten cents a page. They don't even monitor whether you are using their services for illegal useses or not (and there is "abandonware" in the book trade. You can buy a legitmate used copy for $200, or copy it for $10)

Nobody's busting them, or the phone company, even after illegal activity has been proven.

KFG

The strength of bit torrent

[ProfaneBaby]

Bit Torrent's strength has always been that it's a content neutral utility that is great for efficient P2P. The fact that it's been picked up by some large corporations for distributing large files helps. An official search tool will damage that position.

Don't get me wrong - I'm sure it will be incredibly useful. I'm also sure, that it will be filled with porn, illegal software, and illegal copies of music (whether you agree with the law or not, it's still illegal). That hurts bit torrent's reputation as content neutral, and will make some larger backers step away.

Apparently, though, the makers find it more useful to be widely used than widely respected. Fair enough, it's their toy. Unfortunate, though, that it can't be used as a shining, piracy free star in an otherwise ugly niche of the internet.

The real question

[John Seminal]

The official BitTorrent search has debuted. The search engine was built by BT inventor Bram Cohen. The question? Will he get sued?

Will this search engine help other websites get shut down?

I don't think the RIAA can sue the search engine, but it could sue sites that list torrents.

How will this search engine deal with private torrent websites?? Will it cache them? Can that be used as evidence at a later time?

Why should we?

[millennial]

1) It's redundant - who wants to have to use two P2P apps just to get something?

2) It's difficult - until recently, trackerless torrents have been a dream, so downloading a torrent from a random user might end up creating a bunch of seedless torrents.

3) Most people who use other P2P apps tend to not understand BitTorrent. They stick with what's easy.

Re:Speedy

[GMFTatsujin]

Surely that problem exists on the provider's side, not the search engine's side? If I share a movie file with BitTorrent, is it BitTorrent's fault?

If I share a movie via FTP on my web server and Google's spiders find it and link to it, is it Google's fault that I've broken copyright law?

The protocol is irrelevent. (The constant game of cat and mouse, protocol-of-the-week antics confirms this.) Even the uses to which people *put* the protocol are irrelevent. What matters is that people are sharing materials to which they have no copyrights, not that they're using BitTorrent to do it.

BitTorrent doesn't share movies. People share movies.

Re:Speedy

[dougmc]

This is the reason I threw all my Metallica shit in the garbage. Fuck Metallica!!

Of course, this did nothing to actually fuck Metallica. In fact, it probably made them money rather than lost them money.

How so?

Well, if you kept your Metallica stuff (music, T-shirts, videos, I assume), then in the future you might decide that you just don't care for Metallica anymore. So you sell it. And the people who bought your used stuff might not buy new stuff from Metallica because they just bought your stuff.

But now that you've thrown it away (it's destroyed, presumably), this cannot happen, and now somebody will have to buy new Metallica shit, lining Lars' pockets with even more gold.

Good job!

"legally dubious"

[Penguinoflight]

Remember that not all the world has bought into the united states lame idea of intellectual property, and anti innovation laws. IDK where bittorrent.com is being hosted, but if they get bothered by the MPAA, they'll probably just go to Denmark or Switzerland where information is still free.

Re:"legally dubious"

[josh3736]

Actually, I'd like to take this opportunity to point out that in the US, Copyright is NOT a moral right (as it is in most of Europe); rather it is a (Constitutionally-granted) temporary monopoly over distribution. This is a very important distinction to note because if I own the copyright to some creative work, my control over that work extands only as far as distribution is concerned. After that, I have no legal standing to dictate how you use my work. For example, if I were to use a picture of Jar-Jar as toilet paper, George can't sue me for violating the intregrity of his work. However, if George did have moral rights over his work, he could sue me.

Essentially, what it comes down to is under US law, the creator gets more of a 'licence' to his work whereas in other countries his creative works are treated like real property. This is why the bastardized term "Intellectual Property" really pisses me off--there exists no intellectual property in the US. Creators have no moral right to their property. As much as some corporate interests would love complete control of their "Property," their protections are bestowed to them by the Constitution and the Constitution only.

Re:Speedy

[h4rm0ny]

Don't underestimate symbolism. Aside from expressing how he feels to himself, he expresses to many others how he feels. A band depends on other people for its worth. Actions like this diminish it, even if it doesn't cost them a few quid immediately.