Kazaa and Skype Co-founder Interviewed

karvind writes "BBC is running is an interview with Niklas Zennström, the internet entrepreneur behind both Kazaa and Skype, about how his two inventions came about, and how broadband and wireless devices are shaping his vision for the future. From the interview: "On the other hand, Skype, just like Kazaa and other software, are encouraging people to buy broadband connections.""

Comments

position on spyware

[moz25]

One thing I'd like to know is their position on spyware and why it has to be installed along with the actual program? How much money are they getting from it? It's quite annoying.. my father installed Kazaa lately and now he has their spyware on his system... which means that I get the fun job of removing it. Thanks, Niklas!

Re:position on spyware[your answer]

[jwegy]

I thought this was highly interesting when I read
it, and plus it answered your question. I wonder
how sincere they are.


from the article: Zennström agrees the amount of adware in programs like Kazaa, and some of the other file-sharing networks, is "way too much". "It destroys the user experience", he says. Kazaa initially had a very limited number of advertisements, which he says "wasn't that bad in the beginning", but they grew over time. "That's something that me and Janus learnt as an experience, and with Skype we did not have any type of advertisements whatsoever."

Re:Yeah, but on the other hand...

[lowrydr310]

That relates to the same gripe I have about most ISPs or even computer manufacturers such as Dell.

Almost every commercial for a broadband ISP raves about how you can "download movies and music" fast! Even a recent Dell commercial I saw mentioned how you can use your new PC to download movies and music.

I know there are a few places where you can legitimately download music online, but a large number of people don't use them. Even if they do, 1GB of AAC/WMA songs isn't cheap.

I still don't know of any place where you can download movies online (legally) - not just little video clips, but full movies and TV shows.

Re:Yeah, but on the other hand...

[farker haiku]

Kazaa encourages users to break the law.

No, it doesn't. Laws that people don't understand nor actually agree with encourage people to break the law. The end user wants to think that their computer is similiar to their tape recorder. Is it illegal to tape things off the radio? Why then is it illegal to download things off the internet that you could get for free elsewhere? These are the questions that the end user asks themselves right before they install kazaa.

From Michael Powell:

[ImaLamer]

"[VoIP] has ignited a fire under a stalled and depressed industry."

"It's probably the most significant paradigm shift in the entire history of modern communications, since the invention of the telephone,"

"If you're going to say to me that Voice over IP is something that needs regulation, then you're going to have to explain to me why e-mail isn't also, or streaming video or instant messaging is not also,"

Of course, we all know, Michael Powell stepped down and this new guy may not be as friendly.

What I wanted to find is the quote where Powell talks about downloading and installing Skype - he said that he saw a revolution in front of his eyes when the program started. (or something to that effect)

Re:Yeah, but on the other hand...

[east coast]

Kazaa encourages users to break the law.

Just as bars encourage people to drive drunk. The fact is most people leaving a bar between midnight and 2am are legally drunk (by US standards) but you don't hear any serious talk of prohibition. Just because you can go out and get fall-down drunk doesn't mean you need to. Beat on the people breaking the law, not those trying to keep things within the scope of ligitimate use.

the general reaction was "Oh, I didn't know Kazaa was illegal"

Unless things are different in the UK my understanding is that it's not that kazaa is illegal but rather the use of it for piracy is. Nonetheless, since when should the masses suffer because some claim to be ignorant of the legality of a device/service? It's illegal for me to call my neighbor and threaten to beat him to death and if I didn't know this and did threaten him would that be an arguement to get rid of phones or even language since it can be used to threaten?

Re:Phone companies

[dr_dank]

Whether they will attempt to embrace the technology and adapt or restrict its usage via litigation (as the RIAA and MPAA have done when confronted with new mediums for delivery) remains to be seen

Although they haven't resorted to legal chicanery yet, the telcos still give the VOIP upstarts a crushing disadvantage in one area: E911 compatibility.

There is already plenty of FUD keeping the average person away for VOIP by the idea that their call won't be properly routed to the appropriate 911 center.

The direct dial numbers to these centers are a very well guarded secret that the Telcos won't give up to the VOIP providers without a fight.

Why isn't he in court?

[pasamio]

Why is the CEO, CIO and every other person involved with Kazaa and in Australian courts and having their houses raided and this bloke gets in on the BBC. Its interesting to see where things go. These guys are being hauled through Australian courts and this bloke is no where to be seen. Check out http://www.apcmag.com/apc/v3.nsf/0/412A621F4556A65 FCA256E77001DD222 and http://www.apcmag.com/apc/v3.nsf/0/7CC596EF71F41B3 4CA256E77001E31D0 for some information (they're a bit old, but do the trick)

VoIP == Phone ???

[ImaLamer]

don't mandate telcos to make 911 services universally available

Here in Cincinnati, we learned that you *must* mandate. We learned the hard way. The telco shut someone's service off and they couldn't call 911. That person had a child die in front of their eyes.

Then the law was changed so that every phone line must be able to reach 911 in this state. Hey, we here in Ohio don't like to see people die because they don't have a dime to call 911 or they let their phone bill go unpaid.

Sorry, but life is more important than all of this "business" to some people. You know, maybe Vonage/Time Warner cable/whoever shouldn't market their services as "phone lines". People think that VoIP will be able to dodge FCC line charges and other "taxes", but not forever. I say that if you want to call it a phone line, then treat it like a phone line. Sorry, but that includes 911 and the taxes that go along with it.

If the only reason you went to VoIP is because you wanted to skip over a few taxes then it wasn't worth it. On the other hand, the telco has no right to restrict access to government services, or even their own lines (that is why we broke up AT&T right?).

Re:VoIP == Phone ???

[bedroll]

Yes, and in New Jersey there's a law that mandates that 911 calls and calls to the local emergency contact go to the same operator and are treated as equal, meaning that E911 worked here as soon as Vonage implemented it. Not that I'm bashing Ohio, because I'm from there, but there are better ways to implement mandates.

The point is that the mandate is wrong. They're mandating someone to do something without mandating anyone else to comply. It was well-known before all of this that E911 is seriously lacking as a system because the telcos control 911. So the FCC waits until there's a lot of media attention about the problem, then they fix it by mandating the organizations with the least control to fix a problem that the telcos (organizations with the most control) have a vested interest in not complying with. Why haven't they mandated the telcos to work with VoIP providers?

The taxes are a whole nother issue. VoIP gets away without the taxation because the FCC ruled that it's a data service. The taxation is purely to subsidize rural telephone access. Billions of dollars are taxed on interstate phonecalls every year, and that money just goes right back to the telcos because they're saying it cost them too much to provide service in Nebraska. The FCC should re-evaluate the entire taxation system, not simply impose the same taxation on VoIP carriers that wouldn't even benefit from it. As for other taxes, my VoIP line carries the same basic line taxes that my Verizon land line did and my Verizon cell phone still does.

About the marketing claims: Well, it's true that they market their services as phone services. However they make you click through LARGE PRINT disclaimers that clearly state that 911 may not be available, and when it is it may not be functionally the same as standard 911. This should only be a problem if you can't read. It's not even buried in fine print as so much important information seems to be anymore. It's there, plain as day. Shouldn't people be held accountable for reading something like that?

Skype is more than just 'hype' (sorry...)

[virtualeve]

I'm not a shill for Skype but it has reduced our company's monthly expenses. Members of our dev team are geographically spread out all across the country and our guys stay in constant contact with Skype; we prefer it to IM because voice is more immediate than typing and their hands are free to work (code) or, if you know anything about our product, do 'other' things :-) Instead of the variable cost of long distance charges, we have the one-time fixed cost of a good quality USB headset for each employee -- the choice of headset greatly affects the voice quality of the calls; we've found that the Plantronics DSP 500 provides superb voice quality at a relatively inexpensive price.