Report Says 36.4% of World's Computers Infringe on IP

I Don't Believe in Imaginary Property writes "According to a new report by Digital Music News, 36.4% of the world's computers have LimeWire installed. Given their claim that filling an iPod legally would cost about $40,000, they're pretty sure that most of those computers are infringing upon at least a few imaginary property rights. BitTorrent shouldn't feel left out, though. BitTorrent actually uses more bandwidth, but the article suggests that this is because it is used to share larger files, like movies."

Comments

36.4% of the world's computers have LimeWire insta

[sm62704]

"36.4% of the world's computers have LimeWire installed"

That's some damned weak logic, since LimeWire's real reason for existance (and the RIAA's opposition to it) is for independant artists to get their music out.

The RIAA labels have radio and empty-v. Since the RIAA effectively killed "internet radio" P2P is all the indies have.

Now someone please tell me, I heard a song by some indie whose name I don't remember named "scatterbrain". There are literally hundreds of different songs with that name. How can I get a copy of the lagal song I want without ACCIDENTALLY downloading some crap RIAA song with the same name?*

The war against P2P is a war against their competetitors, the independant musicians.

-mcgrew

* Fuck LimeWire, Morpheus has a check box where you don't automatically share downloaded files. The RIAA can go fuck themselves. Hey guess what they are!

Voluntary systems scans

[TheLostSamurai]

From the report linked to in the article, the data was collected when users went to a site (pcpitstop.com) and allowed their computers to be scanned so that the software could find "performance improvements" and make suggestions for their machine. Although I'm sure it was buried in the fine print of the TOS, I wonder how many people realized they were allowing this type of information to be sold to data mining and/or marketing companies.

Re:Constitutional Rights?

[Entropius]

When I was an undergrad I was downloading some Linux ISO (required for work) and meanwhile playing a game of DotA, a Warcraft 3 mod.

WC3 maintains a direct connection to all the other players in the game -- it uses a P2P network model rather than client-server -- but uses a trivial amount of bandwidth (under 10 KB/sec).

The network admins saw someone with connections open to residential ISP IP addresses and using a lot of bandwidth (ignoring the connection to ftp.mandrake.com or whatever) and call me to tell me that they're killing all my open connections due to P2P download abuse.

WTF?

Re:It always amuses me

[Kjella]

That's the upside. The down side is that everything gets pushed through every link which means more than 3TB/day. A modern design would be a cached pull system. Say you request part afba76a7b687af6b87fa6b87a6fbaf67 (hash sum), it goes to the local central, which checks local store (basicly a LRU disk cache), if not requests it from regional central, who'll again request it from the national central, who'll keep requesting it up the chain. If none of the caching servers can help, ultimately you connect to the torrent and get it from one of the seeds. Your ISP can cache it on the way out too, so you seed once and the backbone doesn't need to pull it from your seed line more than once. If the cache expires, it can be reseeded again as long as there's peers like with regular torrents. Basicly, no wasteful transfer because there's no traversal without enduser, it only passes once over a link, no expirery as long as someone is seeding. Technically, this is not really difficult it's legally the problem is. With many switching to encrypted torrents this kind of acceleration just isn't possible.