Slashdot Mirror


BitTorrent Fires CEOs, Closes Los Angeles Studio, Shutters BitTorrent Now (variety.com)

Things are not looking good at BitTorrent. Citing multiple sources, Variety reports today that the company has fired two former CEOs -- Robert Delamar and Jeremy Johnson -- and let go an unknown number of staffers. Company's CFO Dipak Joshi has stepped in as interim CEO. BitTorrent is also closing its Los Angeles-based production studio and shutting its BitTorrent Now streaming efforts. From the report: The company had officially announced the appointment of Delamar and Johnson as new co-CEOs in April. At the time, the duo laid out a renewed focus on media production and distribution, which involved the opening of a new Los Angeles-based production studio. These efforts culminated in BitTorrent Now, an ad-supported music and video streaming platform that launched in June. BitTorrent Now built on the company's efforts to strike media distribution deals with independent artists, but didn't actually use BitTorrent's P2P technology for streaming.

34 comments

  1. Wut? by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 0

    I thought BitTorrent was a protocol to allow efficient distribution of large blobs of data.

    What do you need a studio for to be a BitTorrent?

    --
    I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    1. Re:Wut? by dejitaru · · Score: 2

      this is bittorrent the company, not bittorrent the protocol... Yeah... they don't make it easy like, mozilla (a company and a non-profit)

    2. Re:Wut? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ah, like Perl vs perl or democrat vs Democrat.

      (Yes, or republican vs Republican, you kneejerk bore.)

    3. Re:Wut? by Kjella · · Score: 1

      I thought BitTorrent was a protocol to allow efficient distribution of large blobs of data. What do you need a studio for to be a BitTorrent?

      If you make something popular then despite having no business model there are always some VCs willing to throw money after you on fame alone. Make some shit up, give yourself a nice salary as CEO and just milk it for as long as the money lasts. As far as I can tell the company's products don't really have any relation to its namesake.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    4. Re:Wut? by The-Ixian · · Score: 0

      Don't forget to buy a studio in L.A.!

      --
      My eyes reflect the stars and a smile lights up my face.
    5. Re:Wut? by omnichad · · Score: 1

      As far as I can tell the company's products don't really have any relation to its namesake.

      Somehow they're trying to pull a Napster while still doing P2P.

  2. Hmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Rumor has it they were found trying to use the software for legitimate purposes instead of just pirating media.

    1. Re:Hmm by bobbied · · Score: 1

      Rumor has it they were found trying to use the software for legitimate purposes instead of just pirating media.

      Well Duh! Everybody knows there is no money in that..

      --
      "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
    2. Re:Hmm by hairyfeet · · Score: 1

      Funny enough tons of legit companies use BT every day, they just have no need for BT the company. You look at just about every open world or MMO or FTP game and they are using BT to distribute their updates and patches but there is no need for BT the company for that, just the protocol.

      So I'd say its yet another case of trying to make money off a name when there really was no business model to go with it, like when they tried to turn napster into a DRMed up the ass music rental service. Nobody wants yet another rental service, companies aren't gonna license their DRM when they can just sell their wares on iTunes and Amazon, there is really no point in this company existing which I predict they won't by the end of the year. Oh well I'm sure the ex-CEOs made out nicely on that sweet VC money.

      --
      ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
  3. Who are these people? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    What happened to the Bram Stoker guy? I thought he was BitTorrent.

    BitTorrent Now built on the company's efforts to strike media distribution deals with independent artists, but didn't actually use BitTorrent's P2P technology for streaming.

    Face, meet palm.

    1. Re:Who are these people? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      BitTorrent the company does not use BitTorrent the protocol.

      How meta

      or zen

      or something.

    2. Re:Who are these people? by Reason58 · · Score: 4, Funny

      It's like 10,000 peers when all you need is a seed.

    3. Re:Who are these people? by FatdogHaiku · · Score: 1

      What happened to the Bram Stoker guy? I thought he was BitTorrent.

      No, he was a well published vampire.
      I think someone took him out for drinks and a stake...

      --
      You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
    4. Re:Who are these people? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's literally pied piper.

    5. Re:Who are these people? by Narcocide · · Score: 1

      No, this is actually a legitimate example of irony.

  4. Re: Goodbye! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    BitTorrent the protocol is healthy and happily exchanging pirated stuff all over the internet.

    BitTorrent the legal studio-agreement streaming effort is dying.

    Some stuff just can't be monetised, especially when the competition is both free and better.

  5. Good technology verssus bad economic models by shanen · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It might seem rational to you and me that we work (and play) together nicely, and that our computers could help us. Speaking in a broader sense, if there is some video or news item that a LOT of us want to see, then my computer could help nearby computers get that information, and they could help their neighbors, too.

    Too bad no one makes a profit on being neighborly.

    The way to maximum profits is CONTROL. You have to grab the customers by their balls and tits and squeeze until you get the last pennies out of them! Plural "You" in this case refers to inhuman corporations, fully sanctioned as human beings by the US Supreme Court.

    Government ought to be a neutral referee, but governments tend to like control, too, and when you add in unlimited lobbying by those inhuman corporations, BitTorrent never had a chance. The rules of the game are written by the most cheaply bribed politicians working for the least ethical businessmen.

    In conclusion, we now have "government of the corporations, by the lawyers, for the richest 0.1%" ruling the earth.

    (Con Man Donald, one of the least ethical businessmen and a self-confessed master of bribing politicians, probably thinks that quote comes from Honest Abe.)

    --
    Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
    1. Re:Good technology verssus bad economic models by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Good evening, Ms Streisand.

    2. Re:Good technology verssus bad economic models by LordLucless · · Score: 1

      While what you say is true, it doesn't necessarily apply to bittorrent.

      Bittorrent is a protocol for transferring data. Whether you use it to transfer data to paying clients or to the whole world is largely independent from the protocol. All you'd need is an additional bit of authentication on the tracker to restrict connections to those which have paid you money (which may require a custom client) - but the underlying protocol wouldn't care one bit, either way.

      Now granted, that's not any sort of guarantee that the data won't be shared - once the data's on the recipients PC, they could re-upload it elsewhere, or start an unrestricted torrent to share that data - but the same issue is present with HTTP, FTP, and any other data transfer protocol. There's nothing inherently open about bittorrent. It does require that the data shared be identical, which precludes watermarking.

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    3. Re:Good technology verssus bad economic models by shanen · · Score: 1

      I think I have to say that I don't know enough about the company versus the protocol. Perhaps it is a mistake to link it to the "brand" or label BitTorrent, since I'm really talking about P2P as a philosophy that makes a lot of sense from a technical perspective. I think P2P networking should replace a lot of the giant infrastructure of the ISPs, but the problem is not technical, but economic and political.

      Big infrastructure creates the economic potential for big profits and the political potential for control of the flow of information. BAD.

      Limitation on "BAD". In the case of a natural monopoly, then we do need careful regulation and probably special taxation to fund research into ways to break the monopoly.

      --
      Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
  6. Re:Good technology versus bad economic models by shanen · · Score: 2

    If Slashdot had a better economic model, one of the features that I would be most likely to support would be a recent-post editing feature for stupid typos, like the one in the original Subject: of this thread.

    Gotta stop flogging that dead horse, but my next two targets would be (1) features to reduce the visibility of trolls and (2) improvements in the moderation. Actually, the recent-post editing doesn't matter that much to me, much as I hate the typos. It would probably be 3rd or lower on my list.

    --
    Freedom = (Meaningful - Coerced) Choice != (Speech | Beer^2), and sad sock puppets' bad mods avail them naught.
  7. Mod parent awesome by Sloppy · · Score: 4, Funny

    Five minutes ago, I could have told anyone the name of the guy who invented bittorrent protocol.

    Now I am laughing and having to look it up. Worse, I know I won't remember it! I'll just remember "Bram Stoker" because you just permanently damaged my brain. For the rest of my fucking life, I am going to have to look up the name of the bittorrent guy.

    AC, sometimes you're a genius. And sometimes you're a total bastard. And then there's times like this, when you're both. Fuck you, but also, fuck yeah!

    --
    As copyright owner of this comment, I authorize everyone to defeat any technological measure which limits access to it.
    1. Re:Mod parent awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thanks for that mate. (not the GP AC, just a guy snorting his beer ;)

    2. Re:Mod parent awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The name was Bram Cohen.

    3. Re:Mod parent awesome by sad_ · · Score: 1

      I understand, his name is Bram Cohen.

      --
      On a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero.
    4. Re:Mod parent awesome by Metabolife · · Score: 1

      His name was Bram Cohen.

    5. Re:Mod parent awesome by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The first rule of Bram Cohen is you do not ask questions.

  8. Wait by Trogre · · Score: 2

    "BitTorrent" was the name of a company as well as a protocol?

    What next, DivX?

    --
    "Nine times out of ten, starting a fire is not the best way to solve the problem." - my wife
    1. Re:Wait by blueg3 · · Score: 1

      A company, BitTorrent, created a piece of software, BitTorrent, which used the protocol, BitTorrent, for P2P filesharing.

      The BitTorrent company at least was created by the guy who created the BitTorrent protocol. I think their early "BitTorrent" software was not, however, the original implementation of that protocol. (Don't quote me on those facts, I'm going off of memory here.)

      Later, BitTorrent the company bought/licensed the uTorrent software and distributed it under the name "BitTorrent". (They mercifully incremented the major version number and stopped distributing their earlier software.)

      It's not the best naming system.

  9. Non-profits aren't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Non-profits have no shareholders, but they can extract "dividends" by paying their employees and especially office holders big fat salaries and lurks and perks and junkets and they "work with" their industry partners so office holders have a golden mattress land on when they finally bail.

    But many people think non-profit = charity. Look at how Congress was suckered into handing the keys of the internet to "non profit" ICANN which has a history of all of the above.

  10. Its like "linux" by perpenso · · Score: 1

    Its like "linux", which can refer to either the kernel or the complete operating system. :-)

  11. Re:Good technology versus bad economic models by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    features to reduce the visibility of trolls

    Quit staring at the mirror, boy! Your Pee Wee Herman gag won you another gold star.

    improvements in the moderation

    There you go again, crying for a hug, boo hoo...