The only problem with this is that even if you have blocked altnet, but the supernode you connect to hasn't, you may get these results anyway! :m: I got those prodigy results when I was searching for Alias episodes (the ABC series with Jennifer Garner.) It was a music video (.wmv file no less), so I don't understand the connection between the two!?! What's worse is that they're low bitrate files in sucky formats, labelled with phrases like "Brought to you by Prodigy! Buy the CD from blahblah.com you stinking thieves!!!" (OKay, maybe I exaggerrated a bit but you get the idea. :D )

Personally I don't use KL for music, but this technique annoys me even more than the Prodigy themselves! It's a good idea to let the users generate hype, in a non-spam kind of way, by sharing themed collections etc. (BTW I also got these Prodigy results when searching for Enterprise episodes?! :uu: )

yep.

- js.

In theory, yes. In practice NO.

Why ? The placement costs money. It's only a matter of time before some non-anally retentive label realises that this is a great way of getting their next stars known to one and all...and they have something that the struggling artists don't have : A budget.

Even in the early 80s, when Mute Records was a relatively struggling indie label, I'm sure they'd have had no problem with paying vast amounts to push Depeche Mode, if they felt it was a viable option.

Let's face it, back then a lot of record labels happily gave their work to pirate radio stations, even though they realised a lot of pirate listeners probably taped whatever was broadcast. I know I did. :)

Market forces will simply mean that we'll end up with commercial concerns (i.e. record labels. Even just one minor label with some serious cash will wreck Kazaa) pushing their stuff via the still illicit p2p methods.

It sounds a bit wacked, but I can see it happening.

What better way to control p2p - if you can't do it through force, or through the courts...do it through waving a huge wad of cash at the developers ?

Good points, willow. If there is a limited channel to buy attention on a p2p network (in the form of search results) and if it also proves out to work, it will be quickly saturated. In such a situation the channel owner will naturally raise the prices, and those with big PR budgets will end up dominating the channel. Try to expand the channel too much and people will start hating it and leave the network. Who wants to get 50 % spam in search results.

The solution? What SA_Dave said. Let people own the promotion channels too, and base them on peer trust and shared interest in good music (instead of money). Then you don't need to push any search results to get new artists known in p2p communities. When people know that the recommendations come from other music lovers like themselves instead of industrial PR departments, they will be glad to read such recommendations. Especially if the recommended stuff is freely available. :AF:

- tg ;)

correct. however, that's the thing with p2p systems -- they are pieces of software, which means advertising can - theoretically - be incredibly flexible.

so instead of bidding for a general ad slot that would reach all the users on the system (ie, a tv-style ad), the band/publisher could target only those 0.1% of people (based on communities, explicitly declared interests, existing collections, etc.) that are likely to be interested in their music/films/etc. which should be affordable for anyone.

note that such ad-tailoring needs not to have the privacy issues associated with targeted ads either, because all ad personlalisation can be done locally.

- jaan

God, wouldn't it be just GREAT if things were like in Demolition Man and there would be a separate radio station for 24/7 commercials, a separate Internet for 100% spam/ads/popups/crap, and a separate P2P program for sponsored search results, so normal stations/online folks/P2P users wouldn't have to put up with it? :)

Never mind, just dreaming of Utopia 2003 ;)

This approach sounds very reasonable for a commercial one – but then you are clearly a very reasonable person and understand also the community point of view, jaan. :) On the other hand those who decide marketing policies tend to treat p2p communities as commercial target groups only, and the results are what we have seen so far: loads of intrusive spyware and adware pushed to people’s computers with no respect for online privacy. Kazaa, as we know, is one of the worst examples.

If paid search results are used, I think the minimum requirement is to make it clear to the user which results are paid and which originate from the community. Paid results are just one form of advertising, and advertisements should not be disguised as something else. Another important thing is that there should be no blocking of search results from the community due to commercial interests. For example, if a promoter wants to push some works of artist X from her servers, the community members should still be free to share to each other whatever stuff from artist X they happened to have.

- tg ;)

thanks, tg :beer:

all good points.

however, as i've seen the "dark side" myself (ie talked to people who make those decisions), i can tell you that all unpopular decisions basically stem from three possible sources: 1) need to finance operations, 2) legal considerations, and 3) limited development bandwidth.

- jaan