Peer-To-Peer News - The Week In Review - December 25th, '04

[JackSpratts]

Quotes Of The Week


"Somebody should tell the MPAA/RIAA to put the bubbly on ice, there is a storm coming and this one they may not be able to weather." – nelo & risda


"A version of Windows without Media Player will be available in the European market by February." – Brad Smith


"The Higher Regional Court in Munich has ruled that providers are not obliged for copyright reasons to make specific information about users suspected of operating illegal FTP servers available." - Robert W. Smith


"It's a cute Christmas symbol for someone who's been bad all year. I think it's appropriate for all types of things that the RIAA and the MPAA are doing." – Nicholas Reville

















BitTorrent Servers Close After MPAA Suits
Elizabeth Millard

Hit with a lawsuit by the Motion Picture Association of America, the popular file sharing site Suprnova.org has closed down. It was one of the best-known sites associated with the BitTorrent file- sharing technology. MPAA has targeted more than 100 servers.

In the wake of lawsuits filed over online movie swapping, popular file sharing site Suprnova.org has closed down, with a message implying that its connection with BitTorrent was the main cause.

Last week, the Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA) announced that it had taken action against over 100 servers in the U.S. and Europe, targeting site operators that use BitTorrent and eDonkey to trade movie files.

In a message on its site, Suprnova.org noted that it had "tried everything" to stay open, but found there was "no other way" than to close. It added that if it did return, it would not be hosting any more BitTorrent links.

Closing Up Shop

Although Suprnova is the most popular site to have closed its electronic doors, it is possible that others will follow suit as the MPAA action progresses.

Already, several smaller sites have been shuttered, according to news reports. Among these are Phoenix Torrents, Torrentbits.org, and N4p.com.

"The MPAA will do whatever it feels it needs to in order to protect their property," said Charles Sims, partner in the New York office of law firm Proskauer Rose.

Sims, who has represented entertainment companies against P2P networks, told NewsFactor that the MPAA is likely to be aggressive in its fight against the server operators. "They want all alleged infringement stopped, and for some servers, that might mean having to close."

Legal Department

The strategy of going after servers rather than BitTorrent and eDonkey themselves could be a way to limit the actions of individual users, said Sims.

Recently, the MPAA filed an initial round of lawsuits that targeted people who allegedly swapped movies on the Web frequently. With this batch of server-focused suits, the group could affect users without having to track them down one by one.

"The MPAA probably doesn't like the idea of going after more individuals," Sims noted, adding that it is still possible for the group to file more individual suits in the future, if other enforcement tactics do not work.
http://www.newsfactor.com/internetli...y=internetlife


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Iowa Man Pleads In 'Fastlink' Operation

An Iowa man has pleaded guilty to helping distribute pirated software, games, movies and music over the Internet, the Justice Department said Wednesday.

The department said Jathan Desir of Iowa City entered the plea before a federal magistrate in Des Moines. Desir pleaded guilty to three counts charging copyright infringement and conspiracy to commit copyright infringement.

He faces a maximum sentence of 15 years. Sentencing is scheduled for March 18.

The department said Desir is the first U.S. defendant to be convicted as part of "Operation Fastlink," the largest multi-national law enforcement action ever taken against online software piracy.

In April 2004, Operation Fastlink investigators conducted over 120 searches in 27 states and 11 foreign countries, including Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Hungary, Israel, the Netherlands, Singapore, Sweden, Spain, Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Nearly 100 people were identified as members.
http://washingtontimes.com/upi-break...3731-4872r.htm


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

European Court Rules Against Microsoft on Windows
Terence Neilan and Steve Lohr

Microsoft Corporation lost a major appeal today in a European court, which ruled that the world's largest software company must comply with sanctions imposed by
regulators and strip features from its Windows product.

It must also share up-to-now secret information about its products with other software companies and pay a $665.4 million fine imposed by the European Commission in March, when it found that Microsoft had abused its virtual monopoly of desktop operating systems.

"Microsoft has not demonstrated specifically that it might suffer serious and irreparable damage," said Bo Vesterdorf, the president of the Court of First Instance in Luxembourg, which handed down today's ruling.

Mr. Vesterdorf added in the 91-page ruling that Microsoft's request to delay the commission measures pending an appeal was "dismissed in its entirety."

The immediate impact of the ruling is uncertain. But it may well open the door to continuing legal challenges, both in Europe and elsewhere, to Microsoft's business strategy of adding more and more products and features to its Windows operating system. More than 90 percent of the personal computers in the world run Windows.

Under the ruling, Microsoft must sell to computer makers a version of Windows without its Media Player software for playing music, movies and video clips sent over the Internet on personal computers.

The commission ruled in March that Microsoft bundled Media Player with Windows in order to damage audiovisual rivals like Real Player and Apple Computer Inc.'s QuickTime. Personal computer makers can offer those alternatives already, but until now they could not sell Windows without Microsoft's Media Player. That choice can now be made by PC makers in the European market; a version of Windows without Media Player will be available in the European market by February, the company's general counsel, Brad Smith, said today..

Whether PC makers will widely offer the stripped-down Windows is unclear. Microsoft has said it will offer the two versions of Windows at the same price, prompting an analyst with UBS, Heather Bellini, to say today that "we do not think there will be many takers."

Microsoft has made a number of settlements with rival companies, which make the $665 million fine levied by the commission pale by comparison. Microsoft had already paid that money into an escrow account, after the commission ruled against it last spring.

The Computer and Communications Industry Association, Novell, RealNetworks, Sun Microsystems and Time Warner all accused Microsoft of using its dominant position in the operating system market to give it an illegal advantage in other markets. All but one of those, RealNetworks, settled with Microsoft this year. It was Microsoft's settlement in April with Sun, a longtime adversary, that was the most indicative signal of its new approach to regulatory affairs. In a broad agreement between the two companies, Microsoft agreed to pay Sun nearly $2 billion, including $700 million to resolve antitrust issues.

Microsoft stock opened on the Nasdaq market today 24 cents down, or .89 percent, at $26.83.

A statement from Microsoft today put a positive face on the order, saying "we are encouraged by a number of aspects of the court's discussion of the merits of the case."

It added: "While the court did not find immediate irreparable harm from the commission's proposed remedies, the court recognized that some of our arguments on the merits of the case are well-founded and may ultimately carry the day when the substantive issues are resolved in the full appeal."

Mr. Smith of Microsoft said the company would activate an Internet site today providing "others in our industry, including our competitors," with information on how they can license the company's software communications protocols.

"So that is really out first priority - to ensure that we comply fully with the court's decision, and we will go forward and do that," he said at a news conference in Redmond, Wash., where Microsoft is based.

But he said that it was Microsoft's view that the version of Windows without Media Player would provide consumers in Europe with less value, rather than more. "It will work less well than the version of Windows that consumers have available to them today."

He added: "We have always been skeptical that there would be significant consumer interest in this product. Now we'll all find out as the months unfold."

Jonathan Zuck, the president of the Association for Competitive Technology, which intervened in the case in support of Microsoft, said in a statement: "Today's decision will have dangerous repercussions for small software developers, consumers and the future of innovation.

"While intended to constrain Microsoft, the commission's sanctions will impose billions of dollars in new costs on small software developers and consumers, and threaten the future of innovation."

Goldman Sachs, which does some work for Microsoft, said in a statement that it believed the decision itself was not harmful to Microsoft's business, but that it set a precedent under which the commission could argue that "future enhancements to the operating system such as search or antivirus must similarly be unbundled." It was the precedent that was "really at issue," the statement said.

Although today's ruling came down squarely against Microsoft, the company, could still appeal to the European Court of Justice, although a legal expert on European business competition, Vincent Brophy, said in a telephone interview today that he had doubts that the decision would be overturned.

"I think for Microsoft it's very bad news," said Mr. Brophy, speaking from the Brussels office of the international law firm Jones Day. "It creates serious problems in terms of marketing."

He added: "It's very unusual to say to any company you cannot sell products in the way you want to sell them. You have to unpackage your products, which is exactly what the commission is doing."

The European director of public policy for the Computing Technology Industry Association, Hugo Luders, called today's ruling "discouraging news" for the computer industry in Europe and consumers around the world.

Mr. Luders, in a statement issued in Brussels, said information technology companies "will be less willing to innovate, fearing that their intellectual property will be appropriated by government intrusion into the marketplace."
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/22/te... ner=homepage


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

EU To Throw Patents In With The Bath Water
Ingrid Marson

The EU software patent directive will be passed by the EU Council next week, at the same time as a law on bathing water quality

The controversial EU directive that opponents fear will allow software patenting within Europe will be passed without vote or debate on Monday.

According to a Council agenda, the Computer Implemented Inventions Directive will be adopted during an Environment meeting, which is also due to deal with the issues of bathing water quality and batteries.

Scottish National Party MEP Ian Hudghton said he is unhappy that the EU Council is hastily pushing this directive through, given the concerns that have been raised.

"The apparent rush on this issue is unacceptable," said Hudghton. "The proposed software patents directive caused a great deal of controversy both in the European Parliament and the Council. Issues of this nature should not be fast-tracked onto the statute book."

Once the Council has adopted the directive, it will go back to the EU Parliament for a second reading. Parliament will then have three months in which to make its views known. Hudghton said it is likely that the proposal will evoke discussion in Parliament as a large number of MEPs are against the proposal.

"The Council should think again if they believe that they are going to get an easy ride through the Parliament during this directive's second reading," said Hudghton. "There is a sizeable proportion of MEPs who believe that the whole proposal is misconceived. The Council must recognise this and understand that the democratically elected representatives will not allow their views to be ignored."

Politicans from Holland, Germany, Poland and Austria have publicly spoken out against the directive.

If the directive is passed by the EU Parliament there is disagreement about what will happen next. Some have expressed concerns about "patent war" breaking out, where patents are used by large corporations to crush smaller competitors or open source projects. Linux creator Linus Torvalds has said that software patents constitute the single biggest threat to the future success of the open source operating system.

But these concerns are rejected by pro-patent organisation EICTA, which is supported by various large multinationals including IBM and HP. Peter Hayward, a director at the UK Patent Office (UKPO), also rejected this fear at a meeting at the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) earlier this week. "We, the UK, have written some protection [into the directive] to make sure it can't open the floodgates," Hayward said.

Steve Probert, a deputy director at the UKPO, claimed that it will be easier to contest software patents that shouldn't have been granted as the law will be clarified.

"We have conceded that patents have been granted that shouldn't have been," Probert told the DTI. "It's a heck of a lot easier to challenge patents if you have a law. If any have slipped through it should be easier to invalidate them using [the directive]."

Update: The EU directive will now be passed on Tuesday -- for more details please click http://news.zdnet.co.uk/business/legal/0,39020651,39181664,00.htm]here[/utl].
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/041217/152/f8s8k.html


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Poles Push Patents Off EU Agenda
Ingrid Marson

The EU has again failed to ratify the software patent directive after a crucial last-minute intervention, and opponents of software patents are celebrating

Poland's opposition to software patents prevented the EU from ratifying the Computer Implemented Inventions Directive on Tuesday.

An EU Council spokesperson has confirmed that the Computer Implemented Inventions Directive will not be adopted on Tuesday as had been planned, and was unsure when it would be adopted.

According to informed sources, Polish undersecretary of science and information technology Wlodzimierz Marcinski spoke out at the EU Council meeting and asked that the directive be removed from the agenda as more time was needed to make a constructive declaration. As no-one objected to the Polish request, the chairman removed the item from the agenda.

This last-minute decision to remove the item from the agenda is a surprise that is likely to please anti- patent campaigners who were unhappy that the EU Council was planning to adopt the directive without vote or discussion.

The Polish government initially spoke out against the proposed directive in November, saying that it could not support the text as it was ambiguous and contradictory. Politicans from Holland, Germany, and Austria have also publicly spoken out against the directive.

This latest delay has already been welcomed by activists who have opposed software patents.

"Now Europe has the opportunity to have a constructive debate on the severe shortcomings of the current Council text, under the new Luxembourgian EU presidency next year," said Florian Mueller, campaign manager of NoSoftwarePatents.com.

James Heald of the Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure (FFII) believes that Marcinski attended Tuesday's council meeting personally because "the permanent representative of Poland at the EU had been put under great pressure by the Dutch Presidency and had been rather reluctant to communicate the viewpoint of the Polish government."

However, some of those who have been supporting the directive were dismayed by this latest development.

"[The] Council's failure today constitutes a worrying setback for innovation in Europe, and throws doubt on our collective commitment to the Lisbon Agenda," claimed Mark MacGann, director general of EICTA (European Information and Communications Technology Industry Association), in a statement that "condemned the Council's failure to support European high-tech innovation".
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/041221/152/f8zi0.html


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Legal Setback For Music Industry In Fight Against Piracy
Robert W. Smith

The Higher Regional Court in Munich has ruled that providers are not obliged for copyright reasons to make specific information about users suspected of operating illegal FTP servers available. In a ruling of November (file number 6 U 4696/04), which has only now become known, the court of appeal granted the appeal of an Internet provider against a decision by the Regional Court I in Munich (file number 21 O 10372/04) which had specified an obligation to this effect on the part of providers. In the latter ruling in July the label BMG as legal representative of the artists in its care had initially been granted the right in its pursuit of potentially-illegal download offers to demand information from the access provider about the specific circumstances surrounding the suspected breach of the law by a customer or customers of the access provider.

The case in Munich is similar to a lawsuit pending in Hamburg in which Universal Music is acting as plaintiff. EMI in Cologne is currently contending a third "test case" relating to this highly controversial claim to information from providers.

In the lawsuit now decided by the court of appeal the record company BMG had intended in a civil lawsuit to force the defendant provider with the aid of an temporary injunction to also, for instance, make available information on the number of tracks and albums of individual bands or artists downloaded from the server named in the complaint. In a copious ruling the Regional Court in Munich had granted the injunction, whereupon the Internet access provider affected had responded in accordance with the German Federal Rules of Civil Procedure by filing a request for temporary suspension of the imminent enforcement. The Higher Regional Court had thereupon, against payment of a security deposit of 25,000 euros, the amount of which took its cue from the amount in controversy, temporarily suspended proceedings.

In the opinion to their ruling, a copy of which is in the possession of heise online, the judges note that it was "already highly debatable" as to whether an infringement of copyright in accordance with paragraph 101a of the German Copyright Act (Urheberrechtsgesetz; UrhG) had in fact taken place. Even more debatable was the question of "whether the defendant threatened with the injunction is an actual participant in the - alleged - infringement of copyright." The conditions for a claim to information "that contributes to an effective action against the violation of immaterial protected goods," as it says in Paragraph 101a UrhG, thus did not obtain, the judges declared. Moreover, the judges, thereby somewhat reproachfully pointing their fingers at their colleagues from the subordinate court, wrote that the proceedings amounted to "one of those exceptional cases in which it is obvious that the contested ruling cannot conceivably continue to stand."
http://www.heise.de/english/newsticker/news/54509


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Apple Sues Over Loose Tiger
Ina Fried

Apple Computer filed suit this week against three developers it says posted a prerelease version of Mac OS X onto the Internet.

The lawsuit, filed Monday in federal court in San Jose, Calif., alleges that the three men posted a developer release of Mac OS X Tiger onto sites used by the BitTorrent file-trading network. Apple is seeking an injunction to prevent further releases of its software as well as unspecified monetary damages.

"Apple's future operating results and financial condition are substantially dependent on its ability to continue to develop improvements to the Mac OS and related software applications in order to maintain perceived design and functional advantages over competing platforms," Apple said in the suit. "Apple therefore invests heavily in the development of new and innovative versions of the Mac OS and other software applications."

In the suit, Apple said the tracker on one of the BitTorrent sites indicated that more than 2,500 copies of one Tiger version were downloaded. The postings began in late October and continued through this month, the Mac maker said.

The Tiger-related suit comes a week after Apple filed a separate lawsuit in state court against an unnamed individual who leaked details of a forthcoming music product, code-named Asteroid. Apple last week got a judge to sign off on subpoenas for three Mac enthusiast sites in an effort to uncover the source of that leak.

Apple previewed Tiger at its Worldwide Developer Conference in June but has not released a public test version of the operating system. Several versions have been available to developers, though on the condition that the software be kept confidential.

"Members of Apple Developer Connection receive advance copies of Apple software under strict confidentiality agreements, which we take very seriously to protect our intellectual property," Apple said in a statement Tuesday.

Among the features Apple is touting for Tiger is an improved search technology, dubbed Spotlight. The software is scheduled to ship in the first half of 2005. Desktop search has become a crowded field, with Microsoft, Google, Yahoo and others working to release software that can scour a user's hard drive.

The BitTorrent software at the heart of the Tiger suit has also been under attack from the Motion Picture Association of America and others. Last weekend, a number of the key "hub sites" that enable the peer-to-peer network went dark.
http://news.com.com/Apple+sues+over+...3-5500034.html


Apple Sues Over Online Product Leaks

Apple is suing anonymous people who leaked details about new products by posting information on the Internet, court documents showed on Friday.

Apple's complaint, filed with the Santa Clara County, Calif. Superior Court, comes only weeks ahead of the Macworld conference in San Francisco, the annual show where CEO Steve Jobs unveils the latest Apple products.

Apple is notoriously secretive about its product plans, while many fan sites routinely discuss what may be in store, including posting pictures of real products and hoaxes.

The complaint alleges that "an unidentified individual, acting alone or in concert with others, has recently misappropriated and disseminated through Web sites confidential information about an unreleased Apple product."

Apple said in the seven-page civil complaint, filed on Dec. 13, that it did not know the "true names or capacities, whether individual, associate, corporate or otherwise," of the defendants. Once they have been discovered, the Cupertino, Calif.-based company said it would amend the complaint.

It is not the first time Apple has gone after fanatics who have posted information about upcoming products on the Internet.

In December 2002, Apple sued a former contractor who allegedly posted drawings, images and engineering details of the company's PowerMac G4 computer in July of that year, several weeks before the product was officially unveiled.

"Apple has filed a civil complaint against unnamed individuals who we believe stole our trade secrets and posted detailed information about an unannounced Apple product on the Internet," the company said in a statement provided to Reuters. "Apple's DNA is innovation and the protection of our trade secrets is crucial to our success."

Mac rumor Web sites are at their busiest ahead of the annual Macworld conventions, which are highly anticipated by the Mac faithful for product introductions and Jobs' keynote.

In recent weeks, the Web sites have been buzzing with speculation that Apple will introduce a smaller, cheaper version of its market-leading iPod digital music player that uses flash memory, rather than the hard disk drives of the standard iPods.

Flash memory chips retain data stored on them even when electrical current is shut off.

Financial analysts Andy Neff, of Bear Stearns, and Charlie Wolf, of Needham & Co., have also published notes in recent weeks mentioning flash iPods.

"To succeed, Apple must develop innovative products and bring those products to market in advance of its competitors," the company said in its complaint. "If Apple competitors were aware of Apple's future production information, those competitors could benefit economically from that knowledge by directing their product development or marketing to frustrate Apple's plans."
http://news.com.com/Apple+sues+over+...3-5496099.html


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The trial

Red Cross Caught in P2P Fracas
Patrick Gray

The recording industry will ask the International Red Cross to freeze a trust fund allegedly controlled by the owners of Sharman Networks, an Australian software company.

The music industry maintains that Sharman, the maker of the Kazaa peer-to-peer software, is owned by several companies through a trust fund registered in the Pacific island nation of Vanuatu. The Red Cross is the only beneficiary specifically named in the trust, so the recording industry, which is suing Sharman, is asking the organization to voluntarily freeze the fund until a verdict is reached in the Australian Federal Court.

"We’re preparing our approach to the International Red Cross,” says Michael Speck of Australia’s Music Industry Piracy Investigations, which spearheads the prosecution of accused pirates. "I believe this whole thing will come as a complete surprise to them, and we’re only approaching them to stop them disposing of any funds."

A Sharman Networks source confirmed the International Red Cross is a beneficiary of the Vanuatu-based trust.

Mary Still, a lawyer acting in Sharman’s defense, says the record industry’s proposed approach to the charitable organization "is quite simply staggering."

But Speck says it will simply ask the Red Cross to freeze the fund until a legal outcome in the Australian court case is reached, and hopes the charity will cooperate. "It would be incredibly disappointing if we had to sue them," he says.

The major record labels filed suit against Sharman following a series of civil searches conducted on the company's Sydney offices and the homes of its executives in February. The suit alleges Sharman has directly and indirectly infringed on the recording companies' copyrights, violated Australian fair trade laws and conspired to harm the music industry.

The Federal Court adjourned proceedings on Friday and will reconvene on March 22 and hear final oral submissions, which lawyers expect to run for one or two days. The judge presiding over the case, Justice Murray Wilcox, will then retire to make a decision. The process expected to take several weeks.

The trial primarily focused on the authorization of copyright infringement. Lawyers representing the music industry say Sharman can prevent the transfer of illegal material. It doesn’t, it says, because the primary activity of Kazaa users is to infringe copyright.

The court is also interested in the mechanics of the Kazaa peer-to-peer network, whether it can be centrally controlled and by whom.

However, Speck argues the music industry's case isn’t about technology; it’s Sharman’s business practices that are on trial. "We never take a case against technology, we will take cases against people who use technology to take away our artists’ property," he says.

Speck refused to rule out going after non-commercial peer-to-peer outfits, and was coy when questioned on his current hit list. "We’ve never had to confront the theoretical conundrums in determining when prosecution has been required," he says. "We won’t disclose who our future targets are but we have a number."

But Still, a partner of law firm Clayton Utz, says Sharman’s technology is what’s on trial, and a finding against Sharman could have some unexpected side-affects. "Microsoft supplies, as part of its Windows suite, software that allows you to rip CDs. Depending on how this goes, it could also mean that (Microsoft) software would amount to an authorization of the infringement of copyright," she says. "The same thing could be said for a photocopier."

Still believes Digital Rights Management technology is the only way for the recording industry to protect itself "in the sense that what is the surest way for them to protect their copyright."

But don’t expect any ruling in Australia to affect the law in the United States, Still says. "America doesn’t pay much attention to Australian law. The legislation in America is slightly different."
http://www.wired.com/news/digiwood/0,1412,66069,00.html


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Shift Expected Over Online Music

Christmas may have come early for a technology whose users just weeks ago faced a Hallowe'en nightmare. Events in the music download arena have moved as quickly as the nights have drawn in.

The record industry is intent on culling music thieves and last month the BPI won a significant court ruling to identify serial uploaders through their ISP's in order to sue them.

However, according to Birmingham lawyer Andrew Sparrow, there will be a major shift by the industry in coming to terms with peer-to-peer online music services.

He believes the latest move signals a final acknowledgment that the internet is the media distribution channel of the future - and warned that by the spring the virtual landscape may be very different.

Mr Sparrow, founder of Lecote Solicitors, the Birmingham- based internet and new media law firm, said: "One of the major record labels, SonyBMG, is to launch a unique peer- to-peer music service.

"It's a decision instigated by the label and it has surprised many in the ranks of those who feel that P2P technology should stand for 'Pirate to Pirate'.

"Mashboxx is a desktop file sharing application based on a decentralised peer to peer network.

"The reason why the new service is so significant is that it can plug in to other networks used by unlicensed P2P services such as Kazaa and Grokster.

"When one considers that the record industry has spent the last two years trying to sue the P2P networks out of existence the importance of the step is clear."

He added: "Mashboxx will offer SonyBMG music and possibly other copyright music from major companies, but it has embedded a very clever audio fingerprinting system to enable the record company to identify the SonyBMG artist and when the track is being accessed.

"Once identified the content is replaced with a 'lo-fi' version of the music file in FM radio quality and this file is free to the user.

"However, if the internet file sharer wants to purchase the track they can acquire a CD quality version of the file by a simple one click process."

Mr Sparrow said that the imminent launch is very telling as it suggests that legal action to arrest the decline in music sales will not be the best route and as predicted by many the industry will have to fight the threat of technology with technology.

"As a lawyer I have to say that the Copyright and Related Rights Regulations 2003, introduced in autumn last year to give artists and record companies the legal means to prevent online music file sharers, is a necessary step.

"However, the reality is that there's no point wishing the internet wasn't there and using the law when the answer must surely lie in acceptance and moves toward monetising the benefits of the internet.

"In many ways the internet is the best distribution channel ever handed on a plate to the music companies, but only this week do they appear to grasp that.

"It's the best Christmas present the P2P networks could hope for.

"There have been other attempts at legal P2P networks, but by last summer they were struggling as record companies were reluctant to license content for exchange on a P2P basis.

"Now that they have devised a tracking technology which helps them gain some value from such services they feel more confident in facing the new year. However, the new service will of course enjoy the protection of the latest laws because the offences created by the legislation such as someone making available to the public digital content without the consent of the copyright holder will still apply.

"In addition, any attempt by someone to try and circumvent the technology by which Mashboxx operates will also be guilty under the offence of taking steps to circumvent technological measures in software designed to protect rights holders.

"The law is not going to become irrelevant, but it is obvious that it is going to be put in its proper context and deployed only against major illicit activity such as the defendant in the BPI court action who made available 8,966 files for download."
http://icbirmingham.icnetwork.co.uk/...name_page.html


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Peer-to-Peer TV

Forget Wife Swap, the next fad to hit TV, and the courts, could be swapping live video feeds.

Want 24-hour Hasselhoff? You’re in luck. New German peer-to-peer software will let users upload and rebroadcast all the Baywatch they want.

German software engineers Guido Ciberski and Petra Bauersachs are promising to introduce software they call “Cybersky TV” this January. They claim Cybersky TV will use peer-to-peer technology to carry live television feeds. If the service gets enough users, its first broadcasts in February could revolutionize TV and guarantee a deluge of lawsuits.

“This is something new,” says Charles Baker, lead attorney for StreamCast Networks, creators of the peer-to-peer file-sharing software Morpheus. Streamcast’s joint case with Grokster, another peer-to- peer network, is expected to be heard by the U.S. Supreme Court in March.

Mr. Ciberski says he was inspired to create his software by watching a jammed Internet feed of the 2002 Olympics. Cybersky TV is similar to PC file-sharing networks such as BitTorrent, which relies on users to take the strain off the stream. Any Cybersky user can also become a broadcaster by using a standard PC TV Card ‑ which you can pick up at your local Circuit City ‑ or web cam to capture or create video content.

Another benefit to Cybersky’s design is that it’s purely legal ‑ at least for now. Cybersky doesn’t rely on a central server ‑ a legal fine point that sank Napster ‑ but will instead help users swap files among themselves. This has allowed alternatives to Napster, such as Grokster, to flourish. Last week, however, the Supreme Court decided to review a lower court’s ruling that peer-to-peer networks are legal.

Luckily, legal wrestling is old hat to Mr. Ciberski and Ms. Bauersachs. Their current company, TC Unterhaltungselektronic, a television software company, won a long legal battle with German television broadcasters over the company’s Tivo-style ad-blocking product called the “telly fairy.” The company now trades on the Frankfurt Stock Exchange and the fight became a legend through the German press.

As a result, Mr. Ciberski welcomes the next battle. “We expect legal fights against organizations like the RIAA and MPAA,” he says. “We stand up for our opinion and the enemy knows that we will fight for it no matter how long it takes.”

Legal experts say Mr. Ciberski won’t be disappointed. “I’m sure this will raise copyright hackles,” says Wendy Seltzer, staff attorney for the Electronic Freedom Foundation. Already, Mr. Ciberski plans to launch his company in a country with liberal copyright laws. Though he declines to identify potential countries, the move is common for file-sharing networks. Kazaa, for example, transferred operations and ownership to several locales, including Estonia, Vanuatu, and Australia.

Nevertheless, Mr. Ciberski is less worried about the law than he is about competitors. “If the rules change, we have no problem stopping the service,” he says. The company intends to generate revenue through banner ads and other ad content over the streaming video. Already, Cybersky’s duo says they have had over 5,000 users request the software. Mr. Ciberski expects to have roughly 5 million users sharing the service at any one time, while the network is built for a maximum 30 million. Kazaa currently cites 300 million downloads.
http://www.redherring.com/Article.as...bsector=Europe


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Peer-to-Peer Radio

Start-up's P2P broadcasting legally sound
Dawn Chmielewski

It's hardly news that millions of people use Internet file-swapping networks for free, unfettered access to music. A Santa Clara start-up called Mercora has found a way to deliver just that -- while complying with the letter of copyright law.

Mercora is the first peer-to-peer radio broadcaster. Its software lets people listen to songs off other people's computers. As with any file-swapping network, people can search for music by artist name or song title. The search results tell you where to go to hear a particular song.

Compared to a conventional radio broadcast that can reach an audience of millions simultaneously, peer-to- peer radio transmits music more intimately, from one person's computer to another's.

``Typical radio is one to many. Our model is one to few,'' said Mercora's founder, Srivats Sampath. ``In radio, it's very limited genres and selections. In our model, it's unlimited genres and selection.''

The only wrinkle is Mercora is licensed as an Internet broadcaster. And while you can listen to as many as 10 million songs in near CD-quality, you can't download a copy to your computer's hard drive. Or burn it to CD. That's because Mercora plays music in a continuous stream. It's not a download store.

And, because of the Byzantine rules governing Webcasting, you won't hear more than three songs from the same artist in a three-hour period. That means you'll have to skip around, from computer to computer, to hear all of Gwen Stefani's new solo release, ``Love, Angel, Music, Baby.''

Mercora is nonetheless appealing to a file-sharing service like Grokster, which is searching for a way to bring licensed music to its network. Grokster struck a deal with Mercora last month to offer free peer-to-peer radio, dubbed Grokster Radio, to its users.

Mercora has logged about 28 million listening hours since its test version launched in June and attracted 450,000 listeners last month. For now, the service is free. But Sampath envisions selling premium versions of the service in the coming months.

``We're still making soup,'' Sampath said. ``When the soup's ready we'll throw the switch on. Here's a small fee for a value-added service.''
http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercu...0366020.htm?1c


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

When Tech Does Wrong!
Varun Singh

There is really nothing more to say - except why. But since why is difficult to handle, one must take refuge in how.
- Toni Morrison

This quote best signifies the irony of the DPS MMS Scandal.

Let me spell it out for those of you who are still unaware of the turn of events that led to the scandal capturing the entire nation's fancy. Here's the "How"!

A boy uses his camera mobile phone to snap the video of a girl performing oral sex on him and when the girl breaks up with him, sends it off to a few friends of his, who in turn share the clip on the Internet. Now it is available on every single Peer-to-Peer network you can think of, getting more popular every day, but still far from the scanner of the law. Some student in IIT Kharagpur, while on his usual trip to gather porn from Peer-to-Peer networks, finds the clip, downloads it and shares it on the Campus LAN network. Another enterprising youth sees the clip as an opportunity to make money and not thinking of the consequences, starts selling the clip on Baazee and a few other popular Indian e-Commerce sites, despite it being against the site's policies.

At this exact moment, the clip crossed a whole new boundary; from being free for all, it became a paid-for commodity. The moment this happened, many people took notice and someone finally went and reported the matter to the police. The moment Baazee.com was told about the infringing clip; they removed the clip and provided all the information the police needed in order to capture the seller and find out who bought the clip. The police arrested the seller within two days and questioned a few of the buyers. During all this, they were being supported by Baazee.com; the CEO even flew down to Delhi to help the police in their investigation; and the police arrested him too, saying he monetarily benefited from the sale of the video. The girl in the video is somewhere in Canada and the guy who shot it all was called in for questioning as soon as he came back from Nepal, where he was hiding.

It was technology all the way through; Technology that made it possible; technology that spread it all; and at the end of it all, technology that help sell, and technology that helped capture.

That's how it happened!

Now, since we know how it happened; let's try analyzing why it happened.

Why is it that a school boy had a camera phone in the first place; why is it that the girl allowed what happened, to happen? Why is it that the guy spread the video to his friends? Why did the friends spread it on the Internet? Why is it that the video was so popular on the Peer-to-Peer networks? Why is it that an IIT Kharagpur student, who has a mutually assured future ahead of us, would need to sell the video to make money? Why is it that Baazee couldn't eliminate the video's sales page by itself? Why is it that the CEO of Baazee had to be caught for something he never did, or wasn't responsible for, and as of now, hasn't benefited from?

The answers to these questions are more psychological / humane / illogical in nature than something as seemingly complex, yet brilliantly simple as Technology. I'll leave you with a few pointers and then you, the reader can take the discussion forward.

The girl and the guy both belong to rich, influential families, just like the rest of the students at DPS RK Puram, Delhi; one of the most expensive and influential schools in India.

The IIT Student was completely unaware of any laws limiting or prohibiting the sale of pornography in India, as this law is often abused and nobody does anything about it, it gives the perception that the law doesn't exist. You can find everybody from street vendors to cable operators peddling porn and not only does the law do nothing to stop them, it lets them flourish by providing a helping hand when people complain.

Baazee.com has very little, or no control over what buyers and sellers do using their systems once the transaction is processed. The only place where Baazee can put a check on what is being sold is the item description. But if the seller makes the item description vague enough, he can get away with saying anything, while selling something completely different. There is no way Baazee could have physically checked each and every item being sold. It wouldn't be feasible, either logistically, or economically, and would make absolutely no sense in today's electronic world.

Baazee.com's CEO could in no way be held responsible for the crime of "publishing of information, which is obscene in electronic form" as Baazee themselves never broadcasted or hosted the video, nor provided the medium to broadcast. The medium was the Internet (email to be specific), the publisher was the seller and the users were the buyers who paid for it. Baazee just helped them communicate with each other, as it does for a million other users selling legitimate items.

Another story doing rounds is that Baazee's CEO is the scapegoat for it all. The man rich, influential, politically connected parents have chosen to skin to set an example for others.

The last point and perhaps the most important one, is the fact that our Law system's level of knowledge about cyber crimes, or for that matter, about the Internet itself, is pretty abysmal. They don't understand and can't equate an online event to its physical equivalent, and the so-called cyber security experts are proving of no help so far.

As I finish writing this edit, news has arrived that Baazee's CEO has been released on bail, but that doesn't mean the matter has come to an end. The decision in this case is going to affect a million others. I'd suggest everyone who has anything to do with the IT industry, as a consumer, seller, or middleman, keep a close watch on this case, push for changing the draconian cyber laws, and throw out incapable cyber security experts who know no more than to ruin somebody's life for personal vendettas.
http://www.techtree.com/techtree/jsp/ showstory.jsp?storyid=56811


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Orrin Hatch Song In Ocean's 12

Hatch the composer
p2pnet.net News

Get this: As you may or may not know, senator Orrin ‘Terminator’ Hatch, one of Hollywood’s most favoured promoters, also fancies himself as a song-writer.

Hatch has fronted some of the entertainment industry’s most flagrant (fragrant?) attempts to stomp p2p and pillory file-sharers, the INDUCE Act being one of the best-known examples.

Hatch wanted to terminate file sharers’ computer by blowing them up, quite literally.

He’s also infamous for making grotesque misstatements about p2p file sharing and

technologies which, somehow, always seem to benefit the record labels or movie studios who have contributed so handsomely to his political coffers.

Back to his musical career, Souls Along the Way, “the love song Utah Sen. Orrin Hatch wrote for political rival Sen. Ted Kennedy and his wife a few years ago, has found its way to Hollywood in the box office hit Ocean's 12’," says the Salt Lake Tribune.

Sadly, the song didn't make the soundtrack CD to the”hip heist thriller,” but Hatch who, according to the report, “has earned thousands of dollars in royalties as he hobnobs with stars and manages to persuade some well-known artists to perform his works” is well chuffed anyway.

His song is heard in the background as Las Vegas casino boss Terry Benedict (Andy Garcia), “crashes a wedding party to demand the gang of crooks repay his stolen loot,” says the Tribune write-up, going on:

“In a subliminal reference to Hatch, the groom at the wedding is Virgil Malloy (Casey Affleck), one of the ‘Mormon Malloy’ brothers from Utah.”

Utah composer and former Springdale Mayor Phillip Bimstein is quoted as saying, "I thought it was a little endearing that here was one of the most powerful senators in the United States and yet he's still promoting himself in the same way any songwriter would."

On September 11th, Hatch released the single, America United.
http://p2pnet.net/story/3356


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Artists And Musicians Love The Net

The first large-scale surveys of the internet's impact on artists and musicians reveal that they are embracing the Web as a tool to improve how they make, market, and sell their creative works. They eagerly welcome new opportunities that are provided by digital technology and the internet.

At the same time, they believe that unauthorized online file sharing is wrong and that current copyright laws are appropriate, though there are some major divisions among them about what constitutes appropriate copying and sharing of digital files. Their overall judgment is that unauthorized online file-sharing does not pose a major threat to creative industries: Two-thirds of artists say peer-to-peer file sharing poses a minor threat or no threat at all to them.

Across the board, among those who are both successful and struggling, the artists and musicians we surveyed are more likely to say that the internet has made it possible for them to make more money from their art than they are to say it has made it harder to protect their work from piracy or unlawful use.

Surveys by the Pew Internet & American Life Project show there are 32 million Americans who consider themselves artists and about 10 million earn at least some level of compensation from their performances, songs, paintings, videos, creative writing, and other art. The report includes special analysis of "Paid Artists," those respondents who are musicians, writers and filmmakers and earn some income from their art.

A Project survey in November and December of 2003 finds that substantial numbers of these artists use the internet to gain inspiration, build community with fans and fellow artists, and pursue new commercial activity.

# 77% of all artists and 83% of all Paid Artists use the internet, compared to 63% of the entire adult population. # 52% of all online artists and 59% of Paid Online Artists say they get ideas and inspiration for their work from searching online. # 30% of online artists and 45% of Paid Online Artists say the internet is important in helping them create and/or distribute their art. # 23% of all online artists and 41% of Paid Online Artists say the internet has helped them in their creative pursuits and careers. # 3% of all online artists and 6% of Paid Online Artists say the internet has had a major deleterious effect on their ability to protect their creative works.

"Some in the policy community and in media companies have feared that the internet would bring financial Armageddon to musicians and other artists," said Mary Madden, Research Specialist who authored a new report on the Pew Internet Project findings. "What we hear from a wide spectrum of artists is that, despite the real challenges of protecting work online, the internet has opened new ways for them to exercise their imaginations and sell their creations. To many, this feels like a new Digital Renaissance rather than the end of the world."

These results emerge from a nationally representative survey of 809 self-identified artists in December 2003. The margin of error is plus or minus 4 percentage points.

Artists are divided in their overall assessment about online file sharing:

# 47% of all artists agree with the statement that "file-sharing services are bad for artists because they allow people to copy or use an artist's work without getting permission or compensating the artist." # 43% agree that, "file-sharing services aren't really bad for artists, since they help to promote and distribute an artist's work to a broad audience."

Some other major findings on copyright and file sharing:

# 52% of all artists and 55% of Paid Artists believe it should be illegal for internet users to share unauthorized copies of music and movies over file-sharing networks, compared to 37% of all artists and 35% of Paid Artists who say it should be legal. # 64% of all artists and 67% of Paid Artists think that the copyright owner should have complete control over the use of a work. # 28% of all artists consider file-sharing to be a major threat to creative industries and 30% of Paid Artists say this.

In another part of this research, the Project administered a non-random online survey of 2,793 musicians, songwriters and music publishers distributed through musician membership organizations that was conducted on the Web. Analysis in the report focuses on the 2,755 musicians and songwriters in the sample. The sample was self- selecting and not projectable onto the entire U.S. population of musicians, but this extensive and wide-ranging survey brings thousands of new voices from a broad range of experiences and levels of income into the debate about online file-sharing.

The online musicians who responded to our survey have integrated the internet deeply into their musical lives and are beginning to take advantage of wireless access. The vast majority of these musicians have their own website and are selling their music online. Most offer free samples of their music on the internet.

"For independent musicians, in particular, this newfound ability to bypass traditional distribution outlets and geographic boundaries has been liberating," said Lee Rainie, Director of the Project.

Most of these musicians report that the internet has had a positive, if only minor, impact on sales. Nearly all of the respondents cited improvements in their connections to others in the music community and two out of three musicians in our survey note that the internet has had a big effect on improving their connections to fans and allowing them to reach a wider audience.
http://www.guitarsite.com/newsletters/041220/5.shtml


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

iPod haters Love-In

With Mini's Rivals, More Is Sometimes Less
David Pogue

IN February, Apple followed up its wildly popular iPod music player with the iPod Mini. This smaller, sleeker $250 player could hold 1,000 songs and came in five brushed- aluminum colors. But for only $50 more, you could buy a regular iPod that could hold four times as much music. Logical observers could draw only one possible conclusion: that Apple was out of its number-crunching mind.

The San Jose Mercury News called the iPod Mini "cool, colorful and too expensive." PC Magazine wrote that "you are paying dearly for the miniaturization." And Business Week Online declared it doomed, another of the occasional "fits of delusion" by Steve Jobs, Apple's chief executive.

But the Mini was an enormous hit, and back-ordered for months. Its appeal was never about logic; it's about emotion, style and status. It's so small, cool and comforting in the hand that to hold one is to want one. (The reviewer for Business Week Online had the guts to write a second column, apologizing for the first.)

Inevitably, the Mini inspired other companies to send in the clones. This month you'll be able to choose from four impressive iPod Mini competitors, courtesy of Dell, Rio, Creative and Virgin Electronics.

Some of the similarities are broad, like the charging cable that also auto-loads a copy of your music collection from your PC. Some are tiny: the iPod-like "Don't steal music" sticker (on the Dell's screen), the choice of colors (Creative's Zen Micro comes in 10) or the fingerprint- and scratch-prone mirror-chrome back panel (on the Rio Carbon).

There are also some very important differences. For example, the iPod Mini works with the Macintosh and Windows. But if you want to buy pop music legally online, you must use Apple's iTunes Music Store. That's not such a horrible fate; Apple's store is widely admired. Still, iPods can't play songs bought from other online music stores.

The rival players present the opposite situation: they accept songs bought from almost any online store except Apple's (Napster, Wal-Mart and so on), because all of these stores and players use Microsoft's copy-protection format. Of course, both the iPod and its rivals also play unprotected files like WAV and MP3 and songs you've ripped from your own CD collection.

All of the rival players can synchronize your music collection with Windows Media Player 10. (Thanks to a software plug-in, the Rio Carbon can also sync with the iTunes jukebox program on the Mac or Windows - except for songs you've bought from the iTunes Music Store, of course.)

If all this compatibility talk turns your brain to mush, here's a difference that's easier to understand: The upstart players hold more music than the Mini (about 250 songs more). Each contains a five-gigabyte hard drive instead of a four-gigabyte one. And each rival either costs less or offers more features.

For example, if you buy a Dell Pocket DJ instead of the iPod Mini, you'll save $50. This $200 player is almost the same size as the Mini (both are half an inch thick; the Dell is 3.5 by 2.1 inches, the Mini is 3.6 by 2), and its rounded silver metal case feels equally solid in your hand.

Or how about the Creative Zen Micro? For about $250 online, you get a player that's shorter but thicker than the Mini (3.3 by 2 by 0.7 inches) with a voice recorder, an FM radio and even an FM radio recorder. The sound quality of your recordings is pretty poor - clearly, Creative doesn't want you to make recordings at live concerts instead of buying them - but these are handy features.

As a bonus, this player has a pop-out battery. (After several hundred charges, the other players' batteries must be replaced at the factory.)

The $250 Virgin Electronics player, whose real name is the Virgin Electronics Player, is bigger than the Mini (3.8 by 2.2 by 0.6 inches). But its all-plastic case is as light as a feather (some may say it feels cheap). An FM radio is built in, although you can't record from it. In a masterstroke, Virgin incorporated two headphone jacks, so you can listen (or dance) with a friend. And you can crank the volume way past 11, as the saying goes; in fact, it can go dangerously loud.

You've got to love the creators' hilariously blunt writing. The hourglass cursor says, "busy busy." You're directed to press the Home button "if you're feeling lost, or maybe just a little homesick." And Virgin is frank enough to say in its manual, "Nope, you can't play songs you purchased from iTunes."

Only one company learned from the iPod's secret identity as a piece of jewelry. The domed, tapered Rio Carbon looks like a shining puddle of molten silver. At 3.3 by 2.5 by 0.6 inches (at its thickest), it's actually more mini than the Mini. An alien stumbling upon the smooth, shiny Carbon in the rubble of our civilization might mistake it for one of those worry stones that you're supposed to rub for stress relief.

The company pegs the battery life at a jaw-dropping 20 hours between charges, double what the Mini gives you. And even though it has a built-in voice recorder, the Rio Carbon can be found online for $40 less than the Mini.

Four great players, each with some superpower that the iPod Mini lacks. It's curtains for Apple, right?

Not so fast. On something that's as personal and frequently used as a music player, little things make a big difference, and it's in the Little Things department that the iPod Mini really shines.

For example, when your player contains a thousand songs, you need a way to scroll through them quickly. You can run your finger around the iPod's famous click wheel fast to jet down to the W's and then slowly to pinpoint "What a Wonderful World."

But the Rio's thumb wheel has no such variable speed; it's four songs per turn, period. Working through any list longer than about 12 songs is an excruciating exercise. The Dell's "rolling log" control does zip farther through a list the faster you spin it, but it's awfully hard to speed up or slow down when you're basically twirling a section of a drinking straw. The Virgin's up-down buttons scroll at two different speeds, but that's still more frustrating than the Mini's "any speed you like."

Each player comes with its own disappointments. The backlighting of the Dell, for example, is dark blue, offering precious little contrast with the tiny black type. The volume controls (separate + and - buttons) sit on the top of the unit, looking and feeling identical to the Off button right next to them. And often, pushing inward on the rolling-log thing - which ought to mean "execute this command" - opens yet another menu instead.

The Virgin's buttons are recessed too far, its backlighting is even dimmer than the Dell's, and making the thing work with your PC can involve an ugly ritual of firmware downloads and restarts. (The company admits to muffing this process, and promises to improve it.) More important, the lesson of the iPod's looks seems to have sailed straight over Virgin's heads; this is one aesthetically challenged player.

On the Creative Zen Micro, the iPod's wheel has been replaced by a touch-sensitive vertical strip. In theory it ought to offer variable speed scrolling, but in practice it's a sticky, balky nightmare. You'll find a similar lack of polish when you want to use the Zen Micro's hard drive to transport computer files (a terrific feature of the iPod and all of its rivals) and discover that you must tell the software in advance how much space you'll need for them. How could you know that ahead of time?

The sculptured Rio Carbon looks cool on a tabletop, but it's all wrong for your palm. You wind up with the hard, flat chrome surface against the curve of your fingers, and the domed front pointing up at your face. Truth is, this player's case has been designed upside down.

Furthermore, the Carbon's too-tight carrying case blocks all access to the controls. There's no physical Hold switch to prevent button presses in your pocket or purse. Finally, note that if you opt to use your own headphones (those with a metal ring around the miniplug), you get loud crackling in your ears with any movement of the cord. The company cheerily suggests that you solve the problem with Scotch tape. (Rio also says that it will fix this problem on the next batch of Carbons.)

Remember, too, that for once in its life, Apple is the sole superpower; the iPod makes up 92 percent of the hard-drive player market. If you're an iPod Mini owner, you're part of a whole ecosystem of Web sites, shareware programs, armbands, portable speakers, carrying cases, FM car transmitters and so on. If you buy one of its upstart rivals, you're pretty much stuck with what comes in the box.

All right, so the iPod Mini's rivals aren't as elegant or as polished, they're not as thoughtfully conceived, and they may not fill you with as much pure, overwhelming technolust. Apple's message seems to be, "Perfection has a price."

Thousands of people, however, don't require perfection; they'd much rather save the 50 bucks. Thousands more would really like a built-in radio or microphone. On the Web, you'll even encounter a small army of militant iPod haters, people who despise the whole phenomenon: white earbuds, good reviews, status-symbol status and all.

For these demographic groups, the arrival of rivals to the Mini is a welcome development. Choose the Dell if you want an almost-Mini for $50 less; the Creative Zen Micro if the radio and microphone appeal to you; or the Rio Carbon for long battery life and stylishness that rivals the Mini's. They may not play your emotions quite the way the original does, but every now and then there's something to be said for logic.
http://tech2.nytimes.com/2004/12/16/...l?pagewanted=2


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

HMV Taps Microsoft – Shuts Out Apple
Dinesh C. Sharma

British music giant HMV on Wednesday announced plans to launch a digital music service next year, using software being developed by Microsoft.

Music downloads from the service will be compatible with the Windows Media Audio standard and usable by more than 75 portable players currently on the market, HMV said. Portable players, as well as the service software, will be sold in the company's stores and online. The service is slated to launch in the second half of 2005.

Microsoft applications under development for the service include a customized jukebox that will let users select, purchase and manage their music online--all in one place. HMV said it intends to spend about $19 million (10 million pounds) on the download service and initial marketing.

The digital-music market in the United States and abroad is currently dominated by Apple Computer's iTunes, which is available in the United Kingdom and other European countries. Recently, there have been complaints about Apple's international pricing for iTunes.

HMV's service will not be compatible with Apple's iPod, and when the service is launched next year, HMV stores will stop selling iPods, a representative for HMV said.

"It's great to be involved in such a leading-edge retail project that will support an explosion of choice, enabling music fans to buy music in-store and online--in fact anywhere--on a whole range of devices from different manufacturers," Microsoft U.K. managing director Alistair Baker said in a statement. "The partnership extends to the development of the (software), which will be constructed by a joint team from Microsoft and HMV."

HMV already operates a subscription music download service via its Web site, where consumers can get 50 tracks for about $9.57 a month. HMV's non-U.K. Web site is run through a partnership with Amazon.com. The companies did not say what impact the new service would have on the existing service.
http://news.com.com/HMV+taps+Microso...3-5501032.html


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

The Pursuit of Knowledge, From Genesis to Google
Alberto Manguel

One warm afternoon in the late 19th century, two middle-aged office clerks met on the same bench of the Boulevard Bourdon in Paris and immediately became the best of friends. Bouvard and Pécuchet (the names Gustave Flaubert gave to his two comic heroes) discovered through their friendship a common purpose: the pursuit of universal knowledge. To achieve this ambitious goal, they attempted to read everything they could find on every branch of human endeavor and, from their readings, cull the most outstanding facts and ideas. Flaubert's death in 1880 put an end to their enterprise, which was in essence endless, but not before the two brave explorers had read their way through many learned volumes on agriculture, literature, animal husbandry, medicine, archeology and politics, always with disappointing results. What Flaubert's two clowns discovered is what we have always known but seldom believed: that the accumulation of knowledge isn't knowledge.

The desire to know everything on earth and in heaven is so ancient that one of the earliest accounts of this ambition is already a cautionary tale. According to the 11th chapter of Genesis, after the Flood, the people of the earth journeyed east, to the land of Shinar, and decided to build a city and a tower that would reach the heavens.

"And the Lord came down to see the city and the tower, which the children of men builded. And the Lord said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do. Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they may not understand one another's speech." According to the Sanhedrin (the council of Jewish elders set up in Jerusalem in the first century), the place where the tower once rose never lost its peculiar quality and whoever passes it forgets all he knows. Years ago, I was shown a small hill of rubble outside the walls of Babylon and told that this was all that remained of Babel.

If Babel symbolized our incommensurate ambition, the Library of Alexandria showed how this ambition might be achieved. Set up by Ptolemy I in the third century B.C., it was meant to hold every book on every imaginable subject. To ensure that no title escaped its vast catalog, a royal decree ordered that any book brought into the city was to be confiscated and copied; only then would the original (sometimes the copy) be returned.

A curious document from the second century B.C., the perhaps apocryphal "Letter of Aristeas," recounts the library's origins. To assemble a universal library (says the letter), King Ptolemy wrote "to all the sovereigns and governors on earth" begging them to send to him every kind of book by every kind of author, "poets and prose writers, rhetoricians and sophists, doctors and soothsayers, historians and all others, too." The king's librarians calculated that they required 500,000 scrolls if they were to collect in Alexandria "all the books of all the peoples of the world." Time exacerbates our greed: by 1988, the Library of Congress alone was receiving that number of printed items per year, from which it sparingly kept about 400,000.

But even this (by our standards) modest stock of a half-million books was too much for any reader, and the librarians of Alexandria devised a system of annotated catalogs for which they chose works they deemed especially important and appended a brief description to each title: one of the earliest "recommended reading" lists. In Alexandria, it became clear that the greater your ambition, the narrower your scope.

But our ambition persists. Recently, the most popular Internet search service, Google, announced that it had concluded agreements with several leading research libraries - Harvard, the Bodleian at Oxford, Stanford, the New York Public Library - to make some of their books available online to researchers who won't have to travel to the libraries or dust their way through endless stacks of paper and ink. Millions of pages will be waiting temptingly for their online readers and (to refer back to Genesis) "nothing will be restrained from them, which they have imagined to do." No doubt the whole of the ghostly stock of Alexandria (which vanished in the seventh century) can now be summoned up with the mere tap of a finger.

The practical arguments for such a step are irrefutable: quantity, speed, precision, on-demand availability are no doubt important to the scholar. And new technologies need not be exclusionary. The invention of photography did not eliminate painting, it renewed it, and no doubt the screen and the codex can feed off each other and coexist amicably on the same reader's desk. All we need to do is remember the corollaries to the arguments in favor of a virtual library: that reading, in order to allow reflection, requires slowness, depth and context; that leafing through a material book or roaming through material shelves is an intimate part of the craft; that the omnipresent electronic technology is still fragile and that, as it changes, we keep losing the possibility of retrieving that which was once stored in now superseded containers. We can still read the words on papyrus ashes saved from the charred ruins of Pompeii; we don't know for how long it will be possible to read a text inscribed in a 2004 CD. This is not a complaint, just a reminder.

Bouvard and Pécuchet's ambition is now almost a reality and all the knowledge in the world seems to be there, flickering behind the siren screen. Jorge Luis Borges, who once imagined an infinite library of all possible books, invented a Bouvard-and-Pécuchet-like character who tries to compile a universal encyclopedia so complete that nothing would be excluded from it. In the end, like his French forerunners, he fails, but not entirely. On the evening on which he gives up his great project, he hires a horse and buggy and takes a tour of the city. He sees brick walls, ordinary people, houses, a river, a marketplace and feels that somehow all these things are his own work. He realizes that his project was not impossible but merely redundant. The world encyclopedia, the universal library, already exists and is the world itself.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/12/19/we...ew/19mang.html


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mashboxx aims to make file sharing legit

Grokster Founder Prepares Licensed P2P Service
David McGuire

Ever since the day he became president of the Internet file-sharing service Grokster in 2002, Wayne Rosso has prided himself on being a thorn in the recording industry's side. The loudmouth tech executive remains the go-to guy for journalists seeking incendiary quotes comparing music lobbyists to murderous dictators.

But if Rosso's latest venture gets off the ground, he may wind up generating piles of cash for the music industry giants he once savaged. His new company uses technology developed by another former industry pariah -- Shawn Fanning, the student programmer who kicked off the file-sharing craze with his Napster service in the late 1990s.

Dubbed Mashboxx, Rosso's new service is set to go online early next year. It will rely on the basic "peer-to-peer" technology offered by Grokster, Kazaa and other file-trading programs that allows users to download and swap digital music files.

The big difference is that Mashboxx will be the first peer-to-peer network to use SnoCap, the music-licensing service founded in 2002 by Fanning. This makes it the first "real" legal alternative to popular free P2P networks such as Kazaa and eDonkey, as well as industry-supported downloading services like iTunes and Musicmatch.

"Our model is regular peer-to-peer. You're going to have all the content you're going to get with all the major (file-sharing) networks," Rosso said. "Unauthorized content will not be blocked. Instead, what we're going to be doing is replacing unauthorized content with authorized versions."

SnoCap won't prevent Mashboxx users from downloading, uploading and swapping popular songs over the network, but it will force them to pay for their music.

Although SnoCap promises to clean up and legitimize Internet file trading, it won't work unless peer-to-peer companies allow the San Francisco- based firm to scan the traffic that travels over their networks.

Ali Aydar, SnoCap's chief operating officer, confirmed that the company is in discussions with Mashboxx and several other potential partners that he declined to name. He said Mashboxx could be the first retailer to use SnoCap if it launches as planned in early 2005.

SnoCap works by electronically "fingerprinting" songs and maintaining a database of those fingerprints that it can compare against tracks being sold on retail sites or traded over peer-to-peer networks. Under SnoCap's approach, it will be the record companies' responsibility to claim the songs they own and set the rules for how those songs can be traded.

SnoCap gives song owners the option of making their music available at no cost, allowing free trades for a limited time, selling them, or demanding that they not be distributed electronically at all, Aydar said. Copyright owners will also be able to change the rules at any time.

Universal Music has agreed to set rules for its songs in the SnoCap system, and Aydar said SnoCap is in serious discussions with other major labels. The company's contract with retailers requires that they force their customers to follow the rules set by the rights holders. In cases where copyright owners haven't gotten around to claiming a particular work, retailers can choose either to block unclaimed files or let them through.

Rosso said Mashboxx will take the latter approach. "If somebody comes to me and says, 'Our stuff is up there and blah, blah, blah,' all I have to say is, 'Give SnoCap a call.'"

Rosso did not reveal exactly how Mashboxx will deploy the SnoCap technology. But possibilities include allowing users to download radio-quality versions of the songs to sample before buying the clean digital copy and grafting radio-style voiceovers onto the beginnings and ends of sample songs.

"The bottom line is that the user will get the whole file, and get the opportunity to play it and use it and enjoy it, and get the opportunity to pay," he said. He added that because copyright owners can set the wholesale prices for their tracks in the SnoCap system, the per-song price for Mashboxx users will vary, but the majority of songs will probably be priced around $1 each.

Privacy and Safe-Harbor Concerns

If Rosso succeeds, the man who once unfavorably compared Recording Industry Association of America President Cary Sherman to Joseph Stalin could create a fresh new

revenue stream for record companies, shoring up sales in an industry that's worried about the Internet's impact on its bottom line since Napster's rise in the late 1990s.

If Sherman finds that ironic, he isn't letting on.

"We have maintained all along that [peer-to-peer services] could filter if they want to and stop the infringement. This basically proves that's true by no less a technology guru than Shawn Fanning," Sherman said. "It would be wonderful to find that these really are viable business models."

At a P2P conference put on by the Federal Trade Commission last week, Sherman projected a recent Rosso quote on a giant screen for the audience to read: "The problem is that even though the opportunities are starting to arise now and the record companies are reaching out, many of my colleagues are backing off, afraid that if they play ball, they'll lose their traffic."

Indeed, the biggest obstacles to success for Mashboxx or any other peer-to-peer company looking to "go straight" are the dozens of popular, free networks that have no intention of joining them.

Adam Eisgrau, the head of P2P United -- a trade group that represents eDonkey, BearShare and Rosso's former employer, Grokster -- said his members won't do business with SnoCap. "We will not do this voluntarily," Eisgrau said, adding that he would fight any attempt by Congress to mandate filtering technology.

"What's being suggested is that every file transfer must first pass through their database. From a privacy perspective, from a free speech perspective, from a network effectiveness perspective, that's preposterous." Eisgrau said. "I understand why it makes sense to Hollywood and friends. I don't understand why it would make sense to anybody else."

Phillip Corwin, who lobbies on behalf of Sharman Networks, the Vanuatu-based company that distributes Kazaa, said that even if SnoCap did make sense from a business perspective, it could put peer-to-peer companies on a shaky legal footing.

A federal appeals court ruled in August that peer-to-peer software publishers Grokster and StreamCast Networks Inc. could not be held accountable for the copyright infringement committed by their users. The court concluded that unlike the original Napster, which was ordered shut down by a federal judge in 2001, Kazaa and Grokster don't maintain centralized servers and therefore can't control what their customers share with one another.

However, the U.S. Supreme Court plans to review the Grokster-StreamCast settlement next year, and SnoCap's debut on a service like Mashboxx could undercut arguments that P2P services are unable to control how their software is used.

"If I'm a peer-to-peer executive, I've got a great safe harbor right now. Any change in the technology puts me at legal risk," Corwin said. Since SnoCap requires that transfers be routed through a centralized location, a peer-to-peer company using the technology could be liable in the same way Napster was, he said.

Legal questions aside, the continuing existence of free file-swapping services that operate beyond the reach of U.S. authorities presents significant competition for any service like Mashboxx, according to Peter Menell, a law professor at the University of California at Berkeley.

SnoCap is "certainly a nice idea and it's serving at least a public-relations benefit for the copyright industries, but I don't think they're banking on it as their savior," Menell said. "I think we could spend a lot of time developing business models that meet all of the needs of the major players, but no one really wants to buy it."

Rosso said he is confident that people will flock to a network that lets them share songs without having to worry about lawsuits from the RIAA or the Motion Picture Association of America, or about "spyware" programs that are sometimes packaged with files downloaded from free services.

A Crowded Field

Mashboxx will face competition from other companies lining up to offer licensed file sharing. One is Peer Impact, owned by Wurld Media Inc. in Saratoga Springs, N.Y. The

company has already inked licensing deals with three major labels. Another is Seattle-based Weed, which is focused largely on the independent music scene. Weed requires users to buy the songs, but then pays them when they get others to download the same file. Both of those services use their own technology to prevent illegal downloads.

Mashboxx and similar services must also compete with increasingly popular pay-for-download services like Musicmatch and iTunes. In the first six months of 2004, the RIAA reported that legitimate download sites sold more than 58 million singles.

Still, the number of legal downloads is dwarfed by unauthorized transfers. Last month alone, file swappers traded nearly 1.4 billion tracks over free networks, according to Atlanta-based BigChampagne, a company that monitors peer-to-peer services.

Rosso believes Mashboxx has a better shot of luring long-time P2P users than a pure download service like Apple's iTunes because Mashboxx will offer the ability to participate in an online community, share files with other members and browse from a vast library that includes rare tracks often not available from the big download stores.

Aydar and his colleagues have mortgaged their company's future on that premise. "Here's the challenge: There's about a million tracks on iTunes right now, while on a peer-to- peer network, there are 25 million tracks. There are just too many rights holders out there. We feel that the industry has tried one model, but there are other business models out there," he said.

"Record companies need for me to succeed as much as I need to succeed," Rosso said. "I want to be an agent for change. I think this is a big win for me. I'm about to get everything I've been fighting for and frankly so is the record industry."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2004Dec22.html


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

EMI, Sony BMG Ink Digital Music Pact

In a bold move to pave the way for more widespread licensing of music publishing rights, EMI Music Publishing and Sony BMG Music Entertainment have entered an umbrella agreement that sets working guidelines for clearing rights to new digital music delivery opportunities on phones, PCs, digital cable systems and emerging physical configurations.

The pact, announced Dec. 17, which pairs the world's top publishing house and the second-largest record company globally, promises to drive the clearance of thousands of copyrighted works for new distribution formats.

The deal covers North American rights for master ring tones and ringbacks; DualDisc, the new two-sided music format that combines CD and DVD functionality; digital video distribution, including video-on-demand services and video downloads; multi-session audio discs like copy-protected CDs; and "locked" content for hard drives and storage media that consumers may "unlock" by purchasing the tracks or albums online.

"We didn't want to hear a clamor that everyone was not able to get what they wanted because one group was holding up licensing rights. I think this puts an end to that and sets us on a road to finding out how good these markets really are," said EMI Music Publishing CEO Martin Bandier.

The deal sets defined rates for master ring tones, ringbacks and DualDisc. Rates for other emerging technologies, most notably video, have been left open for determination at a later time.

Specific financial terms of the agreement were not disclosed.
http://news.com.com/EMI%2C+Sony+BMG+...3-5498207.html


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Subject:
Nature of Information
From:
Drathan
Date:
Dec 14 2004 6:48AM

.... alright guys, lemme just set this soap box under my feet here for a second,.. there. Good.

So!

.. Information.. cannot.. be held.. captive. Got that? Its basic paradigm from page 1 paragraph 1 of The Way Things Are book, published by God. Information Cannot Be Held Still.

Information is a form of energy. Don't matter if it doesn't have excited atoms, Potential Energy doesn't have them either, but it counts as energy, right? Well, Information is a very interesting form of energy. Unlike electrical, kinetic, or nuclear energy, Information grows when its shared. And it dies when its locked. Information is to thinking beings what electricity is to electric devices. It can power many things, in many ways, and its very nature its to spread, morph, and then spread some more. It CANNOT be held captive. Its against its self-preservation. If you produce a movie, it WILL be seen, its its -nature-. If you produce a song, it WILL be heard. It is the way it works.

Now, in order to support information's core mission (that is, to spread), society has invented artificial props, like copyright, price tags, sales bills, and paper-or-plastic. They have succeeded, because they were a help to information's spreading nature, not a hinder. But they are not nature. They are artificial props. And what happens when an artificial prop starts opposing the core it was supposed to support? What do you do to a pair of shoes who make your feet hurt, instead of protecting them from the harsh floor? You throw them, and get a new pair. Artificial Things Are Only Tolerated For As Long As They Serve A Purpose... unlike natural things, which are what they are forever whether we like it or not. Information its gonna want to spread whether we want it or not, and if Copyright stands in the way.. well... It will most likely be reshaped. Trial and Error, will come up with a better Artificial Prop. Not because someone said it.. but Because That's How Things Are, when it comes to artificial props and nature.

Okay.

This neatly explains Napster, Grokster, etc. The Information Energy seeks low-resistance, wide-distribution conductors, just like electricity would travel best along copper lines than tin.

China can raise a firewall, but it cant block blogs. It will learn to block blogs, but then something else will get through. The Court may ban Grokster, then something else will pop-up. Its the nature of information. It cant be held captive.

Now, ... what about the media industries who lose money to Grokster? Sure, I saw Sean Austin's commercial about why downloading a movie may deprive the cute script lady from paying her college tuition. I feel for them, but you know what?

The Media Industry needs to adjust to a new paradigm.

It will, eventually, .. market forces will pressure her into doing so, just like it happened with the tape recorder, or the VHS, or freaking TiVo. But it would be nicer if they wised up and did this change proactively.

Yes, proactively. If I was the movie industry, I would not fight the change, I would embrace it and squeeze juice out of the new paradigm. The first one who does this, is gonna reap some major bucks, I think, damn, I wish I had money to do this.

See "But how do you embrace a bunch of pirates ripping off my work?" the media asks? And its a darn good question. Specially if we rephrase it. Lemme rephrase it: "How do I embrace MILLIONS of people interested in my work?" Should I make the question again? Sure thing, here goes: "What juice is possibly there to be made for me, about the fact that millions of people with incomes and education enough to exploit the internet, are so interested in hearing what I have to say, that they will risk the law, invest hours of their time in download, plus the time it takes them to actually see my movie, and who will also keep it in their computers to see it again, and possibly talk about it to their friends?"

Get it yet? No? Are you still saying "So what if half the country sees my movie, along with 70% of malaysia and assorted asian countries in VCD, if none of them pays an entrance ticket or buys a DVD? Where is my money in that?!"

... ....!....

Hello?

Do you really not see any value in the all-things-UFO craze that started after "Encounters of the Third Kind"? Is there no dollar sign to the spike in Mini-Cooper sales after "The Italian Job" (and I hated the movie!). Doesn't Vegas benefit from "Oceans 11", or "Snake Eyes" or "Casino"? Is Fedex happy with Tom Hanks? What a smart Studio needs to do, is stop selling information, and start selling material things. Then use the IMMENSE power of information, channeled through the millions of people wishing to make time in their busy schedules to hear what they have to say, to publicize the material things for sale. And I don't mean stupid Pepsi cans in "Father of the Pride", I mean Deloreans in "Back To The Future", and fedoras for "Indiana Jones". If you embed commercials stupidly, you lose the power of information. But if you do it wisely, information is a great power to wield.

If anyone thinks the power of information can be stopped by artificial props, just like if anyone thinks the capacity to help in the very shaping of modern culture has no dollar value, and must not be wielded with responsibility, then I have one last quote for you, from H.M. Warner of Warner Bros's fame, in 1927 when the "talkies" were invented:

"Who the hell wants to hear actors talk?!"
http://fray.slate.msn.com/?id=3936&m=13275980&


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Subject:
Balance of Interests
From:
Thrasymachus
Date:
Dec 14 2004 11:20AM

Internet technology clearly poses a threat to the present copyright regime; but then why is it assumed that a threat to the copyright regime is necessarily a bad thing?

Or, put it this way: the article briefly references another writer's reasoning by analogy to the development of airspace law, which once protected property rights for an unlimited distance vertically, from the outer edge of the atmosphere (and perhaps beyond) to the absolute center of the earth. With the development of air travel, though, that law "had to go," and now copyright law has to go as well. The article takes issue with this, asking:

Is Lessig right or just clever? If you use the Internet to rip off the entire content of somebody's movie or CD to avoid purchasing it yourself, isn't it a little more serious than a fly- over? These are the kinds of gauzy hypotheticals the courts are now poised to resolve.

This is sloppy reasoning, I think, on the part of the author. He's assuming that an airplane flying over one's property doesn't cause any harm, but that theft of copyrighted material does. But why?

If the courts and legislature had decided to uphold the airspace rights of landowners along heavily trafficked routes, then those rights would have been worth millions upon millions of dollars, and a pilot's decision to fly over a line of individual plots from (say New York to Chicago) without paying for the rights would have been considered an egregious and inexcusable act of trespassing and theft, depriving those landowners of money that would have rightfully been theirs.

By the same token, copyright theft is only "theft" because the law makes it so. The "theft" of one's copyright is no more inherently harmful than the "theft" of one's airspace. It's not like a finger is chopped off, or like any physical thing in the universe is altered by the performance of the act. It's a question of rights, and who has them, under law.

So I'd say Lessig is both right and clever. Property rights (especially abstract ones like copyright) aren't moral imperatives. They're social constructs intended to advance public interests.

In the end, I think the "airspace rights" of homeowners had to be ditched because it would have been impossible, as a matter of law, for any given landowner (except maybe the very,very largest) to prove that an aircraft passed directly over his land unless the thing was flying right over his head.

The same practical considerations might mandate the death of copyright law as we presently know it. It's already damn near impossible to trace where files are coming from (and programs like Bittorrent assemble them from a rotating roster of fragmentary sources, none of them known to the recipient), and it's not going to get any easier over time.

If what we're really faced with here is the sharp restriction of the Internet or the sharp restriction of copyright law, then copyright law is doomed to lose. . . and it probably should.
http://fray.slate.msn.com/?id=3936&m=13279062&


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

RIAA, MPAA Rejoice as Suprnova.org Closes, File Sharing Goes Underground
nelo & risda

Public file sharing has taken a few on the chin recently focusing on BitTorrent. Regardless of these and future RIAA/MPAA efforts, filesharing will never, ever end. Where's the next pointless strike going to be?

So the RIAA and MPAA are celebrating what must seem like a number of glorious victories in their longstanding crusade against public file sharing. Due to a number of raids and repeated threats of severe legal action, many of the most popular file sharing sites decided to shut up shop last week. The most notable of which was the legendary BitTorrent Mecca, Suprnova.org. Sloncek, the owner and creator of suprnova, after seeing what was happening in the community made the brave decision to close the site rather than face a possible prison sentence. But how did the authorities manage to wreak such havoc when they've failed many times before? Simple. They went after the site owners.

Most people are aware of the many court cases the RIAA were involved in last year after they decided to prosecute people who shared files. In many cases they stormed up a media frenzy and a lot of people got very upset at how they were handling it. This time out they are going directly for the site owners themselves. It began at the very start of December when Sharman Networks the owners of the notorious Kazaa peer-to-peer network were taken to federal court in Australia on the grounds that Sharman were facilitating copyright piracy, in the meantime making a steady profit from advertising on the site. This started alarm bells ringing within the filesharing community but it was too late for some major sites as raids were conducted in Holland, Finland and France. The result? EDonkey sites Shareconnector, Releases4U, FinReactor, AntiReactor and legendary French based BitTorrent site Youceff Torrents were all gone; but the worst was still to come.

For the last 18 months, the buzz in the file sharing community has all been about BitTorrent's massive media attention, including one report which suggested 30% of internet bandwidth was being sucked up by BitTorrent use. This has cost the mechanism dearly. With all the attention the RIAA has had in the last year, their stance pales in comparison to the furious wrath of the film industries MPAA. This is interesting considering that the Film Industry has yet to suffer the massive financial losses that have decimated the Music Industry. There is little doubt that the current crackdown on file sharing is being pushed by the MPAA. So it was on Sunday that the most popular file sharing site in the world Suprnova.org ceased to be, visitors to the site were greeted with this message:


Greetings everybody,

As you have probably noticed, we have often had downtimes. This was because it was so hard to keep this site up! But now we are sorry to inform you all, that SuprNova is closing down for good in the way that we all know it. We do not know if SuprNova is going to return, but it is certainly not going to be hosting any more torrent links. We are very sorry for this, but there was no other way, we have tried everything.

Thank you all that helped us, by donating mirrors or something else, by uploading and seeding files, by helping people out on IRC and on forum, by spreading the word about SuprNova.org. It is a sad day for all of us!

Please visit SuprNova.org every once in a while to get the latest news on what is happening and if there is anything new to report on.

As we wish to maintain the nice community that we created, we are keeping forums and irc servers open.

Thank you all and Goodbye!
sloncek & the rest of the SuprNova Team


There was a sudden outpouring of rage and sorrow amongst the many users of the site, but nothing could be done. By the end of the day, several more sites vanished and the BitTorrent scene had been almost obliterated. FD, moderator of the Suprnova forum, formerly the largest Invision Power Board in existence, removed all content relating to BitTorrent and banned any torrent related discussions. This bold move has spread to many more File Sharing boards preventing them from be taken to court.

So what now for File Sharing?

The MPAA and RIAA are most certainly celebrating; in fact they may well be onto their 500th bottle of Champagne at this point but they will certainly have to sober up fairly quickly. Like common bacteria File- Sharing is easy to kill at the outset but new stronger, more lethal strains will continue to evolve and rise from the ashes. There has been a sudden push into private filesharing networks in the past few days and this is a trend that will continue to grow in the coming weeks. Applications such as Waste allow people to establish their own private filesharing networks and only allow friends and people they trust to access them, these small networks may not have the massive collections of files once available to Kazaa fans nor the large community support that Suprnova once had but they do have a killer advantage. Total privacy.

With the Waste network all files transferred are encrypted so nobody not the MPAA or the Riaa has any idea what people are sharing and without such evidence they have no way of stopping it. Without any fear of litigation file sharing will soon attract a whole new user base of people who were too intimidated by legal repercussions to get involved before. To add to their woes the Music and Film industries must also face the impending onslaught of new de-centralized BitTorrent networks. Where before BitTorrent relied on trackers and sites like Suprnova to work, a new generation of applications being led by the top-secret Exeem project are about to be unleashed.

These programs basically remove the need for a tracker or a central site, in fact the users themselves become trackers in a way. With an interface similar to Kazaa in terms of searching and all the raw sharing power of BitTorrent programs such as Exeem could certainly become the next big thing in the world of filesharing. Even if in a year, the RIAA/MPAA figure a way into these private networks with Microsoft and ISP partnerships, there's always new technology around the corner, like certain private WiFi file-sharing access points. Have you heard about that one? So I guess somebody should tell the MPAA/RIAA to put the bubbly on ice, there is a storm coming and this one they may not be able to weather.
http://www.internetdj.com/article.php?storyid=514


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Movie File-Sharing Hubs Poised To Decentralise
Will Knight

Several websites used to rapidly download large movie files have recently closed under legal pressure from the film industry, but experts say they could soon bounce back using a software program currently under development.

The Motion Picture Association of America (MPAA), a lobby group representing major US film studios, filed lawsuits against several popular movie sharing "hubs" on 14 December. A week later many of these sites had closed down.

A message posed to the front page of the most popular of these sites SuprNova.org on 19 December said: "We are sorry to inform you all that SuprNova is closing down for good in the way that we all know it. We do not know if SuprNova is going to return, but it is certainly not going to be hosting any more [Bit]torrent links."

Sites like SuprNova let users locate and download BitTorrent files. These enable the rapid transfer of large files over the internet by splitting data into chunks that are shared between users rather than being downloaded from a single source.

Legal targets

BitTorrent software automatically finds other users with relevant chunks of data, a process that generates a "swarm" of data rather than a linear stream and so provides the most efficient download possible.

Copyright holders in the music and movie industries have been unable to mount successful legal attacks against "peer-to-peer", or P2P, networks on which content is distributed. But central servers are currently required to find BitTorrent files and track them during download.

This centralisation provides sites against which the MPAA can mount legal attacks. However, SuprNova is thought to be developing and testing a new program which would decentralise BitTorrent searching.

"The best effort so far to decentralise the searching aspect is a mysterious project known as eXeem," says Brad Neuberg, an expert in programming P2P networks. "But SuprNova have been a bit secret about it so far, doing a closed beta trial with 5000 users."

Swarming powers

Tom Mennecke, news editor of the popular file sharing news site Slyck, claimed on 1 December that: "EXeem will marry the best features of a decentralised network, the easy searchability of an indexing server and the swarming powers of the BitTorrent network into one program." He told New Scientist: "Decentralising BitTorrent holds the potential to revolutionise the P2P community."

Screenshots posted on another site by a self-proclaimed eXeem beta tester show a client that incorporates a search function and the ability to monitor downloading files. Theodore Hong, a P2P programmer in the UK, says that whether eXeem materialises or not, someone will find a way to decentralise BitTorrent searching and tracking.

"Something like it is bound to come eventually," Hong told New Scientist. "It will be a big problem for the major media companies because they will have to confront the underlying fact that millions of people want to share files."

A decentralised approach is already used by numerous P2P file-sharing networks, but these do not incorporate BitTorrent-style downloading. While these have proven difficult to shut down, users themselves have become the focus of legal action for alleged copyright infringement.

BitTorrent's speed has seen it grow rapidly into the most popular method for downloading large files. Although it is used for many legitimate purposes, such as the distribution of free software, it has drawn fire from the movie industry for its role in movie sharing. Figures released by ISPs for 2003 showed that BitTorrent accounted for more than half of all internet traffic.
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn6830


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

EFF Joins Forces with Tor Software Project
Site announcement

Civil Liberties Group to Support Development of Anonymous Internet Communications System

San Francisco - Today the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) announced that it is becoming a sponsor of Tor, a technology project that helps organizations and individuals engage in anonymous communication online. Tor is a network-within-a-network that protects communication from a form of surveillance known as "traffic analysis."

Traffic analysis tracks where data goes and when, as well as how much is sent, rather than the content of communications. Knowing the source and destination of Internet traffic allows others to track a person's behavior and interests. This can impact privacy in obvious and secondary ways. For example, an e-commerce site could choose to charge you more for particular items based on your country or institution of origin. It could also threaten your job or physical safety by revealing who and where you are.

"EFF is a great organization to work with," said Roger Dingledine, Tor's project leader, who, along with Nick Mathewson, is also a core developer. "EFF understands the importance of anonymity technology for everyone -- from the average web surfer, to journalists for community sites like Indymedia, to people living under oppressive regimes. With their support and experience, we can focus on making Tor useful and usable by everyone."

"The Tor project is a perfect fit for EFF, because one of our primary goals is to protect the privacy and anonymity of Internet users," said EFF Technology Manager Chris Palmer. "Tor can help people exercise their First Amendment right to free, anonymous speech online. And unlike many other security systems, Tor recognizes that there is no security without user-friendliness -- if the mechanism is not accessible, nobody will use it. Tor strikes a balance between performance, usability, and security."

Using Tor can help people anonymize web browsing and publishing, instant messaging, Secure Shell (SSH) protocol, and more. Tor also provides a platform on which software developers can build new applications with built-in anonymity, safety, and privacy features.

Non-technical introduction to Tor.

Technical introduction to Tor.

http://www.eff.org/news/archives/2004_12.php#002174


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Group Plans Holiday Spoiler For RIAA, Studios
Jim Hu

As the holiday season approaches, some opponents of the movie and music industries' legal efforts are planning to celebrate in a Grinch- like fashion.

Downhill Battle, a file-sharing activist group from Worcester, Mass., has launched an Internet campaign to send lumps of coal to the Recording Industry Association of America and the Motion Picture Association of America. The group said it will send a brick of unsightly coal for every $100 that people donate to digital rights defense groups Electronic Frontier Foundation, Public Knowledge and IPac.

"It's a cute Christmas symbol for someone who's been bad all year," said Nicholas Reville, co-director of Downhill Battle. "I think it's appropriate for all types of things that the RIAA and the MPAA are doing."
http://news.com.com/Group+plans+holi...3-5498168.html










Until next week,

- js.














~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Current Week In Review.





Recent WiRs -

December 18th, December 11th, December 4th, November 27th

Jack Spratt's Week In Review is published every Friday. Please submit letters, articles, and press releases in plain text English to jackspratts (at) lycos (dot) com. Include contact info. Submission deadlines are Wednesdays @ 1700 UTC.


"The First Amendment rests on the assumption that the widest possible dissemination of information from diverse and antagonistic sources is essential to the welfare of the public." - Hugo Black

[TankGirl]

Originally Posted by JackSpratts

Poles Push Patents Off EU Agenda
Ingrid Marson

The EU has again failed to ratify the software patent directive after a crucial last-minute intervention, and opponents of software patents are celebrating

Poland's opposition to software patents prevented the EU from ratifying the Computer Implemented Inventions Directive on Tuesday.

An EU Council spokesperson has confirmed that the Computer Implemented Inventions Directive will not be adopted on Tuesday as had been planned, and was unsure when it would be adopted.

According to informed sources, Polish undersecretary of science and information technology Wlodzimierz Marcinski spoke out at the EU Council meeting and asked that the directive be removed from the agenda as more time was needed to make a constructive declaration. As no-one objected to the Polish request, the chairman removed the item from the agenda.

This last-minute decision to remove the item from the agenda is a surprise that is likely to please anti- patent campaigners who were unhappy that the EU Council was planning to adopt the directive without vote or discussion.

The Polish government initially spoke out against the proposed directive in November, saying that it could not support the text as it was ambiguous and contradictory. Politicans from Holland, Germany, and Austria have also publicly spoken out against the directive.

This latest delay has already been welcomed by activists who have opposed software patents.

"Now Europe has the opportunity to have a constructive debate on the severe shortcomings of the current Council text, under the new Luxembourgian EU presidency next year," said Florian Mueller, campaign manager of NoSoftwarePatents.com.

James Heald of the Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure (FFII) believes that Marcinski attended Tuesday's council meeting personally because "the permanent representative of Poland at the EU had been put under great pressure by the Dutch Presidency and had been rather reluctant to communicate the viewpoint of the Polish government."

However, some of those who have been supporting the directive were dismayed by this latest development.

"[The] Council's failure today constitutes a worrying setback for innovation in Europe, and throws doubt on our collective commitment to the Lisbon Agenda," claimed Mark MacGann, director general of EICTA (European Information and Communications Technology Industry Association), in a statement that "condemned the Council's failure to support European high-tech innovation".
http://uk.news.yahoo.com/041221/152/f8zi0.html

Thank you for the WiR, Jack, and thank you, Poland, for doing a big service to European democracy and software industry.

- tg

[multi]

on behalf of all the WiR readers
poachers and feeders..
i would like thank jack for another year of exellent articles
and wish you all a happy new year...

[JackSpratts]

thanks tg and multi and you're welcome.

- js.