Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Kazaa/Altnet To Pay Users For Trading Content

Posted by simoniker on Mon Jun 02, 2003 02:47 PM
from the not-as-good-as-it-sounds dept.
mesozoic writes "News.com is reporting that Kazaa and Altnet are unrolling a setup where users are paid to distribute 'authorized content.' The article also mentions something about getting rid of unauthorized files, but is unclear on when and how. I'll be paying close attention to whether this P2P business model pans out; Sharman _has_ shown some shrewd business sense in the past."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Payed for spam! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by krisp (59093) * on Monday June 02 2003, @02:48PM (#6098923) Homepage
    The hosted files that are authorized by content companies will show up in ordinary Kazaa searches. A company distributing a pop song, for example, might buy the keyword "Britney Spears" and links to its content will show up for people searching for the singer's work.


    Great, now I can get paid to host some companies spam on my computer. Lucky me!
    • Re:Payed for spam! (Score:5, Interesting)

      by aborchers (471342) on Monday June 02 2003, @03:30PM (#6099506) Homepage Journal
      Wouldn't you only be hosting the "spam" if you had elected to download and serve it? It wasn't clear to me from the article that you'd have to host everything that anyone made available.

      BTW, I quote spam because it doesn't qualify if someone chooses to receive it. It is only spam if it is pushed on a user unrequested. Losing that distinction muddies an extremely important issue about our right to control what communication we receive.

      • BTW, I quote spam because it doesn't qualify if someone chooses to receive it. It is only spam if it is pushed on a user unrequested. Losing that distinction muddies an extremely important issue about our right to control what communication we receive.

        Sure but if you think you are getting one thing, like a brittney spears video, and instead you get some promo video for some porn site, then that qualifies as spam yes?
        • by binarybum (468664) on Monday June 02 2003, @07:39PM (#6101684) Homepage
          Sure but if you think you are getting one thing, like a brittney spears video, and instead you get some promo video for some porn site, then that qualifies as spam yes?

          uh, no, that would be more aptly categorized as a blessing.

        • Re:Payed for spam! (Score:4, Interesting)

          by generic-man (33649) on Monday June 02 2003, @03:48PM (#6099710) Homepage Journal
          Whatever KaZaA Gold is, it's nothing compared to KaZaA Platinum [kazaaplatinum.com].

          Seriously though, both services are just rebadges of KaZaA or KaZaA Lite, for which they charge unsuspecting users $1-$2 a month (billed annually in advance, of course). There's nothing legitimate about them, but I'm really curious as to how many people have paid for them.
  • how about this idea instead, they take out gator [gator.com] and any other nasties they include.

    they can keep the money, we'll just call it even.

    Mike
  • by hatrisc (555862) on Monday June 02 2003, @02:50PM (#6098960) Homepage
    almost as dumb as getting paid to look at more ads while surfing the internet (a few years back). users were paid so little that it wasn't worth it. and hacking it got your account killed. those bastards.
    • by yintercept (517362) on Monday June 02 2003, @03:40PM (#6099607) Homepage Journal
      In reading the article, I can't help but wonder if anyone is really foolish enough to trust Kazaa with their money? As an advertiser, I would always wonder if the paid downloads really happened (was it actually a person downloading or a hackering mimicking downloads for cash?)

      As a host, I wouldn't put much faith in actually ever receiving cash from the company. Schemes like this tend to have a history of absconding with the cash.

      Of course, it would be nice if there were an easy way for college students to make a little bit of cash by selling their school's bandwidth.
  • what ifs... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Spytap (143526) on Monday June 02 2003, @02:50PM (#6098962)
    If they try to go legal, they'll get trounced by Apple, disowned by computer users, and end up lie the legal version of Napster...forgotten.
    If they stay illegal, they'll get trounced by Apple, keep their user base, and not make a penny for it. Great business sense indeed...
        • and we all know just how important to a company it is to impress the slashdot community.

          Hell, That whole DCMA thing just went away when we got on the case, huh!
  • Wow... (Score:5, Funny)

    by TopShelf (92521) on Monday June 02 2003, @02:52PM (#6098995) Homepage Journal
    Why do I picture a bad made-for-TV movie (yes, I know that's redundant) where the guys are looking at each other, nodding, and saying, "you know, it's so crazy it just might work..."
  • by goldspider (445116) <ardrake79&gmail,com> on Monday June 02 2003, @02:52PM (#6098996) Homepage
    This sounds even better than when Bill Gates e-mailed me saying he will pay me $5.00 for every person I forward the message to!
  • by valisk (622262) on Monday June 02 2003, @02:53PM (#6099005) Homepage Journal
    Here in Europe we can listen too and pass around Public Domain copies pre 1953 works, where the author is dead, so Elvis etc, but in the US this according to RIAA is 'Absolutely Piracy.'

    So say someone in the USA downloads my copy of 'That's When Your Heartaches Begin' to complete his Sun Studios collection, he would be a law breaker, a german doing the same would be enjoying his right to peruse material in the public domain, but where would I stand?

    • by UnknowingFool (672806) on Monday June 02 2003, @03:08PM (#6099218)
      According to copy right laws in the US, works are copy-righted for the life of the author plus 70 years. It used to be 50 years. So Elvis' work will still be the property of his estate (or the record company depending on who actually owns what) until 2047.

      With the Internet, things are less clear because the expanse and reach of it have only recently been addressed in the courts. Presumably, someone in the USA downloading your copy would be breaking copyright laws whereas someone is Germany would not. That is the present situation until the courts or governments decide otherwise.

    • Not exactly (Score:5, Interesting)

      by NetDanzr (619387) on Monday June 02 2003, @03:11PM (#6099267)
      Here in Europe we can listen too and pass around Public Domain copies pre 1953 works, where the author is dead, so Elvis etc

      Actually, that is not entirely so. In Europe, copyright expires 50 years after the death of the author, not 50 years after the work is published and the author is dead. In the US, the current limit is AFAIK 75 years. As a consequence, Elvis' works are not yet in public domain in Europe.

      Other than that, you are absolutely right; it raises some interesting questions. For example, the works of George Orwell passed into public domain in Europe two years ago, but when I featured them on my Web site, I was quickly presented with a cease-and-desist letter from a US publisher. Residing in the US and having all my files on a US-based server, I had to oblige.

  • Seems to me.... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by SpaceCadetTrav (641261) on Monday June 02 2003, @02:53PM (#6099012) Homepage
    ...that it would be easier to just host the content themselves. The real value is in getting listed in the search results, and bandwidth is relatively cheap compared to the complexity of a system that tracks and pays random idiots on the net. Of course, I am probably wrong.
    • Re:Seems to me.... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by IO ERROR (128968) <error.ioerror@us> on Monday June 02 2003, @03:18PM (#6099338) Homepage Journal
      ...that it would be easier to just host the content themselves. The real value is in getting listed in the search results, and bandwidth is relatively cheap compared to the complexity of a system that tracks and pays random idiots on the net. Of course, I am probably wrong.

      If you have 300 people downloading a 3MB file, that's 900MB you've got to move. Few people can afford to have that much bandwidth on demand. This is why things like BitTorrent [bitconjurer.org] exist. Now that I think about it, this system could do for small files what BitTorrent does for big ones.

      Either way, this will save the content provider quite a bit of money in bandwidth. How much does 1GB of bandwidth cost these days? Suppose 300,000 people want that 3MB file? How much does 1TB of bandwidth cost?

    • Re:Seems to me.... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by patchmaster (463431) on Monday June 02 2003, @03:19PM (#6099352) Journal
      It's distribution on the cheap. This whole thing sounds like the Loud Cloud deal the FastTrack guys tried to put forth a couple years ago. They were selling it to potential distributors as a way to distribute their files without the need for any infrastructure and with effectively no bandwidth costs.

      They were initially going to force regular FastTrack users into assisting with the distribution if they had downloaded the file(s) in question. (They would force the file(s) to be shared.) Then a few people, myself included, started screaming rather loudly, and they eventually started looking for a different business model.

      The problem with this scheme, as well as all its previous incarnations, is it doesn't directly provide any value to the entities bearing the cost. It silently pushes the bandwidth costs onto the ISPs of the P2P users. Eventually those costs will be borne by all internet customers. At least with this scheme they're making an attempt to provide some reward to some of those who will bear the cost. Those customers not using Kazaa will just have to deal with even higher ISP costs without receiving added value.
  • by infinite9 (319274) on Monday June 02 2003, @02:53PM (#6099014)
    Sharman _has_ shown some shrewd business sense in the past.

    Yeah, just don't squeeze him.
  • Great! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by stanmann (602645) on Monday June 02 2003, @02:54PM (#6099020) Journal
    I can earn peer points for allowing my computer to be used as a distributed host for someone elses software. From P2P to B2P2P, except I don't have to want the stuff on my computer.

    Next stop, My computer will be used as a pr0n server without my knowledge, and since it will be (semi-)encrypted, I won't even necessarily know about it.
    • Re:Great! (Score:3, Informative)

      Next stop, My computer will be used as a pr0n server without my knowledge, and since it will be (semi-)encrypted, I won't even necessarily know about it.

      You just described the freenet project. [sourceforge.net]
    • Re:Great! (Score:5, Funny)

      by halepark (578694) on Monday June 02 2003, @03:20PM (#6099376)
      My computer will be used as a pr0n server without my knowledge, and since it will be (semi-)encrypted, I won't even necessarily know about it.

      Girlfriend: "What are these pictures I found on your computer?!?"

      You: "I swear they're not mine! I was just trying to support Kazaa's new P2P business model! Honest!"

  • Kazaa Lite (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Malfourmed (633699) on Monday June 02 2003, @02:54PM (#6099034) Homepage
    Wonder if any of these features will make it into Kazaa Lite [kazaalite.tk] or if they're designed to shut out Kazaa clones.

    Or if anyone will care.

  • by GuyMannDude (574364) on Monday June 02 2003, @02:56PM (#6099056) Journal

    Sharman executives say the new system is well worth bundling inside their software, but they say it can be easily removed if users don't wish to participate.

    "Altnet's Peer Points is like the spell checker in Microsoft's Word," said Phil Morle, director of technology for Sharman Networks. "It's an integral part of the program that you can choose to use or not."

    And it's not like Sharman and Brilliant Digital would ever try to pull a fast one on their users, would they?

    GMD

  • BITTorrent (Score:5, Interesting)

    by mjmalone (677326) on Monday June 02 2003, @02:56PM (#6099058) Homepage
    This model seems like it would apply better to BITTorrent, where companies could provide a link on their website to download a song/movie/whatever. It makes more sense that way, companies could sell content on their website and not have to worry about having the bandwidth available should certain content become extremely popular.
  • by Rahga (13479) on Monday June 02 2003, @02:57PM (#6099073) Homepage Journal
    'They can then host files that are authorized for distribution through this network and will receive "Peer Points" that can be redeemed for prizes every time someone uploads a file.'

    One of those banned Shadowbane players already has 768,323,000,000 Peer Points, and plans to redeem them for a Harrier jet [snopes.com].
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday June 02 2003, @02:57PM (#6099075)
    Because the companies didn't communicate their plans with Kazaa users, the news sparked fears of "spyware"

    Spyware fears with Kazaa? Unthinkable!
    • If you read KaZaA's "No Spyware" Policy [kazaa.com], you would know that KaZaA contains no spyware. It only contains the following.

      • Content - payment for distribution of Rights Managed content (marked with Gold Icons).
      • Regular banner and pop advertising - within KMD and Kazaa.com (DoubleClick and Cydoor).
      • SaveNow - presents coupons and offers that are related to the websites that you are visiting. SaveNow operates and is managed separately to Kazaa Media Desktop.
      • Sales of products and services - eg. BullGuard, Mat
  • Are just like money, but more fun!

    [walks into amusement park, signs everywhere that say "Peer Points not accepted here"]

    Doh!
  • by gpinzone (531794) on Monday June 02 2003, @02:59PM (#6099110) Homepage Journal
    I've got to believe the way this will work is that the users will pay per download and you get the money for it (minus Kaaza's listing fee.) However, why the heck would anyone want to use their bandwidth to allow other people money to download something they've already paid for? If users aren't going to have to pay to download, where's the money comming from? Ads? Sound like a classic 1-2-3 profit scenario to me.
  • Peer to Peer to Peer (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Eberlin (570874) on Monday June 02 2003, @02:59PM (#6099114) Homepage
    You know, I always thought that the demise of napster would evolve into the great peer-to-peer era where we can all do filesharing without being tracked.

    Gnutella proved to be a tad "too difficult" and Kazaa took off (taking Morpheus out in the process). Besides userbase, the only other advantage I see in Kazaa is the metadata. Still, though, when someone is in control of the entire network, you're forced to take what they give you (or run kazaa-lite).

    I haven't followed peer-to-peer in quite some time now. Is there someplace that compares all the different services/protocols and rates them for ease of use, etc? I'm currently using gtk-gnutella but would like to know what my other options are. (qtella, eMule, etc?)
  • by Giant Ape Skeleton (638834) on Monday June 02 2003, @03:00PM (#6099124) Homepage
    After a long season of P2P software developers co-opting corporate resources, it looks like the technology is coming full circle.

    Kazaa's move is essentially an implementation of what BitTorrent's creator alluded to in the recent /. story --

    getting past the "subversiveness" of file sharing and making it work for everyone, including the creators of the shared content.

    Veddy interesting......

  • Keyword: Authorized (Score:3, Interesting)

    by NotoriousQ (457789) on Monday June 02 2003, @03:00PM (#6099132) Homepage
    They specifically said "authorized", not "legal". Thus someone like who is currently sharing stuff that is legal in the US AFAIK, but not necesserily elsewhere (foreign movies not for sale in US), I doubt that I will be allowed to join this program.

    To me this sounds like paying independents, and possibly some bigger companies small money for releasing their "preview" files.

    This is not about the users of the network, it is about making the network seem more like a usable market or an advertising medium. Although this is not a bad step, I see no benefit to me, so I am staying on Gnutella, perhaps the only usable network that has no commercialism attached to it.
  • by Openadvocate (573093) on Monday June 02 2003, @03:03PM (#6099154)
    Now if p2p applications didn't make it hard enough to keep unmetered DSL lines alive, this must be the final touch.
    The question is(as I am not going to install Kazaa and all it's junk on my pc), how much bandwidth would you need to provide in order to make 1$ - power bill.
    And I gues it wouldn't make the job for admins easier at the misc, education institutions. :)
  • Even as Altnet launches its ambitious new service, parent Brilliant Digital is struggling on the edge of financial survival. In a federal securities document filed in late May, the company said it had "negative working capital of approximately $4,165"

    How many prize cars does -$4,165 buy?
  • by Silwenae (514138) * on Monday June 02 2003, @03:08PM (#6099222) Homepage
    But what about ISP's acceptable use policies? If Kazaa is sending you checks, doesn't this violate almost all Acceptable Use Policies that forbid commerical use of residential broadband access?

    Looking at my Roadrunner account's AUP:
    Unless you have specifically subscribed for commercial grade service, the Road Runner service is provided to you for personal, non-commercial use only. This service cannot be used for any enterprise purpose whatsoever whether or not the enterprise is directed toward making a profit. If it is your intention to use this service for these purposes, please contact your local cable operator to inquire whether commercial Road Runner service programs are available.

    I have to believe hosting Kazaa / Altnet content and getting paid for it *could* get some users in trouble.
  • More crappy patents (Score:5, Informative)

    by Sanity (1431) * on Monday June 02 2003, @03:12PM (#6099269) Homepage Journal
    The company is looking to a new patent license for one new revenue source. It has acquired rights to a 1999 patent that Bermeister says covers the technique of identifying files on peer-to-peer networks using a "hash," or digital fingerprint based on the contents of the file. The company will approach virtually all other peer-to-peer services to seek license rights, Bermeister said.
    Good luck to them - the actual 1999 patent [uspto.gov] is invalidated by the hashtable [everything2.org] datastructure which has been around for decades, and their 2002 patent [uspto.gov] is clearly nullified by the Content Hash Key first introduced in Freenet in 2001 (and I am sure earlier prior art exists too but Freenet, being a P2P network, is more on-point).
  • The article also mentions something about getting rid of unauthorized files...

    By unauthorized I assume they mean copyrighted/illegal files. I think it's also safe to assume that while Kazaa has legal uses, it's primary use is trading copyrighted material. If this material is removed for non-paying users, we'll see a dramatic drops in the number of users.

    As has happened in the past, with Napster for example, once one peer-to-peer program removes copyrighted files, there is a mass migration to new, alternative peer-to-peer system that does allow it.

    As others have mentioned, I hope that the least Kazaa will do for paying customers is remove all the spyware.

  • by Lebrun (655496) on Monday June 02 2003, @03:15PM (#6099306)

    Just keep using Kazaa Lite [k-lite.tk], that is, until they find a way to disable access for non-authorized versions, and we all end up with "only" eMule and the other networks, which will probably include a modified version of WASTE in the near future.

  • Definitions (Score:4, Interesting)

    by YrWrstNtmr (564987) on Monday June 02 2003, @03:18PM (#6099342)
    Sharman executives say the new system is well worth bundling inside their software, but they say it can be easily removed if users don't wish to participate.

    "Altnet's Peer Points is like the spell checker in Microsoft's Word," said Phil Morle, director of technology for Sharman Networks. "It's an integral part of the program that you can choose to use or not."


    easily removed and integral part are mutually exclusive. Who are they trying to BS?

    Getting paid for using my PC resources (bandwidth and HD space)? I don't think so. Have any of these schemes worked in the past?
    Paid for browsing
    Paid for viewing ads/click-thru's
    Paid for buying 'Flooz'?

    Yeah, right. All down the tubes, just like this will.

    Throw in Brilliant's spyware track record, and this is a non-starter.
  • by UnknowingFool (672806) on Monday June 02 2003, @03:22PM (#6099409)
    between peer points and actual items. I think any likelihood of success depends on how many points it takes to get something good. If it's like 10,000 points (a point per MB downloaded) to get a pen, most people won't bother.

    Another thing that Kazaa may remember that sometimes people may have more altruistic motives. Take for example Seti@home. Millions of people allow SETI to use their computers to analyze data signals for no charge. It might a little more successful if Kazaa allows points to be donated to charities at a higher rate.

    Without more details it's hard to say how this system will really work.

  • The rewards will range from free access to paid content to sweepstakes entries toward cars and big-ticket cash prizes. The value of the prizes will depend on how many customers Altnet can attract and how much the company can persuade them to offer.

    Riiiiight. Thanks but no thanks -- earning access to paid content and the possibility of winning cash prizes isn't enough of a reason to allow BDE to make money using MY hardware and MY connection, whilst potentially affecting the stability of my system. Howzabout I keep on using Kazaa Lite [hccnet.nl] instead?
  • How long.... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by gambit3 (463693) on Monday June 02 2003, @03:51PM (#6099758) Homepage Journal


    so, how long do you think it takes before your ISP alters its TOS to make it illegal for you to use your PC for this?
  • by Psychor (603391) on Monday June 02 2003, @04:03PM (#6099928) Homepage
    I've always found Kazaa slightly disturbing, so I invented the following conspiracy theories about it, using the tried and tested research method of wild conjecture: - 1) Most of the files on Kazaa aren't really transfered peer to peer - there's a huge central repository somewhere of horrible 128kbps quality mp3s full of noise. The noise makes these files sufficiently different from the original songs that Sharman doesn't have to license them. This is why any poor quality songs start downloading instantly, whereas you have to wait approximately forever to find any good quality material. 2) Sharman also regularly publishes versions of it's other popular software package 'Kazaa Lite'. This contains just as much Spyware as standard Kazaa, but it's special 'stealth' Spyware custom written by Sharman. It also crashes randomly. 3) Sharman also publishes 'Diet Kazaa'. This contains twice as much Spyware as either 'Kazaa' or 'Kazaa Lite', and crashes twice as often. However, as a reward, you get a special button that looks like Britney Spears. 4) Any version of Kazaa uses your idle bandwidth and processor power to research dangerous biological toxins and military hardware for the US Department of Defense. Coming soon - the Sharman Tank. 5) Sharman logs all copyrighted files shared over their network, and the users sharing them, so that if they are ever short on money, they can sell the list to the **AA. 6) Sharman is run by a group of aliens, from their spaceship. This is how the company is able to move so swiftly between countries each time legal action threatens.
  • Ahem (Score:3, Funny)

    by methangel (191461) on Monday June 02 2003, @04:59PM (#6100459)
    Yeah, so people get paid to host files that are legit and authorized...this is excellent! I have no fewer than 4 dusty old machines that want to be paid to distribute! With that said, my regularly used machine can continue sharing the 'fun' stuff.

    Is the verification for the user sharing IP based? If so, I know for a fact that Verizon doles out IPs to anyone on a local network that wants one.
  • by telstar (236404) on Monday June 02 2003, @05:47PM (#6100897)
    Crime DOES pay!