Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×
The Internet

Kazaa Admits to Morpheus Shutdown 429

An Anonymous Coward writes: "KaZaa yesterday admitted to CNET that it was behind the shutout of Morpheus from the FastTrack network. Their reason? The company didn't pay its bills. Still, there has to be more to it than that for KaZaa to cut them off so quickly and unexpectedly, especially since a P2P network's power lies in the size of its audience. There is some weird cat-and-mouse play going on here that can only be damaging to both sides in the upcoming trial against the RIAA and MPAA in California."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Kazaa Admits to Morpheus Shutdown

Comments Filter:
  • oh, come on... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by pinkUZI ( 515787 ) <[moc.temruogmaps ... samj.7.todhsals]> on Tuesday March 05, 2002 @02:03PM (#3112855) Homepage Journal
    Why does everything corporate have to be this big conspiracy? If a company wasn't paying its bills is it really all that surrising that they were shut down?
  • by fist_187 ( 556448 ) on Tuesday March 05, 2002 @02:03PM (#3112861) Homepage
    by shutting down morpheus, they just admitted that they have control over their network and users. now they're screwed in terms of legal defense. meanwhile, morpheus switches to gnutella and will probably survive the onslaught.

    how ironic...
    • >morpheus switches to gnutella and will probably survive the onslaught.

      Yes, but will they survive the fact that Gnutella suxx0rs.
      • by Juiblex ( 561985 )
        If Morpheus can use the Gnutella network together with all their aparatus of media file meta-information, and multiple segmented downloading, and if they use the hyper-cube network approach, rather than the tree one, it will simply rocks, and no one will be able to stop it when it begins.
        • by Skirwan ( 244615 ) <(moc.cam) (ta) (niwreks)> on Tuesday March 05, 2002 @02:40PM (#3113144) Homepage
          If Morpheus can use the Gnutella network together with all their aparatus of media file meta-information, and multiple segmented downloading, and if they use the hyper-cube network approach, rather than the tree one, it will simply rocks, and no one will be able to stop it when it begins.
          And if pigs can fly, and I can ride one, and they fly me to hell, and it just froze over, and we all have ice cream...

          --
          Damn the Emperor!
        • The only problem with Morpheus using their own cool tech is that... well, they have none. They just put interface buttons in Gnucleus and called it their own. Hell, they didn't even bother to change all the dialog boxes containing info such as "please restart Gnucleus" to "Please restart Morpheus". Ever wonder why Kazaa and Morpheus looked exactly the same? Its because they were. Morpheus is basically just selling add space in a program they've renamed as their own.
    • No, not really.

      They demonstrated that they can stop large segments of users (such as users using a given client) from using the network.

      What they have not shown is that they have control over what files are being transfered over the network. That's the thing that got Napster.
    • by klieber ( 124032 ) on Tuesday March 05, 2002 @02:41PM (#3113151) Homepage
      Kazaa, et al DOES NOT have control over the network. The only thing they control is the authentication mechanism. Once you're authenticated, you have complete, unfettered access to the network and Kazaa has no control over what you do/don't share.

      With Napster, it was different since Napster *did* control what files were/weren't shared. With fast track, however, all they can control is whether or not you get on the network. So (and IANAL) as long as they can show that there are legitimate uses for the fast track network, I will be surprised if they get shut down.

      To liken it to the Betamax court case that everyone likes to toss around, Sony had control over whether or not you could buy a VCR, but once you owned that VCR, Sony had no control over what you could or couldn't record.
      • What they mean is KaZaa has shown that they are able to stop the network. In the dutch case they claimed that they were unable to stop users with the program from using it.
      • by DennisZeMenace ( 131127 ) on Tuesday March 05, 2002 @04:35PM (#3113961) Homepage
        This is not true at all. They DO control the network precisely because they control the authentication. The only clients that are allowed to log on the network are the clients that license FastTrack's code, and they have full control over that code (see big fat agreement to license FastTrack's code).

        The proof: FastTrack doesn't allow people to share MP3's encoded above 128kbps. How ? Because the restriction is encoded in their library, which is used by the clients they control.

        GiFT is another example. All FastTrack had to do to shut down GiFT forever was to boost up its protocol version number and change the authentication mechanism. They definitely have control over their network, which is precisely why they'll loose the legal battle.

        My biggest hope, is that GiFT and OpenFT [sourceforge.net] will eventually take over as a true Open-Source alternative to the FastTrack network: a completely decentralized 2-layered network which will become the true successor of Gnutella.

        DZM
  • IRC? (Score:2, Informative)

    by bpalmatv ( 563171 )
    Doesn't anyone use IRC anymore? You can get just as much, if not more, on any of the large networks. Bob.
  • Their future (Score:4, Insightful)

    by shatfield ( 199969 ) on Tuesday March 05, 2002 @02:04PM (#3112873)
    Kazaa is just a minute away from getting completely shut down. They've just admitted to the RIAA that it is possible to shut somebody out of their (nasty) proprietary network... putting them into the same boat as Napster, as far as a Judge will be concerned with them.

    Mopheus, who is now using the restamped Gnucleus software, is on a true P2P network, and it would be next to impossible to shut them down.

    I suspect that Morpheus will be around long after Kazaa is a footnote.
    • I think you have put the finger on it. I wonder if Morpheus did not do what they did to get out of the RIAA fiasco.

      With GNUTELLA and being based in other places it does become very difficult. BTW I am using the new Morpheus and have to say it is getting better.

      Since we are talking conspiracy here is one. Imagine Morpheus buying third party companies on off shore companies. These third companies run "Super Node" GNUTELLA servers. These supernodes enhance the GNUTELLA experience, by caching, etc, etc.

      The RIAA sees these super servers and goes after the owners. Immediately the third party companies shut down. But in the same moment another company with a super server starts up. The RIAA has to go through this deal YET AGAIN!!!

      Morpheus is in the clear because they only provide a client that connects to an open network. That would be a brilliant strategy...
    • It's not impossible... Just very costly.

      Any P2P network has to have a point of insertion. In order for the P2P network to be successful, that point of insertion has to be well advertised. They can't shutdown a small loop of friends, but then a couple of dozen people aren't much of a threat to them so they probably don't care.

      So all the RIAA(or whoever) has to do, is keep tabs on the IP addresses being advertised as connection points, and then simply call each individual ISP and have those connections shut down. If they have a lawsuit ruling to support this action, all the easier.

      And lest you think moving to a third world country works... see the previous articles on Somolia's ISP shutdown, as well as the spam blocking of Chinese ISPs. All it would take is a ruling by some court in the United States or European Union, and those countries would be effectively cut off.

      Costly, but don't think it is impossible.
      • How costly is it, really?

        Besides, there's another approach. Plus they can just take a lawyer and go to ISPs and start talking about filtering incoming connections requests.

        At least cable providers don't like incoming connections at all, so they won't need much prodding. Especially once congress is done discarding the CLECS, the Baby Bells don't like DSL at all, so they may not take too much prodding. There go the high-bandwidth users, the ones people would prefer to download from. Next start going after the biggest dialup outfits, like Earthlink.

        The key point here is that it's not a battle the RIAA actually has to win. They just need to make the other side feel enough pain and inconvenience. I'm sure that p2p could be encapsulated and run over UDP, http, ICMP, or what have you. The point here is that it's getting slower and more difficult to run. Plus as it gets slower, and the border filtering gets more annoying, some number of people will just give up.

        They really don't have to completely eliminate filesharing, just drop it to some level below their attention span, and that is possible, and I honestly don't know what the cost is. I also fear that the higher the cost, the more WE pay.
    • Re:Their future (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Rogerborg ( 306625 ) on Tuesday March 05, 2002 @03:03PM (#3113298) Homepage
      • Mopheus, who is now using the restamped Gnucleus software, is on a true P2P network, and it would be next to impossible to shut them down.

      Here's the danger.

      • It can easily be shown that most Kazaa traffic is copyrighted material. They need to use the Sony VCR defence that there are non-infringing uses and avoid falling into the Napster trap of admitting control over the network.
      • They've flat out blown it on the second point, and are completely boned. Morpheus on the Kazaa network was doomed. They were going to get found guilty of contributory infringement for sure.
      • Now they're on Gnutella. With the same users, doing the same activities.

      Can you see the way this would look to a court? Picture a restaurant where mobsters meet, cleaning their guns and jawing about how many cops they've whacked. The restaurant owners hear that the FBI are filming the restaurant, ready to make a bust. So then they put on blindfolds and earplugs and say "Oh, but now we don't know what our customers are doing. I think we've got a large party of nuns in tonight, I can't really tell with this stuff on."

      Pretty weak defence? I think so. And the nasty-nasty is that now Morpheus is just another Gnutella client, so if Morpheus does go down, why should any client - or specifically any client developer - be let off. Because they're not making money, I hear you say. Because it's just like making copies for friends and family. It's fair use.

      No it damn well isn't. If I hear one more Slashdotter claim that personal/friends/family copies are "fair use", I will quite seriously bust a gut. Here are the allowable purposes for making a copy of a copyrighted work: (1) criticism and comment, (2) parody and satire, (3) scholarship and research, (4) news reporting and (5) teaching [publaw.com]. Don't argue this with me, quote a specific case of a court saying that copies for friends and family are OK. Any judge that drew the line in the sand and said that Gnutella was OK because it's not commercial would have the MPAA/RIAA would asking for his or her head on a plate, and I'm not talking rhetorically.

      Morpheus joining the Gnutella network is the best move possible for Morpheus - and the worst move possible for Gnutella. This one is going to get ugly.

      • by klieber ( 124032 ) on Tuesday March 05, 2002 @03:25PM (#3113419) Homepage
        No it damn well isn't. If I hear one more Slashdotter claim that personal/friends/family copies are "fair use", I will quite seriously bust a gut.

        It may not be fair use, but it may also not be copyright infringement. In fact, it's a grey area. According to ChillingEffect.org [chillingeffects.org], deciding whether something is fair use or not involves (among other things):

        the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work
        So it could be argued that limited copying for personal use provides negligible impact on the overall market, and is therefore fair use. It could also be argued the other way, but it's certainly not as black and white as you make it seem.

        And if it is copyright infringement, the owner of the copyright may not be entitled to any remuneration:

        http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/504.html [cornell.edu]

        A reasonable discussion of Fair Use, with considerably more thought and insight than the parent post is available here:

        http://www.arl.org/scomm/copyright/uses.html [arl.org]

        • by Rogerborg ( 306625 ) on Tuesday March 05, 2002 @04:11PM (#3113802) Homepage
          [personal/friends/family copies] may not be fair use, but it may also not be copyright infringement. In fact, it's a grey area

          It absolutely is not, and none of your references even suggest otherwise. I'll just assert that flat out, because I doubt that most readers will bother reading either of our references, and it bothers me to see this fantasy reenforced here yet again, because it gives a false sense of security, that our personal activities are protected and sacrosanct.

          • So it could be argued that limited copying for personal use provides negligible impact on the overall market, and is therefore fair use

          Look, I'll spell it out again, shall I? There is no clause in fair use, there never has been one, that allows fair use for anything other than: (1) criticism and comment, (2) parody and satire, (3) scholarship and research, (4) news reporting and (5) teaching. To qualify for consideration under the fair use defence, your use must fall into these categories. You don't even get to argue the "negligible impact" until you've shown that you qualify. There is no case zero. There is no case six. Personal/friends/family use is not one of the five cases.

          • A reasonable discussion of Fair Use, with considerably more thought and insight than the parent post is available here [arl.org]

          Betting nobody would read it, huh? This is a very brief document that deals with protection of existing library fair use, which is firmly in the realm of "scholarship and research" and/or "teaching". But enough from me, let's quote verbatim from your reference, with no editing:

          • "The fair use provision of the Copyright Act allows reproduction and other uses of copyrighted works under certain conditions for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching(including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship or research. Additional provisions of the law allow uses specifically permitted by Congress to further educational and library activities"

          OK, thanks for making my point. No mention of personal use. Personal use, friends and family copies, this is fiction, not fact.

          If you're going to argue legalities, you have to learn to quote case law. I'm going to help you out a bit by posting a synopsis of the Supreme Court decision in Sony v. Universal Studios 464 U.S. 417 (1984), a.k.a. "the Betamax case" aka the "Sony Decision" [eff.org] judgement. Note that it contradicts my black and white stance a little, but note also that it qualifies that very carefully, and that it references earlier case law:

          • "The respondents and Sony both conducted surveys of the way the Betamax machine was used by several hundred owners during a sample period in 1978. Although there were some differences in the surveys, they both showed that the primary use of the machine for most owners was "time-shifting" -- the practice of recording a program to view it once at a later time, and thereafter erasing it. [...] The District Court concluded that noncommercial home use recording of material broadcast over the public airwaves was a fair use of copyrighted works and did not constitute copyright infringement. It emphasized the fact that the material was broadcast free to the public at large, the noncommercial character of the use, and the private character of the activity conducted entirely within the home. Moreover, the court found that the purpose of this use served the public interest in increasing access to television programming, an interest that "is consistent with the First Amendment policy of providing the fullest possible access to information through the public airwaves. Columbia Broadcasting System, Inc. v. Democratic National Committee, 412 U.S. 94, 102." "

          OK, your turn. Find a case that extends the defence of a single and temporary copy, entirely within the home, to make it even remotely relevant to making permanent copies for the use of friends and family, or even for personal use. You can't, because no such source exists, no matter how hard you wish for it, and however hard you wish that future judgements are going to be based on the wish list of libraries, the fact is that future judgements will be based on past judgements. Find the case law that supports making permanent copies of non-broadcast material for yourself, or for friends or family.

          Incidentally, this is very much On Topic. If it comes to the crunch, Gnutella - rather Gnutella developers - are just as boned as Kazaa, because neither of them can (I contend) show that they even qualify for consideration for fair use protection. The financial argument is irrelevant, because they won't be able to show grounds for even making it.

          • by yerricde ( 125198 ) on Tuesday March 05, 2002 @04:41PM (#3113994) Homepage Journal

            There is no clause in fair use, there never has been one, that allows fair use for anything other than: (1) criticism and comment, (2) parody and satire, (3) scholarship and research, (4) news reporting and (5) teaching. To qualify for consideration under the fair use defence, your use must fall into these categories. You don't even get to argue the "negligible impact" until you've shown that you qualify. There is no case zero. There is no case six. Personal/friends/family use is not one of the five cases.

            Bull. You completely misinterpret the "such as" wording of the law. According to 17 USC 101 [cornell.edu], "The terms 'including' and 'such as' are illustrative and not limitative" (emphasis by yerricde). The fair use law (17 USC 107 [cornell.edu]) opens by stating: "the fair use of a copyrighted work ... for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright" (emphasis by yerricde). Nowhere does it limit what may be considered as fair use. It then goes on to list the four factors that figure into a fair use defense. The judge in a fair use case must base her decision primarily (if not solely) on those factors. This non-limitation of fair use explains why the Sony v. Universal decision "contradicts [your] black and white stance a little."

            Additionally, your CBS v. DNC quote may pose an argument against encryption of non-subscription broadcast television.

          • by dpotter ( 95081 ) on Tuesday March 05, 2002 @09:10PM (#3115602)
            Rogerborg takes a very complex issue and attempts to reduce it to a simple black-and-white statement. He defends this viewpoint in a strong tone, and is contemptuous of other viewpoints offered by slashdot readers.

            IANAL, so instead of arguing the point, I present this post as a list of expert opinions which contradict Rogerborg's position.

            Rogerborg:
            Look, I'll spell it out again, shall I? There is no clause in fair use, there never has been one, that allows fair use for anything other than: (1) criticism and comment, (2) parody and satire, (3) scholarship and research, (4) news reporting and (5) teaching. To qualify for consideration under the fair use defence, your use must fall into these categories. You don't even get to argue the "negligible impact" until you've shown that you qualify. There is no case zero. There is no case six.
            According to the EFF [eff.org], this list of fair use activities is "not to be construed as exclusive or limiting in any way."

            Current national security advisor Condoleezza Rice authored a paper on fair use [stanford.edu]in 1988, in which she states "The concept of fair use is necessarily somewhat vague when discussed in the abstract. Its application depends critically on the particular facts of the individual situation. Neither the case law nor the statutory law provides bright lines concerning which uses are fair and which are not."

            As mentioned in the previous post, the Sony vs. Universal City Studios Case [findlaw.com] contradicts Rogerborg's black-and-white interpretation of section 107, as it defines time-shifting television programs as fair use.

            Previous case law [stanford.edu]has held that the following are fair uses of copyrighted materials:

            Making personal backups of software.

            Time-shifting television programs.

            Format-shifting.

            Compilation creation ("mix tapes")

            Rebroadcasting radio in a business.

            In short, a wide body of experts seem to disagree with the viewpoint espoused by Rogerborg. I exhort you to consider this when reading his posts. I further ask that you consider that he was willing to defend his viewpoint so vehemently in spite of the contradictory expert viewpoints readily available.

      • You know, conservative Senator from Utah, former chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee? I believe he even helped write the DMCA.

        Go look up Hilary Rosen's Senate testimony regarding Napster, and read the exchange between them. Orrin says basically "is it fair use if I make a copy for my wife to play in her car?" Rosen hems and haws, and Hatch says something to the effect of "It is."

        Now, sharing anonymously over a network is a whole different ball of wax, and that's what's got the RIAA and MPAA in a tizzy.

      • Pretty weak defence? I think so. And the nasty-nasty is that now Morpheus is just another Gnutella client, so if Morpheus does go down, why should any client - or specifically any client developer - be let off. Because they're not making money, I hear you say. Because it's just like making copies for friends and family. It's fair use.

        No it damn well isn't. If I hear one more Slashdotter claim that personal/friends/family copies are "fair use", I will quite seriously bust a gut. Here are the allowable purposes for making a copy of a copyrighted work: (1) criticism and comment, (2) parody and satire, (3) scholarship and research, (4) news reporting and (5) teaching [publaw.com]. Don't argue this with me, quote a specific case of a court saying that copies for friends and family are OK. Any judge that drew the line in the sand and said that Gnutella was OK because it's not commercial would have the MPAA/RIAA would asking for his or her head on a plate, and I'm not talking rhetorically.


        Well, the easy defense would be to find amatuer artists that have put thier work out on gnutella simply becuase they wanted to get thier name out, not to make money. There is no justification for running these amatuer artists out of the market in the name of "spurring innovation".
      • Re:Their future (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Fjord ( 99230 )
        I never thought people were claiming it was fair use to give their friends and family recording. I've heard fair use applied to changing formats: e.g. from CD to MP3 or DVD to MPEG. I've also heard people apply the Audio Home Recording Act [cdpage.com] which says that "No action may be brought under this title alleging infringement of copyright based on the manufacture, importation, or distribution of a digital audio recording device, a digital audio recording medium, an analog recording device, or an analog recording medium, or based on the noncommercial use by a consumer of such a device or medium for making digital musical recordings or analog musical recordings". Basically saying there is no copyright infringment if a consumer noncommercially makes a copy.

        It's possible that there are mixed up people saying "Fair Use" when they mean "Audio Home Recording Act", but that doesn't make the actions of music file sharers illegal.
    • Re:Their future (Score:3, Insightful)

      by RatFink100 ( 189508 )

      Kazaa is just a minute away from getting completely shut down. They've just admitted to the RIAA that it is possible to shut somebody out of their (nasty) proprietary network... putting them into the same boat as Napster, as far as a Judge will be concerned with them.

      I don't think it's that clearcut. This event has shown that they can deny access to network, it has not shown that they can identify or control what is being shared.

      Imagine buying a VCR and discovering it has a secret disabling chip that can be activated remotely by the manufacturer. The manufacturer rents you the VCR rather than selling it and fires off a 'disable' signal if you don't pay your bill. Now Big Media Company comes along and says "You must disable all these VCRs because they are being used to make unauthorised copies of copyright material."

      After they stop laughing, the VCR manufacturer tells BMC where to go. They have no way to identify or stop infringement, and they ain't going to kiss goodbye to their customer base on BMC's say-so.

      "Ah", says BMC, "but you have shown the technology is possible. It must be possible to add the ability to identify content being copied, and by extension copyright infringement."

      "It is", says VCR maker, "but we didn't do that. It's not a 'feature' our customers want. Did you have a point?

      And so on - in front of a judge, until somebody runs out of money.

  • by shankark ( 324928 ) on Tuesday March 05, 2002 @02:05PM (#3112874)
    "...Zennstrom did not provide details on how the Morpheus software could have been shut down as a result of the fee dispute. StreamCast has said that Kazaa BV was able to change settings stored deep inside Morpheus users' computers as they logged on to the file-trading network. "

    Isn't this a case of intrusion into the user's computer. Wonder if they can do that.... I mean, like if its fair or not...
    • Even if it isn't trespass under the law (is it? They've probably weaseled their way out of any such charges with some disclaimer or other in their licensing agreement; I haven't read it, as I don't use their software, and now never will, but it's trespass to me.)

      If you want to change my settings, ask me first. If I think it's OK, I'll let you. If not, I won't. There's a reason I don't allow any automatic updating of my software: abuse of automatic configuration utilities by people like these guys. Too bad. It's a neat technology, but it's gotten a bad rap from abusers like StreamCast to the point where even I don't trust even the companies who claim to play fair and have never been proved not to.
    • I wonder if the vx2 spyware [poenews.com] installed by AudioGalaxy is "fair". Lets see, it sends home comprehensive data about your browsing habbits, right down to data entered in forms on any website, and it randomly opens popup's for IT'S advertisers on random (or not so random) sites you visit. Fun.

      Almost all of the easy p2p options now come with spyware. Morph, KaZaa, Grokster, they're all making money installing hidden software on users' computers. And denying it until they get caught. And swearing not to do it again. And doing it again.
      • Almost all of the easy p2p options now come with spyware. Morph, KaZaa, Grokster, they're all making money installing hidden software on users' computers.

        Spyware in Morpheus? Do you have a cite for that?
        • Spyware in Morpheus? Do you have a cite for that?

          Well, I've heard it rumored quite a few times, but now I just did some research and it seems nobody has been able to prove that morpheus had spyware. So I stand (sort of) corrected. I say sort-of because there was unexplained suspicious activity from the program (.dat files containing user's data that morpheus shouldn't be storing, etc) and because the program itself did (as admitted on the morpheus website) allow someone to change their users' registry settings. That alone makes the software unsafe and almost spyware-ish. Bottomline is, I still wouldn't trust the company. (and, afaik, running any fasttrack client runs some KaZaA code, and deceptive advertising is their whole bussiness model)
        • Kazaa BV was able to change settings stored deep inside Morpheus users' computers as they logged on to the file-trading network. "
        Isn't this a case of intrusion into the user's computer

      At the risk of Karma Death through Redundancy, this is pure FUD. What's happening is that Morpheus client is connecting to the Kazaa authentication servers. The server says "Go away". The client sets a flag that says "I've been told to go away".

      That's factually the same as what Morpheus are saying. They're just spinning it as some sinister Dark Side plot, with you as the victim and Kazaa as the bad guys. Consider the source, huh?

  • And by locking Morepheus out of the network, Kazaa proved that the network isn't really a true P2P network, and that you can shut it down if order to by a court of law. Good job guys...

    • SMTP is P2P. HTTP is P2P. NNTP is P2P. The internet? P2P. Our nationwide telephone switching system? Woops, P2P too.

      You mean fully distributed, not P2P. And I don't think anyone claims it, except for Gnutella and its variants.

      --jordan
    • And by locking Morepheus out of the network, Kazaa proved that the network isn't really a true P2P network, and that you can shut it down if order to by a court of law. Good job guys... No, it's still true P2P, it's just not truely decentralized, which I'm sure is what you meant anyway
  • by dave-fu ( 86011 ) on Tuesday March 05, 2002 @02:06PM (#3112886) Homepage Journal
    "Your honor, we publically stated that we cut them off for non-payment but the _real_ reason we terminated their feed into our systems is because they refused to respect the rights of copyright holders. And doggone it, we just can't abide by that!"
    See also: AOL vs. Aimster...
  • Was it quick? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Hacksaw ( 3678 ) on Tuesday March 05, 2002 @02:07PM (#3112895) Homepage Journal
    Do we really know how long Morpheus has been in arrears with KaZaa? Maybe it's been months. If KaZaa is professional, they wouldn't be telling everyone and their cousin that Morpheus is being a deadbeat. It would be harder for Morpheus to pay if they start losing customers due to a bad rep.
  • by saridder ( 103936 ) on Tuesday March 05, 2002 @02:07PM (#3112899) Homepage
    I was part of the working group for the next generatiopn of Gnutella about 1 1/2 years ago, and I thought that we came to the conclusion that Gnutella couldn't support itself once it became too big. The 2^n problem.

    When was Gnutella brought back? Anything new change in terms of the P2P scheme?
    • by Glass of Water ( 537481 ) on Tuesday March 05, 2002 @02:25PM (#3113038) Journal
      see this [worldos.com] article for a good explanation of why Gnutella is not O(N^2).

      not to start a boring war, or anything.

      j.n.

    • The most advanced Gnutella clients are almost identical to the FastTrack system. FastTrack was coded off of the Gnutella model. It's basically just a pumped up old Gnutella, and that's exactly what the newer Gnutella clients are.

      Once again, folks, the Gnutella protocol is not a static entity. At this point it's really an evolving set of the original protocol and extensions.

      In short, Gnutella is where the action is. It's an open protocol with a great deal of development among the client developers as well as the academic community. Many of the clients are also open source, providing a rich overall platform for innovation. The original protocol with all of the extensions has also become quite complex. The design, I assure you, no longer "sucks."

      If you're interested, check out the center for active Gnutella development at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/the_gdf/

      Thanks.

      Adam Fisk
      LimeWire LLC

  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday March 05, 2002 @02:09PM (#3112915)
    ... it looks like they stand in a circle!
  • Why pay for a software license when you can just share the goods for nothing? Kazaa just doesn't get it!
  • Money (Score:5, Informative)

    by inerte ( 452992 ) on Tuesday March 05, 2002 @02:11PM (#3112925) Homepage Journal
    Still, there has to be more to it than that for KaZaa to cut them off so quickly and unexpectedly, especially since a P2P network's power lies in the size of its audience.

    From Kazaa's homepage:

    "Morpheus users - Come on over to our place"

    Kazaa has spyware, that's where their money come from. For them, any increase on the number of people using their program is good, and NOT using Morpheus.
  • New Morpheus.. (Score:2, Interesting)

    by DCram ( 459805 )
    Steve Griffin StreamCast/Morpheus CEO
    "This unprovoked attack is being carefully investigated, as it appears that federal laws may have been violated. We are still attempting to discover who would want to eliminate the community of millions of consumers who are using the Morpheus software product to connect with other users around the world."

    Because of these attacks there is a new version of Morpheus that you must download in order to use the P2P system. They state in the message that this software was forced to be released early and I can say that the new software isn't what I was expecting. At this point in the P2P lifecycle I don't believe that this is doing any good.

    Wheather or not MusicCity is going to press charges against the attacks that rendered software useless this comes at a bad time. Any company that forces another companys software to go belly must be looked at closely.

    Link [musiccity.com]
  • Quote: "The company didn't pay its bills."

    I think it's quite funny to see a bit of greed from a company dedicated to "sharing".

  • By the huge "so spyware" sign on morpheus' webpage. Because Morpheus is rightfully seen as a better software to have than Kazaa, they probably understood that if morpheus was on the same network, people will always prefer it.
  • by hndrcks ( 39873 ) on Tuesday March 05, 2002 @02:13PM (#3112948) Homepage
    Kazaa / Grokster / whatever "upgraded" the software last week to REQUIRE installation of the Cydoor spyware junk. Morpheus has always committed to "no spyware."

    There is a solution for those wanting to use Grokster but not have the Cydoor crap:

    http://www.cexx.org/cydoor.htm

  • This whole situation sousds a lot like Morpheus escaping a burning building. Kaazaa has got to be on their last leg. All of the back-office wheeling and dealing can mean only one thing. They're desperate. Either the courst are about to shut them down, or thay are running out of money. Either way. the FastTrack software is about to collapse. Morpheus did the right thing by seperating themselves from that whole mess. If they didn't pay thier bills...It jsut tells me that they saw this coming for a while.
  • by instinctdesign ( 534196 ) on Tuesday March 05, 2002 @02:15PM (#3112968) Homepage
    There is some weird cat-and-mouse play going on here that can only be damaging to both sides in the upcoming trial against the RIAA and MPAA in California.
    It might have something to do with the fact that Morpheus, owned by the American company StreamCast, was perhaps the most likely of the three to get convicted under United States' law. Thusly, they were the best target and perhaps the biggest liability of each of the companies running FastTrack. With them, and no other United States localized company running FastTrack, the network is a bit more secure since going after the others would be meddling in other country's laws. Correct me if I'm wrong, but that's how I read it.
  • Kazaa true p2p? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by schmaltz ( 70977 ) on Tuesday March 05, 2002 @02:17PM (#3112985)
    Whether Kazaa / Morpheus / Grokster / Fasttrack is true p2p is in debate, and mostly this question is due to Kazaa's shutting Morpheus down. Without any other facts, Fasttrack's status as true p2p isn't disproven, but it could just as easily be a software switch or "lease" renewal.

    When my LimeWire client first connects, where does it go to get IPs of other peers? A central server. Does this make Gnutella not p2p? I don't think so.

    When my Grokster client first starts up, it also connects to an IP within a relatively small range -a central server (ethereal tells me this much.) When Morpheus clients connect to the same central servers, they are probably being identified as Morpheus clients and being denied the list of peer IPs, and whatever authorization Kazaa's built in to their protocol.
    • Re:Kazaa true p2p? (Score:3, Informative)

      by Ewan ( 5533 )
      When limewire connects it goes not to a central server, but another limewire client. Limewire happens to provide 4 or 5 default client ips to connect to (router1.gnuetta.org, router2, router3, etc if i remember) but if 1 or all of those 5 were to go down, then you could type in a replacement yourself which you could find from a website. With morpheus/kazaa etc, you can't change the IP you connect to first.

      Ewan
      • Re:Kazaa true p2p? (Score:3, Interesting)

        by schmaltz ( 70977 )
        Those 'router' machines are central servers, providing peer IPs upon startup. My linux limewire client shows the following "Quick Connect hosts"--
        router.limewire.com:6346

        connect1.gnutellanet.c om:6346
        connect2.gnutellanet.com:6346
        connect3.g nutellanet.com:6346
        connect4.gnutellanet.com:6346
        I know that, yes, from a protocol and topology standpoint, these are "peers" in a technical sense.

        But they don't seem to be filesharing p2p peers, as their only mission seems to be to bootstrap clients into the p2p network by giving them IPs of other filesharing clients and supernodes. On the other hand, if a gnutella user knows an IP of a currently running client, s/he can manually key that in and get bootstrapped. Otherwise, and without a central server to offer IPs of other nodes, a *new* node to the network is unconnected.

        LimeWire seems to remember peer IPs from previous sessions, as I just deleted the startup server IPs from the config and restarted it, and it has no trouble connecting to gnutella.
  • by javatips ( 66293 ) on Tuesday March 05, 2002 @02:17PM (#3112986) Homepage
    I believe Kaaza shot themself in the foot.

    They showed to thr RIAA that they control the network in some way (they can shut it down and manipulate some registry settings) (even if they may not be able to control content right now).

    They tried to make people switch from a competitor software which was more popular in a very aggresive way. (I for one downloaded Kaaza after the shutdown... However I'm back on Morpheus now). People will not like this.

    Now if Morpheus is able to reclaim it' users (it should be easy because they do include spyware), the FastTrack network will be amputated millions of users.

    It's good for Morpheus... If they survive a lost (if they loose)against the RIAA, their network is now completely decentralized (thank' to gnutella). Which is a good thing against further lawsuit. However, in the same event, Kaaza and Grokster will loose their network and will have to build a new one on another protocol.

    It's a win-win for Gnutella... Whatever the outcome of the lawsuit... Many more millions of users on the network.

    • You said:

      Now if Morpheus is able to reclaim it' users (it should be easy because they do include spyware), the FastTrack network will be amputated millions of users.

      I replied:

      No, Morpheus -does not- include spyware. They state this publically and half the reason that Morpheus is better than Kaaza is that Morpheus does NOT include spyware.
  • Kazaa was involved with putting spyware on your system [slashdot.org].

    What is they do that anyone finds sufficient value in to support anything they do?

  • by liquidsin ( 398151 ) on Tuesday March 05, 2002 @02:17PM (#3112990) Homepage
    "MusicCity (also known as StreamCast Networks) has failed to pay any amounts due to Kazaa BV under the parties' license agreement"


    How will the RIAA / MPAA / Software industry look upon this, with Kazaa adimitting to making money off of their copyrights? (I know that's flawed logic, but the RI/MPAA cares not for your 'logic') Kazaa just admitted that they're in this for the cash. Sure, it's just a license to software that can be used to trade *anything* (not just copyrighted material), but they just admitted that they can and do control who gets on the network AND that they're making cash off of it. They just drew the bullseye on their own forehead.
    • So, you needed this statement to find out KaZaa is out to make money? What did you think they were, a non-profit charity? I really don't think this changes anything.
  • by einer ( 459199 ) on Tuesday March 05, 2002 @02:18PM (#3112995) Journal
    I was running Morpheus and waiting for some very large downloads to complete. I never turned my box off. I'm still downloading the same files just as quickly, but am unable to search the network.
  • Egos Involved (Score:2, Insightful)

    by digger3001 ( 562414 )
    I'm betting there were some egos involved here.

    Morpheus didn't pay the bills and KaZaa called them on it. Morpheus' CEO sounds like a real egomaniac from his comments in the news and on their website and I'm betting he figured he'd wait til they turned him off and then blame THEM and try to make KaZaa look like the assholes.

    Obviously he knew about non-payed bills and the apparent chance of being shutdown otherwise they wouldn't have has a Gnutella client all developed and ready for release within a few days.

    If someone at Morpheus is reading this pass it on to your CEO and tell him that treating partners like this doesn't make anyone want to work with your company and makes him look like a prick.

    I have no affiliation with either company and am strictly speaking as an outsider having dealt with people and situations like this. Is anyone else sick of this ego crap?

  • morons (Score:2, Funny)

    by slapshot ( 10210 )
    my favorite quote...
    "...especially since a P2P network's power lies in the size of its audience"

    obviously not...if you pull the plug
  • What 'bout GiFT???? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Zeeto ( 543476 )
    There's a project called GiFT [sourceforge.net], (acronym to GNU Internet File Transfer) project, that's trying to implement a FastTrack like protocol (not using their network). I'm really excited with it, but it development is quite slow...
    Maybe they can implement a real alternative to the proprietary FastTrack, or to the old-and-slow Gnutella.
  • A different story? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by nocorvair ( 552045 ) <nocorvair4@yaho[ ]om ['o.c' in gap]> on Tuesday March 05, 2002 @02:28PM (#3113058)
    That's funny.....Newsbytes is reporting a different story (http://www.newsbytes.com/news/02/174963.html).

    Basically stating that Kazaa says they knew nothing about what happened to Morpheus and that "they too" were attacked!

    Who to believe? Hmmm........

  • by dstone ( 191334 ) on Tuesday March 05, 2002 @02:29PM (#3113064) Homepage
    There is some weird cat-and-mouse play going on here that can only be damaging to both sides in the upcoming trial against the RIAA and MPAA in California.

    "Can only be damaging"? I don't think that's the only possible outcome. I understand you thinking that infighting could damage the P2P industry's integrity. On the other hand, it's possible for an industry to gain credibility by admitting it has flaws and then "policing its own". Perhaps Kazaa's plan is to demonstrate that they are one of the responsible ones and they're working hard to kick the bad boys out of the game.

    I don't personally believe any of these guys are angels or devils -- it's way too early at this point to know. But like many trials, much comes down to presentation and spin.
  • by Rogerborg ( 306625 ) on Tuesday March 05, 2002 @02:38PM (#3113128) Homepage
    • "MusicCity has failed to pay any amounts due to Kazaa BV under the parties' license agreement"

    Note the "any". You don't need rocket science to work out that you can only give people the benefit of the doubt for so long before deciding that you're being scammed and are never going to see one penny. Ironic, nes pas, that Kazaa kick of Morpheous for freeloading on their work and IP, when the vast majority of Kazaa's income is coming from serving ads to people making copies of copyrighted material (self included, I'm not being pejorative)?

    • "[Morpheus] has said that Kazaa BV was able to change settings stored deep inside Morpheus users' computers as they logged on to the file-trading network"

    Who there, conspiracy theorists. The "setting" is question is probably just the "bool bClientIsAuthorised" flag based on the reply from the Kazaa authentication servers. There's nothing sinister going on here. This is the way the Kazaa network is supposed to work (now). Authorised clients paying for connection to the Kazaa authentication servers. Since they went authentication to throw off giFT [sourceforge.net], Kazaa has been a client-server/P2P hybrid. Maybe Morpheus didn't get that, but I'm sure the giFT team can explain it to them.

    • StreamCast's Griffin conceded last week that there had been some dispute over licensing terms for the peer-to-peer software. But he said that a wholesale shutdown of the Morpheus network would have violated the terms of his contract with Kazaa BV. In a message to Morpheus users this weekend, Griffin pointed fingers at Kazaa BV and warned people not to use the company's software.

    Translation: "Those bastards actually make you pay to play! I mean, they expect us to hold up our end of the contract as well as them holding up theirs. What's with that?"

    • The RIAA reacted to this development quickly last week. "We have been saying all along that they control the system, and this proves it," RIAA Senior Vice President Matt Oppenheim said in a statement last week.

    Sure, or you could have subpoena'd the giFT team to tell you that... ;-)

    What you absolutely must understand is that Morpheus is a commercial service. The "100% spyware free!" boast was a marketing plot. They thought they could make money off of freeloaders (like me, remember?). Trouble is, Kazaa had the same idea, and Kazaa own the keys to that particular part of the Magic Kingdom.

    Now Morpehsu is going to try and make money off of Gnutella. Well, here's a pretty pickle. Does the Gnutella network want a for-profit service in there, attracting the ire of the MPAA and their bought politicians (and judges who, lest we forget, have an eye on promotion to the Supremes, and can tell which way the political winds are shifting)? I doubt it. Can Gnutella do anything about it? Of course not. They can't pull a Kazaa and block Morpheus, either by force majeur or through obscurity.

    Screw who said what to who between Kazaa and Morpheus. That's yesterday's news, it was doubtless all about the bottom line, and given the characters of the organisations in question (proprietary, commercial, legally dubious), we simply can't expect anything like honest answers from anybody. It's "Morpheus versus Gnutella", or "Morpheus with Gnutella" that's the issue now. This is shaping up to be the first big test of how well open source can survive in a hostile environment, with layer upon layer of juicy morality quandaries to pick over.

    Is it wrong for Morpheus to "freeload" off of Gnutella? But they're license compliant, and they bring a whole lot of content with them. And the whole Gnutella network is - de facto - already about freeloading. But making profit off of it just fuels the MPAA/RIAA's law-buying machine...

    This one is going to run and run. I for one am going to settle down with some popcorn and enjoy the (truly) free show. ;-)

  • There's a name missing in this debate: Gnucleus.

    Some of you might not realize the depths of sleaze to which Morpheus has descended. To make their latest "preview version", they took an open source Gnutella client named Gnucleus (http://www.gnucleus.com [gnucleus.com]), added their branding and annoying popup ads, and redistributed it as the new version of Morpheus.

    They did not even contact the developers of Gnucleus before they ripped off their software. And they ban anyone from the Music City chat room who even mentions the existence of Gnucleus.

    The "developers" of Morpheus are not people who deserve your loyalty or concern. My advice to everyone is to immediately delete Morpheus and and install Gnucleus. It's the same program but without the advertising and popups. And by doing so you'll be showing a little respect to the people who actually wrote the program, rather than the pieces of shit who renamed it and are attempting to pass it off as their own.
    • Isn't this the point of open source? The ability to reuse code? To save yourself from reinventing the wheel? Or is there some big respect thing hidden behind the curtains that must be played out to the originators of the source code? This would seperate you from making "ripped off" software as opposed to.....
    • by inerte ( 452992 ) on Tuesday March 05, 2002 @02:59PM (#3113272) Homepage Journal
      Other than not contacting John Marshall (or Swabby, main Gnucleus developer), what evil have they done? They do provide the source code [musiccity.com], and when installing the new Preview Edition, even the GPL itself is presented [slashdot.org].

      I think they were suddenly disconnected from Fastrack and had to move so fast to not lose their userbase base of millions, that quick, but sadly, badly done, actions had to be taken.

      Give them another week to clarify things, first for them, later for the community. I can only imagine the big mess that's currently happening on Morpheus offices... I don't think that bashing will help now.
    • Aparently, for all the ./ people that are such OSS and GPL advocates, that you don't seem to understand that they aren't STEALING anything. They took the open source code, modified it for their needs, relabeled it, and distributed it WITH the source code.

      Now granted, Gnucleus might be 'better' software, depending on your point of view. I think it was a great idea for a company that had to make due in a pinch. If the developers don't like it, don't give away the source. Go to work at M$ or some other 'evil' corporate software maker.
    • by rufo ( 126104 ) <rufo@rufo[ ]chez.com ['san' in gap]> on Tuesday March 05, 2002 @03:14PM (#3113354)
      Damn my mod points to hell, I've got to respond here. By putting their client in the GPL, anyone can take their software and make changes to it, as long as the source is posted, right?

      This means a company like Morpheus can do *exactly* what they're doing right now: take a GPL client, re-brand it, and post it up on the web. They have the source there on their page. They are not breaking any rules at all. They don't have to notify the Gnucleus people. They don't have to keep it ad-free. They can add spy-ware to the installer if they choose (although Morpheus has a no-spyware policy). By putting your software in the GPL, you run the risk of somebody doing this.

      Now, I'm not saying that it doesn't suck for the Gnucleus people. I'd be ticked off too if somebody did that to me. I'm just saying that quite technically, there's nothing wrong here.
    • by Rogerborg ( 306625 ) on Tuesday March 05, 2002 @03:16PM (#3113367) Homepage
      • They did not even contact the developers of Gnucleus before they ripped off their software

      OK, deep breaths. They are 100% compliant with the GPL license, as I think the reporting debacle on here showed. Do we say that every commercial X/GNU/Linux distro "rips off" Linus, and GNU and KDE/Gnome and a whole load of other developers? No, we say that they promote them, bring them to a wider audience, support and develop them, and contribute their revenues back to the whole.

      So let's give Morpheus enough rope to hang themselves. If they spend their ad money developing the client, and if they keep releasing source, and if they don't bring an assload of hurt to the whole project, then they'll be providing the same service as a commercial linux distro.

      Do I think that'll happen? No, based on their past behaviour, I think they'll fork off a version that will refuse to serve content to other Gnutella clients while still leeching from them, flat out refuse to release the source, and bring the Men In Black to the party. But let's give them a little time to prove their guilt please.

  • Gee Whiz! I hope that all of this gets resolved before the new Britney Spears album comes out. What a predicament!
  • I hate it when companies play these stupid little PR games, you never know what's really going on in the background.

    I do know one thing, Kazaa will NEVER be installed on my machine... spyware watching my internet activity PLUS the admitted ability to modify settings on a users machine at will? no thanks.

    The "new" morpheus may not be as easy to use as the original but at least Morpheus has never modified my registry settings on its own.

  • They advertised "Morpheus users come on over" on the front page , but they took that down after a while.

  • It's nice to see Morpheus switch to a completely open source network, but Gnutella? With all its noisiness and scaling problems? If they could have switched its users over to openFT, it would have been the first completely open, decentralized, and scalable P2P network to gain wide usage.

    A shame, really.

    • The problem with peer 2 peer networks is that they are only as useful as the content shared on them.

      And the content shared depends upon the number iof people using the service.

      It makes sense for Morpheus to switch to a P2P which has a known audience, so that they don't have to start "from scratch"

      I would like to hazard aguess that the gnutella network is slowly but surely becoming more mature, and more capable of handling large loads, with the addiiion of ultra peers or whatever they are called in Limewire, In other words, the mathematical arguments againsy the gnutella network are being worked around, instead of being ignored.

      At the moment, I do not believe that Gnutella is the best network out there. However, it does seem to be the only one that is actually advancing with new features.
  • by sluggie ( 85265 ) on Tuesday March 05, 2002 @03:07PM (#3113315)
    Face it people, name it Morpheus, name it Kazaa, name it something else.

    What shuts such network down?
    It's the money, always.

    Who is pissed off in the end?
    The user, always.

    So, what is the solution to all this?
    Gnutella, always.

    I know, my post sounds something like a troll, but please, think about it.
    Let's all migrate to gnutella, fire up you favourite client and let's start sharing.
    We will se how gnutella scales, how it evolves. I think if we all pull over to the only true p2p architecture, we will shut out the MPAA the RIAA and all other stuff that bothers us.

    Yes, maybe people with 56k modems won't be very happy with this. But to speak in the words of a modern time, the collateral damage is everywhere.
    And as time goes on, everybody is going to be on a better connection.

    So, let's shape up, put your middle finger in the air and use gnutella...

    Just my 0.02
  • by frost22 ( 115958 ) on Tuesday March 05, 2002 @03:18PM (#3113387) Homepage
    I think we all are watching a grandiose play.

    Essentially, the IP faction has already bought out KaZaa, under one condition: that they first kill off Morpheus. Witness the obscure and unexplained sellout of Kazaa to a mysterious foreign company nobody really knows. Witness the sequence of events. Witness the actions of Kazaa completely damaging Kazaas own legal standing, while only beeing of limited use to them.

    The Kazaa founders probably got enough money and a promise not to get sued personally for pulling of this stunt.

    This just has waaay too much "random" events to be normal.
  • help from the reg (Score:2, Informative)

    by Dambiel ( 115695 )
    "As a result of MusicCity's breach, Kazaa BV did not provide version 1.5 to MusicCity. Kazaa has also terminated MusicCity's license." (from the cnet link)

    while TheRegister [theregister.co.uk] reports that the plug was pulled bc of attacks on the morpheus network:
    "It appears that the attacks included an encrypted message being repeatedly sent directly to your computers that changed registry settings in your computer," a statement by Griffin to users on the accelerated availability of Morpheus Preview Edition states.
  • Control != Knowledge (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Shagg ( 99693 ) on Tuesday March 05, 2002 @04:52PM (#3114065)
    I've seen a couple people stating so far that because Kazaa was able to shut down the Morpheus clients, this somehow means that they have set themselves up for a Napster-like ruling.


    It needs to be stressed that control of who gets on the network, and knowledge of what goes on inside the network, are two entirely different things. Napster's downfall was not that they had the ability to shut down the network, but that they knew people where trading copyrighted material, and they could also step in and limit what material people had access to inside the network. The Fasttrack network is an entirely different beast. Kazaa may be able to decide who gets in and who doesn't, but once a user is on the network they have no ability to directly monitor what material people are trading and have no ability to limit what people have access to.


    Kazaa is providing a network, but have no involvement with what users do inside the network. Napster lost their case because they did have an involvement with what happened inside the network.

Memory fault -- brain fried

Working...