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."
oh, come on... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:oh, come on... (Score:4, Funny)
It's not the reason, it's the method. (Score:2, Redundant)
Re:It's not the reason, it's the method. (Score:2)
The RIAA/MPAA has conclusively proved (to lawmakers in their pocket, anyway,) that you can't trust people to do the right thing, and you must force them, by any means necessary.
Re:It's not the reason, it's the method. (Score:5, Informative)
It's OK, it's only an idea, not an actual fact. All Kazaa are doing is refusing to authenticate Morpheus clients. The "setting deep in your machine" that gets set is the flag in the client that reminds it that it's been told to get lost.
Always consider the source. Morpheus is a for-profit organisation that's (allegedly but credibly) refused to honour its contract with Kazaa. There's a perfect innoculous translation of their rant against Kazaa that matches the facts. You don't have to buy their FUD, unless you really, really want to.
i think they screwed up bad (Score:5, Insightful)
how ironic...
Re:i think they screwed up bad (Score:2)
Yes, but will they survive the fact that Gnutella suxx0rs.
Gnutella will not suck (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Gnutella will not suck (Score:5, Funny)
--
Damn the Emperor!
Re:Gnutella will not suck (Score:4, Funny)
I really need to stop reading Slashdot while on codeiene.....
Re:Gnutella will not suck (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:i think they screwed up bad (Score:3, Interesting)
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.
Re:i think they screwed up bad (Score:4, Interesting)
They control the authentication -- NOT the network (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:They control the authentication -- NOT the netw (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:They control the authentication -- NOT the netw (Score:4, Interesting)
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
Re:They control the authentication -- NOT the netw (Score:2)
Huh? Habit? There are several technological reasons why Kazaa cannot monitor the network. Number one is the software isn't programmed to do that.
OK, so you can change that, but then there's the issues of servers -- Kazaa doesn't have enough of them to implement monitoring on a global scale. That's one of the beauties of P2P networks is that the load is distributed across thousands of servers. (and yes, it's one of the drawbacks, too)
Then finally, there's the issue of bandwidth, which isn't free. Currently, Kazaa, et al only have to maintain enough bandwidth to do a one-time authentication of their users. If they suddenly have to monitor each and every file that gets shared, you're talking about a massive amount of additional bandwidth that they'll have to procure (and pay for!!)
Napster was ordered to filter files because they could, based on their current technology base. Sony was let off the hook because they couldn't. (gross oversimplification, but it's still applicable)
Napster was certainly boned because they were a wholly-centralized network. Kazaa may be boned, because part of their network is centralized (though I don't think they will be). Gnutella is boned because they run into scalability problems with traffic spikes, but their network is *entirely* decentralized. It's only a matter of time before some innovative entrepenuer comes up with the right balance that will keep the courts off their back and still allow a scalable, free P2P file sharing network.
Re:They control the authentication -- NOT the netw (Score:2)
Re:They control the authentication -- NOT the netw (Score:2)
IRC? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:IRC? (Score:2)
Their future (Score:4, Insightful)
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.
Re:Their future (Score:2)
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...
Re:Their future (Score:2)
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.
It's not impossible... Just very costly. (Score:2)
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:2)
If enough people gets annoyed by them because they start having to much illegal (from the outsider perspective) activities going thru their node, somebody will successfully pressure their connection provider in raising the cost of the connection or severing it.
They have a short term business case, but in the long run, they will have to abide by somebody else rules.
Re:Their future (Score:5, Interesting)
Here's the danger.
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.
Fair use is not a black and white issue (Score:4, Interesting)
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):
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]
Re:Fair use is not a black and white issue (Score:5, Informative)
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.
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.
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:
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:
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.
"Such as" in US © law is *not* limitative (Score:5, Informative)
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.
Re:Fair use is not a black and white issue (Score:5, Insightful)
IANAL, so instead of arguing the point, I present this post as a list of expert opinions which contradict Rogerborg's position.
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.
Re:Fair use is not a black and white issue (Score:2)
No, actually you're manipulating what I originally said. I said a user may not have to remunerate the copyright holder. I never said they will not. If you read the section you cited again, you'll notice that statuatory damages are a choice that the copyright owner may select, but he may also choose actual damages and profits, which are then left up to the court to decide. (and they could decide it was $0)
Again, the overriding point of my original post is that this whole thing is a grey area. This just serves to reaffirm that fact.
Orrin Hatch disagrees with you (Score:5, Funny)
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.
Re:Their future (Score:2)
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)
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)
Ah, ya got me. But look, the point is that in all of these judgements, the court was very careful to restrict itself to specific cases.
VCR's, for example. The allowable use in that case was very specifically making a recording of publically broadcast content, watching it once, then erasing it. Sony had to go to some lengths to demonstrate that users were not creating libraries, or trading tapes. Rio got off on the technicality that it makes copies from computers, not directly from the original digital music recording (so the infringement is done on the PC, not on the Rio).
The danger is that we get complacent about Gnutella or open source sharing networks in general. There is nothing in case law that supports the view that sharing copies is fair use, nor even that ripping a CD to mp3 is fair use. Note tht past statements of personal opinion by executives do not constitute case law, nor are they immune from historical revisionism, nor arguments that the ballgame has changed since they were made.
Here's what I'm saying: assume all P2P networks are infringing until we prove otherwise. We'll have to fight long and hard to prove it. I honestly don't think we can do it. If you believe otherwise, find some case law to back that up. I don't think you will.
Re:Their future (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
That's a case of intrusion... (Score:3, Interesting)
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...
Re:That's a case of intrusion... (Score:3, Interesting)
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.
Re:That's a case of intrusion... (Score:3, Interesting)
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.
Re:That's a case of intrusion... (Score:2)
Spyware in Morpheus? Do you have a cite for that?
Re:That's a case of intrusion... (Score:2, Insightful)
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)
Re:That's a case of intrusion... (Score:2)
- 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 computerAt 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?
Proving FastTrack isn't true P2P (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:Proving FastTrack isn't true P2P (Score:3, Informative)
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
Not Quite (Score:2)
What you must remember is that these filesharing services do not offer the sharer anything and, even without any sort of meaningful enforcement today, have significant drawbacks (e.g., lost resources, bandwidth, etc). In other words, the costs exceed the benefits somewhat. This is why we have the so-called "Tragedy of the commons" today on most file sharing services. The leaches far outnumber the sharers. Now when we toss a large helping of risk in there, you'll see this cost vs benefit ratio change significantly for the worse and a mass exodus of sharers. The industry need not be able to reach every last one of them--just enough to raise the level of risk to a sufficiently high level. Nor does every last individual need to change his habits, the combination of the excessive demand and the potential for additional measures (legal, political, and otherwise) is more than sufficient to bring the service to an effective halt.
Re:Proving FastTrack isn't true P2P (Score:2, Insightful)
Damaging to them or covering their own ass? (Score:4, Funny)
See also: AOL vs. Aimster...
Was it quick? (Score:5, Interesting)
I thought Gnutella was done (Score:4, Interesting)
When was Gnutella brought back? Anything new change in terms of the P2P scheme?
Re:I thought Gnutella was done (Score:4, Informative)
not to start a boring war, or anything.
j.n.
Re:I thought Gnutella was done (Score:3, Informative)
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
When Free Music Fanatics Form A Firing Squad... (Score:4, Funny)
Maybe Morpheus was just sharing the Kazaa software (Score:4, Funny)
Money (Score:5, Informative)
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)
"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]
heh... (Score:2)
I think it's quite funny to see a bit of greed from a company dedicated to "sharing".
Well they might be pissed off (Score:2, Interesting)
The Real Reason: Cydoor (Score:5, Informative)
There is a solution for those wanting to use Grokster but not have the Cydoor crap:
http://www.cexx.org/cydoor.htm
This is a good thing for Morpheus (Score:2, Interesting)
Perhaps becuase StreamCast was American? (Score:5, Informative)
Kazaa true p2p? (Score:3, Interesting)
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)
Ewan
Re:Kazaa true p2p? (Score:3, Interesting)
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.
Bad for Kaaza... good for Morpheus (Score:4, Interesting)
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.
Re:Bad for Kaaza... good for Morpheus (Score:2)
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 & spyware -- why support them? (Score:2, Interesting)
What is they do that anyone finds sufficient value in to support anything they do?
All about the bling-bling (Score:5, Interesting)
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.
Re:All about the bling-bling (Score:2)
Re:All about the bling-bling (Score:2)
An interesting side note. (Score:3, Interesting)
Egos Involved (Score:2, Insightful)
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)
"...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)
Maybe they can implement a real alternative to the proprietary FastTrack, or to the old-and-slow Gnutella.
Re:What 'bout GiFT???? (Score:2)
The Windows port is being worked on, but won't be released until they've had the chance to finalise the protocol, using the UNIX-based users as testers. That way they can be sure that the protocol will scale properly before it's massively stressed.
A different story? (Score:4, Interesting)
Basically stating that Kazaa says they knew nothing about what happened to Morpheus and that "they too" were attacked!
Who to believe? Hmmm........
Attempt at a "self-policing" image? (Score:5, Interesting)
"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.
Before we get too X files... (Score:5, Informative)
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)?
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.
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?"
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. ;-)
Delete Morpheus, install Gnucleus (Score:2, Informative)
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 that the point? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Delete Morpheus, install Gnucleus (Score:4, Informative)
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.
Re:Delete Morpheus, install Gnucleus (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
Re:Delete Morpheus, install Gnucleus (Score:5, Informative)
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.
it just goes to show whats really important (Score:2)
Re:Delete Morpheus, install Gnucleus (Score:2)
Red Hat, Mandrake, Suse, and Morpheus are all being "nice guys" by making the source downloadable from their sites - there is NO REQUIREMENT that they do this.
So, be thankful!
Re:Delete Morpheus, install Gnucleus (Score:5, Insightful)
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.
Re:Delete Morpheus, install Gnucleus (Score:2)
Re:Delete Morpheus, install Gnucleus (Score:2)
Re:Delete Morpheus, install Gnucleus (Score:2)
It's cool that they try to abide by the GPL from Gnucleus, it's how the GPL is supposed to work.
Speedy Resolution (Score:2, Funny)
smells a little fishy to me (Score:2)
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.
Did u see kazaa web page after? (Score:2, Interesting)
Will Morpheus switch to openFT? (Score:2)
A shame, really.
Re:Will Morpheus switch to openFT? (Score:3, Interesting)
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.
I am thru with it, and you should be too... (Score:5, Insightful)
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
My favourite pet theory (Score:3, Interesting)
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)
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)
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.
Re:Eee Gads! I though it was non-shut-down-able... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Eee Gads! I though it was non-shut-down-able... (Score:2, Informative)