Before I start with this article, I would like to point out that I am in no way affiliated with the RIAA or similar interest group. In this article, I try to be as fair as possible regarding both the RIAA and Gnutella users/developers. If that may not be apparent anywhere in this article, please accept my apologies.

--

Well, the RIAA sure is giving itself a name lately - whether that is a good or bad name, that depends on your opinions. But I have seen a lot of 'RIAA bad this' and 'RIAA bad that' threads all over the Internet. And that's actually becoming a big problem.

It is known that a number of Gnutella users share files they are not entitled to share according to RIAA and other interest groups. Whether you are one of those users is absolutely none of my business. But as a Gnutella developer, it IS my business that I could possibly be held liable for this.

With Gnutella, we can all argue that Gnutella is like any ordinary protocol such as HTTP, FTP or SMTP. Each of these is capable of unlawful purposes. But the issue lies elsewhere. It is not the capability of Gnutella or any of the other mentioned protocols, but its common use.

The difference between capable and common use could probably be given with a non-technical example: Hemp (a.k.a. marijuana, cannabis, ganja, or hashish). Hemp has many different uses. Out of hemp, you can create rope, clothing, paper, fuel, food, body lotions, and all other kind of things you see in your daily life. Even the earliest American flags were made out of hemp. However, its common use turned into something that caused a downfall for most hemp products: an addictive drug.

A great number of P2P technologies, including Gnutella, have come under the same kind of attention. While Gnutella can be used for many things, from document sharing to distributed data and voice streaming, a common use for it is to share files to which the user doesn’t have right. That in particular is what sparks the RIAA and other interests groups attention, and why they seek recourse against it. It is the common use that is affecting all Gnutella users and developers.

P2P developers are the targets of such recourses, because it is nearly impossible to go after each offending end user. We have seen this before in cases like Napster, Scour Exchange, and recently MusicCity and its affiliates. Be assured that Gnutella developers are no exception to that.

So what can both developer and user do to resolve this issue before it is too late? The most obvious is to have Gnutella users divert from its current common use. To some it may seem a difficult task, because one is so ‘used to the idea’. But think outside the box. Another possibility needs to be addressed by developers: remove features that limit the capabilities of your Gnutella client. For example, it is okay to share MP3s and include MP3 information with search results. But don’t limit the kind of files that can be shared to multimedia files only. Include text files, Web pages, ZIP files, Word documents, Excel spreadsheets or perhaps even ‘*.*’. People will always be able to refine their searches to exclude files they don’t need. After all, that’s one of the principles of Gnutella.

But it is not just us, as Gnutella developers and users that need to change a bit. It is also interest groups like the RIAA. These interest groups must understand that P2P developers are not in the business to destroy artist works by providing ‘crime tools’. If it appears to happen, it is more likely the developers need the help from RIAA, rather than a court summons. So, if you are part of such interest groups, write a letter to the P2P developers and ask them to come to a meeting. We’re all eager to meet you and work out the issues without the need for legal intervention. Not to mention that it would all save us a lot of money and aggravation that could have been used to further improve P2P technology and your interest group.

Links of interest or mentioned in this article:

[RIAA]
http://www.riaa.org

[Hemp information]
http://tehia.org

[Gnutella]
http://www.gnutella.com

[Copyright.Net]
http://www.copyright.net

[Are we promoting piracy? – O’reily OpenP2P interview]
http://www.openp2p.com/pub/a/p2p/2001/05/15/radio.html

1.Hemp Good
2.RIAA bad, REAL bad
3.Concerts Good

Interesting article, i enjoyed reading it

3 points:

1) I don't know of any gutella client that limits files shared to multimedia, all the ones I've looked at are already able to share and search for the file types you mentioned. The simple fact is that 99.9% of Gnutella users only want to use the network for copyright infringement, it has nothing to do with the client setup. I share many GPL things (Debian and mandrake iso's etc etc) yet I've only ever seen one person dl any of them from me, judging by the search viewer they only want Britney Spears and pr0n. Similarly, when I want to download a new .rpm .deb or distro iso, gnutella never has what i want, and i have to use FTP, this is a shame as gnutella would be perfect for distributing these files, (Mmm imagine apt-get using gnutella!)

2) Hmm not sure I get your example, sure canabis is ilegal, but hemp is still used for many (totally legal) products see some at http://shop.motherhemp.com/ doesn't that bode well for gnutella?

3) can someone *please* disable anonymous posting?

I think gnutella related companies absolutely are about to become the targets of lawsuits. It would make no sense that they wouldn't... every other P2P related company (with the miraculous exception of Audiogalaxy) have been targets... gnutella, except for the fact that there really is no way to stop it, will be no different.

The thinking will be: stop the client developers, sue or stop the distribution points and.. problem solved, right?

Well no. Because the cat is wayyyyyyyyyyyy out of the bag at this point. Millions of people have gnutella clients (millions of clients are downloaded per week!) ... so it's a little difficult to stop the thing now no matter what you do.

The realization should be that gnutella becomes completely worthless for piracy purposes when the industry releases an APPEALING music solution... and MusicNet (so far) certainly isn't it.

Regarding the legitimate use of P2P applications (IE: the encouragement of non-copyright-infringing tasks).

I remembered two things:
1. That I found and downloaded all my updates for popular games like Counterstrike on the FastTrack network in MINUTES where it had previously taken HOURS.
2. That there is currently a debate on about RPMDRAKE in the OTHER half of my computer life.

My suggestion is this:
Use Gnutella to supply updates to Mandrake (and any other linux distro, surely) users. I often have problems connecting to, and getting decent transfer rates from, the supplied ftp servers and cookers - one, because centralized servers can get overloaded, and two, because centralized servers can change their status from one moment to the next.

The technique of tapping in on the great reservoir of users would be invaluable. Look at Uprizer (www.uprizer.com), by the creator of Freenet, and the interest large corporations are taking in using his network as a distribution medium. It just received $4 million in funding, and seeks to create "...a smarter Internet, where network resources and software intelligence are distributed globally."

Linux Distributions could easily adapt an open source protocol to a similar purpose, making connecting to a single server, and updating from it, a thing of the past. The prospects are actually quite sky-high - one could easily imagine a situation where a large community of Mandrake users are connected. If one user were to receive and install a particular update, the Mandrake updater could actually start an automatic download (dependent on user preferences of course), and have it spread throughout the Mandrake network in hours. It would create a living kind of Mandrake organism, and that's exciting. But on the smaller scale, more realistically, it would just allow more efficient dispersal of updates and new Mandrake software.

Another possible use of this is to promote the exact behaviour I mentioned earlier - game updates. It was incredibly handy for me to be able to grab it off FastTrack (boooo, FastTrack), rather than an overloaded web site, considering it was less than a day after the update release.

There are a GREAT many specialized uses for gnutella clients that are presently going untapped.

Lastly, and on a little different note, I'd like to see Gnutella cross-breed with Freenet to create true anonymous filesharing.

If it appears to happen, it is more likely the developers need the help from RIAA, rather than a court summons.

Try telling that to the RIAA. Court summons are what they're best at. I've come to the conclusion that the RIAA is in no way, shape or form willing to negotiate. There is no middle ground with them. They want total control, plain and simple. Gnutella, Napster and FastTrack users are to the RIAA what terrorists are to the US gov't.

Good article. I need to point out w/the hemp analogy, tho, that first, the hemp itself has never changed. It's the people who decide what other people can do w/it that's changed. It's a bit incongruous because hemp product, when used as a mind-altering sedative, affects no one but the people using it. File-sharing affects not only the user, but potentially also the sharer and the creator of that being shared. Also, altho hemp has growers, p2p has developers AND creators of content. If the growers can be analogous to developers, and dopers and dealers analogous to users and sharers, then what counterpart do we use for the content creator?? God?

"P2P developers are the targets of such recourses, because it is nearly impossible to go after each offending end user." That's right. Going after the growers rather than the buyers and sellers is really the only pragmatic way to combat the issue using the current precepts (if there is a pragmatic way). However, my stance is that acceptance and adjustment are much more effective than declaring war on your entire society. Buyers and sellers are infinite in number, and for every grower (developer) that's stopped, another one will pop up in their place.

Just like w/the war on drugs, the war on p2p should be, imo, viewed differently by those who make the rules. It should be seen as beneficial to those who want it to be. However, those who make the rules, just like in the war on drugs, make a whoooole lot more money in the fight against it than in the support for it. The orgs headed Hilary and Jack are viewed by many of us as EVIL simply because their issues and things about which they voice their concerns, for the most part, disregard all but the money-making 0.1% of their industry. They couldn't give a flying fig about the other 99.9. ..and how many of those 99.9% LIKE p2p??? Do Hilary or Jack care? Nah. They're too busy trying to figure out how to develop pay-per-listen cd's.

Good point, emixode. The more famous Gnutella becomes, the higher the possible thread from RIIA and friends.

Those significant effects you allude to are nothing more than emotional and indirectly related to the actual use of the substance. If the user doesn't think there's a problem w/the use, yet those around him or her who care do, then whose problem is it? If the user can still be a functioning contibuting member of society and pay their bills, then who's to decide for that person what they injest in their liesure time? Should the people who are irresponsible and drag down the lives of those around them ruin it for the whole of society?? Do we do that w/alcohol? Xanax or Prozac? Caffeine? Aspirin???? I mean, come on, after all, take too much aspirin and you can die. With anything, if it's not handled responsibly, then it can do damage. And the most damage is done by the user to the user, mentally and physically.

I have a client thats 1/2 done .. it does make me think twice about letting it go public...

Correction regarding the Hemp URL:

http://thehia.org

the author of this article is trying to appeal to my sense of duty, or some such nonsense.
spend your time talking about 'right' and 'wrong', but it's all academic. 'will
happen' and 'won't happen' are the topics of concern. talk to me about morality and
political theory while i am making $7.50 an hour and some guy's trying to sell me a CD for
$16.99. i am not the problem. the RIAA has an obsolete capitalist strategy and i can drive it
into the ground with my IT. that's the problem. they can try and legally or technologically
castrate us, or they can evolve. but i'll tell you one thing - if they come at me with a knife,
they lose their teeth. read up on darwin, sucka.

Don't be so dense Milladrive. Think about it like this. Mary J. because of her addictive personality can turn Joe Schmoe, a productive member of society, into a pan handler on the corner of 31st and Broadway. Sure Joe's life is f*cked, but it doesn't stop there. Joe is no longer a part of the work force, now he is just another hungery mouth to feed. Sure, the world economy does'nt hinge on poor Joe, but add up all the Joe Schmoes and all the Jane Smiths that live off our hard work nd you've got a problem. This is an extreme example, i know, and weed is not the the biggest problem we've got right now, but don't be so narrow minded as to think that one persons bad habbit doesn't have an effect beyond his/her own misserable life.

I'm positive that the RIAA will strike down upon Gnutella, and with everyright. The protocol is used for illegal purposes. Theft. Yeah it can be used for positive, non-damaging, purposes, but 85% of the time it's not. But I don't think shutting down every P2P is going to kill the problem, people will always find a way to get what they want.
I'm a firm believer in the goodness of people. I'm sure that 95% of the population would preffer to buy software and music rather than steal it. Problem is 99% of all truely usefull software is sold well well well above it's true value. Take Adobe photoshop for example. Adobe, or who ever they bought the title from, worked very hard to develope a powerful program. Version 1 is truely a valuable rescourse for the company and should and was sold for hundreds of dollars. But version two was only a revamped version of 1, and version 3 was only a revamped version of 2 and so on and so forth. The software is not being recreated from scrath everytime, they're just making some improvements here and some tweaks there and all using only an 8th of rescources needed to make version 1. Yet if you go to the store to buy Photoshop 6 today you'll end up spending nearly 700 dollars. All major software companies work this way. The truely powerful software is all much to expensive for hardworking people to afford.

Another thing that i chuckle at is consumer vs business applications. Say Granny McFattslapper wants to make greeting cards, flyers, and a newsletter for her church. She can spend $50 for a perfectly useless POS that will give her nothing but head-aches for the rest of her life or she can buy a program that is easy to understand and built with quality in mind, such as Quark Xpress, for ...................$1000. Best part is there are no other options for her (she could buy MS Publisher for $300, which is good for nothing but door stops and chew toys).

So what about upgrades? you can buy a Photoshop Upgrade for about $150 now, where as, full version is going for about $700. So what, let me get this straight, I'm paying $550 dollars for a out of production soon to be obsolete and therefore useless program? Yup. YAY!!! and $150 bucks for the latest version of Photoshop, which is only about 30MBs away from being a full version itself? Yup. YAY!!! The solution to this problem is fairly clear so I won't waste my time.

I'm afraid that the next step in P2P will actually be a step backwards into mIRC territory. Where the recieving user must request a file from a specific user and the sending user must agree to provide it. This is a huge pain in the ass, but it works. The only problem I see is "under cover cops" and moderators policing IRC chatrooms to catch the dealer and his/her customer. I'm afraid that the RIAA is focussing too much on the end problem and not asking themselves "why do people steal software? Where did all of this stem from?"

Great response to the software situation..The shockwave developer program I wanted to use to create a file for a fanpage was like 1000.00 somebody gave me the program for free..what to do?

Simmerinn. Now there's a subliminal nick if i ever saw one. Welp, you make some pretty decent points here, and you seem to have some sort of grasp on of what you speak.

But, right off the bat, my density must once again raise the question: Who turns Joe Schmoe into a panhandler???? Certainly you can't be trying to suggest that Mary J. is consuming it for Joe as well as selling it to him. Don't even try that w/me. Joe Schmoe is a grown man and can decide for himself what he wants to buy and use. Nobody's forced his head back and shoved whatever it is down his throat. How dare you suggest that Mary is part of the problem. Again, my point is that Joe can be a functioning productive member of society and still support his habit, whatever that may be. Mary J. is neither to credit nor blame for Joe's potential addiction. ARE THE LIQUOR STORES GUILTY??? You can't tell me you don't know anyone whose life hasn't been ruined by alcohol. We all do. Stop trying to blame the seller and criminalize the buyer. It's old and tired. Get rid of Mary and put it in the stores, like everything else. Put a label on it, with directions and warnings. Make some tax off it.

Hoo boy. The detractors here have it wrong, wrong, wrong. Here's why:

"With Gnutella, we can all argue that Gnutella is like any ordinary protocol such as HTTP, FTP or SMTP."

BZZZ. The problem with the assumption that Gnutella is "like" these other protocols is that Gnutella IS another protocol. Rather, P2P is. Don't confuse the two; Gnutella is a *network* built on the P2P protocol. The P2P protocol is one of the things the net is built on, along with HTTP, FTP, SMTP, and so on. It simply can't be shut down without a fundamental restructuring of the entire net- which simply won't ever happen until something better, faster, and easier to use replaces it.

"Each of these is capable of unlawful purposes. But the issue lies elsewhere. It is not the capability of Gnutella or any of the other mentioned protocols, but its common use."

BZZZ, again. Killing people is wrong. Nicotine addicts people to tobacco. Tobacco kills. Therefore, by the author's logic, tobacco companies ought to be held directly and criminally liable for each and every tobacco-related death ever. That won't ever happen. Thus, Gnutella- or whatever file-sharing client you build using P2P technology, is forever safe.

" The difference between capable and common use could probably be given with a non-technical example: Hemp (a.k.a. marijuana, cannabis, ganja, or hashish)."

BZZZZ, *again*. Hemp and cannabis are two totally different plants; cannabis can be smoked to get high. Hemp is mainly used for rope, clothing, and so on. The comparison here is between an apple and an orange.

"Even the earliest American flags were made out of hemp. However, its common use turned into something that caused a downfall for most hemp products: an addictive drug."

BZZZ!!! According to the FDA's own tests to determine the addictivness of a given drug, cannabis should be Schedule III- like tobacco and alcohol. In fact, cannabis is far, far *less* addictive than nicotine, the addictive drug in tobacco. Do your homework next time.

"That in particular is what sparks the RIAA and other interests groups attention, and why they seek recourse against it. It is the common use that is affecting all Gnutella users and developers."

BZZZ!#@!! You're still confusing the network with the protocol that drives the network. P2P is at the heart of the issue, not Gnutella. Gnutella is just a name. P2P is the brains behind the network, and again, P2P can't ever be outlawed *or* controlled without the gov't having a presence on every single user's PC. Won't ever happen.

" P2P developers are the targets of such recourses, because it is nearly impossible to go after each offending end user. We have seen this before in cases like Napster, Scour Exchange, and recently MusicCity and its affiliates. Be assured that Gnutella developers are no exception to that."

BZZZ!!!! Are you actually comparing Napster to *true* P2P? Shame on you! They're two totally different things.

"Another possibility needs to be addressed by developers: remove features that limit the capabilities of your Gnutella client. For example, it is okay to share MP3s and include MP3 information with search results. But don?t limit the kind of files that can be shared to multimedia files only."

BZZZ!! Name a popular Gnutella client that limits its searches and I'll swallow that bzzz with no sauce.

Hate to bzzz you so many times, but you don't appear to know to terribly much about your topic. I would suggest you do some research next time.

By the way, I was talking about limiting searches *by default*. Every client I've ever seen has the *option* to limit the search, but it limit option is off by default. See Limewire, Bearshare, and Gnotella for illustration.

Bottom line: the Gnutella network is definitely here to stay, because true P2P is a cornerstone of the net. Remember the popular Unix "talk" utility, used looooong before Netmeeting et al appeared? Without P2P, those utilities would never have existed.

I can use a hammer, or a car, or even a plane to kill. I can use these things to do so at any time. The *possibility* of their being used this way is simply not enough to get them banned, even if they are used that way most of the time.

So long as the potential for a legitimate use of the software exists, it can't be outlawed. Period.

Fix your apostrophes:
"to which the user doesn~Rt have right."
Hint: Use no Microsoft products.

"BZZZ. The problem with the assumption that Gnutella is "like" these other protocols is that Gnutella IS another protocol. Rather, P2P is."

P2P is a protocol? Give me some of that bangh dude! And yes, Gnutella IS a protocol. GNet is the network.

"BZZZZ, *again*. Hemp and cannabis are two totally different plants"

Cannabis is a hemp. Where do you think the word "Canvas" comes from? Look it up in your Merriam-Webster dictionary.

"BZZZ!!! According to the FDA's own tests to determine the addictivness of a given drug, cannabis should be Schedule III- like tobacco and alcohol."

THC is an ingredient found all hemp, but highest in Marijuana, that causes those mind alterations. THC leaves the body VERY slow (days) as opposed to nicotine (minutes). So in turn, THC has a much longer lasting effect. FYI (1) canabis is still in schedule I in all its forms, except *SYNTHETIC* THC (marinol) which is schedule III, as you said. FYI (2) Nicotine and THC are not in the same drug class either.

"BZZZ!#@!! You're still confusing the network with the protocol that drives the network. "

Again, P2P is a protocol? Damn, those guys at IETF and so on must be smoking the same stuff you do! So, where can I find a RFC on this... uhm... P2P protocol? Anyway, you can find the Gnutella PROTOCOL version 0.4, revision 1.2 document at the GDF (see the many links in other articles and forum messages).

"BZZZ!!!! Are you actually comparing Napster to *true* P2P?"

Did I say that?

"BZZZ!! Name a popular Gnutella client that limits its searches and I'll swallow that bzzz"

Did I say "searches"? No. I said "shared files". Two different things. But if you must, Gnotella is one client. By default, it shares 19 multimedia files and only 4 other files: Text, C files, RAR and ZIP files. Do you spit or swallow?

"I would suggest you do some research next time."

Don't preach.

"I can use a hammer, or a car, or even a plane to kill. I can use these things to do so at any time"

Yup, but is that a COMMON use for a hammer, car or plane? For some reason, I doubt you actually read the article or simply didn't understand it.

And you can use swords to cut roses. The question is not what a tool is capable of, the question is, what it was meant for and what it is usually used for.

The law, however, does not forbid the action of sharing files itself.

Freeloader John shut up!

hehe

ok, sy, i think you and i have pretty much effectively separated the parallel of our topic and this thread, but I'm-a continue it here anyway.

I really don't get how you can honestly feel that the simple act of drinking a beer affects those around the drinker -- positively or negatively. "But I never said 'beer,' milla." Yeah, I understand. What's the difference? One is socially acceptable? Were pot legal and existed without its current stigma (as does alcohol), we wouldn't even be having this discussion. Well.. maybe we would but it would be about the poppy plant instead. Dude, pot affects those around the user no more than does alcohol (less, in fact, i believe). And the simple act of injesting a drug affects no one but the injester (is that a word?) It's how they're often affected by the drug that causes those around them to be also affected by their actions. And I'm not talkin' just about maryjane; i'm talkin' about all drugs.

If the war on p2p goes anything like the war on drugs, we shall continue to be considered criminals for a long time to come, while some folks still go to the record stores (alcohol) and others subscribe to the label services (Prozac). So long as we get our fix in an "acceptable" way, it's okay, right? I'd just love to be able to pay my dealer and let him contribute to the legitimate economy but he insists on giving it to me for free! [for parallelism; shut up] Why won't his government let him contribute?

What were we talkin' about again?

I see exactly what you're sayin' and i broadly agree, of course. All I'm tryin' to do is get you to differentiate between the actual act of taking the drug and the effects it has on the user. The latter is the only one that affects (1) & (2). The former affects no one but the user. If Johnny can't get normal in the morning without his hot cup of coffee, then it's Johnny who can't get normal; Johnny's friends, family, and coworkers are only affected by how "normal" Johnny is. ...and ya know what, they shouldn't let it get to them. Johnny won't get help unless he wants it anyway. No point in lettin' themselves get all dragged down w/him.

The debate is more or less pointless, as long as there is an internet, files will be exchanged, that was the whole idea in the first place. If a way is found to stop current P2P, FTP will always be there to show how to make something better.

Om727, I agree that it will continue in every other way people can imagine. But it isn't pointless, as it will slow down innovation (due to fear of prosecution) so the number of available methods you can continue with will become limited over time. Especially since everyone expects everything to be free now, so companies are not willing to invest into someting that is almost guaranteed to cost them more money than they'll earn. Individuals simply won't have the money to face a lawsuit in the first place.

The reason that the vast majority of Gnutella's use is infringement is the fact that "file sharing" and search applications of the legal sort have long been well served by the world wide web - web servers, browsers, and search engines like Google, Altavista, the Inktomi family, et al.

The Gnutella protocol, at it's heart, is just a glorified web server with a good idea for a distributed search paradigm. It would be pretty easy, in fact, to configure any standard web server to serve up files to a gnet, if you had a gnet servent that returned the hits as URLs to the web server.

The only reason that all these wheels are being reinvented and encapsulated in gnet protocol is the need to protect infringement with decentralization!

If one could roll the search architecture and the push technique (to bypass firewalls) into existing web server technology, there would be no need for a discreet gnutella clients and networks - and the argument of "substantial non-infringing use" - ie, the vast numbers of legit websites already deployed - would be much more applicable and credible.

Very well said, Bitspotter. Our company's P2P product (BadBlue) intends to leverage Gnutella technology to augment its collaboration capabilities. Among other things, the BadBlue platform transcodes MS Office files (e.g., Access, Excel, Word) into HTML/XML. We intend to, among other things, solve the double-firewall issue for this class of business application (by using backwards-compatible extensions to the Gnutella protocol a la BearShare 1.3).

emixode, you can't prosecute code... you can only prosecute the people that write it, and if all they are making is a morally and legally neutral tool (like a hammer, or a saw) then there's nothing to prosecute.

And you know what? May downloading copyrighted material *is* illegal... but I think we're in the right on this one. The record companies are gouging consumers for something they already know consumers have been getting *for free* since music first began being broadcast via radio waves. If you walk down the street and hear music coming from a radio someone has, you're getting that music for free, right?

The whole reason these utilities came into being in the first place was because people were sick of paying $20 for a CD that only had one or two quality songs on it. Imagine, for example, how truly pissed off Adobe users would be if Adobe decided LView Pro was better, bought the company out, and started selling LView Pro for $700. Adobe users would either find a free alternative, or just steal it (which, if you search Gnutella, they already are... because Photoshop is vastly overpriced). Never mind that a viable, comparable, and FREE alternative already exists in the form of the GIMP for Linux... the parallel is there.

This whole debate will only work against the record industry. They have for years controlled the methods of music distribution, and now that they don't they're mad as hell... period. That's it; that's all. If they had been on their toes at the beginning, they *might* have stopped it all, but at this point, the war is over, and we have won.

I would very much like to see the RIAA concede defeat and disband. That's likely won't happen. But every action they take against Gnutella is action taken against their own customers, and eventually, the public will get sick of their whining and just tell them to shut up.

I can't wait.

test