Sephiroth,
Quote:
|
First that is very very unlikely to happen do to how gnutella works even if you scan it for a week you wont find every single "offender." If any action would come it would be in stop and desist e-mails or at an extreeme get a user internet service cut i doubt they would sue.
|
A simple method is to view someone's web page. A host of goodies there.
A second method would be to write an application using the gnutella protocol that issues a search for a given artists name and start seeing what is returned. If the same IP address starts to appear a number of times then they've got their target.
As I said previously, all they would have to do is successfully sue one individual. Once they have done that, then the doors are wide open. That in itself might be enough to stop a large number of people from sharing. Once that happens, the topology becomes top-heavy as everyone tries to download from servants outside the RIAA's or WIPO's
jurisdiction.
Quote:
|
The RIAA wont make an example because the media would eat them alive and cause so much bad publicity the RIAA would be hated even more. Considering its the holiday season it would be a bad idea to **** off the consumers.
|
I never said they'd do anything today, tomorrow or even this month. Don't forget, the RIAA already tried to sneak in legislation into a recent bill that would give them carte blanche to hack into peoples computers. If they are willing to got to that level, I do not think for an instant that the RIAA will be to worried about 'public opinion' if it comes to taking someone to court. Besides, what have they got to loose? The RIAA is paid for by the recording industry. I for one cannot see the general public suddenly boycotting all record releases etc simply because they got heavy handed and successfully sued someone...
Quote:
|
But your isp just doesnt give your info out to everyone who askes nicely. The other side has to prove it and even then some isps like verizon still wont give them user info. The only isp that has taken any kind of action on a regular basis is @home and maybe a few others like AT&T and Qwest occasionally.
|
True, but the RIAA will no doubt go in mob-handed. I doubt if the ISP will argue too much, after all, if they do, then there is the very real chance that they can be implicated along with the user. One ISP in the UK (Demon Internet) already lost a legal case about a news article stored on the USENET servers. A president for legal obligation there has already been set. Granted that was in the UK, but ISP's may not be as protective over their users as you would like to think they are.
As you already pointed out, @home and AT&T have both taken action against other users. They are arguably two of the largest Broadband ISP's in the USA (Road Runner being a third). Since Road Runner is itself owned by a media conglomerate, I wouldn't expect them to look kindly on users who have been positively identified as sharing illegal files.
Quote:
|
I can see where people are worried and etc. and thats perfectly understandable after napster but gnutella isnt napster, no prolonged action has been taken yet and until there is i dont think that security needs to be a major issue. Plus unlike all the other file sharing programs gnutella can be used for alot more than just P2P making it a extreemely hard for someone like the RIAA to attack it legally because they would lose.
|
True, GNet is not Napster, but as I said previously, Metallica ID'd over 330,000 users who were sharing 5 or more Metallica songs. They went after Napster itself because that was the 'main artery' for the file sharing system. GNet is a different ball game all together. Essentially each servant is a potential Napster when it comes to copyright evasion.
To say that the RIAA will not pursue a US based user sharing several GB of copyrighted material is completely off the base. They can and probably will. After all, there is no real difference in sharing nGB of illegal MP3's as there is copying DVD's and distributing them elsewhere. The only argument that could possibly be used is one of 'zero profit motive'. However, in the eyes of the law, copyright theft is copyright theft, regardless of the intention or not to profit from it.
Don't think either that public opinion will be against them. People said that about the Napster case and look what happened there. A very large proportion of the population does not, or ever will use GNet or any other part of P2P sharing.
Besides, what have the RIAA to loose? They are funded by the recording industry, not by the public.
Currently, the RIAA are looking at other P2P file sharing applications. Take a look at this except from an RIAA press release:
Quote:
Plaintiffs filed suit against MusicCity.com, Inc. and MusicCity Networks, Inc. (which operate the Morpheus service), Grokster, LTD, and Consumer Empowerment BV [also known as FastTrack] (which operates the KaZaA service), in the United States District Court for the Central District of California.
While the three services provide user interfaces that differ cosmetically, users access the same network library. Regardless of which portal a user enters through, that user is connected to one underlying network that was created "and controlled by Defendants." Or put simply, a Morpheus user, for example, would have access to the same universe of files as a KaZaA or Grokster user.
|
This sound something like GNet? I think it does. Granted the technology may be different, but the philosophy is the same. Whilst it is true that the GNet is not controlled by anyone since it's an open format, there is still enough damage that can be done legally to hurt it in one way or another. Look at Napster. It's not a shadow of it's former self, nor will it ever be. They took on the giants and lost, big time...
What's even more worrying are the list of plaintiffs in the case:
Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer Studios Inc., Columbia Pictures Indus-tries, Inc., Disney Enterprises, Inc., New Line Cinema Corporation, Paramount Pictures Corporation, Time Warner Entertainment Company, L.P., Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation, Universal City Studios, Inc., Arista Records, Inc., Atlantic Recording Corporation, Atlantic Rhino Ventures Inc. D/B/A Rhino Entertainment Company, Bad Boy Records, Capitol Records, Inc., Elektra Entertainment Group Inc., Hollywood Records, Inc., Interscope Records, Laface Records, London-Sire Records Inc., Motown Record Company, L.P., The RCA Records Label, A Unit Of BMG Music D/B/A BMG Entertainment, Sony Music Entertainment Inc., UMG Recordings, Inc., Virgin Records America, Inc., Walt Disney Records, Warner Bros. Records Inc., WEA International Inc., WEA Latina Inc., and Zomba Recording Corporation
Anyone of these organizations alone makes for a scary legal competition. Them all combined makes for a verifiable rotweiller. Also, notice where I highighted WB? Since they are already fighting this case, expect them to fight the next - and Road Runner users will be directly in view. The won't need to ask the ISP for user details since they ARE the ISP!
Finally, in the US alone, the RIAA represents an industry worth $15billion. With that much money, I would not expect them to take this lying down...
Rachel