Hi Sephiroth,
thanks for answering... I see we have a completly different point of view. I will try to show my point, which does not mean I want to convince you, really! I did spent some time to finish this posting (my english is still bad - thx Babelfish).
A disclaimer is not pointless in many countries, it will protect me from local lawsuits, for example if I live in sweden and a application has a disclaimer that forbids illegal use, but provides a legal use, you are not resposible for misuse. In some countries it might be necessary to add some best-use-reminder... e.g. you have to tell north american people not to dry a cat in the microwave or that fresh coffee is hot, if you don't you'll loose millions. So it might be tricky/difficult to find a good _local_ disclaimer and it might be necesarry to remind users to share only legal files... plz ask a local lawyer.
Ideas like encryption would fuel a fire for a lawsuit? How did you come to this conclusion? It makes no difference if your program is less or more secure. In my humble opinion RIAA (or whoever is the executive) will attack the weakest system and the most "attractive" threat in their eyes. We had a similar discussion about adding metadata to Gnutella... it could attract RIAA, in both cases I see no connection or a higher threat. My Counterthesis: If a p2p system is very strong it will be harder to attack... take a look on Freenet: strong encryption + totaly anonymous content + highly decentral, I see no lawsuits against them yet. Freenet might be the last pawn standing.... or FreeTella?
You ask why Gnutella hasn't shutdown? It wasn't the weakest and it wasn't the most attractive one. They take the centralized first (Napster), take the partly centralized next (FastTrack, eDonkey?), then the unprotected decentralized (Gnutella, Swarmcast, MojoNation), then who's left (Guerillia, Freenet). I think Gnutella is in risk now.
Quote:
|
The "threat" of the RIAA, there money and there lawyers were allready well apparent to everyone well before when most of the programs now were released. Almost all the developers out there had to have known about them and were willing to take that risk or else they wouldnt have made their program.
|
Yeah man, that's what I'm telling.... Gnutella told to be safe against a bunch of lawyers (
Gnutelliums). Now things might have changed?! RIAA does not need to attack every single user... they can try to knock out the developers. I think it's threat to every Gnutella developer or P2P company. XoloX would have been the first target because it is the most famous Gnutella client + the dutch court has allready shown it has no technical understanding (they didn't care if Kazaa is decentral/central or proprietary/open protocoll). I can understand that the dutch XoloX team discontinued XoloX.
Sure we have many different clients still, a highly decentralized network and a open protocoll... I wouldn't feel safe as developer of a gnutella client these days.
Damn I hope you're right and Gnutella community is strong! My intention is to help Gnutella and analyze what's going on.
Quote:
|
moak the RIAA didnt "crackdown" on kazaa the IFPI did. Thats an different organization thats similar to the riaa but its not the riaa.
|
Right, actually it was Buma/Stemra. An association that represents Dutch composers, songwriters and music publishers. The IFPI (The International Federation of the Phonographic Industry) is a organisation representing the international recording industry... and brought up the case... which is just another friend/synonym for NMPA or RIAA (The Recording Industry Association of America) = the "pushing force behind".
Greets and good night, Moak
PS: I like the ideas of "
FreeTella" (2 postings above) very much! Cool ideas, thx for the links, Unregistered!
