We left the Gnutella Community several months ago in an effort to support some of the other FileSharing Communities. We were waiting for things at LimeWire to stabalize a bit. It looked like they're having a lot of problem but many of them seem to be resolved now.

We purchased the pro edition of their latest offering version 3.2.1 and put online some content servers and we will see how things go over the next few weeks.

__________________
Lee Evans, President
LeeWare Development
http://www.leeware.com

There is already an excellent peer to peer network available for copyright free music. Lots of goodstuff depending on your taste.
The trend is toward the .shn format. I'm sure you could build up quite a collection and share it on gnutella as well. You can learn about it at www.etree.org or www.furthurnet.net

I don't know if I'm anxious to be embroiled in a lawsuit and counter sue for false allegations, but it seems like it would be very gratifying to offer up titles that are legal but might be assumed to be illegal bt the RIAA. Just to mess with them.

That's a great idea, please do!
The more legitimate content that is shared on Gnutella the harder it is to shut down.

I try to share as much legitimate content as I can. I just takes a while to figure out what legitimate content people like and what name works the best to help people find it, but still accurately represents the content.

Wallpaper, pictures, fonts, books, documents, open source, etc. There are lots of popular things that are not copyrighted or are copyrighted but ok for non-business use.

You can simply share your download folder.
I got one dl: AudioHijack, which the Website offered with only 0.5kB/s with 7kB/s (ISDN) from Gnutella.

When you do that, smaller sites will have less bandwidth problems, or might circumvent them with a magnet link.

I share all downloads and an archive of most of my past downloads.

For example it is possible like this to find an old version of a program, when it is no longer avaible on the web.

__________________

-> put this banner into your own signature! <-
--
Erst im Spiel lebt der Mensch.
Nur ludantaj homoj vivas.
GnuFU.net - Gnutella For Users
Draketo.de - Shortstories, Poems, Music and strange Ideas.

As I've said before, we've been doing this for a while now we have the servers connected via a T1 connection. We've been meshing our file databases for the last 12 hours. All server are returning results and there are people downloading files 24/7.

We have original CBT content Technology shows in MPG format we are hosting DRM content for transmissionfilms.com and we have our own ISO bundles.

see this thread for details and spread the word.


http://www.gnutellaforums.com/showth...threadid=21313


Thanks in advance.

__________________
Lee Evans, President
LeeWare Development
http://www.leeware.com

My name is Adam Harris and I am a Business developer at LimeWire. The reason that I am writing on this forum is to request if individuals with sources for appropriate, legitimate content especially video content, could get in touch with me. I would greatly appreciate it. Email me at aharris@limepeer.com

Thanks,
Adam

An article on slashdot.org is discussing the Magnatune music label-- Creative Commons licensed.

Is there a "license" for legitimate content? Would be nice to have an ASCII character (like the TM ™ or copyright©) that can clearly identify openly shared stuff.

How about unicode 2713, the checkmark the option-v ? (I can't find one that'll post here!)

While I understand the thinking behind the desire for a mark indicating that information is in the public domain, I (along I suspect with others) would vehemently oppose the introduction of such a mark on principle.

Currently (in most of the world at least) all published information can be assumed to be in the public domain unless otherwise marked. That's not to say all information - the act of publishing is normally required (although not always necessarily by the owner or author of the information). The concept of copyright only applies to information you want to publish but retain ownership of.

Where copyright is claimed, it's a far far more acceptable approach to place the burden of maintaining it on the publisher than the reader. The introduction of a 'public domain' mark would reverse this entirely, requiring not only that an author decide to stop defending his or her copyright, but that that author must consciously decide to place their work in the public domain. Not good for the free flow of information.

Good and essential point. If the copyright holders and courts would recognize that argument and spend their millions on setting up ways to correctly rename "mislabeled" files, we'd quickly see infringing content clearly identified.

p2p users should not be held responsible for the ripping software that mislabels files, or commercial distributors who fail to label their files appropriate with new electronic standards.

I would gladly filter all searches to block © files, or only use them knowing they were to be paid for or deleted. You're right--if the copyright holders leave their goods on the street, they had better be clearly marked.