A Moral Dilemma: Open letter to Gnutella community

[innoval]

I’m told, reliably, expect sub-committee hearings or an investigation, starting this fall and early next year; prompted by the recent congressional report commissioned by Rep. Henry Waxman (D) of California and Rep. Steve Largent (R) of Oklahoma. According to the report, new P2P file-sharing programs are increasingly being used to exchange pornography and bypass filters set up by parents. Thousands of pornography videos and photographs, which include child pornography, bestiality, and graphic scenes of brutality and rape, are readily available to children with these programs. All of the content is free, credit cards are not needed, and no attempt is made to exclude minors from accessing it.

The Gnutella network will certainly be front-and-center when hearings occur.

The issue is greatly magnified because pornography rides obtrusively and openly on the coattails of young people’s searches for popular music. A simple search for the name of any popular music star produces a list of songs as well as a large number of often-unrelated pornography videos and photographs. The descriptions of some of these videos and photographs are vivid and lurid by the standards of many people. Make no mistake about it: searching for and downloading music is a popular Internet activity among school-aged children. Make no mistake about it: children are confronted with the worst possible pornography when doing so.

Gnutella’s “dirty little secret” is that home computers, school computers, library computers, and business computers are actively being used – often without the owner’s knowledge or consent – in the dissemination of child pornography. Though it is not a secret to technically savvy users, the public at large is not aware that when people access pornography with file-sharing programs -- a child may do so out of curiosity – they become active participants in its distribution. Once a file has been downloaded the file automatically becomes available for redistribution from the recipient’s hard drive. The recipient thus becomes a distributor, or to be more technically correct, a sharer. Even when young people are only looking for music, the file-swapping programs running on home, school and business computers are being actively used to assist others find pornography. By using one of the popular file-sharing programs, a user implicitly agrees to cooperate with any and all searches by anyone regardless of the nature of the search.

When my company announced that it would provide a free filter to help curb the problem, we hoped for a more positive response from those companies that have a vested interest in the Gnutella network. Instead, we received mostly hostile responses. It was suggested that our filter would disrupt the network, impose unwanted moral standards on others, and defeat the free exchange of ideas and content. In our opinion that is a narrow sighted view. Many users of Gnutella agreed with us. The filter, installed by a parent, school or business, gives the computer’s owner three options: 1) block all Gnutella activity, 2) hide inappropriate content, or 3) not participate in the propagation of inappropriate searches (but only inappropriate searches). It is this last option that has raised the ire of some people. Others, however, have recognized that non-propagation of pornography queries may very well improve the value and performance of the network by reducing a large amount of unwanted traffic.

To not filter, optionally, could very well lead dire consequences for Gnutella and other P2P networks. It won’t be long before members of congress receive live demonstrations of Gnutella. (I am already invited to be in Washington in September and October to conduct demonstrations). I can imagine a public hearing: A computer is placed on the desk before one of the committee members. He or she is asked to imagine himself or herself as a twelve-year old child; then asked to type in something like “Pokemon” or “Mariah Carey;” and finally asked to read aloud, before television cameras, the descriptions of the files that appear on the screen. Quick action to curb Gnutella and P2P will likely ensue unless the P2P industry can demonstrate what it is doing to solve the problem.

There are, among P2P users, those who staunchly defend their rights to exchange any and all information freely. They argue that legislative and enforcement action cannot succeed at interfering with their rights. Technology, they insist, will find ways to protect anonymity and unconstrained distribution of content. Perhaps so; but until then, expect the companies that produce Gnutella software to be targeted or at least inconvenienced with costly legal action. So, too, Internet Service Providers (ISPs), who provide essential connectivity to those who share files, may be targeted. Reports are that it is already happening, to some slight degree.

An argument can be made – and should be seriously considered -- that unconstrained pornography will hurt the sharing of copyrighted music. Though the recording industry has money, clout, and court victories against Napster; they have failed to garner significant and widespread public support for their protests of copyright infringement. Public support to curb P2P pornography, however, and particularly support to curb child pornography, will not be hard to generate. The recording industry certainly realizes that they can be effective by lending support to anti-pornography lobbyists. Expect it.

Proposed legislation to hold ISPs responsible if they allow “worst kind” pornography to flow from “client” machines they service with essential connectivity is likely not far off. Arguments for some measure of control are fortified by the fact that a computer in one’s home or in a school may be used, without obvious knowledge or consent, to share such material. It also may not be long before federal prosecutors and some states’ attorneys general test the power to prosecute not just those who are direct providers and hosting facilitators of child pornography. With Gnutella and P2P, originating sources can remain highly anonymous. Thus, Gnutella software companies and ISPs may be targeted. Though they may be able to defend themselves under current law (I think so), they may not want to face protracted and costly legal action. Small software firms may simply shut down. ISPs may voluntarily block Gnutella and other P2P protocols; either outright, or selectively for certain types of files. If ISPs impose selective blocking rather than full blocking, MP3s may well be targeted because of copyright issues. Winning may simply be too costly. ISPs may well be advised to consider early action before Gnutella grows much more, thus lessening customer dissatisfaction issues and avoiding possible legal action.

I believe that filters, written as responsibly as possible, will help stave off legislative action, legal action, and even ISP action. Gnutella software developers and others who have a financial stake in the network need to recognize this and for the good of open networking endorse and promote filtering.

The moral issue about pornography is murky to some people. So too, it seems, is the moral issue about sharing copyrighted music. But the moral issue about one’ s right to protect children and not actively participate in the dissemination of and searching for pornography, particularly child pornography, is not at all murky. Some will argue that if you use the Gnutella network you have a moral obligation to propagate queries just as your have a moral obligation to share. I understand that, but I respectfully disagree. Gnutella, by design, is uncontrolled and public. Thus a user can participate by degree so long as he or she does not act to hurt others. Not propagating queries for pornography through a privately owned computer is not immoral.

History should teach us that when a problem gains public prominence, one of three possible courses of corrective action takes place: 1) an industry takes initiative to remedy the problem, 2) an industry voluntarily responds to pressure, or 3) the government acts. For some people these possibilities are hard to accept. I understand. There is, among many Internet users, an anti-establishment spirit that feels threatened by the interests of “big business” and “big brother.” There is an inclination among some to want to fight technological “freedom” wars, which will only lead to escalation, make an open and public network into a proprietary closed network, and obviate the opportunity to take a positive initiative. Big business (e.g. Microsoft) will then simply move in and own the open network – with private controls and commercial content.

The problem of sharing copyrighted music is like the speeding problem on an open, public roadway. Most everybody speeds. It is accepted. No one thinks about the moral dilemma of breaking the law by going 65 miles per hour in a 55 MPH limit. Though police have the legal right to set speed traps and give tickets -- which they do – mostly, they enforce the law with a very small percentage of drivers by targeting the worst offenders. However, on the open, public roads drunk driving is not acceptable, at all. On the public, open Gnutella net, child pornography is never acceptable. Worst kind pornography, allowed to continue at current unconstrained levels, may well end the music.

Users of Gnutella should applaud any of the Gnutella companies that encourage the implementation and use of robust filters. Those companies have the best interest of an open network at heart. Frankly, our company, which has other work-in-progress designed to benefit Gnutella users (and make us some money through software sales), is planning on Gnutella’s growth and success as a free, open network.

You have a promise from me: our company will listen to the concerns and suggestions from Gnutella users. We already have. We will also work with other Gnutella companies to help ensure the growth of the network as an open, public network. We are also working to filter existing proprietary P2P networks. We’ll make some mistakes along the way. I’m sure of that. But we’ll correct them as we go, with your help.

Yours truly,

Daniel R. Porter, President and CEO
InnoVal Systems Solutions, Inc.
http://innoval.com/rifilter

[Beckerist]

I can't tell if this is an advertisement or a sincere warning. The software/website looks promising, but if you really feel that you need to have parental filtering, use Bearshare. The only true way of using parental filtering is to be sitting in the room with your child. I know that isn't possible in some cases, but using some programs (such as those provided by Iopus.com) the internet could be monitored very well, without the use of purchased program (yes I know iopus.com does offer some shareware programs, but they still are fully functional for a limited time). I am not advertising this website, I am just showing whats out there, which could very well be what This company is doing, but I am fairly suspicious of this post.<br>In conclusion () I feel the best way to monitor your child's use of the internet is by either being with them while they are online, periodically checking the Temporary Internet Files, or History of internet sites visited, using completely seperate programs to do this monitoring for you, or simply talk with your child and set standards.

[innoval]

Beckerist, this is not the place to advertise a filter. That would be naive on my part and inappropriate. We have engaged an advertising firm for that and a PR firm for other aspects related to this filter. I know that hardcore Gnutella users would not buy this filter nor use it. I am seeking buy-in. That is different.

Never, ever, advertise in newsgroups, community forum, etc. But this is a place to engage users. When we first announced the filter, we received significant and helpful advice. (We also received a number of blasting emails).

It is a warning. It is sincere. It is also opinion. Thus disagreement is welcome. BTW: our filter is fully functional and never expires. We hope for commercial revenue but little or no end-user revenue.

It is my opinion that at some time, not too far off, CEO's of Gnutella firms will be called before sub-committees or investigative panels and they will be able to say that there are filters available.

Bearshare's and LimeWire's built in filters are a good step in the right direction but are only useful with fully trusted children or home environments where Internet activity is closely supervised. The reality is that parents, schools, etc. are (maybe sadly) looking for more.

Thanks for your thoughts.

Dan

[Beckerist]

In all seriousness, thank you for the 'warning'. I do know where this problem stems from, and (in my opinion, which this is a board of) I feel it is the parents faults in the first place. Child control starts at home. Being the son of a teacher and a high-school student myself, I know this all too well.

[innoval]

Originally posted by Beckerist
In all seriousness, thank you for the 'warning'. I do know where this problem stems from, and (in my opinion, which this is a board of) I feel it is the parents faults in the first place. Child control starts at home. Being the son of a teacher and a high-school student myself, I know this all too well.

John, I do agree, child control starts at home. Were all homes a good environment there would be no need for filters, no need for hotlines for exploited children, no latchkey kids on the Internet, and so forth. Nor would congressmen be concerned. But they are. Without filters, I really do believe, Gnutella is in jeopardy.

Dan

[Ahri]

I agree with you, innoval, about two things. Gnutella should be free of illegal graphics/pornography, and legal pornography should not appear is search results by mistake. Unfortunately, problem number one is extremely difficult to correct, and if it is corrected, such material will simply move to another P2P network which does not solve the problem. Problem number two can be solved with co-operation of the major producers of Gnutella clients and without third party software such as yours. If you didn't already know, sub-networks can be created inside the Gnutella network. If one is created for pornography (limewire already has one) and it is just as accessible and easy to use as the mother network, I am sure no one would have a problem with using the porn sub-net instead. This would remove or reduce the pornography on the rest of the network to such a degree that accidental search results would not happen. I think this could work, but people have to want to make it work. With out support from all major Gnutella clients, filters like yours may the only solution.

I believe your concerns with the Gnutella net are valid ones, however, I believe the legal solutions such as the ones you have described are the wrong way to solve the problem. Even those attempts succeed, best case scenario, people use another P2P network and make the protocol more anonymous, more secure, and harder to deal with. Napster is a prime example. You didn't get pornography in your search results there did you? Closing it down just made kids pick-up Gnutella, and now look at what we got. These kinds of solutions will just make things worse. The attitude, "If I don't like it, I'll get ride of it", is poor one to have. I think the problems with P2P networks can and should be dealt with by better means.

I completely agree with Beckerish, and I appreciate his input on the matter. You can't blame anyone for being a little suspicious. Children don't need Gnutella to get pornography. Many millions more get it straight off the web. Why you chose to pursue an attack on Gnutella rather than the web may make some people curious until they look at your product.

[innoval]

Originally posted by Ahri
I agree with you, innoval, about two things. Gnutella should be free of illegal graphics/pornography, and legal pornography should not appear is search results by mistake. Unfortunately, problem number one is extremely difficult to correct, and if it is corrected, such material will simply move to another P2P network which does not solve the problem.

If it moves outside the mainstream of most Gnutella content, then it becomes less of a problem. It follows the old, somewhat ridiculous, somewhat priggish NY laws that prohibit strip joints from opening within so many yards of a school or church. Out of sight, out of mind.

Problem number two can be solved with co-operation of the major producers of Gnutella clients and without third party software such as yours.

I agree.

If you didn't already know, sub-networks can be created inside the Gnutella network. If one is created for pornography (limewire already has one) and it is just as accessible and easy to use as the mother network, I am sure no one would have a problem with using the porn sub-net instead. This would remove or reduce the pornography on the rest of the network to such a degree that accidental search results would not happen. I think this could work, but people have to want to make it work. With out support from all major Gnutella clients, filters like yours may the only solution.

Yes, we do know that. We are building a piece of code that can implement this feature across all clients.

I believe your concerns with the Gnutella net are valid ones, however, I believe the legal solutions such as the ones you have described are the wrong way to solve the problem. Even those attempts succeed, best case scenario, people use another P2P network and make the protocol more anonymous, more secure, and harder to deal with. Napster is a prime example. You didn't get pornography in your search results there did you? Closing it down just made kids pick-up Gnutella, and now look at what we got. These kinds of solutions will just make things worse. The attitude, "If I don't like it, I'll get ride of it", is poor one to have. I think the problems with P2P networks can and should be dealt with by better means.

I agree. I agree. I agree. BTW: We will offer optional blocking of the other primary P2Ps, shortly.

I completely agree with Beckerish, and I appreciate his input on the matter. You can't blame anyone for being a little suspicious. Children don't need Gnutella to get pornography. Many millions more get it straight off the web. Why you chose to pursue an attack on Gnutella rather than the web may make some people curious until they look at your product.

First of all we don't look at it as an attack. But we will be adding web filtering in the very near future. The code is done. But until we get Gnutella filtering working we don't want to tie it in. There are other web filters on the market.

Thanks. Good comments, Ahri.

Dan

[Beckerist]

Users of Gnutella should applaud any of the Gnutella companies that encourage the implementation and use of robust filters. Those companies have the best interest of an open network at heart. Frankly, our company, which has other work-in-progress designed to benefit Gnutella users (and make us some money through software sales), is planning on Gnutella’s growth and success as a free, open network.

Implementation of filters... Open Network... Do I hear an idiom? Make us some money... Gnutella's growth as a <b>free</b>, <b>open</b> network. I think I missed something

[Ahri]

You agree? You must not have been referring to the legal actions you talked about in your letter. Seems like you were in favour of that. These solutions will hurt your cause, not help it. Napster again provides an example. The lawsuit increased awareness and popularity of the program. It caused an exponential amount of growth in the number of users. Before they were taken to court, very few people knew it existed. When they found out, people rushed to get in on free music. You have the same problem with children and Gnutella. Most kids don't know they can get pornography off the internet, never mind Gnutella. By percentage, few kids use the internet for pornography. Taking people to court over Gnutella and publicizing its existence will influence many more kids to use it, many more then your filter will ever stop. What's better, 50% of 100 kids getting pornography, or 100% of 10?

Your filter has one major problem, and this is why you are getting no support from the Gnutella community. It gives people the option to stop their software from routing descriptors. This causes a disruption in the network and provides absolutely nothing to users of the filter. I strongly urge you to remove that feature from your program. If your software in anyway disrupts the health of Gnutella, such that it is hurting non-users of your filter, you can expect anti-filter software. Think about a free filter remover on the home page of all Guntella clients. If kids can install a Gnutella client, I'm sure they can install a filter remover.

Your company and its supporters seem to oppose legal pornography on the Internet. I say, if its okay in magazines, its okay for the Internet.

[Beckerist]

I agree with the general, um populace of this board. I felt that even in his speech he had many flaws. No offense, he does raise some good issues, however most of them are being intorduced into software even now (Limewire sub-network of Adult Content). I don't feel threatened by the filter, or its company but I do feel that this network should.