As I understand it, Gnutella is a P to P protocol whereby there is no central system. There are many implementations of the Gnutella software whereby there are several "competing" versions that are Open Source. Many of the Gnutella versions are by small companies that are dependent on Gnutella. They need cash as we all do, and include spyware to generate income. The main use of the software is for "sharing" music. The established musical industry takes a dim view on this

At this moment P to P is identified with a Napster, a Kazaa, a Gnutella. And everything is done to stop "illegal" use. The problem is twofold. A whole technology is in danger. To me it is obvious that what is needed for businesses in P to P to succeed is to have legitimate uses for the technology. The money will not come from the Gnutella clients but from functionality like a peer server.

My suggestions are the following
* Allow for a closed use of Gnutella. For instance sharing data within a company. (Intel is on record using P-P for that)
* Cooperate on the Gnutella client. Gnutella should be like Linux, a LimeWire, BearShare like RedHat Suse.. When everyone works on the same codebase, the evolution of Gnutella would greatly increase.
* Do not use spyware in a client. The reason is simple, when a client is infested with spyware, the commercial off shoots will not succeed in commercial applications because companies can not be associated with that.
* With cooperation on the client done in a community way, there will be more time=money available for the commercial bits and bobs.
* On the Mandrake forum they are floating the idea of contributing Euro's for continued work on the client... Contributors are more likely to get heard when new functions are requested.... Read there postings.
* Look hard for "legitimate" uses of Gnutella. When Gnutella is widely used for functions that nobody can object to, there is no change to have the technology destroyed by a RIAA or a BUMA/STEMRA.

Thanks
Have fun
Gerard

Actually I don't really look for MP3's - Gnutella has a lot of legitimate uses - especially since the "Internet bubble" burst. It used to be you could easily find free web servers to host your own files, but now the best are gone. What's left forces tons of pop-ups and other obnoxious ads on you and cuts off sites that uses too much bandwidth. Any popular file becomes increasingly expensive to distribute - even if it's perfectly legal to do so.

I see P2P as a great solution for this. Popular OpenSource, Freeware and ShareWare stuff can all benefit. For example, Linux ISO's are perfectly leagal to distribute but *huge* - how many people can afford to host such stuff on a web server?

Not to mention all the videos and MP3's people make themselves these days. The giant media corps want to control *all* content distribution - their copyright or not. All these people making their own video and flash stuff may really become a threat. The solution, as the media giants see it, is to buy enough laws to make sharing any file impossible.

What people do is their own business. Problem is that a technology ie Gnutella is deemed to be only for "illegal" use.

My point is that there is Gnutella the client and on top of that functionality can be build. Money is made by providing worthwhile functionality. This can have central functionality like in a peer server or, files are distributed and you get the file that is nearest to you (saving on bandwith and increasing speed) within a closed community.

By making the client universal, it is up to the user to utilise the functionality. By spending effort on the server/services that can be provided, the company that does the work is legitimate and out of bounds for a RIAA, BUMA/STEMRA.

When you make clear what good use can be made of the technology by not focussing on a RIAA, you make your point best.

Thanks,
have fun
Gerard

Just to illustrate what kind of functionality is similar to what I am talking about, there was this post on /. which leads to

http://www.almaden.ibm.com/cs/people...erv/userv.html

This is what makes money. It saves on bandwith. It provides a service. This is what you can do with Gnutella too I think.

Before a company commits itself to some services, it requires certain functions. This whitepaper is a case in point; it talks about most of them. See what you can learn and make your business succesfull and use Gnutella, cause it is good

And, see to it that there is one GREAT client

Thanks,
have fun
Gerard

Thats not true, most clients are from volunteers. Only two companies seems to do Gnutella fulltime; Limewire which is OpenSource and Bearshare which is proprietary (btw both come with spyware).

I agree about the other statements, cooperation and a free Gnutella is the future.

That's pretty the same to gnutella, they mixed Gnutella with FastTrack (supernode) and Guerillia (the gnutella clone whith indirect proxy/relaying traffic) technology. But without any fair&healthy anti-freeloading as FastTrack/eDonkey or any any Gnutella client has... you can leech with every webbrowser, eeeek.

Having only one client is a very bad idea. One of Gnutella's strengths is that no single company controls it or can dictate how it must work.

All of the net's most successful technologies have been built with open protocols. What *is* needed is a well-defined standard (just like with FTP, HTTP, etc) so all clients can implement features in a compatible way.

I agree to SRL, cooperation and a free Gnutella and a open protocol is the future.

Hi SRL, I totaly agree! Someone should tell the GDF. They have some very good homebrew ideas, but remain small, slow, hidden yet. And there is no wider open discussion, RFC, documentation project or new developer promotion/support.

I wonder if a Gnutella business model is just a dream? I guess a cool gnutella client is good for company PR and a interesting education project for programers... but how making money with a Gnutella client as only horse in the stable? As long as there are many other good Gnutella servants and other free P2P systems, the user will not pay money for one? *brainstorming* It might be also hard to provide a special unique service or a splittet single vendor network, because centralized systems might be threatened by lawsuits (Napster/Kazaa).

I make a distinction between what the client is, and what the businesses do. The businesses develop legitimate services based on the Gnutella protocol.

It is in their intrest to have a GREAT client. However, they are part of a community.
The community sees to it that the protocol is optimal. That the code is OPEN and MODULAR. It is up to everyone to make the client that they want. Business or no. Just like the Linux distro's. They are all different. But the core is the same.

When everybody programs on the same core. It will become clear whose code is used and why. The community as a whole can be anonymous, the community. Something hard to get at by a RIAA/Buma-Stemra. The BUSINESSES work on Gnutella implementations, things that make Gnutella usefull.

When that means that the client needs certain functions under certain conditions, make it optional. No problem, no hassle the whole Gnutella community wins. AND THAT IS WHAT YOU WANT IF YOU WANT GNUTELLA IN A YEAR'S TIME ..

I think

Thanks,
Have fun
Gerard