BitTorrent's Loss is eDonkey's Gain?

MrAndrews writes "According to this BBC article, users in South Korea, Italy, Germany and Spain are using BitTorrent less frequently these days, after lawsuits by the movie industry. However: "While the use of BitTorrent has fallen, file sharers have moved to an alternative network called eDonkey". "

You can't kill the nature of internet :)

[Programmer_In_Traini]

This just shows that no matter what the people in legal suits do, they can't kill the sharing ... they cannot kill the internet RAWRR!! :-p

Seriously, for any network they "shut down" 10 new will popup. The reason for that is that its hard to prove that they're used only for illegal file sharing, many like, BitTorrents and other havea very legitimate use.

But, that's what makes the world go round these days and lawyers are all the more happy because that's more money in their pockets.

Re:You'd have thought

[tyllwin]

It *is* like whack-a-mole, isn't it?

Anyway, I thought the algorithm of the moment was "If it's popular, torrent it, use emule if it's rare (and be prepared for it to take forever.)'

Being #1 is good?

[Winterblink]

I would hardly call being the #1 filesharing network a "gain", with the ??AA's being all lawsuity.

They're moving on?

[__aanmdr9234]

Let me get this straight - these people are moving ON to edonkey/emule? Most people who do filesharing started off on eDonkey and then switched to Bittorrent for the speeds it offered.

This isn't the end

[ChrisF79]

Let's face the facts. As soon as the RIAA or whatever organization starts scaring people away from one technology, everyone migrates to the next. To see a story touted as news about people switching from torrents to eDonkey seems like common sense really. In six months or so, I think we'll be reading a post on here about how people are switching from eDonkey to whatever comes next. It's a cycle with the organizing bodies constantly playing catch-up.

eDonkey can't stop MPAA/RIAA

[LexNaturalis]

It doesn't matter if people move from Kazaa to BitTorrent to eDonkey, as the article mentions, because the internet traffic still ends up in the same place. At some point, the traffic has to go from your computer to another computer via an ISP or other such service (obviously assuming it's not a LAN). The MPAA/RIAA has taken to issuing subpoena's to ISPs, so even if eDonkey is "decentralized" the users can still get caught. I don't see what the point is, really. I mean, seriously... if the BBC is posting about it, do you think the over-priced greedy hawk lawyers of the RIAA/MPAA are going to ignore it?

Re:Pffft eDonkey

[masklinn]

Hah, I moved from Bittorent to newsgroups, THAT is what I call progress !

Re:Every movie recently released is secretly porn

[goldspider]

"Flawed logic, perhaps, but a nifty bit of justification I'd say."

Thanks for giving the RIAA/MPAA justification. Take notice, Slashbots. The parent post is a perfect example of why media industries regard their "customers" with such distrust.

Re:Every movie recently released is secretly porn

[Mr Guy]

Thanks for giving the RIAA/MPAA justification.
Actually, before you level an accusation like that, you'd need to point how how my logic is flawed. Blockbuster makes the same money they would otherwise, thus the MPAA makes the same money they would otherwise, and I watch the movie when it's convenient. I can't see how this is illegal, except for the fact I have to use deCSS to do it. I don't even make a perfect digital copy, which was part of the stipulation of the Sony Beta case. I make a reduced quality copy.

The only thing I have telling me it's "wrong" is some vague sense of the RIAA/MPAA wanting me to officially "buy" a copy of it. I can't even put my finger on the law that would make it "wrong" (Again, other than the DMCA). It would seem to my untrained nonlegal mind that the Supreme Court would uphold my right to make a reduced quality backup for the purpose of time shifting. Reading Blockbuster's membership terms, I can't even find where they say I'm prohibited from making a personal copy, except where it says I have to obey copyright law, which I've already explained I can't find where I'm not.

In short, my logic may be flawed, but I can't personally find where. The MPAA doesn't have to like it, if it's legal.

Re:Every movie recently released is secretly porn

[iainl]

I certainly can't find any flaw in your logic if you delete the copy after you've watched it, that's for sure.

Re:Every movie recently released is secretly porn

[ovit]

# CommieAnarchistLibertarian©

Please don't use "Libertarian" anywhere near the terms "Commie" and "Anarchist". Various dead libertarians are currently spinning in their graves...

        ovit

Re:Every movie recently released is secretly porn

[goldspider]

Here's how the (copyright) law reads:

Subject to sections 107 through 122, the owner of copyright under this title has the exclusive rights to do and to authorize any of the following:

(1) to reproduce the copyrighted work in copies or phonorecords;

Nothing there about a "perfect" duplication. Ripping a DVD would (by my definition, anyway) constitute a reproduction.

Aside from that, my point isn't to debate the merits of the Blockbuster/MPAA/RIAA business models. It's that actions like what you described give them ammunition to create laws that further restrict all of our rights.

Re:PeerGuardian; false sence of security

[darkitecture]

Thats brave! I'd just buy the flippin cd's rather than risk a $15,000 fine!

Actually I have, you presumptuous jackass. When they release;
- Seasons 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 of Frasier;
- The Daily Show complete run from 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004 and 2005;
- Scrubs seasons 2, 3 and 4;
- The West Wing seasons 5 and 6;
- the entire run of Top Gear;
- the entire run of The Wonder Years;
- the entire run of Parker Lewis Can't Lose;
- not to mention about a dozen Japanese dorama series

on DVD, then be sure to let me know; I'll buy them.

Re:The real problem with BT

[m50d]

This isn't a mistake in bittorent design, bittorrent is not a filesharing program and was never meant to be a filesharing program. As you say, it's good as an FTP replacement, but the mass exodus to bittorrent for music/movies/warez trading was sheer idiocy. Claims of faster downloads (despite being blatantly false for anyone who actually tests it) are the only reason I can find for it, but even then it makes little sense. Everyone knows FTP is the fastest protocol for transferring files, but the days of people trying to use it for their filesharing are long gone.

Re:Every movie recently released is secretly porn

[LoverOfJoy]

Do you ever rent a movie a second time?

Re:Stallman slams Slashdot; Slashdot silent

[Anonymous Coward]

No, that is picking news. That is not editing. Editing actually means you are not only picking the worthy news stories (even if it means picking Roland Pipquepaille's submissions an inordinate amount of times, or picking out stories that look like thinly veiled advertisements for products), but you are cleaning up the summary, checking to see if it has been posted before (If Slashdot editors "edited", they would at least bother to check the front page to see if the same story has been posted before!), and making sure the summary is accurate. An editor is a proofreader too!

You don't have to have political propaganda (though, you sure seem to conviently forget the "editor" Michael Sims who always inserted his political point of view into stories!) to have a quality news site. Why do you think that these things are mutually exclusive?

Slashdot is not the media - they rely on the very media you slam for their news. I can admit the inadequacies of the mainstream media just as much as I can admit the inadequacies of Slashdot. You see, I can tolerate it and still have a quality experience - there are alot of good things here that I enjoy, just as much as I enjoy off of places like CNN, BBC, and others.

My beef is with your one sided view of what Slashdot is - you have this binary view of things: "mainstream media bad, techno-nerd news blog good". The truth is, its not so black and white. There are shades of grey here. Get off your high horse.

The only way

[el_womble]

to stop illegal downloading is to uninvent the wheel. Make ANY device that can digitize analog data illegal unless they are properly licensed by a *IAA authorized service provider. No home movies. No home recording, unless it is to analog media. In a sense make digitzers like stills. Anyone can make Whisky, its easy, unless the equipment to do so is illegal.

I have little sympathy for the *IAA. Do you think they gave us CD/DVDs because they gave us better quality, or because they increased profit? The fact that they were too miopic to realise that the same technologies that were dropping their bottom line could enable consumers to replace them is karmic.

The creators of optical media suing bittorrent et al, is like the great ship builders suing boeing and airbus. It shouldn't be allowed to happen. Artists need to stop looking for recording contracts and start looking for marketting contracts. You can still make money in popular arts, its just you can't expect to make money by selling digital facsimilies of that art.

Re:This is news?

[Anonymous Coward]

You can find anything on eDonkey! Too bad you have to wait in a queue for three weeks and download your file at 20B/s after that.

Re:I don't really get it.

[Anonymous Coward]

Then don't download DivXs with bad sound quality. When I want to watch a movie that is long out of theatres, but not yet available on DVD I'll download a 2cd rip that has an AC3 audio track copied bit-for-bit from the DVD. Even the video is nearly indistinguishable from the less-than-perfect DVD video stream... this is on a 100 inch projected screen. And now, of course, HD content is available on P2P networks. Shrek in 1080p is freakin' sweet! So I really have the opposite argument: When is commercially available media going to reach the level of P2P content.

Re:Every movie recently released is secretly porn

[goldspider]

I usually don't rent them a first time. But if I do, I don't feel entitled to making a copy of it.

If I want to watch a movie whenever I want, I'll buy it.

Re:Every movie recently released is secretly porn

[Ath]

You have two problems in your point.

First, you are assuming that all copyright laws are the same as US laws.

Second, you are not considering the fair use rights. The problem with the status of the law today is that prior court decisions have not been reconciled with the DMCA.

The DMCA specifically prohibits the actual act of circumvention of a copy protection for most purposes. Copying the work is no longer the violation, the circumvention of the copy protection is.

I just wish this issue would get to the Supreme Court so it can be resolved. I am always hopeful that they could basically uphold the DMCA while still guaranteeing the rights of individuals to exercise their fair use rights like archival copies and removal of the region coding.

Subject to 107 through 122

[Mr Guy]

107 is the four factor test. Again, I'm not a legal genious, so I'll refer generously to Stanford [stanford.edu] and the EFF [eff.org] for help in this matter.

1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
Personal use is clearly non-commercial.
2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
In this case, the work is creative which is a point for their side.
3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
In my case, it's a whole copy of the work, another point for their side, however it's a reduced quality copy which is a point for my side.
4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
With Blockbuster's particular business model, I've already demonstrated it's actually MORE profitable for them to have me rent a movie rip it in 20 minutes and return it. As for future sales loss, that's not relevant to this argument because of a crucial factor - I delete them after I've watched them. The Supreme Court (Universal City Studios v. Sony Corp., 464 U.S. 417 (1984)) ruled that a time shifted copy does not deprive them of revenue, and that was for a broadcast, not even a paid rental as in my case. I firmly believe that the courts would uphold my arguement that I rented the media that it's on but bought a license to watch the movie. In fact, Blockbuster's terms and conditions does not stipulate how many times you may watch a movie that you've rented, it merely stipulates how long you can keep the media. I've time-shifted the right to watch the movie until after the media is returned, but that doesn't negate my right to watch it, and the Supreme Court upheld my right to time shift it.

Re:I hate to be a stick in the mud, but...

[wfberg]

If they keep *telling* the various special interest groups what we're using to rape their respective industries, no fucking wonder there are new rounds of lawsuits every time large groups of people jump from one sinking ship to another...

Bastard media, be on our side for once.

You do realise that it's the media industry you're raping, right?

Re:Every movie recently released is secretly porn

[bradbeattie]

You're right on the money. This is where copyright breaks down and we need to choose one of several options.

• Find some kind of alternate method of digital rights management (Street_Performer_Protocol [wikipedia.org] is an example)
• Infringe upon people's rights to memory and expression (unjust, I'm willing to argue, but it's the route we're currently walking down)
• Some other option?

Either way, information that can be expressed as bits can be copied [cryptome.org]. We're going to have to address this somehow.

Re:The real problem with BT

[HD Webdev]

What we need is something analogous to IRC where all but the higher intelligence/true geeks can do their thing without it being flooded by idiots and junk. Also some sort of file verification system is needed beyond a user rating system that is pretty fool-proof and solid to keep things legit and flowing smoothly.

That would be much like USENET has been and still is. It's as fast as your newsfeed provider allows. News hosts can be found that hold files for at least 30 full days. Leeching doesn't hurt anyone. The initial part of the learning curve is high which stops a lot of people from uploading junk. File verification is easy. Don't download the file until it's been up for a few days. If it's bad/non-working then there will be plenty of replies mentioning that.

Re:quality over quantity

[MBGMorden]

eDonkey tends to have more persistent files. With a tracker you usually end up with a Window of but so long before either the tracker expires or all the seders remove it in favor of other files.

With the ed2k network, you find many more people who simply share out certain directories, so that those files are available whenever they're online, and for a very long period.

As such, I find the eMule is a MUCH better place to look for less popular things.

The drawback is that ed2k is usually a much slower way to get something. I usually see transfer rates around 15KB/s on Bittorrent, with a fast/popular file sometimes reaching around 100KB/s. When using eMule I usually see speeds closer to 4KB/s, with a really fast file sometimes hitting 20KB/s. Usually downloading a large file is a matter of hours on Bittorrent and a matter of days on eMule.

I use both quite a bit myself, but I think that I use eMule a bit more.

Re:my P2P round-up

[Antiocheian]

Much to the hapiness of regular, responsible emule users, people like you will never have a satisfactory experience of the ed2k-kad network.

You are a leecher.

You entire posting, informative as it is, it is a cookbook for leechers. You don't like bittorrent because you have to seed. Too bad for you. You don't like emule because it's slow. Has it ever occured to you that its slow because people like you refuse to share and you get little credits? You like Gnutella because it allows you leech freely. And you like messing up the usenet by abusing any part of the word "privilege" that it used it be.

I am glad you don't use ed2k. Just be aware that it works perfectly for those who contribute and those who share.

Re:The real problem with BT

[Anonymous Coward]

AC because I moderated...

It doesn't sound like you're really clear on how BT works... so I'll sprinkle excerpts from the BT FAQ [bittorrent.com] in with my own comments.

IMO is the whole tracker/seed deal. This part should have been made transparent to the point that users didn;t have to see or understand it. I personally never saw it as being that good of a system in the first place. It is not elegant nor does it lend itself to people using the software as it is intended.

How is this opaque? If BT is installed, I click on a BT link (which I need not understand), BT opens and begins downloading. I fail to see how eDonkey/gnutella/kazaa are "more transparent" than this.

As for needing a tracker & seed, how do other P2P's beat this? You can't download from shareaza unless at least one person is "seeding" there, either, and you can't search the network unless you connect to a peer (who works as your "tracker"). If anything, BT is distilled P2P, simpler than the others, because it omits the whole search/index system, and targets one file at a time.

The whole BT thing is a good idea for software releases and large files people are looking to download from a single site, say I go to a distro site and have a choice of FTP/HTTP/BT

Yes.

but to use it for P2P is just useless in my eyes.

Please describe for me how you could NOT use BT for P2P sharing [wikipedia.org]. BT is a P2P program because you are downloading the file from peers who are sharing it.

BT doesn't include a search & index system; it has always been intended to use the WWW for search and index, as opposed to including these features in the client, like gnutella, kazaa, etc.

The whole Zen "the interface is no interface" thing was a little unsettling too as I had no idea that my downloads were being slowed by my firewall back when BT first came out until I used a version that showed that there was a problem.

So you had a problem with the first version of BT, that was fixed in subsequent versions. And didn't you just ask for an interface where users don't have to understand the guts?

I still think there is a place for BT and software like it, but not for P2P filesharing.

You download pieces of files that are shared by peers. There is nothing else to it; that is P2P. If you have an alternate definition of P2P I'd love to hear it.

As much as I hate to admit it, I like having n00bs and clueless users on my system so I can access stuff easier and faster.

Yes.

BT was more for the tech savvy and they tend to be smart enough/greedy to never seed a download unless they happened to walk away from a download that completed.

Peachy, because it's not just the clueless n00bs that are uploading.

***

From the FAQ:

What is BitTorrent uploading from my machine?

Pieces of the file you're currently downloading. BitTorrent trades pieces you have with pieces your peers have.

I don't want you stealing my bandwidth! How can I stop it from uploading?

You could hack the source to not upload, but then your download rate would suck. BitTorrent downloaders engage in tit-for-tat with their peers, so leeches have very little success downloading.

***

So, you can't DL from BT without uploading, unless you're using some 1337 hack which would definitely put you in the tiny minority. Furthermore, constricting your upload bandwith narrows your dl bandwith, which nobody likes.

I find that with most files I download, I end up with a >1 ul/dl ratio--even if they stop immediately after completion.

That's right, no matter how greedy and tech-savvy I am, short of hacking my own client I will be uploading. Compare this to every other client I've used, where I invariably set

Re:Every movie recently released is secretly porn

[AK Marc]

Really? I've heard talk that sidewalks and roads should be private. If you want to get to your property, then you buy communal property (like a condo, but land only) from one place to another. If you want to travel long distances, then you need to get on the private toll roads and pay to use the road. The complete privatization of roads is something I've heard Libertarians talk about.

And if you think that Libertarians are for a standing military, then you are talking about a completely different Libertarian party than I've heard about. They discuss the savings of closing all foreign bases and shutting down the military. Let the states or communities organize all volunteer groups to protect us in the case of an invasion, but with little, if any, ability to project power to the other side of the globe.

No, I've seen little difference between the ideal government from a Libertarian point of view and no government at all.

Re:Pffft eDonkey

[Doctor O]

Actually, there are lots of people who believe that this [usenext.com] is a "brand new way of downloading". Of course, those are of the kind who came on the net when DSL was available and who have their machines on 24/7 just to download movies and music they'll never get to watch and listen to in their lifetimes.

I've given up on downloading years ago. I just don't care enough to wait days for downloads to complete and find out how to a) uncompress the shitty, obscure compression format du jour and b) how to convert the shitty, obscure codec du jour junk to something usable (or even just *play* it). Plus, if you factor in all associated cost like DSL and flat rate fees and electricity, that makes for a whole bunch of DVDs you can rent or CDs you can buy.