P2P Future Darkens as eDonkey Closes

By Nate Mook, BetaNews

September 28, 2005, 8:20 PM

eDonkey has become the latest victim of the recording industry's wrath following the Supreme Court's ruling against Grokster. In testimony at a U.S. Senate Judiciary Hearing on the future of P2P Wednesday, MetaMachine president Sam Yagan said his company was throwing in the towel.

The announcement follows news of the shut down of WinMX and the disappearance its Web site. On September 15, the RIAA sent out sent out letters to seven popular file sharing networks demanding they block copyrighted content or face legal action. eDonkey -- owned by MetaMachine -- was one of those recipients.

"Before I get to the core of my opening statement, I'd like to make it clear to the Committee that we have replied to the RIAA's cease-and-desist letter and I have personally committed to Mr. Sherman -- which I reiterate today -- that we are in the process of complying with their request," Yagan said.

In written remarks, Yagan detailed that MetaMachine will "convert eDonkey's user base to an online content retailer operating in a closed P2P environment," and said he expects "such a transaction to take place as soon as we can reach a settlement with the RIAA."

Yagan's testimony also provided insight into the content of the letters being sent to P2P networks.

"These letters threaten imminent litigation -- not only against the companies, but also against their executives and directors -- based on the music industry's interpretation of the MGM v. Grokster ruling unless the firms immediately take steps to eliminate infringement."

Yagan went on to tell the Committee that the Grokster decision means the end of all small P2P companies - not because they are liable for inducing copyright infringement, but because they simply cannot afford to prove otherwise in court.

"Because the Grokster standard requires defining a company's intent, the decision was essentially a call to litigate. This is critical because most startup companies just don't have very much money," explained Yagan. "Whereas I could have managed to pay for a summary judgment hearing under Betamax, I simply couldn't afford the protracted litigation needed to prove my case in court under Grokster."

The real winner of Grokster, Yagan warned, may not be the record labels and movie studios, but rather rouge P2P developers who move offshore and go underground. "The next generation of open P2P applications will travel even further down the road of anonymity and secrecy," he said.

"With many P2P applications offshore or simply open sourced, the entities that will end up being most devastated by Grokster will be those -- like us -- that set up shop in the US, abided by American laws, paid taxes, and, at least in eDonkey's case, tried to license content from the entertainment industry."

Lastly, Yagan asked the Committee to clarify the Supreme Court's decision on Grokster, noting that many new companies cannot be sure where they stand with respect to the law.

"As you know, eBay recently acquired the P2P company Skype for more than two billion dollars," Yagan said. "Note that Skype was founded offshore; it would be a real tragedy and a blow to our economy should all technology entrepreneurs take their innovations offshore."

Add a Comment (155 Comments)

BetaNews reserves the right to remove any comment at any time for any reason. Please keep your responses appropriate and on topic. Foul language and personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Name (required):

E-mail (required):

Enter Your Comment:

By spikeyredcactus

edited Jun 21, 2007 - 6:50 PM

argh, they have shut down eDonkey!, they have SHUT IT DOWN! unbelievable...
(thoes basterds, dont take any notice of the your ip address has been logged because it hasnt, and you are virtually un-tracble to them, so dont take any notice of that either!)

DONT take any notice of this pathetic attempt to try to scare you to not download any more music, DONT do what they want you to do, download your music ect. from bittorrent or mIRC(with the xdcc klipper add on)and show thoes basterds whos boss!

Score: 0

By mashman

edited Nov 17, 2006 - 11:43 PM

Hmm i was away from the internet for a while and went to www.edonkey.com and got a nasty message saying downloading is stealing thats cool .

Then it showed my IP address and said it recorded it sound like big brother is watching me hey hey WHAT"S that noise hide the kids honey

Score: 0

By AlphaOmega

posted Sep 13, 2006 - 9:16 PM

For all those with edonkey: starting the application while disconnected will override the shutdown command, then just connect to the internet and edonkey will run exactly as before. Overnet and the bittorrent as well.

Score: 0

By Velociryx

posted Sep 13, 2006 - 4:23 PM

No...I cannot agree with those who have said that P2P is stealing (implication: Those poor artists who are due their royalties).

* It has already been demonstrated that P2P doesn't dent sales. Of course, given that the evidence runs contrary to what the RIAA wants to hear, they can't have that....

* If I buy a CD, I do exactly that..>I BUY it...I don't borrow it, and I don't rent it. The content that gets onto the networks had to have been purchased by someone, and thus, the artist (and the record label) have already been paid their due. Just as I can go make a tape or a cd copy of an album I bought and give it to as many people as I want, so too, can I share my files on a P2P network. No difference, except that it's infinitely faster and cheaper than me buying CD's to burn for anybody who wants them. So? The fact that it is faster and cheaper is not a crime. It's called technological progress, and it's here to stay.

I am speaking to you from the perspective of an artist, btw. I'm an author, and involved in a (computer) game development project aimed at bringing a completely free game to the public, and I FULLY support P2P and everything it stands for.

I've published all my books independently (through booksurge.com) and I can tell you that NOTHING would please me more than to see my works appear on a list server somewhere. That would rock. :)

-=Vel=-

Score: 0

By frogshak

edited Feb 26, 2007 - 9:48 PM

You go Vel, more power to you.

Score: 0

By AlphaOmega

posted Sep 12, 2006 - 1:23 AM

In an attempt to stop illegal downloading, the supreme court took a bold move today and decided to shut down the entire internet. Said one member of RIAA, " The internet is used primarly for sharing stolen copyright materials and porn, we see no other way but to shut it down entirely."
In an unanimous decision the supreme court voted to shut down the internet entirely, causing a mass panick as billions of users flooded the internet in a last ditch effort to download some free porn or perhaps the new movie "world trade center".
Amazingly only the rich and middle class were affected as the majority of the poor don't own a computer. George W. Bush was quoted as saying" The internet was invented by Al Gore, so of course it was going to have to be shut down eventually, I mean we just can't have normal people sharing information and trading stolen copyright materials online like they were."
Critics of the "Internet shutdown" set up their own private servers and as a result there was only about 3.2 secs of actual downtime for the internet. Still it was yet another bold move by our countries leaders to try and deal a harsh blow to criminals, terrorists and perverts everywhere.
A 20 billion dollar contract was awarded to Haliburton who will spend the next few years researching how to end this terrorists' internet once and for all. In addition to the entire internet being shutdown a small P2P program "edonkey" was also shut down, however as most users will point out, except for an annoying popup, the edonkey system is still running exactly as it use to.
"My edonkey downloads have never been faster" said one edonkey user," I am pushing an easy 300kb down, as well all the edonkey links are still working, now if I can just get rid of this annoying pop up."
The Department of Defense has drawn up plans for attacking these private internet servers, it is expected that nearly a million bunkerbusters will be dropped over the next few months as they begin the campaign to end the internet once and for all.

Score: 0

By el gazzar

posted Dec 25, 2005 - 11:32 AM

hello my dear custmers

Score: 0

By el gazzar

edited Dec 25, 2005 - 11:27 AM

dear adnan_hp2:

to be my good custmer

thanks,

Score: 0

By preveet

posted Oct 22, 2005 - 3:57 AM

eDonkey download comes with the "Accoona" spyware pretending to be a toolbar. It took me days to get rid of it and finally had to reinstall my firewall as it rendered it inoperable. Accoona will hijack your system. Thanks eDonkey!! (see cnet review "accoona")

Score: 0

By lakhan

edited Oct 19, 2005 - 4:52 AM

copycontrol version 3.8 with seral no

Score: 0

By stoney1

edited Oct 5, 2005 - 11:03 PM

Wake up record companies! Pay the musician for their talent! Stop pushing them for more, more,more and let them creat real music for the general public. Start your own download sites and charge .75 cent per song. We can afford to pay a decent price for a quality CD full of something WE want to buy not something you want to push off on us for your personal gain. (PAY THE ARTIST!)Make good music available!!!

Score: 0

By FiFo

edited Oct 3, 2005 - 1:45 PM

so, will bittorrent network improve?
coz many people largely depend on it in arabic cocuntries!!! (like Iraq)

Score: 0

By John_Bedin

posted Oct 3, 2005 - 12:46 PM

BTW I HAVE DOWNLOADED HUNDREDS OF ALBULMS THANKS TO WINMX.IAM CANADIAN .I AM AWATING TO BE ARRESTED .

Score: 0

By Pegusis2

posted Oct 3, 2005 - 11:02 PM

You are Joe Simpleton.... Seek and yee shall find.

Score: 0

By John_Bedin

edited Oct 3, 2005 - 12:40 PM

Simple, do you want to defuse the RIAA STOP BUYING MUSIC FROM THESE MORONS.BETTER YET BUY AND SHARE AMONGST YOUR FRIENDS, RELATIVES AND EXTENDED FAMILIES .HIT THEM IN THE BOTTOM LINE.WHERTE IT HURTS .THEY HAVE BEEN PROFITING FROM ARTISTS FOR AGES . THIS IS THE INTERNET . SPEAK UP AND REFUSE TO TO TOLERARATE THEIR EGENOMY. FIGHT BACK,IT'S YOUR RIGHT UNDER THE FIRST AMENDMENT.ARE YOU AMERCANS MICE OR MEN?

Score: 0

By turbo_nissan_racer

posted Oct 3, 2005 - 10:13 AM

RIAA is an arsehole and he should get killed by someone, do it!

Score: 0

By turbo_nissan_racer

edited Oct 3, 2005 - 9:42 AM

I AM RIGHT!

Score: 0

By turbo_nissan_racer

edited Oct 3, 2005 - 8:14 AM

RIAA is run by the JEWS

DONT BUY CD'S ANYMORE OR
YOU WILL BE SUPPORTING
JEWS WHO KILL & RAPE WHITE
PEOPLE THE WORLD OVER.

Score: 0

By nightops

posted Oct 3, 2005 - 9:17 AM

Friggin' retard. Even if Jews ran it, what difference does that make? You must be a troller or a flame-seeking bas****. Rid the world of your incompetence, please.

Score: 0

By turbo_nissan_racer

posted Oct 3, 2005 - 9:44 AM

wot difference? becasue the jews are gonna rape you're mom, thats why....

***************
*RIAA ARE JEWS*
***************

EVERYONE WATCH OUT FOR THE JEW!!!!

Score: 0

By turbo_nissan_racer

posted Oct 3, 2005 - 9:47 AM

I AM THE RIGHT ONE HEAR, JEWS ARE EVERYWHERE, THEY GONNA RAPE YOU'RE MUM IN THE ARSE

Score: 0

By chady

edited Nov 3, 2006 - 1:06 PM

Idiot!! Ever wonder what Jesus was before he created Christianity - he was a ****ing Jew you bible thumping pimple on the anus of humanity. Leave religion where is supposed to be between the Priest and his alter boys!!!

Funny never heard of a Rabbi didling kids unlike priests. Never heard of a Rabbi chopping kids hands off for stealing like an Iman.

If your life sucks it is most likely your fault not some other organization you wish to spout your excuses for being an idiot on.

By the way I'm not a Jew I'm a human being

Score: 0

By CKman

edited Oct 3, 2005 - 12:15 AM

They will never kill the P2P community, look at what happened when Napster went down, Kazaa and several others popped up and took their place (with Kazaa looking similar to Napster except with more things than music).

P2P community will never die.

Score: 0

By spiffyjeff

posted Oct 1, 2005 - 7:25 PM

I stop buying cds and buying/renting movies, especially when it directly benefits RIAA.

It's called boycott. If they think targetting p2p will increase their funds, we must prove them wrong. Don't want to be controlled by RIAA? Then stop giving them your money!

Score: 0

By roj

posted Oct 1, 2005 - 1:55 PM

eDonkey is an open source protocol. It's for all intents and purposes immortal. Future darken? More BetaNews sensationalism. I swear, this rag is turning into Slashd... er, The Regist.. , er, National Inquire...

*yawn*

Score: 0

By Mr Opinion :)

edited Oct 1, 2005 - 2:30 AM

First, if we allow the RIAA to go any further, then we should close all libraries, I see NO difference.

Second, I don't download music. I prefer to show the artist my 'respect for their performance' by buying a CD. I have NO liking for the RIAA at all, and I am disgusted they get a dime of my money, I buy a CD for the artist only.

Third, for all you folks that want real music, and complain about today's music, I have one sentence for you .. "support your local bands". That's the way music gets going that is original. If you don't support local bands, then your causing the problem, since corporate america will just turn out more bubble gum music. Get out to a club and check them out, they need your support.

Finally, Can anyone provide a link for anyone that has actually went to court in any of the personal cases? Curiously, I cannot find a single one.

Score: 0

By Arakiel

edited Oct 1, 2005 - 1:04 PM

To your first point: The difference here is the difference between borrowing and sharing. The library loans the person a book and the person eventually brings it back. At any one time only one person retains the rights to read the book. When you share files you are sharing multiple copies without anyone ever giving up their right to the music, and without the copyright holder being compensated for the extra copies.

To you second point: Thank god there are at least a few people like you who have a sense of right and wrong and justice.

To your third point: Nicely said, local bands can produce wonderful music and some even provide it for free or at least low cost.

Lastly, I dont think any of these cases ever hit court, if they have they haven't been publicised very well. I can think of a few earlier cases of mistaken identity that caught the attention of the media but personally, I think that once the perp gets caught they come to their senses and realize they haven't got a leg to stand on so they settle...well...that, and, most of the thieves are college students or younger who cant afford a lawyer anyway. I havent got a single statistic to back that claim up, just my opinion.

Score: 0

By twosheds

posted Oct 1, 2005 - 5:45 AM

The whole point is that these cases never go to court because no-one can afford to take the RIAA on - it's a case of 'capitulate or be squashed like a bug'. There will never be any hearing or discussion of these issues.

Score: 0

By Phoenixmcmlxi

edited Mar 11, 2006 - 6:07 PM

In reality, these cases do not go to court because the RIAA hasn't got a case. They lost any leverage they might have had when they said nothing after the release of the VCR.

Let me explain.

A few months ago the RIAA announced that they were 'Suing' 300+ people that they had Identified as having 'Shared' copywrighted material over the Internet using KAZAA and/or KAZAA Lite. (Notice I said 'Shared' not 'Downloaded'. Sharing is 'Illegal', downloading is not, hmmm...) I immediately wrote a letter to RIAA, giving them my name and address, Phone #, etc. Told them I am a DJ, I have downloaded several thousand songs off the internet, as well as movies and other sundry files. I use the music files in my DJ business. Come get me, if you dare. And if you do, be prepaired to answer these few questions honestly; 1) Do you own a VCR? 2) Have it hooked up to a TV? 3) Have you ever recorded anything off of the TV onto VCR tape using the VCR? Yes, Yes, and You Have? Hmmm... Seems to me that you just stole that programming from the people who made it. You certainly didn't pay for it. so, either downloading video from the TV to the VCR is illegal also, or else downloading music from the internet to the Computer isn't. You can't have it both ways. To this day, I have heard nothing

Score: 0

By Spasticus_XIII

edited Oct 1, 2005 - 2:10 AM

who cares, honestly just move to the eMule! or something. I must say I'm sick to death of USA and its s***ty laws against P2P, its a program, that enables people to share files, you cant stop people from distrbuting music on the networks, its built for sharing files, music can be made into files, if you want to take someone to caught take the CD ripping programs or something, or work out a new way to use the protection on the market. Instead of hunting a killing small companies that produce programs for convience of finding files placed there out of their jurisdiction. If you cant stop them distibuting porn etc!.. bloody hell

Score: 0

By DmytroL

edited Oct 3, 2005 - 2:23 AM

As far as I know, music file formats have a structure and can be recognized by a computer program. More than that, there are file formats that can contain licensing information along with the digitized music data. So, why don't the makers of file sharing software just add a piece of code preventing anyone from sharing copyrighted media?

I do understand smart geeks will find a workaround, but most likely it will incur either altering the software itself, or altering the music files - both actions being unlawful. Thus, it will be the sharer's responsibility if copyrighted content becomes publicly available.

Score: 0

By Pegusis2

posted Oct 1, 2005 - 12:13 AM

All I can say is.... Yeeppppie!!! and another one bytes the dust... another one bytes the dust...

Score: 0

By spiffyjeff

posted Sep 30, 2005 - 9:25 PM

You don't know what you're missing until it's gone... Things especially legal, like skype, should just temporarily, for a week or two, disable their service. All should do this at the same time, get a lot of people mad, and make them aware what they will be missing. It just might end up with a lot of people writing letters pro peer to peer, and cease companies from doing this crap.

Score: 0

By squallie

edited Sep 30, 2005 - 8:37 PM

**** ALL U SUPREME COURT ****ERS..WHATS IT GONNA HURT TO DOWNLOAD STUFF? U bas****S STILL MAKE ****ING PROPHET..PLUS BANDS ARE KNOWN WHEN PUT ON FILE SHARING STUFF....THATS WHERE THEY CAN GET NOTICED

Score: 0

By Arakiel

posted Sep 30, 2005 - 8:45 PM

ROFLMAO...that was so bad it was funny as s***.

Score: 0

By iknowyouknow

posted Sep 30, 2005 - 7:25 PM

Think about this... its only over recent times the RIAA has manged to nail peeps over P2P.. ONLY recently.. The reason why is simple, it was on the UK News about 4 moths ago, a chinese guy has wrote a program , this is being used by the RIAA.. It penetrates anything and everything.. firewalls, Peerguardian, the lot. It sniffs out your IP, reports home (to the RIAA) they then contact the ISP and like in a short period of time, you have a bill on the doormat. This is true guys.

Score: 0

By Phoenixmcmlxi

edited Mar 11, 2006 - 5:46 PM

Not sure where you came up with this one. In actuality all 300+ people who were 'Sued' by the RIAA were using KAZAA or KAZAA lite, both of which work through a central server, similar to Napster. Hence, the the reason why they were trackable.

Does pose an interresting question though; Did the RIAA purchase the alleged spyware program from the Chinese guy, or did they download it for free off the internet?

Score: 0

By roj

posted Oct 3, 2005 - 9:45 AM

...and that program would be an invasion of privacy and thus illegal under the Prvacy Act in Canada.

I **ADORE** our Privacy Act.

Pity you people south of the border did the "bend over and cough" thing when legislators started taking your rights away.

Score: 0

By mashman

posted Nov 18, 2006 - 12:07 AM

Ok just you head over to www.edonkey.com and find out . I was in stealth mode on my firewall and it showed me my IP address and said it was logged .

Score: 0

By iknowyouknow

edited Sep 30, 2005 - 7:20 PM

What you guys forget is , irrespective wether its the RIAA or a software company its THEFT. Stealing music, thats it. Wake up, knock off the excuses and "reasons to be right" and smell the fockin coffee, its pure and simple , Dont STEAL, Dont get sued!

Score: 0

By mashman

posted Nov 18, 2006 - 12:01 AM

Well i really don't see it as stealing because it's not like i'm walking into a store and grabbing a CD and walking out .

I see it like this Peer A has a song i want to borrow so i type in the name and he is willing to let me use it . Mind you Peer A never mails me a CD or anything . Now me being Peer B wants to repay him for letting me > Borrow Borrows < one of mine .

You really want to know the truth IF CNN & the rest of the news folks didn't rub the music polices nose in it they would not have done anything .

Really why doesn't the music police SUE the makers of CD burners the one i have hooked up to my system has only one thought in mind and that is to copy music . So what is the diffrence if i buy one CD like Peer A did and just start making everyone i know a copy same as P2P if you asked me

Score: 0

By spiffyjeff

posted Sep 30, 2005 - 9:10 PM

exactly, so why kill the technology!

Score: 0

By beta_animal

posted Oct 1, 2005 - 1:15 PM

They're trying to kill the technology because it's easier and cheaper to sue a few software companies than it is to sue several million individuals worldwide.

I think the technology has its benefits, and the software distributers shouldn't be held responsible for users actions - it's like suing car manufacturers because their cars are capable of breaking the speed limit. However, in all honesty, probably about 90% of files shared by P2P file-sharing programs are illegal. Sharing music and movies is an illegal activity, and like it or not, by sharing files you are breaking the law. The RIAA / MPAA should go about it in a different way, but the outcome really has to be the same... to stop illegal piracy.

Score: 0

By xoineg

posted Sep 30, 2005 - 3:54 PM

The music companies can close everything down, but at the end there are just killing themselves. There are many ways to share music and some of them don’t include the internet. You can actually take thousands of songs from an ipod or a friend’s computer or just copy cd’s. Plus if you buy it online from places like itunes you end up spending less money since you only pay for a few songs since most albums today are just crap. Who wants to pay 15-20 bucks for a 18 songs and of those 18 just 3 are good.

Score: 0

By mfarmilo

posted Sep 30, 2005 - 2:49 PM

The really shameful thing about this is that the P2P companies are being labelled as 'guilty until proven innocent'. They are effectively being forced to prove their innocence, by companies that can afford to keep the process going until it bankrupts the victim anyway.

Kind of makes you want to take an oath that you will never, ever again buy a music cd.

Score: 0

By NappyHead

posted Sep 30, 2005 - 11:00 AM

I own about 2000 CDs, I've bought all of them. If I decide to share them with my friends is that the same as file sharing. I get pissed when I hear all the record companies complain about sales. Why is there a need to put copy controle on a CD I just bought, I own it and should be able to do with it as I please. I don't donload music, I love the whole package, inserts and all. I love owning my music, but I think I should be able be able to copy it to my computer, for my Squeeze Box, and make a copy to play in the car. Lower the price of CDs, and stop selling all that cookie cutter s&^t they call music, and sell some real music.

Score: 0

By blaurier

posted Sep 30, 2005 - 6:02 PM

That's the problem NH. What the courts have given to RIAA & MPAA is that We the Consumer don't own what we have bought anymore.They(RIAA & MPAA)own it. And they will tell you what you can or cannot do with what you bought. So if you loan a CD to your friend they lose a sale and could sue you for the loss.

Score: 0

By wincement

posted Sep 30, 2005 - 3:10 PM

2,000 X $15/CD (average) = $30,000

Wow... you've spent a lot on music. My car is worth about an 8th of that lol.

Score: 0

By NappyHead

posted Oct 1, 2005 - 12:23 AM

Somethings you can't put a price on, some people spend more that that on coke in a month.

Score: 0

By bleh427

edited Sep 30, 2005 - 3:09 AM

The funny thing is that this will basically change absolutely nothing. The eDonkey client will just go commercial and noone will use it, but the network will continue long after that company is dead. Something like 90% of the eDonkey network is compromised of people using eMule anyway. eDonkey's client isn't even a major player on their own network.

Score: 0

By Jedite

posted Sep 30, 2005 - 9:25 AM

Yeah its kinda funny that Emule is such a better client than eDonkey and it is used more on eDonkeys network.

Score: 0

By adamdawg

posted Sep 30, 2005 - 1:33 AM

I'll download music for as long as I live. The RIAA can kiss it. I'm tired of reading threats upon threats. Their history inspires me to strengthen my actions.

Score: 0

By iknowyouknow

posted Sep 30, 2005 - 7:21 PM

Thats an adult statement. Lol

Score: 0

By kevf219

edited Sep 30, 2005 - 2:26 AM

dont be too c***y there buddy, i got sued by them, and my college didn't exactly approve either. just a note, peer guardian doesnt work.

Score: 0

By Velocition

posted Sep 30, 2005 - 9:35 AM

I suppose thats your fault for doing it at a college campus...

If you're at home, its another story.

Score: 0

By bigsexy022870

posted Sep 29, 2005 - 11:39 PM

This is total BS. I just have to hope this is a bump in the road for file sharing. I'm not about to being paying for music and stuff again.

Score: 0

By Pegusis2

edited Oct 1, 2005 - 12:18 AM

bs... and you're not about to start paying for stuff again? Well now you've spoke for all the P2P folks... not about to pay for it again. Nope and it's not stealing is that right? "...not about to start paying for that stuff."

You'd be a poor speaker for the P2P community.

Score: 0

By aimini

posted Sep 29, 2005 - 10:10 PM

One p2p chapter ends, another begins

The all-in-one P2P sharing software
http://www.aimini.com/

An all-in-one P2P software, that through the use of PozID, IP, hostname or URL address you can directly connect between users. This enables direct file-transfer, as well as peer-to-peer (P2P) file-sharing and can make for faster searches and downloads of all types. This direct connect function also allows for collaboration over the Internet and corporate intranets, holding real-time conversations where users can see, hear, and exchange information with each other.

Aimini P2P software supports industry standards and offers rich data transmission, audio transmission, and video transmission capabilities in a seamless, easy-to-use client. They also provide with the software an Address Book and an FTP client.

Score: 0

By twosheds

posted Sep 30, 2005 - 6:41 AM

Stop spamming, that's commercial software, which has NO FUTURE in this sector of the 'market'.

Score: 0

By wincement

posted Sep 29, 2005 - 11:17 PM

umm... yeah... that wasn't an ad.

Score: 0

By midfingr

edited Sep 29, 2005 - 2:43 PM

I haven't bought a CD in years. But not because I use P2P for music, it's just that there's simply nothing worth buying. I'm old. I have a record collection (around 500 or so), that I'm digitizing on to CD and DVD. I worked for and bought those records like millions of others.

When I see this kind of thing, it makes the hairs on the back of my neck stand up. I mean, the RIAA killed the DAT consumer market. When CDs first arrived on the scene, they were complete garbage compared to an LP. We were expected to (and did) buy these pieces of crap for $25+ And the hype was absolute extorsion, with words like 'indestructable' - yeah right.

And now 30 or so years later, the music I grew up with is gone and replaced with a watered-down pale version of what is called popular music.

Give me a break.

My point is not some much about P2P, but more about the weasels that represent (and always have) the new world order and corprate control on a scale never seen before in the history of entertainment. We don't get to see and hear any new really talented people anymore, just fashion statements to sell more soda products.

It's all about the mighty $$$z and control, control, control over our most sacred desires. P-ricks. I'm absoulety sick and tired of having rap-ditty-dap-dap hip-slop-crock shuved down my throat every time I turn on the TV, Internet, and or radio, and given the 'grand illusion' that I should be living my life they way the media wants me to. -- **** off

Score: 0

By midfingr

posted Oct 2, 2005 - 5:44 PM

Whoa. Thank you so much for the feedback. I'm humbled. It is good to see that there are so many people out there that are as passionate about music as I am.
Much appreciated!

Score: 0

By ConceptJunkie

posted Sep 30, 2005 - 7:45 PM

I used to feel like you, midfingr, until about the mid-90's when the Progressive Renaissance occurred. I used to think the best days of music were in the past, but not any more. You need to dig hard, but there is so much good, intelligent, sophisticated music out there. You often won't find it in a record store, except maybe the biggest Tower Records, and even then it's a crap shoot.

Whether you like "classic" rock, jazz, art rock from the 70's (now called "progressive"), classical, folk or many other genres, there is good music to be found. Here's the funny thing, the RIAA compamies rarely sell it. It's the independent labels. I recommend Inside Out, but there are many others. The members of the RIAA are the companies that largely puke on a CD and pay the radio stations to play it. It's OK to make money, but they are not about art. They are not about creativity. They are about forcing crap down your throat

I _do_ buy all my music... and there's more interesting stuff out there than I can afford.

Unfortunately the on-line music download stores have crappy selections... I usually can't even find the more popular of the artists I listen to, but there's always Amazon, as well as dozens of smaller on-line stores for buying CDs.

Once you buy a CD, it's yours. Good quality. No DRM. Nothing else can beat it, and probably never will.

Score: 0

By midfingr

edited Oct 2, 2005 - 5:51 PM

Thank you. I checked out the Inside Out site. Very cool! There is one site that I looked in to at: allofmp3.com. Don't know if you've seen it, but it has some half decent downloads - no DRM! and the prices are unbelievable cheap - they way it should be.

Thanks again.

Score: 0

By twosheds

edited Sep 30, 2005 - 6:46 AM

A-f***ing-men. At least there's an upside to being of an age where you remember good music and regard the pap that is put out now as dross - no need to get ulcers about the RIAA. This is going to be a long struggle, but I sincerely hope they don't achieve what they're trying to - i.e. getting the 'copying' genie back in the bottle instead of reviewing their pricing and quality policies.

Score: 0

By uberfly

posted Sep 29, 2005 - 7:58 PM

I feel your pain, but SOMEONE is making them powerful. Your anger should be more towards the dumb animals in the feed line than the zoo keepers handing out the gruel.

Score: 0

By swlaurier

edited Sep 29, 2005 - 10:24 PM

Uberfly, your right that we the consumer have made them powerful with our purchasing, but what we give can or will be taken away. The RIAA, MPAA ultimately forget that we the consumer pay the piper. I would love to have the books open for inspection by government/private auditors to find out really how much truth they “losing millions” from P2P downloads. You and I know that they would stonewall til hell freezes over before they submit to it.
It’s time to show the emperors (RIAA, MPAA) have no clothes.

Score: 0

By blaurier

posted Sep 29, 2005 - 4:29 PM

Your very correct midfingr. The RIAA, MPAA their God is the Almighty $$. They do not care about the artist’s only their bottom line and how much they can squeeze out of the artist and the consumer.
We no longer own what we buy from these buffoons, we only lease what they want us to hear or see and they will change their colleted brain cell when they see fit give it too us again and again.
It would only take one day of virtually no sales from any venue to let them know that the consumer has had enough of their Bullying.

Score: 0

By Cerviperus

posted Sep 29, 2005 - 3:03 PM

I've read all of the comments on this page thus far, and I felt this one warranted a reply. Well written and thought out. If more people put as much thought into posts and replies there wouldn't be the over-abundant flame wars we see every day on the comments here at BN.

Score: 0

By uberfly

posted Sep 29, 2005 - 1:56 PM

You want to stop the RIAA, stop buying the crap that the companies they represent produce. The consumer is what makes them strong. Are they (RIAA) being overzealous? Probably. Though not sure why everybody is so against people/companies protecting their copyrighted property. Create something that everyone else steals, them come back here and you'll whine a different tune.

Score: 0

By pwned_j00

posted Sep 29, 2005 - 2:13 PM

And then get a REAL job.

Score: 0

By wincement

posted Sep 29, 2005 - 2:07 PM

Well said.

Score: 0

By pwned_j00

posted Sep 29, 2005 - 12:19 PM

P2P is a fad.

It's fed via IRC (Another tech where you depend on another user's bandwidth) and NNTP.

NNTP. That's it. It's been around longer (as UUCP) than the internet itself. MPAA and RIAA can't touch it. Music, movies, tv shows, porn, pics, lossless and hd.

All a few clicks away and 500Mbit+ speeds.

P2P. Doesn't. Even. Come. Close.

Score: 0

By rstevensjr

posted Sep 29, 2005 - 1:48 PM

P2P is not a fad...it is here to stay and the RIAA & MPAA wants it to. I mean they are getting people to settle of 3 to 5 thousand dollars for a couple of hundred songs. If you break it down they make more money per song or per album by going after people on P2P networks.If they really wanted to stop it they will go to the source of the problem. Insiders, people at CD or DVD pressing plants, the guy running the projector at movie theater or the guy that gets a advance copy of a CD at a radio station. If they went after the source of the problem they could really stop it...but wait...why....they can sell a CD for anywhere between 14 to 20 dollars or.......sue someone and get 40, 50 , 60 dollars for that same album.
They are not losing money.....what needs to happen if them to sue the wrong person. I mean someone that will fight it all the way...appeal after appeal.....think about...they never sue anybody that has the money or the desire to fight back....shows there true colors.

Score: 0

By pwned_j00

posted Sep 29, 2005 - 2:10 PM

feh.

Whatever.

Let 'em play their games. I'll stick with my "anything digital for $10 a month" plan and sit back an laugh at 'em while I watch my commercial free TV, my DVD quality movies that I get to see @ home before they're released, and listen to my lossless tunes.

F0ck 'em.

Score: 0

By wincement

posted Sep 29, 2005 - 2:06 PM

"think about...they never sue anybody that has the money or the desire to fight back....shows there true colors"

Well, if you think about it even more... the people that would have enough money to fight them... wouldn't need to download music in the first place =/

Score: 0

By pwned_j00

posted Sep 29, 2005 - 2:12 PM

No one needs to download music.

You high?

Score: 0

By wincement

posted Sep 29, 2005 - 2:40 PM

What I mean is they would have more than enough money to buy it. Why wait for 2-3Kbps downloads when you could just buy it without any real loss? $20/CD is immaterial to the kind of people that could actually take on the RIAA (which... is just about no one).

Score: 0

By googun

edited Sep 29, 2005 - 11:35 AM

The record companies keep ranting about how much money they lose on illegal copies. Have they any idea how much money the CUSTOMERS lose on legal CDs, and what a lousy investment a music CD really is???
Buy a chart CD in a shop and then put it on eBay. You will get almost nothing for it.
Sony, EMI, et al, get with the beat, your product is over-priced! Look at iTunes and you see that people ARE prepared to pay a fair price for music.

Score: 0

By kholdstare

posted Sep 30, 2005 - 2:56 PM

tell me about it most CD's I buy usully have 2 or 3 good songs on them and thats mostly because the CD on comes with 9 or 10 songs on it!!!! and wonder why prople will not spend 15 to 20 dollars on a music cd.

Score: 0

By citizen420

posted Sep 29, 2005 - 10:30 AM

even tho this dosent affect me toooo mutch, this is sad news, for those who were using eDonkey, all i can recomend is "the pirate bay" or "strong dc"

Score: 0

By Jedite

posted Sep 29, 2005 - 9:36 AM

So let me get this straight, if a service or item can be used for illegal activity then said item must be banned from use? HMM.. I guess we should start pilling up all those freaking guns Joe Bob and Carl keep in their house eh? I mean out of all the Murders out there on the street, how many are caused by guns? Thats right, so by this whole P2P ruling i guess we better start collecting these.
OH AND START SUING THE GUN MANUFACTURERS.

Oh I forgot, the courts dont really care about Joe the consumer, they are too busy swimming in the pay off money from the big Corporations.

Wether you like it or not, P2P is here to stay. I personally am tired of paying 15bucks for 1 or 2 songs then the rest is sub standard music. Its freaking ridiculous how much these ppl make.

A freaking doctor who works his BUTT off going to school, then saving lives day in day out, doesnt make 10% what some artists make. Oh they loosing money, you know what @#$%@ em. They have enough money.

Hey RIAA/MPAA why dont you take your head out of your ********, and do some constructive, how about actually promoting creativity amongst your artists, o thats right, they dont need creativity when you can just sue your way into more money. bunch of chumps.

Score: 0

By LostProphet

posted Sep 30, 2005 - 10:30 AM

P2P is here to stay, the more the RIAA compalins and sues people, the more computer programmers go stealth and create a new p2p.

Second I am an IT admin for multiple hospitals & other companies and trust me the doctors make a pretty large chunk of money.

So why do aritist make more you ask??? Simple an artist sells there talent for what 15 to 20 bucks per CD. ( alomst everyone has that much money ) A Doctors talent cost 1000's of dollars and most people can not afford it, and health care does not cover most stuff, so many people due without. Also docotrs have to deal with mal-practice suites.

It to bad we can't sue the artist for only writting 2 good songs out of the 24 that are on the cd. 20 bucks for 2 songs out of 24 songs, now thats theft. ;)-

Score: 0

By wincement

edited Sep 29, 2005 - 1:52 PM

The only problem with your analogy, is that guns are used for legit reasons most of the time.

P2P is not. (some of the time it is, but mostly it isn't)

Score: 0

By Jedite

posted Sep 29, 2005 - 3:14 PM

Really? Most of the uses guns have is for illegal activity. Sure ppl use them for self defense and or hunting. But for the most part what kills ppl? ppl with guns thats who.

P2P can be used for legal stuff to, and it is used for that, however most of the publicity is around the Illegal side of P2P.

They are going after a service that serves both the legal and illegal activity. Thats what Gun Companies are. Guns can be used to both legal and illegal activity.

Score: 0

By jjdavis

posted Sep 29, 2005 - 10:10 AM

I agree with Jedite. If the RIAA spent so much time and effort developing and promoting fresh new talent instead of worrying about piracy and alienating their customers, we'd have a new Renaissance in music instead of the contstant same old retreads.

Score: 0

By Maxwolf

posted Sep 29, 2005 - 8:30 AM

Yagan made very good points...the first being about the rouge P2P developers who are going to push for complete anonymity on the internet and there are several projects out there right now doing just that. (ex. http://tor.eff.org/).

The other being the cold fact that money hungry rules like this and the MPAA/RIAA breathing down everyone's neck will lead to people not even bothering with the US in terms of support and the next big things in technology mihght not have anything to do with the US...

On the side, I really like how the MPAA has that slogan "Illegal Downloading: Inappropriate for all ages" even when they are in P2P death mode they are still the corporate entity as always coming up with the same boring content.

Score: 0

By tipsyboy

edited Sep 29, 2005 - 12:59 PM

You are right and you are wrong.

This whole attitude of "Copyrighted Stuff" is not only limited to the U.S.A. - it's going on in Europe, too.

But they won't stop developping new technology, because technology is the only means to rule the world. And 90 per cent of ALL technology has been invented and developped in the United States of America. (Nothing to be proud of, though, in my eyes . . .)

Score: 0

By sjc001

posted Sep 29, 2005 - 9:24 AM

With the way that the USA is becoming anti-tech and anti-science and moving ever faster towards being a theocracy that is going to happen anyways. In fact its already happening.

Score: 0

By wincement

posted Sep 29, 2005 - 9:01 AM

"The other being the cold fact that money hungry rules like this and the MPAA/RIAA breathing down everyone's neck will lead to people not even bothering with the US in terms of support and the next big things in technology mihght not have anything to do with the US..."

That's a pretty big statement. So you think two organizations, having nothing to do with diplomacy, are going to affect foreign relations that much?

I'm definitely don't like the MPAA/RIAA, but I think that's a bit much.

Score: 0

By jrizznit

posted Sep 29, 2005 - 12:06 PM

It's foreign investment, not relations. And yes, if the U.S. is seen as hostile to innovation, fewer innovative companies will set up shop here.

In broad terms, innovation means a few companies start changing an industry, and long established companies start losing money. The dinosaurs eventually disappear. Think about the advent of the car, the phone, the computer - every innovation causes casualties. The RIAA is just fighting for its life.

Score: 0

By wincement

edited Sep 29, 2005 - 1:55 PM

I don't see P2P as something of "innovation"

The problem with your analogy of the cars, phones, etc... is that all of those were improvements on whatever was available at the time. P2P doesn't improve on anything... It just is.

Score: 0

By jrizznit

edited Sep 29, 2005 - 2:30 PM

Sorry but that's absolutely ludicrous. Look up the word innovation before you come up with your own definition. P2P makes it easier for people to do what they've been doing for decades - share music and movies. We used to do it with TAPES! Are you old enough to remember those? Yes, it was more difficult back then, but then the internet came along, and through INNOVATION, sharing these things we've been sharing all our lives became much easier. I know you don't understand because you've obviously never made a tape for anyone, or given them a movie you illegally recorded off the TV. But people in mainstream society do this all the time, and no one thinks it's a crime except for apologists like you.

Score: 0

By deathshead

posted Sep 29, 2005 - 5:12 PM

There are lots of good example of p2p technology being used in an innovative way:
- Radio stations broadcasting on the internet using bittorrent style software to save on bandwidth costs;
- Software developers releasing new versions and patches (I often download new linux updates this way);
- New music artists and movie directors wanting to get noticed;
- TV - one day TV may be distributed over the internet using bittorrent style technology.

Score: 0

By wincement

posted Sep 29, 2005 - 2:43 PM

It's really hard to change a perspective...

Score: 0

By jrizznit

posted Sep 29, 2005 - 2:51 PM

...when it's dead on.

Score: 0

By Straspey

posted Sep 29, 2005 - 8:14 AM

It's really easy to bash those "Big Bad Record Companies", but eventually the issue becomes whether or not the actual musicians start to get pissed and simply stop making new recordings.

I know...that will ever happen. But guess what..why should I bother making recordings for the benefit of the P2P community when I can make up the revenue by simply doing more tours ?

Then, instead of paying $14.99 for one of my CD's, which you can listen to over & over, if you want to hear my new stuff you'll have to buy a $50.00 ticket and hear the songs once in live concert.

Eventually, the people who actually provide the artistic material are going to get fed up. Not just the big companies.

Score: 0

By tipsyboy

edited Sep 29, 2005 - 1:06 PM

O yes - what a pity if not thousands of songs would be available daily to rush our brains - !

You don't seem to have any idea what rules the life of an artist . . .

Score: 0

By sjc001

edited Sep 29, 2005 - 9:21 AM

Many artists actually want people to download their music. Downloading alone has zero affect on record sales, in fact it helps them and has been proven so. If anything hurts record sales it is due to the crap they put out.

Plus, it is the big labels which rip off the artists the most. It is getting to the point where many are just going their own way and selling over the internet instead themselves.

Score: 0

By wincement

posted Sep 29, 2005 - 2:00 PM

"Many artists actually want people to download their music. Downloading alone has zero affect on record sales, in fact it helps them and has been proven so. If anything hurts record sales it is due to the crap they put out."

I see people use this argument all the time. And not once; not once has anyone shown me the study or research that lead to that conclusion. Do you know the artists? Do you know their financial information? Do you know what hurts their profits and what helps them? No.

And even if you did, it's a moot point.

Even if it was true, the artists that would want their music downloaded, wouldn't copyright it. Therefore, they would not even be involved in this issue in the first place.

And yet, none of this has anything to do with the actual issue, which is an illegal sharing of copyrighted information.

Score: 0

By sjc001

posted Sep 29, 2005 - 6:23 PM

Here is a link to the study.

http://64.233.167.104/se...t+downloading&hl=en

Score: 0

By Polychronopolis

posted Sep 29, 2005 - 3:20 PM

Every so often, you hear an artist make a roundabout statement saying that downloading their songs is ok. I vaguely remember Green Day or Pearl Jam making a statment like this. The record labels usually comeback and oppose the artists decision and remove the content.

Regarding you statment, "the artists that would want their music downloaded, wouldn't copyright it." Your point is made without any background. Artists record music for the labels. The labels are the ones who are copywriting the songs.

One of the founding reasons for the record labels was to provide the best available studio and recording equipment to several artists who would share in the profits. Somewhere, someone got a little too much power and decided that they the label deserved more money.

While I do agree that we are on a tangent from the main topic, this is something that truly needs to be brought to the public eye. So many corporations are gaining too much power outside of their domain. Corps are gaining power in our