Mobile/PDA About Us Advertise here


		User name	Password

		Not registered yet? Register here. Lost your password? Click here.

Browse by topic

News

P2P firms ask RIAA to prove that filtering can work

24 February 2004 14:33 by Petteri "dRD" Pyyny | 7 comments

P2P United, an alliance that represents several commercial P2P operators, has delivered a letter to the RIAA, demanding that the recording industry lobby group proves its claims that the filtering technology RIAA demonstrated to the U.S. Congress actually works in live P2P environment.

The technology, developed by a company called Audible Magic, was used when RIAA demonstrated to the Congress that filtering of illegal material in P2P networks can be done. P2P companies have claimed that such technology is impossible to develop that would 100 percent accurately manage to filter out unwanted -- in this case, illegal -- material without removing legitimate content from the network.

P2P United's claim is rather valid, as the only P2P operator so far that has tried to filter out illegal material from its network -- Napster -- failed, at least according to the recording industry back in 2001.

P2P United also asks RIAA to stop characterizing the Audible Magic technology as a "filter", as it would ultimately change the whole idea of modern decentralized P2P networks, as the material transferred between users -- or "peers" -- would have to pass through a separate server that would inspect the materials legitimity.

Source: P2PNet

Permalink to this article

RIAA sues another 750 P2P users (28 October 2004)

Universal music group boss can't wait to sue british file-sharers (23 September 2004)

Technology available for blocking illegal P2P traffic, RIAA says (9 March 2004)

« Previous news article
Backdoor discovered in ES5, the P2P-client

Next news article »
Napster hits 5M sold songs

Post your comment

Discuss this article!
Nephilim (Moderator) 24 February 2004 16:42
riaa: Put up or shut up! [ + quote]
DaOsT (Senior Member) 25 February 2004 2:42
I CAN'T see how the hell it would work and it must be aload of BOLLOCKS ..... it would never be 100% anyways as they claim ..::WhO GiveS A ShiT::SO FuckiN WhaT!!::....::LivE ForeveR OR DiE TryiN!!::....::DonT FinD US WE WilL FinD YoU::.. ChecK OuT ThE PenguiN GamE AnD PosT YouR HighesT DistancE ON ThE ForuM http://www.gazholland.com/ [ + quote]
Ghostdog (Senior Member) 25 February 2004 4:13
So they showed a filter that might or might not have worked. But what good is the technology if it only concerns "older" file-sharing priciples. A large number of todays file-sharing networks are P2P without any "middle-man", right? [ + quote]
DaOsT (Senior Member) 25 February 2004 4:25
Ghostdog overnet is ment to be the rest I am unsure of DaOsT ..::WhO GiveS A ShiT::SO FuckiN WhaT!!::....::LivE ForeveR OR DiE TryiN!!::....::DonT FinD US WE WilL FinD YoU::.. ChecK OuT ThE PenguiN GamE AnD PosT YouR HighesT DistancE ON ThE ForuM http://www.gazholland.com/ [ + quote]
pa104inf (Member) 25 February 2004 4:34
This is a good idea because being a programmer, I know it is not an uncommon practice to set up a test for ar particular piece which is guaranteed to succeed but would fail in the real world. [ + quote]
Rodgers (Inactive) 25 February 2004 5:59
If the "Glove don't fit, you can't convict"! Best to All! Rodgers [ + quote]
GrayArea (Member) 26 February 2004 7:10
Note to the RIAA: Go ahead! A screen door will keep the flood waters out. Really. The down side would be slower transfers and big hardware costs for the P2P companies all for a technology that would surely fail. Are they going to make a law that tells me how to name my files? [ + quote]