Re: [kDev] A new file sharing proposition

[Daniel Harris <daniel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi John,

Just to clear things up here:

Peer to peer (p2p) systems can relate to any system where there is no 
central point of failure. The original Napster had central servers so 
didn't really fit the pure p2p model. But Gnutella does - I think. With 
p2p you can do many things more than just sharing files. For example, 
my desire for KendraBase is that it enables the sharing of ideas.

File sharing systems are not necessarily p2p and they are not 
necessarily put to illegal purposes...

On 4 Nov 2003, at 13:04, John McHugh wrote:
> ... I get concerned that there will be an implosion point.

That's why I say we have to concentrate on building the world how we 
want it (creation) rather than being always in a state of reaction. In 
a way we have to be a bit blinkered to the chaos going on around us and 
get down to the building bit.

> \Q: will content actually just end up being shared via a Pier-2-Pier 
> model?

Agree with Scott here. Also, p2p can have payment systems built into 
them as your Navio CEO says. So, can file sharing systems for that 
matter. But if there is no credible paid for system that gives us the 
same convenience then how can we expect anything else? That is a 
question that nobody in the music and film industry ever answers 
because they know it'll show 'em up!

> \Q: how will this eventually be monetised so that the content owner 
> and distributors get paid?

Well, for starters the content owner and distributors (now the ISPs and 
telcos) have got to say that they want to be paid. Then, as logic 
dictates, they have to build a system that helps them do this taking 
into account that if they fragment the market with many incompatible 
systems they will confuse the consumer - who will go use the more 
convenient file sharing systems.

> \Q: is there really ever going to be a secure way to protect this 
> content?

Agree with Scott here. What is your priority? Do you want to let people 
hear the music and get paid for it or do you want to secure your music. 
If it's the former then put it up there with a price tag. Of course, 
you need a system that works. That's why I'm suggesting Kendra as a 
vehicle to build the system. If it's the latter then all I can say is 
good luck. I can't blame the music industry - they've been sold a 
really bad story by the technology industry promising a DRM heaven. But 
having DRM is one thing. Getting people to use it is another. It's a 
vicious circle.

> That being said I do subscribe to ODB2 and I pay my monthly 
> subscription and I get my content as and when I want and yes I do pay 
> for it!

But when comparing OD2 and all the other current legal systems out 
there to file sharing systems, it's like comparing your local village 
library with the British library. The legal systems just don't have the 
catalogue and hence they don't have the convenience. Until the music 
and (soon) film industry start talking about convenience to the 
**user** rather than themselves then we'll continue to see wide spread 
use of file sharing systems.

> ... just interested to see in which way the model turns over the next 
> three years and to that end you surely have to make this a 
> consideration for the framework?

I reckon the best thing to do is stick to the plan. Don't try and 
second guess what will happen. But stick to designing the world we want 
to live in. That's my method and I'm sticking to it until I find 
anything better - which I doubt I will find.

Your son sounds like my 13 year old brother asking for a MySQL login 
for his webspace! ;-) In 10 years time we'll have a whole new 
generation of very clued up people. Wanting to impress their friends 
with the latest encryption crack. What will their parents teach them? 
Will they learn about being in a state of reaction (short term) or 
being in a state of creation (long term). I really hope it's the latter 
for all our sakes.

Cheers Daniel