“Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music and Sony BMG’s RIAA seem to have gotten things a little backward in their fight with Harvard law students, their professor, Charles Nesson, and alleged massive online file sharer Joel Tenenbaum, their client,” I said recently, going on:

“Normally, the corporate music extortion unit attacks victims’ parents first, and only then goes after their real target, the children.

“This time, however, Joel’s mother and father, Arthur and Judie Tenenbaum, have been dragged into it.”

But the RIAA hadn’t, in fact, abandoned its Standard Operating Procedure.

In a Q&A with p2pnet,  “My parents found out about it before I did,” says Joel, who’s currently at Boston University pursuing a physics PhD.

What does he think of the RIAA lawsuits?

They’re a, “gross extortion of a generation”.

Subverting American schools

Harvard professor Charles Nesson, colleagues of his and students he’s teaching, “are leading the way in demonstrating plainly and unequivocally to Vivendi Universal (France), Sony BMG (Japan and Germany), EMI (Britain), and Warner Music (US) and their RIAA they have no business trying to subvert American schools in the interests of corporate profits,” said p2pnet recently, going on »»»

Nesson has, “gone to bat for an RIAA defendant in Boston, entering a case in which he will be taking the RIAA on directly, squaring off against Timothy Reynolds, Eve Burton, and Laurie Rust, the same Denver, Colorado, lawyers trying to dismiss UMG Recordings v Lindor in Brooklyn,” said Recording Industry vs The People’s Ray Beckerman recently.

“The Massachusetts case is SONY BMG Music v Tenenbaum, one of the hundreds of cases consolidated in Boston under the caption London-Sire v. Does 1-4.”

The Big 4’s RIAA is, “in the process of bringing to bear upon the defendant, Joel Tenenbaum, the full might of its lobbying influence and litigating power,” says Nesson and his “crack team of CyberOne students” on Harvard’s CyberOne: Law in the Court of Public Opinion blog.

Ten days ago Nesson and his team stood up for Joel’s parents, Arthur and Judie Tenenbaum.

The recording industry wanted to use a US court to force Arthur and Judie to produce their home PC for corporate inspection.

The trouble is, not only wasn’t the computer used for the alleged transgressions took place, Arthur and Judie didn’t even own it when Joel lived with them.

p2pnet Q&A with Joel Tenenbaum

p2pnet: – What kind of Music do you enjoy?

Joel Tenenbam:- I like: Elliot Smith, Pink Floyd, Radiohead, Janis Joplin, Nine Inch Nails, Simon & Garfunkel, The Kinks, Beatles, Unity Reggae Band, Shostakovich, Brahms, Beethoven, Chopin, and I have a soft spot for doowop and a capella as genres.

p2pnet: – Is your family musical?

Joel Tenenbaum:- My mother is a professional harpist and everyone in my immediate family plays at least one instrument.

p2pnet: – Do you play an instrument and if you do, are you in any kind of a band or group?

Joel Tenenbaum:- I play piano, drums, and I can play a few songs on guitar and a weak “Twinkle Twinkle Little Star” on a half dozen other instruments.  In college I played in orchestra.  In high school, some friends and I pretended to form a band that could have been named “No Talent and No Effort”. If you’d like to hear my college piano recital, I’ve made the mp3s
available: http://physics.bu.edu/~jesusina/piano.html

p2pnet: – When did you first learn you were being singled out for special attention?

Joel Tenenbaum:- In early college.

p2pnet: – How did the news affect you?

Joel Tenenbaum:- I worried.

p2pnet: – Did you tell your parents and friends from day one, or did they learn about this later?

Joel Tenenbaum:- My parents found out about it before I did.  They received the letter.  I mostly avoided telling my friends about it.  Until it showed up in the Boston Herald.

p2pnet: – What do your friends at Goucher have to say about it?

Joel Tenenbaum:- 

• “I’m praying to St. Thomas More (patron saint of lawyers) that your case goes well.”
• “Stick to those bastards.”
• “Don’t worry, I’m sure it’ll be fine.”

My friends in Boston say things like:

• “What’s going to happen?”
• “What are they going to do?”
• “How can they sue you for a million dollars?  Do you have a milliondollars?”
• -”Are you going to go to jail?”

And my advisor says:

• “I’m worried how this is going to affect your research.”

p2pnet: – According to Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music, Sony BMG and their RIAA, anyone who shares corporate-owned music with someone else without first paying them is a criminal and a thief. How do you view sharing?

Joel Tenenbaum:- It’s not something I’ve done in a while.  Any true music fan will agree that the artists deserve compensation.

Before Napster, it was a challenge to discover new artists or albums.  To guarantee you weren’t wasting $16, you had to limit yourself to what you and your friends knew.  Everyone had the experience of buying some shit album because its one good song was on the radio.  I never would have discovered Elliot Smith and bought all his albums on iTunes had a friend of mine not shared a few songs with me.  Traditionally, you learned about new music through your friends.  Sharing seems to me the natural extension to that.  Pandora impresses me as well.

I grant that a record company and an artist do not get paid when a song is shared, and that there are people that exploit this to avoid paying for music.  That’s the cost.  But the record companies quietly omit the benefits which accrue to themselves: free advertising.  Sony BMG used to actually (and illegally) pay radio stations to play the music they sold (payola).  That fact attests to the value of advertising.

p2pnet: – You’re said to have downloaded at least seven songs and made another 816 available via Sharman’s Networks’ Kazaa P2P file-sharing application. How how did you find out about it ?

Joel Tenenbaum:- It was the next thing everyone was using after Napster was shut down.

p2pnet: – How long had you been using it?

Joel Tenenbaum:- Probably a couple of years.

p2pnet: – Did you know when you bought it that unless you specifically closed the music folder, you’d be sharing online whether you intended to not?

Joel Tenenbaum:- I don’t think I knew this *when I got it*.

p2pnet: – I understand you offered to settle for $500, but the music companies demanded $12,000.

Joel Tenenbaum:- Actually, I offered them $5,250 at one point.

p2pnet: – Would you have paid if you’d had the money?

Joel Tenenbaum:-  I don’t know what I would have done.  After dealing with these people, it seemed worth it to file for bankruptcy on the principle.

p2pnet: -  When did professor Nesson and his students take you on as a client?

Joel Tenenbam:- I believe Professor Nesson’s first appearance with me was in court September 23rd, the day before my 9-hour deposition.

p2pnet: – Do you think the music industry settlement plan is helpful to students, perhaps saving them from having to face the same kind of difficulties now confronting you?

Joel Tenenbaum:- I think the “music industry settlement plan” only shows how much this is a full-time business to the record companies.  I wouldn’t call the bureaucracy of hourly paid operators who shuffle you around when you say you can’t pay, routinely lose anything you fax to them “easy to deal with”.  It also costs them less to pay operators hourly than lawyers, so I hardly think they’re set up for our benefit.

p2pnet: – Most victims heard from people working at settlement centres designed to get them to pay the RIAA to go away. Did you have the same experience?

Joel Tenenbaum:- Yes.

p2pnet: – Before the labels decided you were ripe for attack, did you know about their sue ‘em all campaign?

Joel Tenenbaum:- No.

p2pnet: – Do you believe American schools are right to be cooperating with the labels?

Joel Tenenbaum:- They’re just being practical, unfortunately.

p2pnet: – What kind of effect is this lawsuit having on you and your studies?

Joel Tenenbaum:- It is seriously draining time away from my research and will probably end up delaying my graduation from the PhD program.  See comment above from my advisor.

p2pnet: – What would you say to other American students similarly lined up as alleged illegal distributors of online music?

Joel Tenenbam:- Could you recommend good music for me, along the lines of Janis Joplin?

p2pnet: – What would you say to teachers and administrators?

Joel Tenenbaum:- Admins, don’t fold when you’re in the right.

p2pnet: – Were you, or are you, a customer of any of the labels?

Joel Tenenbaum:- I own a 101-disc changer that I used to use.  I’m willing to bet these labels sold a good number of the CDs in there.

p2pnet: – If you could advise labels and their trade associations on what to do and how to do it, what would you say?

Joel Tenenbaum:- There are better ways to do business.  You’ll find yourselves maligned far less and profiting far more.  You can distribute music with advertisements, release music that only lets itself be played a certain number of times, etc…  To paraphrase professor Nesson: “The architecture of the internet is code, and that architecture is limitless.”  The internet is better looked upon as a tool for business than a weapon against it.  A broad base of passionate fans would eagerly reward innovation and good will.

p2pnet: – How’s Professor Nesson?

Joel Tenenbaum:- Magnificent.  I’ve been very fortunate to have him.

p2pnet: – How are his students that are working on the case?

Joel Tenenbaum:- They’ve been wonderful. They’re very talented and yet very down-to-earth.  Shubham, Nnamdi, Matt, Isaac and Debbie have been great.  (Sorry to anyone who’s name I don’t know who I left out).

p2pnet: – How would you like this to end?

Joel Tenenbaum:- I’d like the gross extortion of a generation to stop.  I’d like these lawsuits to cease being a full-time business and money tree for the record companies.  I’d like the artists to continue to be rewarded for the talent, effort, and emotion they pour into their work.

My fairy tale perfection ending involves Antonin Scalia reading a unanimous decision striking down the statute as unconstitutional, chiding the record companies for not knowing better.

And a celebratory dinner with free beer afterward.

p2pnet: – What’s the worst part of this process?

Joel Tenenbaum:- Obliterated privacy.  They want unlimited access to the hard drive contents of every computer I or my family has ever owned, none of which is involved.

I’d rather they not look through every image, text file, Word file, video, and sound recording I’ve put on my computer in the last six years.  We’re going to see if we can prevent this.

p2pnet: – What’s the dirtiest part about what they’re doing?

Joel Tenenbaum:- In many cases, the students they sue end up settling so they don’t have to reveal the mountains of porn they have to their parents and the general public.  I’m sure this blackmail isn’t an accident.

For more information, please visit: http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/cyberone/riaa/.

Stay tuned, and don’t forget to check out the team’s Facebook page.

 Jon Newton – p2pnet

Harper heads up a minority government with the federal Liberals and New Democratic Party of Canada in opposition to keep him in check.

He’s praying that, with little to choose between his government and the Liberals, he’ll be returned to office, this time with a majority.

It’ll be seriously bad news if either party is elected. But there is an alternative.

The NDP is the only one of the three major federal parties that’s figured out which way is up, recognizing the vital importance of the Net and cyber communities, which are a growing hour by hour and exerting more and more pressure on events on- and offline.

So it’s no surprise the NDP is also the only party to have named a spokesman specifically to address digital issues.

Here, digital culture spokesman Charlie Angus lays it on the line in an exclusive p2pnet editorial »»»

Prime Minister Stephen Harper said he was forced to call an election because the opposition parties wouldn’t give him a free pass on his upcoming agenda. Funny thing was, Steve hasn’t told anybody what his agenda is. But it doesn’t take a political scientist to know exactly where this right wing crew is going – more war, more oil sands production, and a whole lot less government programs that benefit average people.

What does this mean for the digital innovation community? Plenty. And none of it will be good — that is, of course, unless average citizens work together to change the “agenda”.

And this election gives us a real opportunity to put issues like Net Neutrality and reasonable copyright on the election agenda.

‘Dubious record on digital innovation’

First, let’s look at what we’re up against.

On the eve of the federal election, Harper made the decision to kill the celebrated New Media Fund. The $14.5 million program had been established to move Canadian arts into the digital realm and ensure a strong Canadian cultural voice on the internet medium.

All summer the Conservatives have been hacking their way through various arts and cultural programs. Some say, this pre-emptive war on the arts was a way of reassuring the hard right wing base of this Conservative government that the government hasn’t gone “soft”.

Seen from another angle, however, the slashing of the New Media fund speaks to the fact that this is government is deeply suspicious of anyone who has the means to speak outside the narrow message box created by the pointy-heads in the Conservative war room. And this is where the Conservatives’ dubious record on digital innovation becomes very disturbing.
Conservative Senator Marjorie LeBreton summed up this flat-earth mentality succinctly when speaking in the Senate: “Honourable senators, I have been asked about Facebook before. I never look at Facebook because I do not understand the technology. I think the concept is dangerous.”

It’s a bizarre confession to make but it does give a fairly chilling view into a party that simply doesn’t like average folk being able to network, exchange information and create virtual communities – without having to pay a major corporation for such rights.

Which is why, anyone interested in the future development of the digital “Commons” in Canada needs to be concerned about the potential for a Conservative victory.

‘Do some campaigning to get rid of these guys’

Under Stephen Harper, Canadians are being force-fed US-style copyright legislation. His “law and order”  agenda is right onside with the secret ACTA negotiations. And his laissez-faire approach to the Telecom giants will do nothing to protect any vestiges of Net “neutrality” in Canada.

This election will be crucial for the future of digital innovation in Canada. So folks, its time to move beyond click and point and get out there and do some campaigning to get rid of these guys.

As the Digital Spokesperson for the New Democratic Party I’ll take the risk of seeming “partisan” by stating the New Democrats have been the only party to consistently and forcefully speak out on issues of copyright, digital rights and Net Neutrality. In fact, we’re the only party with a designated point person for digital issues.

We’ve brought forward anti-Net throttling legislation. We’ve consistently spoken out against DMCA-style copyright legislation. We’ve worked with artists, educators and innovators on the need to find a reasonable consensus between fair use and ensuring that artists (as opposed to corporate lawyers) benefit from copyright. As well, this summer, we led the fight against the Telecom giants who are gouging consumers with text messaging fees and onerous contracts for I-phones.

‘We’ll bring forward Net Neutrality legislation’

In the next Parliament, we have the opportunity to move Canada back on track in terms of digital and cultural development. We’ll throw out the regressive Bill C-61 copyright legislation and bring in legislation that will protect the privacy of consumers, while ensuring artists are able to receive compensation for their work.

We’ll bring forward Net Neutrality legislation to ensure the Telecom giants can’t “throttle” your use of the internet.

We’ll support innovation in the growing digital realm.

We’ll also make sure that Telecom giants aren’t given a free reign to gouge you on your cell phones or force you into onerous, long-term phone contracts.

But to succeed, we will need more MPs in the House who understand the importance of these issues.

There are key urban ridings across Canada where the issue of copyright and Net Neutrality could spell the difference in winning or losing the riding. This provides a unique opportunity to the arts, education and innovation community to get active and organized. The Conservative party needs to know that the digital community will push back against their corporate agenda.

As well, the Liberal party needs to feel the heat so they won’t continue sitting on the fence while these key issues are being decided. Above all, it will be vital to elect representatives who understand the importance of digital culture and issues.

Key battlegrounds

I’m going to highlight some key battlegrounds for digital activists to consider:

Peggy Nash – Parkdale High Park. Her election victory in 2006 over Sam Bulte, has been seen as the first grassroots backlash against the industry lobbyists. These issues will be playing out again in the 2008 election.

Bill Siksay – Burnaby Douglas. Bill has spoken out consistently against Bill C-61 and co-sponsored the NDP’s Net Neutrality Bill.

Michael Byers – Vanouver Centre. The famous author has spoken eloquently on copyright issues and is facing off against copyright luddite Heddy Fry.

Tom King – Guelph. The well-known artist and radio personality has written on the need to make copyright and digital issues a factor in the House of Commons.

Anne Legacé Dowson – Westmount. Anne has received the personal endorsement of Cory Doctorow from Boing. Boing – it doesn’t get any cooler than that.

Needless to say, this election will be a crucial time for Canada.

Once the cards are redistributed in the next Parliament it could be possible to move ahead with legislation that will embrace digital legislation rather than trying to make it illegal.

Stay tuned.

p2pnet news view

Never heard of him? You should have, says Rick.

“If you’ve flushed a toilet, taken your dog for a walk or even cleaned out your RV’s holding tank,  he’s probably involved,” he says.

Buster is the chief lawyer and spokesperson for the MPAA, Manure Producers Association of America, for whom the medium is the message »»»

Q:  What does the Manure Producers Association do?
A:   My organazation represents six major companies who hold patents on a number of techniques for producing manure in this country.  From treating Steer and Chicken manure for gardening and farming to sewer treatment facilities around the United states.

Q:   Most Americans have never heard of your group.  How long have you been around?
A:   The MPAA has been around for only a few years.  Cowpie express Inc. and Hitthefan Inc. were the first two companies to patent their processes.  Cowpie started in LA centering around Hollywood and Hitthefan got its beginning in the Washington DC area.

A:   Why those areas?
Q:   Those Cities are the biggest producers of manure in this country.

Q:   How did the MPAA start??
A:   Well I was working as a legal advisor to the Entertainment Industry when we started suing children, college students and single moms to recoup the massive losses the industry faced because of these common criminals.  Their pirating ways and total disreguard for laws of our land was a black mark against every God fearing, law biding, patriotic multi-conglomorate corporate entity in America today.  Going into the manure business was a natural for a guy like me.

Q:   Your orginazation is currently lobbying congress for tougher manure laws?  What’s that all about.
A:   Well, as you know, we’ve been having a big problem with Manure pirates lately.  People are taking it upon themselves to produce their own manure.  They’re composting garden waste, recycling and treating their own sewage in private housing developments and just letting their dogs roam and crap at will.  In most cases, using the same techniques that the companies I represent have owned and patented for years.  These pirates are stealing our technology.

Q:  Let’s talk about the bill.  It has a camping provision in it?
A:   Yes, If you want to go camping it must be in a MPAA approved camping facility where we can recycle your garbage and other human wastes.

Q:  What about the pet provision?
A:  That’s one of the most misunderstood provisions of this bill.  All we’re saying is that your domestic pet should wear a sanitary collector at all times and emptied in one of our MPAA-approved collection barrels where it would be picked up regularly like the weekly garbage.  For a small fee of course.  Now the bill has a provision for farm and range animals.  The animals must be registered then our collection vehicles will come out once a week to sweep the area clean of all manure and waste.  Again, for a fee.

Q:   What if the Farmer wants to use the manure for their crops?
A:   They buy it from us.  This bill is necessary to combat the rampant piracy going on in the manure industry today.

Q:   Why is producing your own manure bad?
A:   Why?  It’s common sense.  Think about it.  If we allow lawless americans to produce their own manure whenever they want, not use our public restroom facilities, pay the taxes tacked onto their sewer bill, use our campground facilities, or take care of their animals accordingly, thousands of jobs would be at risk.  Hard working families who rely on the manure industry for their bread and butter.  This would lead to bankruptcys and forclousures on mortages.  In time the industry would implode from within creating the most devistating depression since the 1930’s.  Tens of millions of Americans would have to resort to using outhouses and other unsanitary means.  desiase would run rampant, another plauge would surge through america.  I don’t know about you but that’s not the kind of America I want to live in.

Q:  So what are you doing to stop this?
A:    Well first is this necessary legislation.  Then we need to enforce it.

Q:   You have your own enforcement team?
A:   Yes, our verison of MP’s, manure police. They work in conjunction with the FBI and the Department of Justice to bring these hardened criminals to account for their crimes.  I got this idea from the Entertainment industry who have their own private police force.

Q:   Isn’t having a private police force doing the work of law enforcement agencies unconstitutional?
A:   Not when the corporate cartels involved in the entertainment and manure industries get done lobbying congress to change the laws.

Q:   What else are you doing?
A:   Taking a page from my friends in the Entertainment industry, we are now filing thousands of lawsuits in civil court to stop these pirates from producing their own manure and making them pay for the damage they’re causing the industry.  We own the rights to manure production, and we’re going to protect them.  We’re also going to the public school system where we are teaching our youth to respect patents.  We teach our children that stealing manure production techniques is just like walking tinto a store and shoplifting.

Q:   What about private schools?
A:   That’s a challange.  Private schools are not as enlightened as the public, government run, school system.  Public schools offer a wider range of experiences for our children, like million dollar sports departments which enhance a healthy competitive atmosphere, and allowing private corporations like ours to come in and teach the kids at taxpayer expense.  All private schools want to do is educate.  things like math, reading, history.  how boring.

Q:  Aren’t these heavy handed tactics creating a backlash among your customers?
A:  Customers?  People who violate our patents, produce their own manure without our consent or control, taking money from our pockets are not our customers. All we want is a harmounous coexistance between our business, government and the public where everyone wins.  What’s so wrong about that?

What indeed

. .Stumble It!

New York Times – xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, August , 2008

p2pnet news Advertising | Mobiles | Freedom:- They say no publicity is bad publicity and that certainly appears to be the case as Rogers rogers Canadian consumers.

For all the, “griping over pricing plans for Apple Inc.’s new iPhones, the exclusivity contracts the big telecom carriers have signed with the computer giant to distribute the coveted touchscreen devices are paying off as planned,” says the Globe & Mail.

“AT&T Inc. in the United States and Rogers Wireless Communications Inc. in Canada have exclusive rights in their respective countries to sell Apple’s updated iPhone,” it says, going on, “And each is taking heat online from customers for the pricing packages they’ve put together, as well as for their reluctance to offer the phones without lengthy contracts.”

But, “Even with the public relations headaches and the fact it had to shoulder the costs of a recent price cut when Apple decided to make the iPhone cheaper, you won’t hear AT&T complaining. Publicity is firmly on its side and consumers are expected to fall in line.”

The story even has happily complacent AT&T spokesman Michael Coe stating:

“I mean, you know, from the time that the iPhone was first announced it’s been the most written about device probably in the history of the industry.”

Say NO to Rogers

However, Canadian consumers aren’t taking it lying down and as various entities and individuals are finding to their cost, what the Net bringeth, the Net can also taketh away.

Two online petitions are currently running, one (http://ruinediphone.com/) asking for $2 donations to “get more bandwidth, more exposure and more impact,” with the other, Rogers Canada iPhone Data Plan, saying >>>

We, the future users of the Apple iPhone, living in Canada, would like to see an unlimited data plan at a reasonable price, comparable to those seen in the United States, prior to the Q4-2007 release of the iPhone in Canada.

Increasing numbers of users have paid several hundred, and in some cases more than $1000, during one month for data usage that would have not been charged extra on any other North American carrier on their best data plan. Some customers have posted messages about their Rogers data overage costs at the following forum websites:

http://www.howardforums.com/showthread.php?t=580161&page=3&pp=27

http://www.blackberryforums.com/showthread.php?p=164173

Admittedly, ruinediphone was going up and down like a yo-yo. But $2?

The site’s organisers don’t say what they’ll do with whatever’s left over after they’ve paid the bills, but they today said 25,141 people had said NO to Rogers.

Meanwhile, at 5:52 am Pacific, the other petition showed 8,197 signatures.

Will Rogers get away with it here as AT&T did in the US?

Stay tuned.

. .Stumble It!

Globe & Mail – Carriers cheerfully take heat on iPhone pricing, July 2, 2008
aren’t taking it lying down – ‘F*CK YOU ROGERS!’ iPhone protest site down, July 1, 2008

p2pnet special:- Running p2pnet can be very satisfying and one of the nicest emails I’ve had this year came from Susan Crawford.

Wikipedia describes her as a, “prominent media internet legal scholar and professor at the Benjamin N. Cardozo School of Law” and p2pnet has been fortunate enough to carry a number of her posts.

She’s famous on- and offline, “for her pithy, lucid and very much to-the-point views on Net events of many different flavours,” we posted in 2005, but more recently, she’s become famous internationally as one of the main movers behind OneWebDay, a now-annual event.

“Will you be a OneWebDay Ambassador?” – she asked me a little while ago.

No worries. It’s an honour and a privilege.

So what exactly is OneWebDay? It’s a wonderful way to focus on the Net as the world’s most powerful means of communication.

But there are forces which would would like to subjugate it, bringing it under their total and exclusive control.

Not if Crawford and the people supporting her and the OneWebDay movement can help it.

“Every September 22 is an Earth Day for the internet,” she explains.

“It’s a day to celebrate, educate, and activate – do good works and raise consciousness about the threats to the internet around the world.”

For the 100 days before OneWebDay, “we will be anointing/calling on 100 OWD ambassadors to each take one day to talk to their community about their values – and how those values tie to OneWebDay’s 2008 theme of participatory democracy,” says the OWD Ambassador site, going on:

“The idea is for the ambassadors to introduce new people to OneWebDay, while we in turn introduce them to the wider OneWebDay family.”

In a short Q&A, “What inspired you to come up with it?” – I asked Crawford >>>

Susan Crawford: It seemed to me that we were at risk of taking the internet for granted. Meanwhile, many different forms of pre-internet businesses (including law enforcement, Hollywood studios, and telephone companies, just to name a few) were waking up and arguing (and acting) as if they should be in control of internet communications. Most people who use the internet don’t understand that it’s not the same as a telephone network. I thought we needed to make these issues visible, and make the people who care about the future of the internet visible to one another. I didn’t do this alone – a lot of people have gotten involved over the years. This is the third OneWebDay.

p2pnet: Is there any one thing above all others you hope it’ll achieve in 2008?

Susan Crawford: I’d like to see more involvement by people in developing countries. Connectivity and censorship are major issues, and I’m hoping the word will spread beyond the developed world both online and through groups like the Internet Society. A top priority is involving schools and kids.

p2pnet: And is there any one thing you’d ask people to do to make it a success?

Susan Crawford: I’d like to see people getting involved by going to http://www.onewebday.org/base/index.php/OneWebDay_in_a_box and hosting meetings to talk about internet issues in their homes or classrooms. Lots of tiny events like these, particularly involving young people, will help awareness grow around the world.

p2pnet: Censorship in many and varied forms is increasing as large corporations and self-serving administrations strive to gain control of how the Web is used, and by whom. What can OneWebDay do to help stop this?

Susan Crawford: We make progress when we make things visible. Earth Day, for example, didn’t take off until we saw a picture of the earth from space – a fragile blue marble in a black void. We can’t *see* the threats to online communication in our day-to-day lives – OneWebDay can help make specific control problems visible, and raise consciousness about the power of network operators in many countries to constrain internet access.

p2pnet: With this in mind, what role can OneWebDay have in the Net Neutrality battle?

Susan Crawford: OneWebDay is a platform for use by anyone. It’s yours. It can be used to raise awareness about the risks to the open internet – press conferences, rock concerts, teach-ins, anything. To the extent that groups want to use OneWebDay for activism about Net Neutrality (which is no longer just a US issue) the day can provide a useful focus for these efforts – useful for press coverage.

p2pnet: Blogs are only now really coming into their own. How important are they to the growth of the Net as the principal communications vehicle of the twenty first digital century, and in OneWebDay as a manifestation of that?

Susan Crawford: The big idea is “up” – uploading our own stuff online. Blogs, video sites, photography – there’s an explosion of user-generated content online. Part of the goal of OneWebDay is to encourage everyone to leave a bit of themselves online. Although the internet seems to be a collection of machines, it’s actually a deeply-human network, optimized for human communication. Let’s not take that for granted- it’s not a broadcast network.

p2pnet: OneWebDay is a massive undertaking with scores of famous people such as Sir Tim Berners-Lee, the man who invented the web, involved in it, and promoting it. Given that, how important are ordinary people to it, and what can they do to get involved themselves?

Susan Crawford: We’re all ordinary and extraordinary at the same time. One of the great things about the Net is how it empowers all of us to communicate freely. Everyone is important to OneWebDay. To get involved, go to OneWebDay.org and click on “40 Ways to Celebrate OneWebDay”. The theme this year is online participatory democracy – so here’s an idea – send an email to the mayor and ask him/her to proclaim OneWebDay in your city.

p2pnet: Can children also play a part?

Susan Crawford: Absolutely – children are key to OneWebDay. Something like telling a story online, or creating a class wiki – labeling these things OneWebDay and telling us about them – these would be great OWD events. Try to imagine what the world would be like without the internet.

Would you like to be a OWD ambassador? Or do you know someone you believe should be included? Email volunteer@onewebday.org

Stay tuned.

Jon Newton - p2pnet

. .Stumble It!

p2pnet news | Freedom:- Before the Net, it was almost impossible for ordinary people to make themselves properly heard, unless they were involved in a movement with a certain amount of clout, say, had access to the mainstream media, or were unusually aggressive.

But that was then.

Ottawa Gal had been posting comments to p2pnet for years, and I don’t think she’d be angry to be described as an ordinary person – a mother and a wife.

She’s also a dedicated surfer and one day, she decided she’d had enough of what she decided was completely unjustified traffic throttling on the part of Bell Canada.

So she wrote about it in depth and in detail and p2pnet published the results under Bell Sympatico P2P Black List.

The rest isn’t history quite yet, but it’s getting there because as a direct result, Bell and other major Canadian ISPs such as Rogers and Videotron are learning the painful, for them, lesson that in this era of instant online communications where people can talk directly to each other, bypassing the traditional media, it doesn’t pay to mess with your customers.

At government level, industry minister Jim Prentice dismissively passed the buck for dealing with corporate traffic “management” or “shaping” directly back to the ordinary people who’d elected him, telling them if they wanted anything done about Bell, they’d have to do it themselves: he wasn’t about to step in on their behalf.

Fortunately, however, another federal politician didn’t, and doesn’t, share Prentice’s views.

Charlie Angus is the NDP digital culture spokesman. He believes the ISPs are accountable, and he’s said so repeatedly and in no uncertain terms.

Ottawa Gal had a number of questions for Angus.

Here’s their virtual conversation >>>

Ottawa Gal: Below are the costs of the three major Canadian ISP competitors (hidden modem fees included):

• Bell-Ontario: 49.95$ – with 60-gig limit and pay for use bandwidth
  
• Rogers-Ontario: 47.95$ – with 60-gig limit and pay for use bandwidth
  
• Bell-Quebec: 43.95$ – with 30-gig limit and pay for use bandwidth
  
• Videotron-Quebec: 60.95$ – with 20-gig limit and pay for use bandwidth

Is this collusion — price fixing or bandwidth fixing, by the major players?

Charlie Angus: The NDP is very concerned about the issue of giant telecoms being able to price gouge consumers. This gouging could happen in a number of ways. First, the issue of throttling 3rd party ISPs raises serious questions about anti-competitive practices. If smaller, more price-friendly competition is removed from the market, the telecom giants would be able to set artificially high rates for internet service.

Another area that’s of great concern is the move towards tiered pricing for access. The NDP understand that a tiered pricing may be necessary to address high bandwidth use by certain consumers or businesses. However, such pricing needs to be transparent and competitive. Without clear ground rules in place, telecoms will be able to easily gouge users who have come to rely on high transfer rates of information. As well, telecoms could be in a position to artificially slow down streams while pushing frustrated consumers to accept higher priced service in order to ensure higher speed response.

it’s also disturbing that Bell has also announced that it will remove any maximum monthly rate cap for service. This sends a signal that consumers may end up paying through the nose for service they take for granted now. In the area of cell phone usage, there have been nightmare stories told by consumers who have been hit with phenomenal bills because their children were using laptop video games via a cellular connection – and then were hit with roving phone bills costing many thousands of dollars.

There must be some consumer-protection checks in place for any such steps taken by the telecoms.

Ottawa Gal: Below are the costs of four of the most popular smaller independent Bell wholesalers:

• Teksavvy 1: 29.95/month B/W 200-gigs
  
• Teksavvy 2 39.95/month B/W Unlimited
  
• Acanac 1: 18.95/month B/W Unlimited
  
• Acanac 2: 33.95/month B/W Unlimited
  
• Electronic box: 34.95/month B/W unlimited
  
• Velcom: 34.95/month B/W unlimited

(Note Acanac charges 18.95 for first time users, then 33.95/month after your 1st year trial)

These companies manage to stay in business and continue to do very well. They’re favorites because they have no bandwidth limits and they’re affordable. One price and that’s it. No hidden modem fees or extreme B/W fees. Bell gets the lion share of their income, in excess of 60% ($20 to $24) per month, per connection, of the monthly stated cost (above) from the wholesalers. So the wholesale ISP in effects has to make ends meet with around 10$ per user. Bell has now filed in court for the removal of the CRTC mandated tariffs (fighting to remove the set cost of providing services to the wholesaler).

Bottom line, Bell wants to be able to charge the wholesaler whatever it wants. If Bell gets its way, it’ll be able to decide which wholesaler gets what price, allowing it to play favorites, with all that implies. Apart from creating potentially serious conflicts between and among competitors, which would bounce back on users, it could well put lower income Canadians at an extreme disadvantage, possibly forcing them to pay double the amount that they pay now for internet. Do you think this is justifiable, or even fair for Bell to try and use the courts to increase costs across the board, which will affect everyone in Ontario & Quebec?

Charlie Angus: Bell’s move to remove tariff limits on the independent 3rd party ISPs must be challenged. If left unchecked, it would allow Bell to simply price its competitors out of business. As it stands now, the 3rd party ISPs rent bandwidth from Bell. If the consumers use up maximum bandwidth, the ISP finds itself in the situation of either having to rent more bandwidth or dealing with degraded service. This system works. Once again we return to the need for transparent ground rules so that Bell, as provider of the bandwidth, is not able to act in an anti-competitive fashion against its 3rd party ISP competitors.

Ottawa Gal: If Bell wins in court and the CRTC wholesale tariffs are eliminated, might that mean the end of an affordable high-speed Net in this country, given that it would be extremely unlikely smaller, innovative competitors would still be able to offer $19 or $30 high-speed internet connections? Would this not set the precedent for all other Canadian Telcos across Canada to do the same?

Charlie Angus: If Bell’s challenge against the 3rd party ISPs is successful it will send a clear message to the boardrooms that the giant telecoms can set the rules for the internet and that consumers will have little choice but to go along with them. The innovation agenda in Canada has been based on the simple fact that consumers and innovators are in the driver’s seat when it comes to determining content, not the companies who run the pipes. There is a clear interest within large, vertically-integrated telecom/entertainment empires to turn the internet into a 21st century version of cable TV. In order to do so, the telecoms will need to be able to decide which traffic is advanced and which traffic is slowed down.

It’s interesting that at the same time that Bell is telling the consumer that the days of unlimited downloading is over, it is also trying to sell consumers on unlimited downloading for a monthly fee. Questions are also being raised as to whether the cleared bandwidth space from throttling will be filled by video streaming from the major telecoms. The major telecoms are moving in the direction of pushing VOD services. Questions need to be asked about the possibility that they will intentionallay degrade service for their internet-video competitors raises serious anti-trust flags. At the end of the day, the fight of traffic throttling is a fight to determine whether the consumer or the telecoms will be in charge of determining content priorities.

Ottawa Gal: When Bell-Sympatico started throttling bandwidth last November, there was outrage within the user community and many people abandoned the company in disgust. Now Bell is about to force wholesalers to adopt traffic shaping, legal disgust of many (most) wholesalers. Do you agree this is anti-competitive? If you do, why hasn’t the Competition Bureau stepped in? Why hasn’t Industry Canada?

Charlie Angus: I’ve raised serious concerns about whether Bell’s net throttling practices have the potential to gouge the consumer and whether it crosses the line into anti-competitive practices. The NDP recognizes that a certain level of ‘network management’ may be necessary at times to ensure that the digital highway flows efficiently.

However, it’s incumbent upon the CRTC to lay down clear rules for both ISP providers and the consumer, so that everyone is working from the same playbook. In the absence of such a set of rules, the internet will become a world of a few corporate winners (the giant telecoms and the entertainment industries who pay for high speed service). The losers will be customers, 3rd party ISPs and Canada’s innovation agenda.

Ottawa Gal: Around the same time Bell started discriminating against the users of P2P applications, principally, the CBC released an episode of ’Canada’s Next Great Prime Minister’ which was specifically intended to be downloaded and shared. To their dismay, large numbers of Net users found out it could take up to 11-hours to download while people in Europe and even the States could download it at full speed in a matter of hours. Do you think Bell’s throttling had a detrimental impact on this specific trendsetting example of Canadian enterprise, and that it might echo down the line to have a more serious impact on Canadian content yet to be created?

Charlie Angus: The decision by CBC to release ‘Canada’s Next Prime Minister’ via BitTorrent is a prime example of how innovative technology is often perceived first as a threat but then quickly moves into the mainstream.

Readers can recall the hysterical denunciations of VHS technology by Jack Valenti and the Hollywood lobby in the 1980s. As well, Youtube was derided as a ‘pirate’s haven’ before becoming the vehicle of viewing choice for both consumers and industry. Imagine if Hollywood had been successful in shutting down VHS technology – they never would have reaped the phenomenal sales of the emerging VHS (and then DVD) market. The question today is whether the giant telecoms should be able to monkey with technologies that were initially denounced as pirate-ware but are now moving clearly into the mainstream. Innovation on the internet takes place because there has been a net neutral response to the flow of information. it’s vital that such a standard remains in place.

Ottawa Gal: How can new entrants into the internet market compete when a throttle is forced, and if Bell has it their way, no regulated cost that Bell can charge them? Do you think this is competitive, open and free market?

Charlie Angus: The NDP is very concerned that by allowing the telecoms to usurp the unilateral decision making rights on the flow of information on the internet, the innovation agenda of this country will be impacted. Therefore, Canada needs to ensure that innovation-driving competition in the digital market continues to evolve on networks that are governed by a clear set of rules that ensure fairness for all internet users and stakeholders.

Ottawa Gal: Why, in your view, is industry minister Jim Prentice ignoring the Canadian people? You seem to be our only person in Parliament who sees what this is doing (and going to do) to the Canadian people, and the only one voicing concern. Many people are saying the reason that the government’s silence is related directly to the fact these major players (the big Telco) play a huge role in political funding. Can, do you think, the Canadian people be assured this isn’t the reason our politicians are remaining silent?

Charlie Angus: Industry Minister Jim Prentice is simply on the wrong side of the issue on net neutrality The fact is that the CRTC already regulates the area where Bell is throttling – that’s their internal “ATM” network and the 3rd party ISPs that make use of this network. The telecoms, for their part, have moved to unilateral regulation in the form of capped usage, tiered-pricing and throttled traffic. The question is not whether regulation will occur but whether there will be scrutiny of such activities.

I believe that politicians who are on the wrong side of this issue will pay the price as consumers across Canada become increasingly vocal about the need to protect the ‘little guy’ from the arbitrary actions of the telecom giants.

[Ottawa Gal, who says she wants to continue being anonymous, works in a university, likes her cat, reality TV, and Doctor McDreamy. Her favourite web sites are the Michael Geist blog and p2pnet.net. "Privacy on the net is also important to me," she says. "I need a tinfoil hat " She's also the mother of, "two darling little girls who tore down my ceiling fan thinking it would be fun to hang from it." So she advises parents to, "never have an armchair around from which little ones can reach fans". (No one was hurt )

Charlie Angus --- that's him above right, raising awareness through song ---- is a Canadian writer, broadcaster and musician, who turned to politics in 2004 in the Ontario riding of Timmins-James Bay. Apart from his interest in the traffic shaping controversy, he's also raising awareness of the plight of First Nations school children in northern Ontario.]

Jon Newton – p2pnet

Slashdot it! . . .Stumble It!

Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php

It’s forcing Linux user Scott McCausland, aka sk0t, to install Microsoft Windows while he’s on probation after admitting he uploaded the Star Wars Episode III .

McCausland, an EliteTorrents administrator before it was shut down by the FBI, was jailed for five months and also sentenced to home confinement during which he’s been banned from using Linux.

Yesterday, “Weekend Passing Fast,” he blogged, going on:

This weekend seems to be speeding by… whooosh… there is goes… it is already Sunday (for 2 hours now)… and Monday is my start date for school. It will hopefully reign as a new beginning
for me. I will post more on that topic later.

Today, “I am heading back to school for the first time in a while,” he says,
adding:

I am switching my focus from Psychology to Management Information Systems (MIS),

I start this morning at 11:15AM, I just have to remember to wear long pants… atleast of the first day to cover up my Ankle Monitor. What a great first impression; “Hi, My name is Scott, I just out of prison, and I am on home confinement for 5 months. I like long walks on the beach and furry fuzzy puppies.”

McCausland had a few words with p2pnet >>>>>

p2pnet: You were charged in what the DoJ says is the first ‘criminal enforcement action’ against ‘copyright infringement on a p2p network using BitTorrent technology’. And that lined you up for a possible five years in jail, a fine of $250,000, and three years of supervised release. Obviously, that had to be a frightening prospect. How did it affect you and your family, and what did your friends have to say about it?

sk0t: Well, I was a mess for a while. It was late May 05, and I was in a summer session at my university, and it was just a lot. I withdrew from that semester, and focused on the prospect of a prison term. My family, rightfully so, was shook up about it. But, what could they do? It was a battle in mind hands. So I got a lawyer, and we started the business of working through this. My family was supportive, and my friends were shocked. What else can anyone say? I made the bed I have to lay in.

p2pnet: You admitted to ‘conspiracy to commit copyright infringement’ and ‘criminal copyright infringement’ for loading Star Wars: Episode III before its official release, and landed in jail. Where were you imprisoned, and what was it like?

sk0t: I was designate to FCI Morgantown, located in Morgantown, WV. It was a Minimum Security prison, with the exemption of having a Special Housing Unit (’the hole’, designated at MAXIMUM SECURITY’). It was a typical prison day. Forced to get up at 7:00, (but 99% of the time you were up earlier because the lights were turned on at 6AM). The diversity of the prison was staggering. I was a definitive minority. The food was horrible, the atmosphere was horrible, and the inmates were typical inmates… doing their time. I didnt have a lot of incidents there… but the ones I do, I will save for another time.

p2pnet: A couple of days ago you blogged, “Opinions Needed – So, I am getting shafted by the Justice Department again… Here goes: I had a meeting with my probation officer today, and he told me that he has to install monitoring software onto my PC. No big deal to me, that is part of my sentence. However, their software doesnt support GNU/Linux (Which is what I use). So, he told me that if I want to use a computer, I would have to use an OS that the software can be installed on. Which basically means: MICROSOFT AND MONITORING SOFTWARE or NO COMPUTER. I use Ubuntu 7.04 now, and they are trying to force me to switch.” What kind of help are you loooking for?

sk0t: I’m not really looking for help, I just initially wanted opinions on the whole thing, opinions or comments, whatever anyone wanted to say. I don’t mind when people speak their mind: if you think I am retarded, by all means, post about it. I just wanted to let everyone know what is going on … this is pertinent to a lot of people.

p2pnet: You have an appeal for donations on your website. You state, “I want to inform you all that this money will go to the purchase of Microsoft Windows XP or Vista …” – pPresumably, that’s because of the Linux provocation – and you also say the money will help with, “other expenses related to my situation,” also cautioning people not to donate if there are not “financially stable”. So how much do you think you’ll need?

sk0t: I didnt add an appeal for donations… I added an ‘OPTIONAL’ DONATE link. If people want to donate so be it. I’ll use the money to purchase Microsoft Windows XP or VISTA, (because I still need a computer for school, and the internet. The option of not using the internet won’t work for my current situation). And if I happens to get more money, I’ll use the money for other items relating to my situation … who knows, I might put a poll up to see what I should use the money on. I wouldn’t, however, spend the money frivolously. I know what it’s like to take advantage of a situation, and I know what it’s like to get taken advantage of…

p2pnet: People involved in entertainment industry lawsuits have in the past made similar appeals, some of them raising considerable amounts of money. Do you plan to provide information on how much money you receive and exactly what it’s being spent on?

sk0t: Yes, I’ll provide detailed receipts and information on what the money is being used for. No doubt.

p2pnet: Do you have a girlfriend? And if you have, how has all this affected your relationship?

sk0t: I’ve had the same girlfriend for over 5 years. As you can imagine, 5 months away (while I was in prison) can be hectic on a relationship. But we managed to work through it all, and we both survived.

p2pnet: Back to the case itself, you’ve admitted uploading Star Wars, so what were you thinking about when you did that?

sk0t: I was just doing what I had always done relating to the piracy scene. If I had something, everyone was entitled to partake. I got a hold of the movie, and put it on the site. For that is the way I feel it should have been done.

p2pnet: You now have two felony black marks against you. Do you see yourself as a criminal?

sk0t: I see myself as a normal individual who does what everyone else does … you can say I stole, fine. But hypocrisy is a pet peeve of mine. If you upload something illegal, or download something illegal you are the same to me. And when I hear that downloaders arent as bad as uploaders I just chuckle… because what is the difference. There are lots of downloaders, and in the torrent game, you still seed… so everyone tastes both worlds… I just got caught. I do not condone what I did, I just feel I was handled harshly.

p2pnet: What are your thoughts on P2P and file sharing in general?

sk0t: It won’t stop. Nothing can be done to slow the trend of filesharing and illegally obtaining software, music, movies, and porn. It is here to stay. I am no longer part of that world, but I won’t ever forget it.

p2pnet: On August 8 you posted, “Today was a great day… I proceed in the normal direction at the start of today… I wake up… smooge around a little bit… then sit at the computer. I check my email, check here for any comments and then check my feeds for anything new I haven’t read (there is always something new)… and then I decide to check the status of my school loan application… so even though it is a Sunday, I figure: “What the hell, I will check it out”… low and behold, I was approved… so that is one less thing I have to worry about….” What’s a bad day like?

sk0t: Waking up in prison surrounded by 1,500 people who could care less what you did, who you are, and what you plan to do… loneliness is terrible thing. But if you have read my posts you will notice that I lost a lot of friends with this (almost all)… and it has opened my eyes to a few things.

p2pnet: Things are tough, right now, but but they won’t stay like that forever. What are your plans for the future?

sk0t: I will be returning back to school. My “GOOD DAY” post has proved to not exist. I got some details about the school loan that I was approved for, and it turns out that there were things not mentioned in the credit disclosure. So I wasn’t willing to accept the terms of the loan… back to the drawing board. I will be returning to school and trying to find a new way to fund my education.

..Slashdot it!

Also See:
Star Wars Slith movie – EliteTorrents admin jailed, October 27, 2006

Use free p2pnet newsfeeds for your site. It’s really easy!
Subscribe to p2pnet.net | | rss feed: http://p2pnet.net/p2p.rss | | Mobile – http://p2pnet.net/index-wml.php

Net access blocked by government restrictions? Use Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto. Go here for details. Download here.

Now it’s back, and it’s here to stay, say (left to right) Angel Leon, Eugene Kim, Yacine Benzine, Ethan Lu, Fitim Blaku, Cristian Radu and Francis Ho, the multi-national team behind it.

Users can upload, and share, an unlimited number of files, listen to music, create playlists, back up files —- and there’s nothing to download or install.

They have total control of personal data and can keep private information from prying eyes, promises the group.

p2pnet spoke with Leon, whom we already knew through his connection with the FrostWire team, members of the LimeWire open-source community who decided to go their own way with a free, non-profit and independent p2p application when LimeWire started filtering content on Gnutella.

p2pnet: Aren’t you afraid you’ll have the entertainment cartels breathing heavily down your necks, accusing you of facilitating illegal file sharing?

Leon: More and more Internet users are beginning to realize that they should be allowed to share their files however and whenever they choose to. The entertainment industry has been holding back innovation in file sharing for nearly a decade. People have always shared their files, but they’ve mainly been doing it the tedious way; through email or file transfers over IM. The more technologically inclined have relied on FTP or newsgroups, to name a few.

But really, there’s no central place on the Internet which gives these users all the storage and other tools they need to share and backup files easily. That’s where MyBloop.com comes in.

It’s important to mention that we abide by all international laws. The Digital Millenium Copyright Act gives us the right, by law, to run this website. Copyrighted content is taken out when get a DMCA takedown request from the copyright holder.

p2pnet: Why are you offering this service?

Leon: There’s no easy way to send a bunch of files to someone. Often, many of us wish we had access to our own files from any computer with an internet connection. MyBloop offers the platform, the service, the community and the features people have come to expect from a great file sharing website.

p2pnet: Where are you located?

Leon: We’re located in New York, but we’ve incorporated in New Jersey.

p2pnet: Do people simply upload files, and if they do, aren’t they inviting unwanted attention from the entertainment cartels? And what about downloading?

Leon: No one can “download” someone else’s music files through our site. Users can only download music they’ve uploaded themselves. This makes MyBloop a great way to backup files. Anyone can listen to another MyBloop user’s music through their web browser with MyBloop’s Flash Player.

Users can also make playlists with other users’ songs, but we prevent and are against the actual downloading of music, as was made famous by Napster. Moreover, any user can choose to make any or all of their files private. MyBloop encourages users to share their files, but we also fully respect people’s privacy.

p2pnet: Are you talking about any files, or purely independent files which aren’t tied down by copyright?

Leon: Users can upload any type of file and uploads as many files as they want. If someone wants to upload a new album by Beyoncé they purchased online, or a song they ripped from a CD they bought, they just mark it as a “Private” file once it’s uploaded. This will ensure only the user who uploaded it can access the file. Then that user can decide whether or not to share the private link.

This ensures they’re never held liable for copyright violations, because they’ll be the only user with access to it.

p2pnet: If copyrighted files are involved, do you have agreements with any of the corporate entertainment companies?

Leon: We only have agreements with our users. It’s really their call on what they decide to share, though we do moderate the site. However we’re open to talking to entertainment companies if they want to freely distribute promotional material from their artists. We’re also interested in helping independent artists, and we always accept Creative Common-based playlists. Major labels and independent artists can create an account in MyBloop, make a playlist with promotional music, and talk to us to promote their playlist with links to buy the music on iTunes, MP3.com, etc.

p2pnet: Will you ultimately charge fees, or in some way bundle MyBloop with advertisements?

Leon: Our main service will always remain free. We’re really trying to provide a service that would normally cost users a lot of money if they went anywhere else. The site is driven solely by targeted advertising at this point. We have plans to eventually introduce premium accounts, but right now we’re focusing solely on perfecting the free service.

p2pnet: People have to sign up to use MyBloop, giving their ages, sex, home country and email address. How safe will this information be?

Leon: If you want to just listen to music and browse files, you don’t have to register at all. If you want to start sharing files, we ask you to create an account. We ask for an email address to make contact with you and in the event that you forget your password. We ask for the country you’re located in because we will be expanding to data centers in other countries, and when you download a file, MyBloop will serve the file from the location that’s closest to you. Age is used for filtering adult content from underage users. To prevent showing unrelated, annoying banner ads, the age and gender are also used for showing targeted ads in the future.

No personally identifiable information will ever be shared with, or sold to, a third party.

p2pnet: You say, “You are given complete control, enabling you to easily hide personal documents from public viewing.” How does that work?

Leon: After creating an account, you can access the My Files page and set any file as “Private”. The file will be removed from the search engine and all public listings (top files, new files, etc).

The only way someone else can access the file is if the file’s original owner gives them the URL.

p2pnet: I see you have a bunch of football files online right now. Are you targeting the sports videos in particular, or is this just coincidence?

Leon: Just a coincidence. We’ve got some sports enthusiasts who must have found out how easy it is to share their files on MyBloop.

Fitim Blaku started developing the first version of MyBloop, which only supported pictures, in 2006. He recruited friends of his to help develop and grow the service, which now supports music playlists, videos and every single type of file.

Ethan Lu worked with Fitim and Eugene Kim, re-vamping the core code and database architecture. His main project is developing a new file-browsing interface for the site: Bloop Explorer.

Eugene Kim is from Uzbekistan and has experience in client and server side programming in different programming languages. He linked up with the MyBloop team early on and currently leads the development of the flash uploader and classic uploader.

Angel Leon is a Venezuelan software engineer who, after working for LimeWire.com, moved over to Flycell.com, at the same time, starting the FrostWire development in his spare time for fun. He met Blaku and Lu at his day job and after sharing bite to eat on Broadway, decided their mutual interest in file sharing was worth taking several important steps further.

“I tried MyBloop.com and I wasn’t going to let the chance of being part of something so important go away,” he says. Currently designing and developing the MyBloop API and a top secret project with Francis and Fitim. He’s also a podcaster under the pseudonym of Gubatron and will try to make MyBloop.com a great tool for the podcasting community.

From Romania, Cristian Radu met Fitim and the rest of the group while he was working for New York advertising company. He, too, fell in love with the concept and started helping out on the development side. He’s urrently working on new version of the Bloop Player (Flash Music Player).

Yacine Benzine was born in Algeria and also has French citizenship. His family lived in Ethiopia full while before moving to New York city when he was 11. Benzine focuses on the business, marketing and financial and of MyBloop.

“After years of working on mind numbing web applications and treading the intricate mine fields of office politics, joining MyBloop’s development team was a great substitution for overdosing on Prozac,” says Francis Ho, only partially joking. He’s working on new features for the website and the MyBloop API, as well as heavily cloaked secret project also involving Leon and Blaku.

Slashdot it!

Also See:
started filtering content – October 13, 2005

If your Net access is blocked by government restrictions, try Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto’s Munk Centre for International Studies. Go here for the official download, and here for details. And if you’re Chinese and you’re looking for a way to access independent Internet news sources, try Freegate, the DIT program written to help Chinese citizens circumvent web site blocking outside of China. Download it here.

AllofMP3.com is a small Russian company which has become the international poster child for attacks on independent music download sites.

By itself, it probably doesn’t represent much of a genuine threat to the labels or studios. But if it’s allowed to survive and prosper, its existence would certainly encourage other entrepreneurs to adopt the same marketing approach – DRM-free downloads at reasonable prices – which would result in serious competition for the corporate cartels which, until the Net became universally adopted, had been able to control virtually everything ordinary people saw or heard.

Competition is good: it promotes free choice. But neither ‘choice’ nor ‘competition’ are words found in cartel lexicons. So a massive, and ongoing, multi-million-dollar campaign has been mounted against AllofMP3.com by the cartels, with the record labels to the fore.

Leading it on behalf of the labels and other vested interests is the US administration, which has brought its full weight down on a handful of people in another country who dare to compete with Warner Music, EMI, Vivendi Universal and Sony BMG, with the major movie studios and software houses lurking darkly in the background.

In rich irony, only Warner Music can be said to be truly American. And even it’s run by Canadian. The other three members of the Big 4 music cartel are EMI, Vivendi Universal and Sony BMG, based in Britain, France, Japan and Germany, respectively.

In other words, the US government is generously spending money provided by American tax payers to help four foreign companies maintain an iron grip on a market whose openness would benefit American artists as much, if not more, than artist in other countries.

Nor does it appear anyone in either the United States Trade Representative Office, which is behind much of the US-mounted pressure on AllofMP3.com, nor music industry ‘trade’ organizations, such as the IFPI (International Federation of Phonographic Industry), have made any effort to talk directly with AllofMP3.com executives to find a way to reach an accord.

p2pnet was able to have a word with the people who run AllofMP3.com.

p2pnet :- Who originally started AllofMP3.com and what was the motivation behind it?

AllofMP3.com:- People love music. As digital audio and mobile technologies improve, interest in digital music will only increase. Several years ago we foresaw this situation and thought we could create an Internet store to provide people – both experienced and inexperienced computer users and audiophiles – with a quality service and a wide assortment of music. We obtained all necessary licenses and started our hard work. What will become of it in the long run, our users will decide.

p2pnet :- Approximately how many users does AllofMP3.com currently have?

AllofMP3.com:- We’ve 5,500,000 registered users.

p2pnet :- You’ve been singled out for special attention by the US administration: “I have a hard time imagining Russia becoming a member of the WTO and having a Web site like that [AllofMP3.com] up and running that is so clearly a violation of everyone’s intellectual property rights,” said US Trade Representative Susan Schwab, according to Reuters.

The story went on, “Schwab’s call for the allofmp3.com Web site to be closed came as the United States and Russia are trying once again to reach a deal on Moscow’s 13-year-old bid to join the WTO. Those talks failed in July, primarily because of agricultural issues and U.S. concerns that Russia was not doing enough to stop piracy and counterfeiting of American goods.”

How does it feel to be a principal target of the American anti-p2p effort?

AllofMP3.com:- It is disappointing that United States Trade Representative Susan Schwab completely and deliberately mischaracterized AllofMP3.com. Furthermore, it is irresponsible to use AllofMP3.com as a negotiating instrument in an attempt to extract concessions from Russia in return for US support for accession to the World Trade Organization.

AllofMP3.com is a Russian business that is in complete compliance with Russian law.

p2pnet :- Do you believe the existence of your site stands in the way of US/Russia trade negotiations?

AllofMP3.com:- We believe we are a not barrier to the conclusion of WTO negotiations and that Representative Schwab has deliberately mischaracterized our company. As a Russian-based company, we operate legally under Russian law. It appears the US government is a willing partner in the campaign being waged by the big record companies that wish to shut down our company. And, unfortunately for us, it appears that the US government also sees AllofMP3 as a wedge issue to gain concessions from the Russian government in exchange for its support for WTO ascension.

p2pnet :- What effect might this have on you as a company?

AllofMP3.com:- At the moment it is not possible to define exact terms and conditions of Russia’s accession to WTO. Until the actual accession, which is not soon anyway, WTO rules do not apply to Russian companies. That is also true for any international intellectual property treaties developed under the WTO framework. It is possible that after Russia joins WTO some changes will be made to the national legislation and also that Russia will ratify some new international treaties. But for now it is too early to talk about effect that Russia’s accession to WTO will have on AllOFMP3.com business.

p2pnet :- Have you had any official or unofficial approaches from your government at any level asking you to stop operations in the interests of international goodwill?

AllofMP3.com:- We have not been contacted by Russian government.

p2pnet :- Have you heard from Schwab personally?

AllofMP3.com:- No.

p2pnet :- If you haven’t heard from her, have you heard from anyone else within the US trade office?

AllofMP3.com:- Nobody.

p2pnet :- Who’ve you heard from within the RIAA, or any of the other Big 4 trade organisations, and what did they have to say?

AllofMP3.com:- Nothing.

p2pnet :- Assuming you intended to keep AllofMP3.com online, what will be your next steps?

AllofMP3.com:- We believe the Russian market will continue to grow given the upward trend in incomes and access to the Internet and our plan is to build our business to support this market. We will grow our business by maintaining a dominate position in the market by providing customers a web-friendly site and great functionality at an attractive price point. Currently, we do not envision moving into other digital products.

p2pnet :- On the voucher story currently occupying the mainstream media’s attention, are you concerned with people advertising and selling Allofmp3.com vouchers on sites such as eBay, or on their own sites?

AllofMP3.com:- We don’t sell vouchers. Any user can purchase Gift Certificate on the site and give it to anybody.

p2pnet :- The Big 4’s IFPI (International Federation of Phonographic Industry) is trumpeting the arrest of a Londoner who allegedly worked for Allofmp3.com’s European office. How much truth is there in this?

AllofMP3.com:- The IFPI/ BPI (British Phonographic Industry) turned a person reselling gift certificates into a “European office of AllOFMP3″ in London. After that they initiated the loud “closure” of this “office” and an arrest of its mythical “employee”.

[NOTE: AllofMP3.com said earlier that it's never been active outside of Russia and, "Thus we do not have any offices or employees abroad".]

p2pnet :- I know you’ve been through this a hundred times before, but could you please explain, as simply as possible, how you’re able to legally sell downloads online?

AllofMP3.com:- We believe it is legal in Russia under Articles 44 and 45 of the Law of the Russian Federation No. 5351-1 On Copyright and Related Rights dated July 9, 1993, as amended, (the Copyright Law), which authorizes Russian non-profit Russian organizations for collective management of copyrights (Russian Licensing Societies) to grant licenses to entities such as ALLOFMP3. ALLOFMP3 has up-to-date licenses from the Russian Licensing Societies from the Federation of Rights Holders for Collective Management of Copyright with Respect to the Use of Musical Works in Interactive Regime (FAIR) and from the Russian Organization on Collective Management of Rights of Authors and Other Right Holders in Multimedia, Digital Networks & Visual Arts (ROMS).

Russian Copyright Law allows holders of intellectual property rights to establish non-profit organizations such as ROMS which in its capacity oversees licensing agreements and collects royalties and pays them out to copyright holders, aside from some commissions.

The Russian Copyright Law provides non-profit Russian Licensing Societies with a right to grant licenses and to collect royalties for the use of music without necessarily obtaining permission from the copyright owners.

p2pnet :- Do you get many requests from artists to have you to feature their music on your site? Still on this, have you had any well-known musicians ask you to include their music, and if so can you say, who?

AllofMP3.com:- Yes, we get a lot of new requests everyday. But we’ve no story with well-known musicians.

p2pnet :- One of the favourite themes of the Big 4 is: downloads which, presumably, include music from AllofMP3.com, are polluted with viruses and so on and are extremely dangerous: what’s your response to this?

AllofMP3.com:- WOW! We hear about it for the first time We’ve no viruses on the site nor in media-files.

p2pnet :- Do have a plan to start offering videos through AllofMP3.com?

AllofMP3.com:- No. We didn’t plan it.

p2pnet :- Do you see any hope of coming to terms with the corporate music industry?

AllofMP3.com:- It’s a question of time. Why not?

p2pnet :- The North American media tend to confine themselves to calling AllofMP3.com an illegal pirate organisation: do the Russian media write about you in the same way?

AllofMP3.com:- The Russian media are proud of AllfofMP3 because of its popularity all over the world.

p2pnet :- And finally, do you have any messages for the people who continue to support you?

AllofMP3.com:- Thank you for using our services! Stay tuned!and

=================

UPDATE:

“Ignore the jurisdictional issues for the moment,” says Digital Copyright Canada’s Russell McOrmond in a comment post, going on:

While AllOfMP3.com may be perfectly legal for Russian customers, it is not legal for them to sell to foreign customers. Copyright and licensing need to be analysed domestically, and you can’t say that what is legal in Russia allows you to do something in Canada or the USA.

Canadians should read this closely as this relates to the type of objections that the major labels have against Canada’s Private Copying regime. Unfortunately, unlike in Russia, many Canadians seem to be opposed to this regime as well – they appear to prefer lawsuits to levies for recorded music.

On the other hand, I wish the levies were moved from legacy recording media (that’s how we share music now) and moved to a voluntary system where those who wish to non-commercially share music, movies or television (including mashups) would pay a flat-fee to a collective society (likely through the ISP as part of the monthly service charge to make things simpler).

We also need a compulsory regime for commercial Internet download and Internet radio. I disagree with the industry executives who claim the current system of private negotiations is working out well.

For those in the USA, think of “Save Internet Radio” which is based on the same issue (although it is streaming rather than downloads).

Collective licensing rates are being set so high by the US government that it will drive the big net radio stations to have to make special deals with the major labels. The net result? The redundant labels make a lot of money, and the actual composer and musician makes far less. While the rate was set far too high, the compulsory license had a formula that was far more fair in terms of the percentages that the composer and musician would make.

As is the case for most of the battles involving music these days, the target of the labels isn’t “piracy” but attacks against the interests of composers and musicians. Even though labels are redundant in the new economy (only needed to finance the historically high costs of recording, editing and distributing recorded content), they want to take the lion’s share of any music industry money and keep composers and musicians poor.

Jon Newton - p2pnet

Slashdot it!

f your Net access is blocked by government restrictions, try Psiphon from the Citizen Lab at the University of Toronto’s Munk Centre for International Studies. Go here for the official download, here for the p2pnet download, and here for details. And if you’re Chinese and you’re looking for a way to access independent Internet news sources, try Freegate, the DIT program written to help Chinese citizens circumvent web site blocking outside of China. Download it here.

Born and raised in Toronto and the proud father of “three great kids” (7, 5, and 2), he’s the University of Ottawa’s Canada Research Chair in Internet and E-commerce Law, a position he’s held since 2003. Before going to U of O seven years ago, he was at a long list of law schools including Columbia Law School in New York, Dalhousie Law School in Halifax, Canada, Cambridge University in England, and Kobe University in Japan, where he was doing graduate work and some teaching.

His editorial output is prolific. He produces numerous professional publications and writes for Canada’s Toronto Star and Ottawa Citizen, and England’s BBC, and p2pnet is proud to regularly run his columns. He’s also on the director and advisory boards of several internet and IT law organizations including the Canadian Internet Registration Authority, the dot-ca administrative agency, the Canadian IT Law Association, and Watchfire.

The former chair of a global Internet jurisdiction project for the American Bar Association and International Chamber of Commerce, Geist is regularly quoted in the national and international media on internet law issues and has appeared before government committees on e-commerce policy.

Obviously, with a work-load such as that and three lively children, he doesn’t have much in the way of free time but when he does, he’s a big sports fan who, although he’s an Ottawa Senators season ticket holder, is also a “a die-hard Toronto Maple Leafs hockey fan”. And when he gets the chance, he takes in “a fair amount of music” on his iPod, “in addition to a growing list of podcasts.”

One of his favourite bands is Green Day, and he’s also a Springsteen fan.

“I really like Pandora for listening to new stuff,” he says. “I buy music on Apple iTunes and also download occasional stuff. Frankly, most of my P2P downloading tends to be torrents of video files of recent lectures or other video content.”

BitTorrent is his application of choice for downloads.

Do you think Canada will ever be in the same situation as the US where even young children can become CRIA (Canadian Recording Industry Association of America) victims? – we asked him in the Q&A below.

“I hope not,” he says

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

p2pnet: You’ve become a virtual spokesman for copyright common sense not only in Canada, but in other parts of the world. Is this something you deliberately set out to achieve?

Geist: : No, not at all. My focus has traditionally been on Internet issues and I’m very active on privacy, spam, Internet governance issues. The growing attention to copyright merely reflects its critical importance to the Internet and to creativity and culture more generally.

`

p2pnet: Does the role sit well with you?

`

Geist: : I think there are a lot of people who do great work in this area. I’m fortunate to have some platforms to speak out and educate – such as a regular newspaper column and my blog. These are issues that have not gained significant awareness in the past and I’m happy to help change that.

p2pnet: How much real influence do you think the entertainment and software industries have over decisions made in Ottawa and elsewhere?

Geist: : Enormous influence – they’re clearly one of, if not the single most successful lobbying concerns worldwide as their influence extends internationally, nationally, and even at the local levels. In Ottawa, I think that policy makers are genuinely interested in hearing all perspectives. Once their work turns into a bill, however, we’ll see the power of the lobby come to the fore.

p2pnet: Do you think they have undue influence? If so, should it be curbed, and can it be?

Geist: : They certainly have far more resources than any other stakeholder group. I think it is essential that other stakeholders – particularly those who represent the public interest – receive active support so that their views are heard. In the US, there are many groups (EFF, CDT, Public Knowledge, ACLU, EPIC, IP Justice, etc) that work in the area. We don’t have nearly that kind of support in Canada as I think CIPPIC, the public interest technology law clinic that I helped establish at the University of Ottawa, is one of the only similar groups in Canada.

p2pnet: Is it acceptable for elected politicians to accept benefits from the entertainment and software industries, and to so obviously (and actively) represent their interests against those of their constituents?

Geist: : No. That issue sat at the heart of my very public fight with former MP Sarmite Bulte. These are tough issues and I think it is critical that the process be both fair and seen to be fair. When you have MPs in decision making positions, they shouldn’t be seen to be aligning themselves with any single stakeholder group. It was for that reason that I proposed the copyright pledge. It didn’t say that politicians couldn’t take money from lobby groups – only that they couldn’t take the cash and then directly influence policy by sitting as Minister, Parliamentary Secretary, or on the relevant House of Commons committee.

p2pnet: Have you ever been approached to work with, or for, any of the entertainment or software companies?

Geist: : I talk with many groups and companies all the time. While we may disagree on certain issues, the complexity of copyright is such that your opponent on one issue, may be your ally on another.

p2pnet: Are you able to sit down and have a reasoned, and reasonable, discussion on copyright and other related issues with the people who make the corporate decisions?

Geist: : I am. There are some people who don’t want to talk, but they’re in the minority.

p2pnet: Is it acceptable for the purely commercial labels, studios and software houses to so easily use, and be an integral part of, police and other agency raids and enforcement operations the industries themselves usually initiate?

Geist: : I think true commercial piracy – the sort where commercial operations churn out infringing software or DVDs for sale and profit – is obviously wrong and the law should be used to stop such activities.

p2pnet: Is copyright ‘crime’ a crime at all?

Geist: : I think it’s fair to say that the commercial piracy described above is a crime. I don’t think that the non-commercial copying that we see on P2P networks falls into that category, however.

p2pnet: Would you agree that if the software and entertainment companies were to use p2p technologies for handling and distribution, a reduction both in counterfeiting and duplicating and in costs associated with physical product would follow?

Geist: : I think P2P represents a tremendous commercial opportunity for those groups. I think it has the potential to reduce distribution costs. I’m not sure that it would have an impact on commercial counterfeiting.

p2pnet: Should the cartels be allowed to have a definite presence in schools and universities via their so-called ‘educational’ programs?

Geist: : I think it’s up to the schools to ensure that their students gain a balanced perspective on these issues. Educators wouldn’t tolerate commercial messaging in other areas and shouldn’t here either. It’s essential that educators take that role seriously by educating their students on the full range of copyright issues including their user rights to use works without prior permission.

p2pnet: Do you believe people who share files with each other online are ‘thieves’ and ‘criminals’ as the CRIA, et al, claim?

Geist: : No.

p2pnet: Is file sharing really “devastating” (to quote the CRIA claim) the music industry and its various elements?

Geist: : I don’t believe so. I’m sure it has some impact, but it’s hard to know precisely what that impact is as there’s some evidence that the impact is positive, not negative. Regardless, the decline in sales that the major labels have experienced in recent years is almost certainly about a host of issues that have little to do with P2P, including more consumer entertainment choices, pricing, changes in the retail distribution of music, the decline of radio, and the releases being brought to market.

p2pnet: Do you think the wholesale price of between 60 and 80 cents for a single Big Four digital file is fair?

Geist: : I don’t know. In an open market, the market would set the price. Obviously people like NY Attorney General Eliot Spitzer are skeptical that the market is truly functioning appropriately without unlawful and anti-competitive interference.

p2pnet: Does a download equal a lost sale?

Geist: : No. I don’t think anybody would argue that it does. Even the Copyright Board of Canada has valued a downloaded song as a lesser value that the CD version for purposes of the private copying levy.

p2pnet: Are file sharers and counterfeiters equally and jointly responsible for entertainmment and software industry downturns, as the CRIA and other trade-cum-PR units suggest repeatedly?

Geist: : I don’t think file sharers and counterfeiters should be equated – there is a significant difference between the two. As for industry downturns, I’m not sure that those industries are making those claims. For example, the video game software industry is enjoying enormous growth, while the movie industry is experiencing terrific revenues from DVD sales and other new licensing opportunities.

p2pnet: Should parents he held responsible under the law for something their children may, or may not, have done?

Geist: : Well, certainly not for something their children didn’t do. The better question is whether we should hold anyone liable to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars in damages for P2P activity. I think not – statutory damages provisions should be amended to address this misuse of the law.

p2pnet: Do you agree that blogs and bloggers are replacing the traditional media as disseminators of news and information?

Geist: : I’m not sure they’re replacing traditional media, but they are obviously having an enormous impact on the dissemination of news, opinion, and information. I think blogs often provide more timely, more informed analysis that you will find in the mainstream media and thus either replace or complement MSM coverage. I also think that we’re seeing a growing convergence between the two – newspapers are starting to look a lot like blogs – take the redesign of the Globe and Mail as an example.

p2pnet: Do you think they’re having, or will have, an influence on what the labels, studios and software makers do?

Geist: : I think bloggers are having an influence on all aspects of society, including public policy and corporate decision making.

p2pnet: Do you think Canada will ever be in the same situation as the US where even young children will become CRIA victims?

Geist: : I hope not. I’m hopeful that Canada can develop a model that benefits all stakeholders and does not resort to damaging litigation that serves no one’s best interests.

p2p news special / p2pnet:

Thanks to the unrelenting, multi-million-dollar Big Four anti-p2p campaign, they’ve been held up as as thieves and criminals by the corporate media corps.

Yet nothing has been stolen, no money has changed hands, not one of the 18,000 has ever been found guilt of anything, and the unimaginably rich Warner Music, Vivendi Universal, EMI and Sony BMG have never been able to uphold their claims that they’re being “devastated” by file sharers.

Nor have they ever been able to substantiate their assertions that a file shared equals a sale lost.

Like Patti Santangelo, Tanya Andersen is a single mother who’s being accused of the wholly fabricated charge of criminal file sharing.

Santangelo is refusing to admit she’s shared even one file and will be the first person to challenge the labels in an open court before a jury.

Andersen, who’s laid RICO (Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organization) allegations of her own against the RIAA, also flatly denies its charges and since early last year, has been trying to get the labels to check her hard-drive as proof.

The Big Four ‘trade’ organization didn’t want to know. Period. But suddenly, it decided it did, after all, require access to her hard-drive - to all of it. But a judge ruled Andersen could name her own investigator who’d search only for specific files.

And the RIAA will have to pay his or her bill.

Meanwhile, Andersen – pictured here with Kylee, her daughter, and Tazz, their terrier/Maltese cross – used to buy music through BMG, but dropped the service when she was sued.

Now, in this Q&A with p2pnet, she describes how BMG Music asked her to return to the fold because she’d been, “such a great customer”.

They also promised her a free CD if she’d sign up again.

“I think it’s sad that all the beautiful and hard work of artists is being tarnished by these lawsuits,” she told p2pnet.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

p2pnet: You’ve been embroiled in a fight with the Big Four record labels for some time, now. Mark Eilers at their Tukwila, Washington, ‘Settlement Centre,’ claims you downloaded ‘illegal’ digital files. But you’ve said from Day One the allegation isn’t true. Do you have any idea how they decided to zero in on you?

Andersen: No, I don’t. There were a lot of things that went on with my computer during that month – I was down for a week and had to call Verizon to get me back on line. During that time, there was an employee that went in and did some things to my computer – worked my computer from their office; also having me go in and change my ip address several times. I also had a virus that month that I had a hard time getting rid of. I really have no idea. I just know that I never did what they’re saying I did.

p2pnet: Have you ever shared files?

Andersen: No.

p2pnet: Do you know how to share files?

Andersen: I’d heard about people file sharing before this lawsuit was filed against me. But if you told me to go into a program and do it, I wouldn’t know how. Through this lawsuit, I’ve had to educate myself through reading and talking to people to learn about how Kaaza works and about how file sharing works.

p2pnet: Your lawyer says in a, “sweeping and indefinite manner,” the RIAA lists 1,406 file names. This represents statutory damages of either $4,500 or $1,054,500. How much is the RIAA actually demanding from you?

Andersen: The Settlement Support Center that kept calling me told me if I didn’t agree to pay them that they’d be filing a huge lawsuit against me in Federal Court, and would sue me for hundreds of thousands of dollars. When I told them I didn’t do what they were saying, they told me they just don’t end these things and I’d better just pay. Or else. I kept telling them there is no way I did what they said, and could I please see the proof of what they were saying I did. They told me they couldn’t provide that to me at that time. It wasn’t something they did. That, when they filed a lawsuit against me, I could see what they had. He did finally tell me on the phone how many songs there were, named some of them, and told me the user name (which I’d never heard of). I continued to tell him I didn’t do what they were saying. They would just say they’d sue me for hundreds of thousands of dollars if I didn?t enter into an agreement with the Settlement Support Center to pay.

p2pnet: How much are they demanding from you?

Andersen: I’m not even sure, at this point, the exact amount they are suing me for. I just know it’s huge.

p2pnet: Have they told you which files they’re accusing you of sharing?

Andersen: When the Settlement Support Center called, they had told me the names of a few they were accusing me of. It was not until I got served the lawsuit and saw the exhibits that I found out what all I was even actually being accused of.

p2pnet: Have you considered paying to get the RIAA off your back?

Andersen: Nope. I don’t believe I should pay for something I did not do.

p2pnet: Your daughter, Kylee, is nine, now. Does she understand what’s going on?

Andersen: She understands that her mom is being sued, but isn’t sure what all that means. I’ve tried to keep a lot of it away from her. Even though I try that, she’s still heard some things. I found out one day that this stuff was affecting her more than I knew and that she’s heard some of it. One day, out of the blue, she asked me if those people are going to take her mom away and if I’d go to jail. She wanted to know if we’d still have a place to live and food to eat and would we be OK. It scares and confuses her. She keeps asking me if they’re still suing me.

p2pnet: Might she have shared files on your computer without you knowing?

Andersen: No. She was seven at the time – only a few months into the age of seven. She still doesn’t know how to even connect to the internet. She’s always had to ask if she does get on the computer. The computer is out in the living room, and always had been, where I can see it. It also had passwords on it. She gets on the computer to play with her store-bought kid software or has gone on children?s site occasionally, if I help her get on there. She doesn’t even know how to do that herself.

p2pnet: Is the RIAA action affecting her in any way?

Andersen: Yes. She’s scared they’re going to take her mom away for something she doesn’t understand. She’s worried if we’re going to be OK. Plus, she puts up with a mom who has more stress than normal, at times. I try real hard to keep that under control, but it’s pretty hard at times.

p2pnet: When they can’t get to parents, the RIAA is infamous for going after children. Do you know if it’s thinking about a suit against your daughter?

Andersen: No, I haven’t heard of that.

p2pnet: We understand you wrote US senator Ron Wyden and Congressman David Wu, and state senator Gordon Smith, all from Oregon, asking for their help both as an Oregon citizen, and ex-employee of the Oregon Department of Justice. Did they respond?

Andersen: They each responded with a letter that appeared generic in reply. They all told me that, as congress people, they couldn’t get involved in someone being sued in a lawsuit. I could tell by the letters that they didn’t even understand what I was talking about.

p2pnet: What do your friends and neighbors think of the law suit?

Andersen: Most think it is pretty insane and can’t believe this is happening to me. They know I didn’t download or share music.

p2pnet: Do you have any idea at all how the RIAA zeroed in on you?

Andersen: No, I don’t.

p2pnet: Are, or were you, a customer of any of the labels?

Andersen: Yes, I was. I bought CDs regularly and was a member of BMG?s music club. I ordered a lot of CDs from BMG. I cancelled my membership when this happened.

The weird thing is the other day, I received a phone call from BMG Music asking me to come back because I had been ’such a great customer.’ They told me if I signed back up, they’d give me a free CD. I told them No and they asked me why. I told them that maybe they should quit suing their great customers. They guy on the phone told me he didn’t even know they were doing that. (I’m sure he was just a telemarketer and it didn?t matter much to him.)

There are songs out now that I hear and love and would love to buy the CD, but when I see the recording company, I feel sick to my stomach and won’t buy it. It?s sad to me because music used to be something that would relax me and make me feel good – it was a huge joy in my life.

Now, knowing what I know, the entire industry has left me with a different feeling.

p2pnet: What would you say to any of the other people who are being victimized by the RIAA?

Andersen: People can make a difference. I believe that.

Believe in yourself and don’t let someone bully you into paying for something you haven’t done.

. .Stumble It!

He says he’s an advocate for the fans (sometimes called ‘consumers,’ sometimes called ‘end-users’, sometimes called the public)’ and ‘a music fan first, and everything else second’. And as Wikipedia sums it up, he’s been on CNN, CNBC, ABC’s Good Morning America, The NewsHour with Jim Lehrer, and Fox News O’Reilly Factor, as well as being widely quoted in a number of national publications.

Von Lohmann has an AB from Stanford University and a JD from Stanford Law School and in a world where lawyers are largely perceived as whores who’ll do anything for money, he stands out not only as someone who’s hard-core  – hard-core for user rights – but also as a genuine visionary at a time when the superlative is seriously over-played.

As the EFF’s senior staff attorney specializing in intellectual property, von Lohmann represented Morpheus owners Streamcast Networks in Grokster vs MGM.

His intelligence and commitment are deeply respected on all sides and as an expert in intellectual property matters, he’s represented programmers, technology innovators and individuals. He’s also involved in EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundation) efforts to “educate policy-makers regarding the proper balance between intellectual property protection and the public interest in fair use, free expression, and innovation,� says the foundation.

Before joining EFF, von Lohmann was a visiting researcher with the Berkeley Center for Law and Technology, zeroing in on the impact of p2p on the future of copyright. And before that, he was an associate with the international law firm Morrison & Foerster LLP, concentrating on transactions and counseling involving the Internet and intellectual property.

Read on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

p2pnet: Where do you come from?

von Lohmann: I spent my childhood in Southern California (most of it in “the OC”). I’ve been living in the SF Bay Area for most of the last 19 years.

p2pnet: Is lawyering part of your family background?

von Lohmann: No. My father was an engineer, my mother a waitress. Both are immigrants, arrived on these shores with just the contents of their suitcases, and managed to build themselves a pretty reasonable facsimile of the American Dream. I’m very proud to be their son.

p2pnet: Did you ask to join the EFF, or did they invite you?

von Lohmann: I applied for the job. Working for EFF was my dream job since my early days of law school. I’ve described my “conversion moment” in a post at Deep Links as part of EFF15 blogathon. In short, it was John Perry Barlow who inspired me, thanks to his now-classic article for Wired Magazine entitled “The Economy of Ideas.”

p2pnet: How would you describe your role as an advocate for common sense in the digital 21st century?

von Lohmann: I’d describe my role as an advocate for the fans (sometimes called “consumers,” sometimes called “end-users”, sometimes called the public). Intellectual property laws have always sought to strike a balance between owners and the rest of us, all in the name of the public interest. Unfortunately, there are more advocates paid to speak for the owners than for the fans. I’m just trying to right the balance a little. After all, if it weren’t for the fans and end-users digging into their pockets every day to pay for movies, music, software, books, newspapers and magazines, there wouldn’t be any “IP industries.”

p2pnet: Given your ongoing involvements, I doubt if you’re married. But you never know : ) So are you?

von Lohmann: Engaged to be married, actually.

p2pnet: You’re knowledgeable on software and you’re obviously technically inclined. Just how adept are you? And where did you acquire your skills?

von Lohmann: I’ve taken one college-level programming course, which I took while in law school for kicks. It made me realize that I don’t have the patience for debugging code (debugging legal arguments, on the other hand, I enjoy). Otherwise, I’m just an enthusiastic Mac user who tries not to hurt himself when playing on the OS X command line.

p2pnet: Do you use p2p applications for downloads? If so, which ones and for what kind of files? If not, why not?

von Lohmann: Not often. I use Bit Torrent once in awhile to download TV shows that my TiVo has missed and live recordings of my favorite bands. I’m a big music fan and audiophile, so I buy CDs and vinyl. Most of the mp3s floating around on p2p networks don’t have the kind of audio quality I want. Plus, I like the physical object – I actually miss the physical heft of a vinyl record (and recently bought my first turntable in 20 years to get back to it). I’m an old fashioned music fan, I guess.

p2pnet: Do you have time for any serious interests on the side?

von Lohmann: When it comes to hobbies, I’m a music fan first, and everything else second. Those secondary hobbies include indoor rock climbing, sea kayaking, and scuba diving.

p2pnet: What’s your favourite band? What’s your favourite piece of software? And what’s your favourite company?

von Lohmann: Favorite band: Tori Amos. Favorite software: iTunes (which does a surprisingly good job managing my 15000+ song music library). Favorite companies: small American high end audio companies, like Audio Research, Conrad Johnson, Pass Labs, Vandersteen, Wilson Audio, that continue to make equipment that serves the music first.

Most Americans don’t know that some of the greatest stereos are made by American tinkerers!

p2pnet: How does it feel to know you’re a major, and highly respected, player in a world where all too often, only money and political influence decide who’ll speak and who’ll be listed to?

von Lohmann: It’s a great honor and privilege to get paid to work on issues because you believe in them, rather than because a company needs someone to push its interests. If I won the lottery today, I’d come to work tomorrow. How many people can say that? I am grateful to EFF’s supporters every day for making it possible.

p2pnet: What was the most satisfying case you’ve been involved in?

von Lohmann: Ironically, it wasn’t a cyberlaw case at all. While clerking for the federal district court in San Francisco, I worked on the constitutional challenge to California’s Proposition 209, which eliminated affirmative action in public employment, public education, and public contracting. My judge, Thelton Henderson, declared the proposition unconstitutional, and while the decision was ultimately reversed on appeal, it remains the case I am most proud to have worked on.

p2pnet: Who’s your favourite ‘opponent,’ so to speak? And who’s your hero?

von Lohmann: I can’t name a single favorite “opponent.” Frankly, I’ve had the privilege of dealing mostly with sophisticated, smart people who work for the Dark Side. Many of them I like and respect personally. But the companies they work for are not in business to do the right thing, but rather to do the profitable thing. In a world of vigorous competition, the customer can often keep companies honest. Unfortunately, where the entertainment (and some parts of the software) industry is concerned, the reality of oligopoly means that the right thing and the profitable thing are increasingly far apart.

As for my heroes, I’d give the nod to the entire EFF Board of Directors – Larry Lessig, John Perry Barlow, John Gilmore, Brewster Kahle, Brad Templeton, Pam Samuelson, Joe Kraus, Dave Farber – each is a visionary, each has made a commitment to give back to the public good after finding success in their professional lives. Oh, and Joss Whedon. I’m a big fan of Buffy the Vampire Slayer.

p2pnet: Have you ever had invitations from anyone in the movie, music or software industries to work for them?

von Lohmann: No.

p2pnet: Will you ever go into private practice, and if you so, in what area?

von Lohmann: I was in private practice at a big corporate law firm in San Francisco for two years. I have no current plans to return to private practice, but you never can tell.

Of ‘piracy’ and ‘pirates’……..

p2pnet: In your opinion, are the entertainment and software industries truly being “devastated,” as they claim, by file sharing?

von Lohmann: The movie industry is clearly not being “devastated” – in fact, they’re enjoying some of their most profitable years in history. Similarly, I see no evidence that the software industry is being “devastated.” There is plainly more than enough incentive today for people to continue investing in the software industry. When it comes to the music industry, I think we simply don’t have enough data to know how much (if at all) file sharing has contributed to the recent downturn. But even the music industry can’t plausibly claim to be “devastated”. Frankly, I’m guessing a lot of airline industry executives would be happy to trade jobs with their record industry counterparts. Plainly, lots of what’s ailing the music industry has nothing to do with file-sharing.

In the long run, I’m certain that file-sharing (and the internet generally) will be a huge boon to the entertainment industries. After all, for a century, every new technology that the entertainment industry started out attacking turned out to be a huge new business opportunity. The player piano, phonograph, broadcast radio, jukeboxes, cable television, VCRs, cassette decks, you name it. I see no reason to presume that the internet will be the first technology in a century that will be an exception to this rule.

p2pnet: Do you think someone who downloads a music or movie file is in effect negating a sale somewhere, some time?

von Lohmann: When tens of millions of Americans are downloading music, one of them will support virtually any proposition. Doubtless, some file-sharers are downloading as a substitute for purchasing. For others, the downloading is driving more purchases. Many policy-makers and economists think that the important question is which response is predominant. I think that’s looking at the wrong thing. After all, if downloaders were given the opportunity to pay a reasonable, up-front, flat fee in exchange for the freedom to download whatever they like, that would create an altogether new way to monetize downloading.

We at EFF have proposed something like this, known by copyright lawyers as “voluntary collective licensing“. Instead of asking whether downloading sells more or fewer CDs, shouldn’t we all be talking about the new business models that might capitalize on this global phenomenon that is clearly great for the fans?

p2pnet: Is it reasonable to mention both ‘pirates’ and file sharers in the same breath – or, put another way, are they components of the same problem, as the entertainment and software industries suggest?

von Lohmann: I think the use of the term “pirate” is inaccurate and unfortunate. “Piracy” has traditionally been used to refer to infringers who are selling counterfeit copies for personal gain. Lumping typical downloaders into the same group as for-profit pirates is a mistake – they are not the same people, are not driven by the same motives, and are a great deal more diverse in age, income, and circumstance.

Pirates are never your customers. Downloaders, on the other hand, are the core of music fandom – they are, like it or not, the core demographic that the music and movie industries will need to please in the future.

Are parents responsible for what their kids do?

p2pnet: Do you agree the music, movie and software cartels are bent on dominating and, ultimately, completely controlling online sales distribution in the same way they control offline markets? If you do, will they succeed? And if not where, in your view, do they stand and where are they headed

von Lohmann: Certain parts of the entertainment industry – the major motion picture studios, the major record labels – are still extremely afraid of losing their grip on distribution. After all, these businesses have depended for decades on controlling the distribution bottleneck. These are the dinosaurs of the copyright industries, and they’ll soon be facing lots of smaller players who will be quicker to adapt to the digital world. The dinosaurs will either need to evolve to become birds (smaller, lighter, more nimble) or go extinct.

Other parts of the entertainment industry – like BMI and ASCAP, as well as some of the MMO publishers – are better suited to making the transition to a world where controlling distribution is not as important as licensing and subscriptions.

p2pnet: Do you agree with the RIAA, MPAA, BSA, IFPI, etc, etc, that people who use the p2p nets to share files with each other are criminals and thieves?

von Lohmann: See my answer above about “pirates.”

p2pnet: Is it acceptable to make parents responsible in a financial or other sense for something their children may, or may not, have done?

von Lohmann: The increasing number of lawsuits against the parents and grandparents of alleged file-sharers is a particularly unfortunate part of the recording industry’s litigation campaign against music fans. There is no precedent in copyright law for holding parent responsible for the infringing activities of their minor children. If the question ever went to court, I believe the RIAA would lose. Unfortunately, the RIAA has made it clear that, if a parent fights the lawsuit, they will simply sue the child directly.

Most parents are unwilling to expose their kids to that kind of ordeal, so they settle.

The cartels and the law …….

p2pnet: Do you think it’s OK for the cartels to ‘work’ so closely with various enforcement agencies in the US and around the world in raids and other operations?

von Lohmann: I can’t speak for what goes on in other countries. In the US, law enforcement has (to the best of my knowledge) largely restricted their involvement to situations involving commercial piracy. I have no problem with that – where commercial pirates are concerned, copyright owners should have effective remedies to seize counterfeit goods before they disappear out the back door. Of course, if we have US Marshals breaking down college dorm room doors to nab file-sharers, the issue would be different.

We’ve been watching law enforcement tactics closely, especially in the cases involving the operators of Bit Torrent trackers, where the tactics appear to be more heavy-handed.

p2pnet: The movie and music industries in particular seem able to have their wants acted upon at the highest government levels. Is it reasonable for them to be able to wield this kind of influence?

von Lohmann: For better or worse, in a modern democracy the political process is responsive to two things: votes and money. For most of our modern history, the copyright industries have dominated the political process with the latter. That won’t change until the fans start making a difference with the former. As a tax-exempt nonprofit, there’s a limit to how much lobbying and political organizing EFF can do. But there are others who are beginning to engage on a more political level. I don’t believe that a majority will ever be “single issue copyright voters.” But even a small minority, with targeted donations and smart political operatives, can bring down members of Congress who vote against them on the issues they care about.

p2pnet: Is copyright ‘crime’ on a par with, say, robbing a bank? Is it a crime at all, and it you think it is, at what kind of level should it be ranked?

von Lohmann: I think most people see commercial piracy as a crime. Perhaps not as bad as robbing a bank, but certainly worthy of criminal sanction. As for noncommercial infringement, I think most people don’t view it as a crime. Fortunately, the US Attorneys around the country appear to agree – there have been virtually no federal criminal prosecutions of “garden variety” file-sharers. The worst possible thing for our civil liberties would be a world where 60 million American music fans are suddenly potential criminal suspects – thanks to downloading music! That would put more Americans “under suspicion,” and thus subject to government coercion, than ever before in our nation’s history.

p2p and distribution …….

p2pnet: How would you greet the contention that if the software and entertainment companies were to start using p2p technologies for handling and distribution, they’d see both a reduction both in counterfeiting and duplicating and in costs associated with physical product?

von Lohmann: If the p2p revolution has taught us anything, it’s that the fans (assisted by technology developers) do a better job distributing music than any record label or retailer ever has. The only problem is that the artists and rightsholders aren’t being fairly compensated. It seems to me that if we concentrate on the compensation problem, and leave the distribution to the fans and new technologies, everyone would end up better off. As I mentioned, EFF has a proposal for how to solve the compensation problem, and it looks as though the record labels may actually be on the verge of experimenting with something similar in the UK by giving blanket licenses to the subscribers of PlayLouder.

p2pnet: ‘It’s only business’ is a popular justification for enterprises or individuals to do something the average person believes is wrong. With that in mind, is it OK for companies, such as Sony, with a major presence in all camps, to be part of the sue ‘em all movement on the one hand, and to be making and marketing equipment – camcorders and burners, for example – used by the people they’re accusing of being unconscionable thieves, on the other?

von Lohmann: It’s a strange place that many technology giants find themselves in. Both Sony and Microsoft are building technologies that help people to make and distribute copies, on the one hand, and are also building DRM systems to restrict what people can do with content, on the other. But you have to remember why technology companies are willing to play ball with Hollywood: because Hollywood threatens to play favorites, releasing their next-generation formats only to those who satisfy their DRM demands. That dynamic can be directly traced to the incredible concentration of market power that we see in the music and movie industries. If we had 5,000 small, competing movie studios, they’d be in no position to tell the technology industry how to build the next DVD player.

p2pnet: Do think there’s room for commercial p2p companies such as StreamCast and Grokster and the studios and labels to sit down together to resolve their differences?

von Lohmann: We’ll see. The trouble, of course, is that p2p file-sharing technologies can be designed and distributed anywhere in the world by virtually any reasonably qualified programmer. That makes it hard to imagine that negotiations alone will resolve the P2P dilemma.

And lastly …….

p2pnet: If you were able to get the movie studios, record labels and software companies to pay honest attention, what would you say to them?

von Lohmann: It’s important to remember that not all of these industries are in the same boat.

To the movie and software industries, I’d say “enjoy your huge profits, but remember that the only way to stay ahead in a Darknet world is by continuing to give customers products that can effectively compete with free.”

To the music industry, I’d say “the p2p horse is out of the barn, so let’s talk about how we can get you fairly compensated for the sharing that is going to continue regardless.”

p2pnet: Do you think it’s acceptable for elected politicians to so obviously accept benefits from the entertainment and software conglomerates, and to so obviously (and actively) represent their interests?

von Lohmann: See my response above about the politics of copyright.

p2pnet: Are the record labels fair to be wholesaling ‘product’ at 65 cents per and up? And should companies such as Apple be sitting still for such charges?

von Lohmann: As in all markets, there’s a price point that maximizes total revenues. I think anyone can see that, in a p2p world, price has to be less than 99 cents per song. After all, Yahoo! is already offering you “all-you-can-eat” music for $5 per month.

p2pnet: Commercial p2p companies such as MashBoxx hope they’ll be able to bridge the gap between ‘consumers’ (as opposed to ‘customers’) and the labels and movie companies. Do you think they’ll succeed?

von Lohmann: We’ll have to wait and see. As a team of Microsoft engineers pointed out in the now-classic 2002 Darknet paper, if you’re going to compete with free, you have to offer the customer something better than what they can get for free. More DRM, restrictions, and interoperability hassles are not the answer. We’ll see what MashBoxx and Snocap will be allowed to offer by the record labels.

p2pnet: Should the cartels be allowed to have the kind of presence and influence that they do in schools and universities?

von Lohmann: I think it’s a great idea to educate younger people about copyright and the difficult policy issues at stake in the debates. Of course, that’s not what the entertainment industries have in mind when they stress “education.” Instead, they want kids to be told, at the youngest possible age, that copying is “stealing.” Our copyright laws have never been that simple, nor the issues so black and white. I would be thrilled if our high school and college students started thinking critically about copyright laws, how they are made, what purposes they serve, and whether they are currently set at the right level. I’m absolutely confident that, in an honest debate about copyright law, students will almost unanimously side with the fans against entertainment companies.

p2pnet: And lastly, do you have anything you’d like to say to anyone who reads this?

von Lohmann: If you care about these issues, please consider joining EFF. We are a member-supported nonprofit. Without the annual contributions of our members, our work would not be possible. So if you think the fans deserve more of a voice against the big media companies, please join!

=================

Something you think we should know? tips[at]p2pnet.net

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win

- Mohandas Gandhi

Brian Robertson, ex-president of the cartel-owned CRIA (Canadian Recording Industry Association), once reported the multi-billion-dollar music industry is being “devastated” by file sharers and file sharing. And yet, the number of overall units of music formats shipped to retail distribution channels increased by 4.4% year-over-year, a 3.3% increase in retail value compared to 2003, states the cartel’s RIAA (Recording Industry Association of America).

The number of CDs shipped in the US last year rose 5.3%, a 2.7% increase in value compared to the previous year and, “The DVD music video format continues to experience extraordinary growth, with a 66 percent increase in music shipments from record companies to retail outlets and special markets distribution channels and a 51.8 percent increase in value (list price),” it states unequivocally.

Lately, there’s been a tendency for people and organizations to cozy up to the corporations. However, the tide is turning as more and more individuals around the world log on to discover they now have voices which are being heard above the self-serving clamour set up by the entertainment and software cartels. ‘Consumers’ have become customers and clients again, instead of the mindless cash-cows which have made the Big Four so wealthy.

p2pnet recently carried a Q&A with Santangelo’s lawyer, Ray Beckerman. He told us, “We will fight to the end … The RIAA will give up long before we do, because sooner or later it will dawn upon them that their attorneys are taking them for a ride.”

In a second p2pnet Q&A, Santangelo says she, too, is here for the duration.

Read on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

p2pnet:  Hi, Mrs Santangelo. Before we get down to the questions, thanks very much for talking to p2pnet.

You’re becoming a heroine online and offline and your stand against the RIAA and the Big Four record label cartel that owns it will make a huge difference both to the way the Net functions, and how p2p is perceived by people who may not have come across it before.

You’re the first of close to 14,000 people who’s decided you’re not going to be pushed around by the record labels. How do you feel about that now, particularly in light of all the media attention your case is drawing?Santangelo: The attention was quite a surprise. I had no idea when I chose to hire Mr Beckerman that I was the first to say No to a settlement.

p2pnet: Are your family and friends behind you?

Santangelo: Yes. Everyone has been very supportive.

p2pnet: You’re reported to have said you’ve never used Kazaa and that, further, you didn’t even know what it was before the RIAA turned up on your door-step. It’s also been said the software belongs to a friend of your children’s and was installed without you, or anyone else in your family, knowing about it. Is that an accurate summary?

Santangelo: That’s correct. I had no idea what Kazaa was or what it was used for. I think of software as an actual disk that you hold in your hand so I’m not sure about that or how it was installed. The screen-name that was used for the Kazaa account did not belong to any of my children is what I said. I never said that one of my children did not know this person had a Kazaa account.

p2pnet: Even though you hadn’t heard of Kazaa, did you know what an mp3 was? And had you come across the term p2p (peer-to-peer) before?

Santangelo: No. I had no idea what either a p2p or an mp3 was.

p2pnet: Had you heard about file sharing before you caught Big Music’s eye? And if you had, what were your impressions of it?

Santangelo: I had never heard of file sharing.

p2pnet: We understand the RIAA’s settlement centre told you the labels wanted $7,500 out of you. Can you recall what was said? And what was the manner of the person who spoke with you?

Santangelo: That was the original amount that was asked of me. However, it was reduced to $3,750, if I remember correctly. At the time I was called, there was no music on my computer because it was only three or four months old. I’d recently moved and they had my old address and the computer we had at that location had been destroyed by a virus. So when I was told that I needed to sign some type of statement saying that myself, or someone in my home, was responsible for this “crime,” I had nothing to actually look at except a court paper with an IP address. There was no file sharing company or account at that time. I couldn’t accept that.

p2pnet: What was your first reaction?

Santangelo: Fear, like most people, I suspect.

p2pnet: When did you decide you weren’t going to put up with the bullying, how did you go about finding legal representation?

Santangelo: I stopped answering my phone for a little while and started to research what it was all about because, like I said before, I had no idea. I decided after reading about the Jane Does that this was so very wrong and that I’d let them name me with their lawsuit.

Unfortunately, finding an attorney to handle this was not so easy. I made a lot of phone calls and spoke to friends and came up empty. That’s why I appeared in court in May alone. The judge told me to try and find an attorney. I started looking online and found a website called the Electronic Frontier Foundation. There was a link for lawyers and that is how I finally found Mr. Beckerman.

[NOTE: "I've never had a situation like this before, where there are powerful plaintiffs and powerful lawyers on one side and then a whole slew of ordinary folks on the other side," said US district judge Nancy Gertner in Boston a little more than a year ago. And US District Judge Colleen McMahon, who’s already had a “glimpse of the case," told the cartel's lawyers in reference to the Pay Us Or Else intimidation tactic that the settlement center was no longer to be involved and that she'd, "love to see a mom fighting one of these" - Ed]

p2pnet: Your children’s friend is apparently named on the subpoena. That looks a little like the cartel is trying to go to the well twice. Do you know if he or she has been asked to settle, and if so, for how much and what is he/she going to do?

Santangelo: I know nothing about anyone besides myself being named on a subpoena, sorry.

p2pnet: Have you personally heard from the RIAA again since this all began?

Santangelo: I’ve heard from them once since I went to court in May. It wasn’t really the RIAA but the settlement center representing them and I explained to them what Judge McMahon had said in court about me finding an attorney and that I would not be settling with them.

p2pnet: You’ve already had Pay Us Or Else threats leveled at you. If you lose this case, you could end up facing a lot more than $7,500. What’s your reaction to that?

Santangelo: Right now I’m surviving on pure faith that these cases against random IP addresses are wrong and that’s all I can think about right now.

p2pnet: If you triumph, and we’re sure you will, the Big Four record labels will be in an extremely dangerous position. Their entire terror campaign will collapse around their ears. They’ve already abandoned several cases for various reasons. Suppose they decide it’s not worth risking that you’ll win and they decide to drop their charges against you? What then?

Santangelo: Honestly, that would be a relief. But it solves nothing if they can continue doing the same thing to other people like me. I didn’t know I was the first person to take it this far. Since hiring Mr Beckerman I’ve learned a lot, and realize that this isn’t just about my case: it’s about the legal rights of all the people who are being unfairly sued.

p2pnet: Assuming your case ends up in court, how far are you willing to go?

Santangelo: I’m willing to take it as far as I have to to prevent other innocent people being dragged into frivolous lawsuits. It’s wrong.

p2pnet: The record companies say file sharers are devastating them? Does that seem to be a reasonable proposition?

Santangelo: I have three teenage children who love music and I think that’s a great thing. I can’t count the amount of concert tickets and cds that I’ve purchased over the past few years, and I still have two younger ones who are showing the same love for music. I find it hard to believe that file sharing could impact record companies to the point of devastation. There are some people, apparently, who copy and sell CDs, and that is piracy and they are the ones that need to be stopped. That’s just wrong.

p2pnet: Is there anything you’d like to say to other people who, like you, are being pilloried by Big Music?

Santangelo: Don’t let your fear of these massive companies allow you to deny your belief in your own innocence. Paying these settlements is an admission of guilt. If you’re not guilty of violating the law, don’t pay.

p2pnet: And finally, when will you open an e-payment account so people can start helping with your defense fund : ) ?

Santangelo: I’ve been very stressed about how I’ll handle paying for my defense. My only relief from this stress has been the amount of supportive people from all over the country who have offered their help. It’s amazing! I’m looking into the best way to set up a defense fund that will help me continue the legal proceedings and to stop this from ever happening to another innocent person.

After researching this Kazaa network I realized that if everyone who ever did share a file would donate $1 that would be more than enough to put an end to the RIAA terror campaign.

Jon Newton – p2pnet

==================

Stay tuned.

If there’s something you think we should know, tips[at]p2pnet.net

See:-
stand up – New York mom battles Big Music, August 15, 2005
extraordinary growth – Big Music sings the blues, April 19, 2005
“devastated” by file sharers – Hands across the border, December 5, 2003
Ray Beckerman – Mother of 5 takes on Big Music, August 28, 2005
Nancy Gertner – Big Music vs Ordinary Folks, August 20, 2004
settlement center – File sharing, p2p criminals, March 12, 2005
Kazaa network – Kazaa decision due Monday, September 4, 2005

==============

First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win – Mohandas Gandhi

The Big Four are using their now-standard Pay us or Else tactic, threatening her with civil court unless she can somehow come up with $7,500 to buy them off.

The lawsuits are a PR blitz custom-designed to indelibly mark men, women and children who share music and other files with each other online as vicious, hardened criminals out to deliberately bilk the honest, but beleagured, entertainment industry and its hard-pressed workers.

However, just as music industry claims that there’s a thriving, reasonably priced online business are false, accusations that file sharing is causing terrible financial losses to the industry and awful hardship to its workers are equally disingenuous.

Meanwhile, none of the estimated 13,500 very ordinary Americans pilloried by the labels has been found guilty of anything because not one of them has ever appeared before a judge. As one of the first victims, Lorraine Sullivan told p2pnet.

“If I knew the rest of my life wouldn’t be ruined and that I wouldn’t have this huge financial thing hanging over my head, I’d stand up to them. But I can’t take the risk.”

It’s clearly impossible for an ordinary person with ordinary resources to take on the multi-billion-dollar industry with its bottomless pockets and legions of highly paid lawyers. Not that this stops RIAA spinsters from implying thousands of people have been found ‘guilty’ of the crime of sharing music with each other, an assertion faithfully repeat by the mainstream media as though it comes from credible sources. And the time-honoured maxim Innocent until proven Guilty goes by the board.

But Patricia Santangelo plans to fight and backing her is the New York law firm of Beldock Levine & Hoffman with Ray Beckerman in the front ranks.

Read on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

p2pnet: About how much will cost to mount and maintain Patricia Santangelo’s defense?

Beckerman: We have no idea what the total cost will be in the long run. We do not expect it to be wildly expensive, because (i) we are charging drastically reduced fees (e.g. my personal rate is half my standard rate) and (ii) we expect the case to be dismissed, based upon the motion to dismiss, which has been briefed, submitted, and argued, and is now awaiting decision. If the motion is granted, there will be no pretrial discovery, and no trial.

p2pnet: Where will the money to pay for it come from?

Beckerman: We expect Ms Santangelo’s costs to be picked up by the RIAA, since (a) the copyright statute permits the Court to shift the attorneys fees to the losing party, (b) these cases were clearly frivolous and brought in bad faith, and (c) it is a matter of public interest that the RIAA be deterred from bringing more such meritless cases.

p2pnet: Record label financial, political and legal resources are immense. Will you be able to fight to the end matched against this kind of weight?

Beckerman: We will fight to the end. Anyone who knows me knows that I don’t take on something unless I am prepared to fight to the end. Also, anyone who knows me knows that the one thing I can’t stand is a bully. The RIAA will give up long before we do, because sooner or later it will dawn upon them that their attorneys are taking them for a ride.

p2pnet: You say on your site, “we and our firm have undertaken to represent people in our area who have been sued by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA)”. Are you representing anyone other than Patricia Santangelo?

Beckerman: Yes we have other people we have represented, however only one other matter is actually in litigation. We just entered that case a week ago, and have nothing yet to report.

p2pnet: If there are other people near you who want to be represented, will there a limit to their numbers?

Beckerman: As far as I am concerned there should be no limit to how many people we can represent. If we have too many cases we can hire more lawyers.

p2pnet: Could you summarize your defense platform?

Beckerman: There is no such thing as a “defense platform”, the way I practice law. Although I am fully aware that there are important societal issues at stake, I am an old fashioned “country lawyer” (regardless of the fact that my office is in the most cosmopolitan of places, Manhattan). I represent people. And I represent them one person at a time. So I cannot represent people on a cookie cutter basis. My style of practice is to make my client a partner in decision making. In each case I do what is in the best interests of that particular client, and what that particular client wants me to do (with certain exceptions, such as professional courtesies, which is something a lawyer has to take responsibility for on his own). I can say that in Elektra v Santangelo, the basis for our motion to dismiss complaint was that the complaint failed to allege any specific acts of infringement. In response plaintiff disagreed, arguing that its vague complaint did satisfy the pleading standards, since it alleged that a Kazaa account attached to Ms. Santangelo’s IP address had a “shared files folder”. Our reply papers reminded the Court that that alone would not make out a claim for copyright infringement, and that the Courts have consistently required specific acts of copying, and the dates and times of those acts. A fully set of the motion papers is now online. In the unlikely event that our motion is not granted, there are numerous other issues that would come into play later on in the case.

p2pnet: On a scale of one to 10, where do you place your chances of winning?

Beckerman: I think our chances of winning the Santangelo case are a 10. Our motion was based on black letter law. The plaintiff’s ‘opposition’ papers were weak, digressive, and nonsensical. I believe they will be laughed out of court.

p2pnet: Have you yet heard from the RIAA? If so, from whom and what did they say?

Beckerman: The only people I speak to, or can speak to, are their attorneys. All the attorneys I have spoken to are junior attorneys, who are doing what they are told, and who have not exercised and are not authorized to exercise any decision-making authority. It will be an interesting conversation when and if I get to talk to whoever has managed to convince the gullible people in charge of the RIAA that their terrorism is helping them.

p2pnet: Would you be prepared to collaborate with other lawyers/law firms in the US to help other people in the same situation as Patricia Santangelo?

Beckerman: Absolutely. I am thrilled to help the other lawyers and I know they’ll help me as well. That is why I have made the litigation documents available online. So that any attorney who is representing victims of the RIAA onslaught will have the benefit of knowing what we did, and what the RIAA’s lame arguments are.

p2pnet: The record label cartel is using its IFPI, BPI, and so on, to attack people in other parts of the world. Would you share any knowledge you may acquire through this case with law firms/victims outside of the US?

Beckerman: I don’t know who those organizations are, that you mentioned, but my documents are available online, so they are more than welcome to use them.

p2pnet: You’re a lawyer defending a client, but do you have any personal feelings about file sharing and file sharers?

Beckerman: Personally, from what little I know of it, I don’t think mere file sharing is a copyright violation. If someone can share a copyrighted cd without violating the copyright laws, why couldn’t they share a digital song without violating the copyright laws? But of course, you asked for a personal opinion, and this is my personal opinion. In the current climate, I certainly couldn’t advise someone legally whether it is or isn’t a copyright violation, the law is unsettled, and the RIAA is on the warpath. So until the issue has been played out in the courts, we won’t know the answer to that one.

If there’s something you think we should know, contact us – tips[at]p2pnet.net

See:-
Patricia Santangelo – New York mom battles Big Music, August 15, 2005
Pay us or Else – File sharing, p2p criminals, March 12, 2005
backing her – RIAA victim defense blog, August 27, 2005

If there’s something you think we should know, contact us – tips[at]p2pnet.net

However, p2pnet writer catflap was able to talk to one of the cartels’ more recent victims – Alexander Hanff who may well be the man to go down in the history books as the first person to take on the MPAA and RIAA thugs in an open court.

Read on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Pirate. Outlaw. Criminal. These words are commonly used by the illegal New World Order-controlled mainstream media and the monopolies of the MPAA and RIAA to describe filesharers, BitTorrent tracker owners, and owners of filesharing websites with quicklinks for other filesharing networks.

We know they’re wrong. Dead wrong.

Alexander Hanff isn’t the stereotypical, Hollywood-fabricated, macho, gung-ho Bruce Willis “action man”. He’s better than that. Much better. He’s the real thing. A man of principle and conviction who’s faced adversity in his life head-on with bravery and integrity, and overcome unimaginable obstacles with dignity, against all odds.

He’s a man of action with an honest sensitivity seldom written about. And now he’s standing against the MPAA’s unprecedented and unjustified attacks on honest, hardworking people who are breaking no laws.

On March 15, 2005 The Register ran an article on the then newest victim of the illegal and immoral MPAA-sanctioned terrorist attacks – Alexander Hanff, a UK citizen and owner of BitTorrent tracker and vibrant filesharing community DVDR-Core. The MPAA claims he was ‘“helping people download copyrighted films via P2P technology”.

The website’s servers were at one time located in the USA. The illegal MPAA movie cartel claims Hanff is “subject to the jurisdiction of the United States federal court by virtue of … engaging in BitTorrent activities through a US Internet Service Provider, among other reasons”.

The fact he’s an English citizen doesn’t seem to bother them.

To fight these allegations, he’s retained lawyer David Harris, an expert on intellectual property and IT issues, who’s with the law firm UKITLaw.com. Harris is also representing Kevin Reid, another MPAA victim.

I recently spoke to Alex regarding his fight, P2P technology, and his life experiences which have brought him to this point. Below is our uncensored discussion.

Read On >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Alex, thank you very much for taking time out from your hectic life.

Catflap: Firstly, in your opinion, is file sharing copyright material really illegal? I’ve never heard of a court case or specific law regarding that. Would you say (your personal opinion) that if it’s being done, then it isn’t illegal if money or services aren’t being exchanged; and, that falls under the category of “Fair Use” laws which are on the books in many countries?

Hanff: I do believe in fair use. I also believe that in many countries it’s actually not illegal – it’s just that the MPAA grossly misinterpret copyright law to try and make it look illegal, as well as casting ludicrous aspersions that it’s damaging their industry when they have no proof whatsoever that the individuals who download the material would never have purchased it from a retailer. This is very important, as it completely obliterates any claim for damages, since in reality they have lost no sales. Add to this that many articles/polls and studies are appearing to show conclusively that p2p only increases the profits of the companies screaming “infringement”, as people who become serious about the hobby end up spending more money on original material they have “tried” in the first place.

Catflap: Are films and audio different than TV programs, in that tv programs are free to all who have terrestrial/cable/satellite access to them, and people have been “allowed” to record and copy them for decades, whereas the ability to copy DVDs and CDs is relatively recent?

Hanff: Any audio that is played on the radio or on tv should be classed as “public domain” for personal use – or are Sony going to sue themselves for developing technology that allows people to record both music and television programs that they don’t own the copyright for? The same goes for TV. My partner currently owns over $4,000.00 worth of original DVDs, as well as paying an $80 monthly subscription to cable tv. If she misses a show on a subscription service, why should she not be permitted to download it? She has already paid her “royalty” fee by paying subscriptions to the cable company.

Catflap: Are you using the “Betamax defense” or a “Google” search engine-like defense? Basically, if you can tell us, what is your defense argument?

Hanff: In the current case raised, our defense is simple: they have no jurisdiction and if they think they are going to try and tell me what to do when they have zero authority over me whatsoever, they can kiss my ass. We have elected officials to tell us what to do, so why would I pay attention to a fat cat corporation in a different country?

Catflap: I understand that your tracker’s servers were located in the USA. Why did you decide to have them hosted there in the homeland of the MPAA and RIAA, when there are other locations available?

Hanff: Firstly we currently have no tracker. The site was based on a US server for approx 5-6 weeks way back in October last year. The entire site was shut down in December, at which point it was located in the Netherlands.

Catflap: You say you won’t settle out of court or use any of the money from the defense fund towards a settlement. Obviously, the LokiTorrent sellout has made many filesharers suspicious of tracker owners, and made the MPAA and RIAA more courageous. And of course, it’s put you in this terrible position.

Catflap: I noticed you have an online merchandise shop to help raise funds for your legal expenses. Besides that and the ads, are these the only forms of “donations”?

Hanff: We’re not actively seeking donations (which doesn’t mean we won’t accept them). In light of the Loki sellout, we decided the most effective way to try and raise funds would be through banner ads and merchandise. That way the people who wish to help will actually get something back for their money. If anyone wishes to donate they can contact either myself or my lawyer for the details, but I must stress, I’m not pushing the donations. I completely understand why people would resent it and I sincerely sympathise with the people who got ripped off with Loki. At least by using banners linking to products and services they are interested in and merchandise they can use, they are getting something for their buck.

IHanff: I‘ve no control over the independent donation account setup by my lawyer so I couldn’t say how much has been donated so far.

Catflap: You must surely realise (since the Loki sellout and secrecy surrounding it) that if your legal expenses are not publicly shown, whether or not you settle out of court people will want – demand – to know how much money you collected and where the money went. Will you provide the relevant financial details on your website so that anyone can see it?

Hanff: I’ll discuss that with my lawyer when it’s appropriate. I’m not trying to be secretive and I’m sure it will not be a problem. My lawyer is working pro-bono, so the donations will go towards paying any extra costs (such as filing documents to the court and other expenses related directly to the case).

Catflap: Do you have any idea when your case might reach a court – if at all? Either in the UK or the USA?

Hanff: I’ve no idea.

Catflap: Would the lawyers consider some kind of “class action” type of suit to defend other UK-based trackers, filesharers, etc. in order to offset the cost for you?

Hanff: If either myself or Kevin win the case should it come to the UK, I expect we will certainly discuss a class counter-suit. I’m also looking into bringing criminal charges against the MPAA for “Money by Menace” and several other criminal offenses in the international arena, the US arena and the UK arena.

I wish the best of luck to Kevin in his case and will do anything I can to help support him. I hope others do the same.

Catflap: If you go to court and you lose, you will probably be faced with hefty fines and possible restrictions on your personal/professional internet usage. Is there a possibility of you going to prison? Will you appeal any decision against you? Will you move your servers to a different location?

Hanff: There’s no chance of going to prison. I’m not a criminal, nor have I committed a criminal offense. In fact, in the UK I’ve not even committed a civil offence, and it’s very questionable as to whether I’ve in the US either (remember, no judge has ever made a ruling on this issue and thus until they do, we have done absolutely nothing wrong). They cannot restrict my internet usage in any way whatsoever. If any judge tries to restrict my online activity, I’ll ignore them. I’m a human being, not a pet – people don’t tell me what I can and can’t do with my own time, and anyone who tries will be faced with complete disregard.

Catflap: Are you going to support the boycott organized by p2punite, April 24-30?

Hanff: I don’t see a boycott as a short-lived thing. I would like people to boycott Hollywood completely for an ongoing period until such time as they (MPAA/RIAA) start to respect public opinion. I’m not clued up on the p2punite boycott, but I’ll look into it. I’ve to read so much stuff everyday I’m afraid I’ll have to add it to the “to do” list.

Catflap: What facts or info is incorrect or unfairly reported or represented in the Register article, or elsewhere, that you would like to be cleared up?

Hanff: Well, the Register article was actually quite good, just some people chose to misinterpret it. I’ve already made clear on several forums (including our own) that I was responsible for the running of the forums and the chat room, but never had anything to do with the tracker configuration/setup or general technical administration. Everyone who knows me, knows I’m a community man. That is where my activity in DVDR-Core was concentrated.

Catflap: Alex, the mainstream media portrays filesharers and BitTorrent tracker owners as dangerous, hardened criminals. We know this isn’t true. They don’t treat you like human beings. And once they’ve reported that, they move on to other things and never take the opportunity to interview the real victims like yourself and Kevin Reid.

Catflap: But to us, you’re not just a name on a website or lawsuit. So tell us something about yourself.

Hanff: I grew up in probably the worst of circumstances. My mother and father separated shortly after I was born, and remarried. The stepfather was a wife and child beater and a violent criminal as well as a sex offender. I’ve two sisters, both of whom were sexually abused, and I was severely beaten throughout my childhood. After my mother separated from our first stepfather, we had to move from pillar to post due to continued violent attacks. At one point my younger sister was even kidnapped by my stepfather.

When I was 3 years old my mother was almost killed in a car accident and spent several months in a coma, and a total of 2 years in hospital having very serious brain surgery. When she recovered and our stepfather had spent all her compensation money, she left him and life went from bad to worse. Our pets were brutally killed, our house was regularly broken into, and we lived in sheer terror.

My mother remarried again eventually, and when I was 12 I was shipped off to a government boarding school for gifted children, where I stayed until I was 17. The events that took place during that 5 year period are both too numerous and too difficult for me to discuss, but if my life was hard before I went to boarding school, it pales almost in comparison to my life from 12-20.

My entire family was ripped apart by child abuse and somehow they forgot about me. Being away at boarding school I lost everyone I ever loved, my entire family. I went from being in boarding school for 36 weeks of the year to having to fend for myself in the real world, with no job, no money and no home. Needless to say, times were hard, but I struggled on. I started to work with children and adults alike who had been sexually and physically abused, in an attempt I suppose, to understand my own life. That grew and I eventually started a non-profit organization online in the early 90’s, providing advice and information for people who had been abused all over the world. Further to this, I started to work with agencies around the world, tracking down paedophile rings and child pornography traffickers online. In 1997 I wrote an academic paper as part of a college course I was doing, based on the issues of paedophilia on the internet, outlining how serious a threat this was. I’ve provided evidence for several successful prosecutions (although I hope you will appreciate I cannot disclose which ones) around the world.

However, I had a serious blow to my emotional stability in 1999 when I discovered my father had died the previous year and quit my job as a teacher at the local university and moved to the US. At this point I ceased my work in the area of child abuse as I was not emotionally strong enough to look after myself, let alone other people. After six months in the US I returned to England.

I’ve been involved in many projects over the years, from setting up internet cafes to spearheading campaigns for social reform. In one instance in 1999 I was working on a campaign to stop companies in my city from exploiting students by paying illegal wages and working them 16 hours a day when they should have been studying. The result of this was corrective surgery on my face after being brutally assaulted by a local business owner who wanted to continue exploiting students and didn’t like my campaign.

For the past 12 years I’ve worked in the technology field (specifically internet related) and have done everything from system testing a multi-billion pound welfare system for the government, to building hundreds of PCs, web design, programming, teaching, research, course development, technical support, and the list really is endless. I’ve constantly been screwed over by companies who wished to use my experience but when payday arrived, the cheques either bounced or didn’t balance. To date (including interest) I’m owed around £30,000 in unpaid salary. In one instance an employment tribunal even ruled in my favour, but the company directors disappeared and I never saw a penny of the money they owed me (Cooee where are you now?).

I’ve seen things most people will never see. I’ve experienced things most people will never experience, and I’ve felt pain like many people will never feel.

The MPAA fight might seem impossible to win to some people, but there’s nothing, absolutely nothing the MPAA can do to me that can even remotely compare to the suffering I’ve both experienced and witnessed in others. They are nothing. They (the MPAA) exist purely because we let them, no other reason. The only way we can take control of our own lives is to take it back from the mechanisms that manipulate them to their advantage and profit. I’m a man of conviction.

Some people would say I’ve been a victim all my life. I don’t see it that way. I see myself as a person who has been shaped by experience. I don’t dwell on my past – I live for the future, a future that as of last week now will contain my first child, and a wonderful and understanding partner who has an equally wonderful and understanding family. Without them I would be nothing, less than nothing. Heather truly is my reason for picking myself up again and going from strength to strength.

I’m a man who hates to see people mistreated and downtrodden. I’m a man who takes pride in absolutely everything he does. I’m a man who will fight for anyone should they need it. I’m a man of intelligence and I’m a man of so much love for his fellow human beings that I can’t express it in words. DVDR-CORE was setup because I saw a floundering community who had been discarded by their original server owner and who wanted to continue in a safe and enjoyable environment. I was known on the forums for being the one who didn’t take any shit. I told it how it was. If someone was causing problems for others, I would deal with them and no-one got in my way. I never made any money from DVDR-Core and I never downloaded anything from our tracker. In fact, I lost substantial amounts of money and dedicated around 80-100 hours a week into making sure people felt safe in our community.

The MPAA case is nothing less than an insult to everything I’ve ever done and everyone I’ve ever helped, and it’s completely unfounded. I’ll fight this case to the bitter end and then when it’s over, whether I win or lose, I’ll continue to live my life in the same fashion as before, trying to help people.

My father said to me once “it’s nice to be important, but it’s more important to be nice.” That is my philosophy and I’ll crush anyone who tries to stand in my way whilst trying to achieve it. The MPAA it off more than they could chew with me and they will regret it in the long run.

Catflap: Thank you very much for all of your time, Alex. We’re certainly behind you 100%. I know p2pnet and the rest of the filesharing community will be watching the case very closely.

And now a special message from me – catflap – to the MPAA:

Pirate? Outlaw? Criminal? Hardly.

You’ve picked the wrong man to threaten with a lawsuit, especially since you have no jurisdiction where he lives.

You monopolies, you cartels, you New World Order megalomaniacs. You’ve created the situation you’re in, and you dare to penalize and tear apart whole families and communities for the sake of a few extra dollars in your already-fat wallets?

What you’re doing, and what you’d like to achieve, is diabolical in nature and dictatorial in concept and practice. Not satisfied with having completely morally bankrupted all of Western society with your inferior products and values, you seek to financially bankrupt decent, hardworking individuals and families, many of whom are struggling to make ends meet and who rely on the internet for affordable (legal and free) information and entertainment, because they cannot – and will not – pay the outrageous price of a cinema ticket, a dvd, or a cd.

You blatantly disregard the laws of other countries and constantly and consistently disrespect the basic tenets of civil and human rights afforded to everyone, no matter who or where they are.

You won’t be able to contain the growing global dissatisfaction with your products and services. You’ll not be allowed to control every, and any, form of communication. Your terrorist attacks and illegal blackmailing schemes will be stopped, and one way or another, you will be made to pay for the damages you’ve inflicted on society.

==========

Something you think we should know? tips[at]p2pnet.net

The differences are in orders of magnitude. Can they possibly be accurate?

Yes, Big Champagne ceo Eric Garland promises.

p2pnet: What, bottom line, does Big Champagne do?

Garland: Big Champagne gathers information about activity on all of the most populous/popular p2p file sharing networks by large-scale participation in those networks.

p2pnet: How do you manage that?

Garland: The process involves passive observation of what users are downloading to shared directories, sharing over time, and what they’re searching for – all recorded and analyzed continually. Our systems are constantly monitoring activity globally, and have been doing so for more than four years.

p2pnet: Do you study just a few of the bigger sites, or all of them?

Garland: The networks included in Big Champagne’s reporting support or under gird virtually all of the most popular p2p applications.

p2pnet: Such as ….?

Garland: Big Champagne’s core database includes information about activity on the original Napster network, the Scour Exchange, AudioGalaxy, Fasttrack (originally popularized by the Morpheus client and later, Kazaa), Donkey, gnutella. We also collect information about Warez usage trends, and about torrents, and we’ve profiled a number of smaller communities (Soulseek, for instance) as well.

p2pnet: Do you actually have digital files on your servers?

Garland: No. Big Champagne doesn’t host content.

p2pnet: Do you have any kind of role in what the entertainment inudustry likes to call pirate-busting – for example, do you know the identities of file-sharers?

Garland: No. We don’t participate in any kind of anti-piracy activity whatsoever. Nor do we try to identify individuals. Big Champagne is a purely a measurement firm and as such, we’re concerned only with observing how content on p2p proliferates and is sought over time at a population level for the purposes of market analysis.

p2pnet: So how do you do what you do?

Garland: While the specific method of measuring activity on different p2p networks varies according to differences among those systems, in all cases Big Champagne is connecting to logged-on users, recording information – in the public domain of the p2p environment, mind you – constantly, 24/7.

Big Champagne systems time-stamp activity on p2p to the millisecond, continually, on a massive scale on multiple networks, as they’ve done since October, 2000. In concept, our data collection methodology is similar to that of any popular search engine’s method of indexing the public world wide web.

The amount of time spent communicating with each user is very little; the system scales very elegantly without causing traffic congestion for users or the network in general. Generally, in the course of data collection, Big Champagne doesn’t download complete files from users (or upload anything without permission, for that matter). In multiple NOCs, Big Champagne maintains multiple high speed connections to Tier 1 ISP backbones around the clock. We use dynamic, simultaneous, direct monitoring presences on key network nodes. Through each node, we’re connected to tens of thousands of additional locations at any moment. Big Champagne monitors billions of online searches and files.

Big Champagne communicates across the p2p network, making use of the very purpose of these systems – to publish information about files sought and shared and facilitate the exchange of this information among users.

p2pnet: Do you do anything other than simply measure and report the data?

Garland: Yes. Big Champagne analyzes and reports on the popularity of online media at the individual title level, in granular close-up. We’ve spent years refining, improving, and expanding our systems, and years developing analytical processes that make sense of this torrent of “raw” information as it is received.

When BigChampagne takes the activity observed on p2p and plots this information over time, it plots the wax and wane of the popularity of any given title on p2p systems. We also observe and record search activity, again with significant differences from network to network, although search activity is not factored into the charts you see on p2pnet)

By definition, Big Champagne reports only on what we can observe across p2p systems. We’re not concerned with file sharing that occurs via email, IM, private servers and so forth. Further, we’re not concerned with kids in school swapping CDRs full of mp3s, or dumping the contents of their iPods onto each other’s computers.

Having said that, BigChampagne also has reporting relationships with commercial radio airplay monitoring companies, traditional retail sales monitoring companies, and a growing number of online retailers and paid download sites that are feeding information into our systems for use in more diversified chart reporting, as we expand and diversify our offerings.

Something you think we should know? tips[at]p2pnet.net

Under it, tracks from Heart’s Sovereign Jupiter’s Darling are being offered on Morpheus in SML’s Weed Format, StreamCast told p2pnet. Each track is in Microsoft’s Windows Media Audio format and comes wrapped with Microsoft’s digital rights management (DRM) technology.

But both companies are listed as members of the Distributed Computing Industry Association (DCIA), Sharman Networks’ front organization.

So is this the thin end of the wedge? Has StreamCast crossed the tracks?

Not even nearly, StreamCast ceo Mike Weiss told p2pnet editor Jon Newton in a Q&A interview.

Now read on >>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Newton: You’ve been one of the most outspoken opponents of Sharman, Kazaa and the DCIA, adamantly refusing to have anything to do with them. In a June 21 newsletter post ‘welcoming’ new ‘member’ Sovereign, DCIA ceo Marty Lafferty mentions the launch of Jupiters Darling and makes a point of stating, “[...] in the peer-to-peer (P2P) distribution channel, Sovereign Artists has concluded agreements with DCIA Member Altnet and Streamcast Networks (Morpheus) …” Aren’t you concerned that Lafferty will turn the Sovereign / SML arrangement into an opportunity to continue to imply that StreamCast is firmly alongside the DCIA, if not actually a member.

Weiss: The DCIA will have big problems if they try to imply, infer or state that Morpheus is a member of or supports DCIA. StreamCast remains a commited member of P2P United. However, there are mutual interests DCIA and P2P United members do share. For example, the defeat of Orrin Hatch’s Inducing Infringment of Copyrights Act (III s.2560) (aka the INDUCE Act) and PIRATE Acts are two measures both groups are fighting against. Morpheus isn’t against the DCIA, we don’t believe the stated DCIA approach represents our best interests – or those of other P2P United members. It’s our belief that for all the “good” the DCIA is attempting to do, the fact that their financial backers are Sharman, Altnet and Brilliant will always take away from their efforts.

And we think that in many instances, intentional or not, DCIA is confusing the issue of who represents the p2p industry. P2P United doesn’t purport to represent the entire P2P industry, but it does represent the interests of the major commercial p2p file-sharing developer and distributor members that conduct business in the United States. It’s misleading, at this stage, to state that any one organization represents the entire industry.

StreamCast and the other member companies of P2P United formed it to ensure that Congress hears all sides of the issues surrounding the p2p file search and sharing industry and not just the side of the entertainment industries or that of Sharman Networks.

Newton: Each Hearts track has Microsoft’s DRM. I hope that doesn’t mean you’re getting into DRM, or that Morpheus files will suddenly be copy protected, as the entertainment industry likes to call it.

Weiss: P2p technology is content neutral; it supports all file types. If a file is DRM wrapped to start with, it stays that way. If it isn’t, then it’s DRM free. Morpheus isn’t in the DRM business. We’re here to develop and distribute p2p search and file sharing software and are on the verge of introducing the new NEOnet p2p technology to the world this year.

Newton: What about the Weed component?

Weiss: Heart has chosen to use Weed technology to promote and sell their latest album. The mechanism that allows other p2p users to become distributors and get compensated when a purchase is made is intriguing and I think it’s worthwhile to see how the users react to such a plan. Just like in technology development, one should never be afraid of experimenting with new business models to see what the future may hold.

In the future, StreamCast hopes to offer other alternatives to content providers, whether there is a payment component, a promotional component or both. P2p users should be able to buy music through, or by using, their favorite p2p applications, and they should also be given the option of financially supporting the artists they like. We’d like to help that along, and earn revenues while we’re doing it.

The primary reason Morpheus is in the Heart promotion is to support them and their record label. It’s refreshing to see a recording artist and their label looking to the p2p community instead of filing lawsuits against p2p users and/or companies. StreamCast hopes to support other content providers who reach out to the community, as well. As with any new technology, it’s usually the independent companies (and artists) that first embrace it. If we can help these independents make inroads to consumers by alternative methods, since traditional methods or radio airplay and in-store promotion aren’t readily available to them, then we’re happy to do so. I believe very few people in the p2p community are against artists being fairly compensated for their creations and our Heart promotion represents one way to achieve this.

Also, I think the Heart / Morpheus p2p distribution promotion illustrates another substantial legitimate use of p2p applications and just how valuable certain providers find p2p apps, like Morpheus, to be for their own livelihood. The more content providers embrace p2p companies for promotion, distribution and sales, the better it’ll be for everyone.

Newton: Kazaa is on the way out, Sharman’s 2003 Join the Revolution multi-media campaign and other efforts to bolster the fast-failing app notwithstanding. Something will need to be found to plug the gap. A perceived association with StreamCast will go a long way towards that. With Grokster, the other senior veteran p2p operator, on the DCIA member list, the apparent appearance of Morpheus will lend weight to unsupported DCIA claims that it represents significant elements of the independent p2p operator community. How do you feel about that?

Weiss: Morpheus is NOT a member of DCIA, does not support their platform and does not believe that DCIA represents the interests of the entire P2P industry. We continue to attempt to make this clear to lawmakers, business leaders and the public, though with the DCIA repeatedly incorrectly implying that StreamCast is a member, or that StreamCast is “working with” DCIA, we continue to need to continue to remind the outside world of the reality.

Newton: I understand that companies the DCIA has been able to talk into using one or more services or technologies pay neither membership fees nor dues, but nonetheless show up as ‘members’ as part of the package. This members list enables the DCIA to present itself as a peer-to-peer industy trade group although with the exception of Sharman associates, Brilliant Digital Entertainment, which is having financial troubles and Altnet, none of the ‘member’ companies have a presence on the p2p scene. In fact, I’ve been told some member companies are already having regrets. What’s your take on this?

Weiss: Yes, this is a problem that unsuspecting “members” of DCIA are falling into. They don’t understand the background or history of DCIA. This isn’t to say that DCIA is all bad, but these companies need to understand their actions. I don’t know if they’re being told the whole story or not – but they should take their own initiative to research fully what they are getting into. If they don’t, then it’s difficult to put the blame on DCIA. Marty and his DCIA staff are doing the job that they have been hired to do. Shame on other companies, if they don’t conduct the proper due diligence.

P2P United was founded by major independent commercial p2p operators BearShare (FreePeers, Inc), Grokster (Grokster Ltd), eDonkey2000 (MetaMachine Inc) and Morpheus (Streamcast Networks Inc) and is the only genuinely reresentative p2p trade and lobbying group.

Newton: One of the complaints sometimes levelled at Morpheus is that it has adware. Will you ever change that?

Weiss: Right now Morpheus earns its money by distributing two other pieces of software, as well as the actual application. It also incorporates a banner ad and three pop-up ads over a 30 minute time span. If we can continue to develop other revenue sources – such as the sale of digital music files – to replace them, that would be ideal.

However, unlike Altnet, StreamCast isn’t attempting to develop an eCommerce platform that we’ll try to force down everyone’s throats as being the only method of doing business. That’s at the heart of P2P United – individual companies working together for a common cause, but still maintaining their independent business practices and strategies. We collaborate with each other or with others if it makes sense to do so, but that’s totally at our option and through our own independent analysis, not because of any heavy-handed behind-the-scenes maneuvering.

We believe p2p networks (all the networks except dark-nets) do indeed represent the next distribution channel for digital media. That’s an exciting proposition and I believe all the commercial companies are looking for ways to create a profitable business from this while providing users with something of value.

This is at the heart of the fights in congress and in the courts. The incumbent entertainment industry wants to control this new distribution channel. Sharman, Altnet and Brilliant also want to control this distribution channel.

We don’t want to control anything but our ability to continue to make and bring technological innovations to market such as content agnostic general communications tools. But Morpheus strives to continue to be a leading contributing participant to the evolution of media distribution.

We expect to offer solutions and if they’re viable, we hope they’ll succeed and perhaps be adopted by others if there are significant barriers, such as the fear of prohibitive lawsuits.

One thing is certain – no one has a crystal ball and it’s only through trial and error that viable solutions will be found.