Open letter to the RIAA, MPAA
p2pnet news view | P2P:- On his blog, Allen Harkleroad says he owns and operates, “a technology, e-commerce hosting, publishing, marketing, computer repair, networking and software development business in Statesboro Georgia” as well as publishing, “quite a few content sites”.
And on Techno Blogo, “You Are Targeting the Wrong Thing,” he tells the RIAA and MPAA, going on in an open letter >>>
You expend a lot of money and time going after individual users, and as most everyone on the Internet that follows RIAA’s and the MPAA’s enforcement activities, it is a lose-lose situation for you. While you may recoup a small amount of money you claim has been lost to filesharing. What you do is estrange potential customers that would prefer to steal your group’s intellectual property (i.e. music and movies), because of your hardnosed stance of prosecuting the consumer of such illegal downloads, and making it hard to enjoy the items they do purchase. No matter hard you prosecute illegal downloaders, it is only going to get worse, never any better, period.
The writing is already on the wall; you just can’t seem to see the forest for the trees. What a shame not to mention a waste of millions of dollars.
You have tried going after several of the filesharing networks without making much of a dent in the illegal sharing of music and movies. All it did was waste a lot of money and who knows how many hours of billable legal time.
For the life of me I don’t know why RIAA and MPAA doesn’t have their own DRM free music and movie stores, you could cut out all the middle-men, keep nearly all of the profits and make music and movie consumers happy all at the same time. Too bad you have your collective heads up your collective asses on this. You could quite literally own the music and movie download market and make far more money than you have wasted tracking down and prosecuting a bunch of broke college students and single mothers.
What RIAA and the MPAA should do is go after companies that write the software such as P2P client software creators. If there are few software clients out there then there are fewer sharers.
I have read in the news that many of your group is dropping DRM from digital music, such as the announcement regarding Amazon.com’s music catalog. That’s a good step, however, I only believe that the music companies are dropping DRM because of the 20% drop in music sales during the holiday shopping season. RIAA is still not `getting it in terms of embracing new technology, your group is still clinging to a dying business model. There is an old saying in the business world, Innovate or die, you should really chew on that thought for a while.
While I am firmly against big business lobbying to congress, there is one filesharing bill I would like to see pass (and I would support such a bill), and that would be to criminalize the creation of P2P filesharing software that facilitates music, movie and software piracy. In additional such a bill should criminalize the use and distribution of P2P filesharing software that facilitates the theft of intellectual property.
What I am referring to specifically is software specifically written to connect to filesharing networks and that allows downloads of illegally obtained intellectual property of others and software that provides sharing capabilities of others intellectual property.
No need to go after individual users, no need to get into costly legal battles with P2P networks, simply go after the P2P client software creators. They are all fully aware that they are creating software that enables users to steal from you and others. One could almost say it is premeditated and with forethought that they are creating such software products. It would be extremely hard for them to defend themselves in court. They can’t say they weren’t aware, they can’t say they didn’t know. They are doing it and with the full intention of assisting users in the theft of your intellectual property.
The filesharing networks in my eyes are the scum of the Internet and they at this time feel they have no legal responsibility for the theft of intellectual property. So be it. However, the creators of P2P client software programs know full well that they are aiding and abetting software, music, movie and other intellectual property theft.
Of course such a law on the books would only affect the U.S., however over time I believe other countries would create similar laws.
There are only a handful of filesharing client software creators out there. It would make it much easier to get rid of those legally than it is trying to sue every consumer on the planet downloading and sharing your intellectual property.
I am not condoning RIAA’s and the MPAA’s legal enforcement tactics, I am just providing and easier software route to reduce theft of others intellectual property. I do not condone theft of others intellectual property either. Theft is theft, it doesn’t matter if there is no one standing at the door checking packages as people exit or not, it is still theft.
I am a business owner and we do find out digital content (3D software digital media and software) out on filesharing networks and other sites. Yes it does hurt our business financially, however running all over the Internet attempting to enforce our intellectual property rights one abuser at a time isn’t the answer. Criminalizing the creation of, use and distribution of P2P client software is, and I am all for criminalizing such software.
It’s kind of like drug paraphernalia, while in many states it is legal to buy it and as long as it isn’t being used for consuming drugs it still isn’t illegal, however when such items are used to consume drugs it then becomes criminal to posses. Whats the difference between drug paraphernalia that is used to illegally consume illegal drugs and software that allows consumers to illegally consume (steal) your intellectual property? There is no difference, which in its self should help you to lobby for the criminalization P2P client software.
Regards,
Allen Harkleroad
Want to help p2pnet stay online? Please click here.
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
December 31st, 2007 at 12:23 pm
This guy is just as narrow minded as the greedy corporate world and can’t see that the p2p software is used for many other legitimate purposes.
December 31st, 2007 at 12:25 pm
Good one. Eliminate the ability to transfer all files (legitimate or otherwise) and all will be good. Amazing.
December 31st, 2007 at 12:54 pm
What we can’t control and dominate — we exterminate !!
December 31st, 2007 at 1:40 pm
” What RIAA and the MPAA should do is go after companies that write the software such as P2P client software creators. If there are few software clients out there then there are fewer sharers. ”
Thus outlawing the entire internet.
P2P software has many legitimate, legal uses.
The Grokster decision provided the roadmap.
Fully advertise the legal legitimate uses.
Kind of like all of the legal uses of blank CD’s and burners,
like Cassette tapes, VHS tapes etc .
As long as there are legal, legitimate uses for it, P2P software has a
RIGHT to be made.
December 31st, 2007 at 1:41 pm
What the author of this article doesn’t get is that making it illegal in the US does not prevent development nor distribution of said software.
In simular problems, such as AllOfMp3 in Russia, it took far more than just saying it was illegal in order to close it down. It took arm twisting through pressuring credit card companies as well as using WIPO to remove the site. Russian courts determined that the denial of payment to AllOfMp3 was illegal in the way it was done, AllOfMp3 was dragged through Russian court only to find by their laws, the site was legal. In the end it was the threat of removal for consideration to the World Bank that made Russian lawmakers make a special law that would remove AllOfMp3 from the net in the country. Result? AllOfMp3 was back up and running within days in another country with another name.
Say make it illegal in all countries? At the present rate that isn’t going to happen. Due to protectistic measures on the home front, the US has decided it is more important to protect the domestic gambling industry than it is to protect copyright. Because outside countries are not being treated equally in competition, the US is breaking WIPO treaty agreements themselves. While allowing domestic on line gambling, they are refusing to allow offshore gambling doing exactly the same thing the same way. The results of this is that the US will agree to pay and ignore the country of Antigua’s case on WIPO’s treaty agreement. A case that Antigua has won on merits. As it stands, Antigua can now legally ignore US copyrights, steal and reproduce all they want of the US copyright inforced products, and there is nothing the US can say or even have a leg to stand on about it.
So it comes down to the idea that if you make it illegal in one country that will not and does not stand elsewhere. So the whole premise of this article is so much smoke going up into the air with no real method to enforce beyond wishful thinking.
December 31st, 2007 at 1:43 pm
” This guy is just as narrow minded as the greedy corporate world and canât see that the p2p software is used for many other legitimate purposes. ”
Doesn’t WANT to see, rather.
You won’t see mention of any legitimate uses in mainstream media
( controlled by the same corporations ) either.
Legitimate uses are consistently ignored or portrayed as negligible,
which is not the truth,
Just what one would expect from a Government/Corporate controlled media.
Truth is subject to cash evaluation.
December 31st, 2007 at 3:22 pm
All he is doing by writing that article is engaging in self-promotion. So now, I would proababy want to download his books illegally rather than buy them just for him being such a narrow-minded RIAA hack.
December 31st, 2007 at 6:11 pm
“What RIAA and the MPAA should do is go after companies that write the software such as P2P client software creators. If there are few software clients out there then there are fewer sharers.”
“and that would be to criminalize the creation of P2P filesharing software that facilitates music, movie and software piracy.”
Christ, what an asshole. Who does he want his masters in the RIAA/MPAA to sue next, Tim Berners-Lee?
December 31st, 2007 at 6:12 pm
There are gaming companies such as Egosoft who use p2p (bit torrent) to distribute large patches. X3 reunion is a space sim they made, and the patches take forever to download from their server. By using p2p technology Egosoft is having users host the files for them reducing bandwidth usage and speeding up downloads for everyone.
Lately it sounds like “all p2p is evil” is a common claim in the media. Also I’ve heard about official game demos being redistributed by p2p networks.
The way I see it, p2p technology is just a tool. If it were a hammer for instance, I could theoretically use it for violence and crime against others, or I could use it to remove and replace the storm-damaged siding on my barn.
December 31st, 2007 at 10:43 pm
How does this guy think Linux users are going to download their isos? If bit torrent didn’t exist, we would have to invent it.
January 1st, 2008 at 12:34 am
What has happened to you, have you changed or are you just getting in good terms with the RIAA.
You used to want Bens Guide out on p2pnet and now you have ignored my emails, and ignored me. I wanted for a response for a long while and yet Nothing.
Now you rather the RIAA and MPAA go after sharing networks, Sharing can be for legal and illegal purposes.
What your asking is the RIAA shut down All IMs (AIM/MSN/Yahoo/Jabber/ICQ/IRC), Newsgroups (Usenet/Usenext/NNTP), All filesharing systems (Grunetella/EDonkey/FTP/Bittorrent), all forms of communication (SMTP/POP3/Email/VOIP/HTTP Servers), and that the entire internet get shut down.
You used to sorta like Bens guide and now it seems like your against Ben and his File-sharing Rebellion against Totalitarian governments, there I said it, thats the big secret I tried to tell a forum through PMs but they thought I was lying, hes apart of a file-sharing rebellion doing what he can to protect filesharers rights. He also supports the impeachment of George W. Bush.
He also supports the ACLU, EFF, and the National Library groups that archive copyrighted material. He supports Free of Speech.
Have some sense Man, Please don’t ignore the truth that Bens guide needs to be all over the world for Freedom of Speech, and Safety.
January 1st, 2008 at 5:06 am
This idea is useless. Here’s why: What happens to the 500 Million+ p2p clients already in use? Oh yeah…. duh…. forgot about those!
January 1st, 2008 at 5:17 am
To pass a bill that goes after people who make P2P software?
Last time I checked Software is an IP. So you’re saying that the government should criminalize people creating Intellectual Property. So in that sense, you might as well sue Microsoft for creating windows and allowing us a stable Operating System in the first place upon which all these P2P software packages are created.
Yeah man, forget the individual broke college students and single mothers. Go straight for the source, take down Microsoft. Get rid of all OSes in existence, set us back a few centuries technology wise and we’ll have 0% piracy.
I very much like your argument there.
January 1st, 2008 at 7:33 am
I guess all males should have their dicks removed….after all the could someday commit rape!
January 1st, 2008 at 8:44 am
What RIAA and the MPAA
those idiots above should be taken to the gallows
why they don’t go to Mexico and sue people there ,
if they go there they will come back in a wooden box
how many Americans have die in Irak fighting for the American freedom
and those bastards RIAA and the MPAA are here taking their kids freedom away
I have a Radio tuner that brings me 2gb of healthy music right to my pc
I don’t need file sharing appz to get music
Britney spears get $750.000.00 every month , why because some stupid people bought her music .she is becoming rich while the ones who try to listen her music are becoming poor
plus are been robbed by the American laws
January 1st, 2008 at 9:35 am
I don’t know who’s more dumb – The IRAA or this clown. He might own a tech company, but he clearly doesn’t understand how the Internet works. P2P is everywhere and used for MANY legitimate purposes besides downloading music and videos.
Let me guess… His solution to world poverty is to collect $1 from every person worldwide. LMAO
January 1st, 2008 at 9:36 am
Based on this logic then, the creator of anything used illegaly by someone else would be prosecuted. Think of it – someone gets in a car crash, the creators or cars will be prosecuted. If anyone ever gets stabbed with a kitchen knife, the cutlery companies will be out of business. If you turn your stereo too loud, no more stereos will ever be built. Genius.
January 1st, 2008 at 10:35 am
The author’s suggestion is a step in the right direction, but it is obviously not enough. Grokster was shut down, the original Napster was shut down, and what happened? Sites offshore sprang up and little can be done about them. No, I’m afraid the world is left with the one tried and true means of law enforcement — punishment. Illegal uploaders and downloaders must be punished for the theft they aid, abet and commit. It is an unsavory outcome but, sadly, the only thing that might ultimately deter people from doing it. The mere fact that it is morally and legally wrong does not seem to sink into the public’s thick skull. A sad commentary on the world today.
January 1st, 2008 at 10:46 am
What is not being said is the software companies like utorrent, bittorrent,Azureas are not breaking any laws.
I look at it like this. Music, movies are art forms.unlike software which should be regulated art and movies are meant for people to enjoy. Not just the people who have money to enjoy the art. I wonder how many painters and artist’s fully expect money for their product.
I wonder if the artist’s learned that just because I did not have the money to pay them then would he or she give me a free copy. I think yes they would.
AS far as I can see the world has much bigger problems then anti piracy.
Nuclear War comes to mind.
Get some perspective people as soon enough there will not be any computers or Ipods or anything for that matter.
All that will be left will be some static that some alien radio will pick up that used to be planet earth.
January 1st, 2008 at 11:08 am
This guys an idiot; he’s logic is about as good as his proof reading skills.
How do you go after the people who write every p2p client, let’s use bit torrent as an example there are now literally dozens upon dozens of different clients written by companies, and individuals in the closed source and open source communities. You can’t seriously claim that every one of those ‘flavors’ was written with under the premise of stealing intellectual property.
Even if you went after a few of the authors the source code is out there, you’ll never shut it down. It’s been embraced by many companies as a cost effective way to distribute large files, data, software etc to their customers abroad. How would making p2p illegal benefit these companies in any way? It would be devastatingly costly to many of them and could be a very damaging blow to their business. One prime example, Blizzard Entertainment distributes Patches for is most popular game via it’s own integrated torrent client. These patches can range from a few megabytes up to 600+megs every few months. It would be virtually impossible for them to distribute this to 9million+ subscribers; there network system wouldn’t be capable of it.
Many open source software projects are distributed via torrent. How would projects that are open and free distribute themselves to the masses if they were then charged with supplying the entire download bandwidth for said project? That would in some cases seriously call in to question the ability of many of those projects to continue, and could hurt the buisness models of many companies that distribute %100 legal software this way.
Do you seriously think piracy started the day p2p software was invented? SERIOUSLY? I’ve got news for you, it’s been going on far far longer then that. Newsflash, it was going on pre-wide scale internet use. Do you seriously think removing a few p2p software programs is going to stop it? SERIOUSLY? Are you that narrow sighted?
Perhaps what needs to be examined is the US copyright rules themselves, they need to be reviewed, rewritten. This time with the public being consulted, concepts like “fair use” put into play. Do seriously expect me to accept that if I legally purchased a CD, that I’m stealing from the RIAA if I rip that cd and put it on my computer, then copy it to my iPod? And that it should be illegal for me to modify any electronic device I legally paid for?
What next? Let’s totally bow to industry, let’s make it illegal for you to change the operating system on a computer that you legally purchased. Let’s make the fine up to $1million dollars and life imprisonment. Then force consumers to prove they have a licensed copy of their operating system installed every 30days to the manufacturer. Man would Microsoft ever love that, think of it, they’d get rid of all those pesky illegal copies of windows. But even better, you’d get rid of that pesky thing called Linux. Think of how great that would be! No more people using free open source operating system, they could get rid of things like open office… And their biggest nemesis,Google would overnight be gone and all it’s assets would be for the legal pillaging of Microsoft.
The current copyright laws in the US are backwards; prohibitive and like many of the patent laws, do nothing but slow progress and fill the pockets of a few; they serve no greater good or cause.
The recording industry is fast going the way of the dinosaur, as is the video rental store, the music store, the lp, cassette tape, beta, vhs, CD’s, and yes even DVD’s. No Virgina there isn’t a Santa Clause; and these things will be extinct in your lifetime. In time there is a change even the idea of 3rd party retailers selling music online may come to an end. Why is it in the interest of a band to have someone else sell their music online? Wait a minute, eventually they’ll figure out they can sell it themselves via their web page. But the big money will never be in music sales again. Most bands are starting to figure out where the money now lies, see my friend all industries change, and you either adapt or get left behind. In music the big money today is in big production live shows. Why do you think bands of the past are suddenly getting back together to
do shows? You don’t think bands eg. The Police, Van Halen, Led Zepplin etc are stupid? They know where the buck stops.
Eventually all these businesses will adapt or be pummeled into complete irrelevance and become nothing more then a relic of the past. Changing a few laws, fighting the consumer tooth and nail isn’t going to work; and will do nothing more then speed up their very demise.
Your buisness included! You need to change, you need to adapt, not us, The consumer isn’t going to adapt to your buisness model. Alienating your customer base isn’t that way. Besides the biggest threat to you and your company isn’t intellectual property theft (piracy) by a few customers, the biggest threat over time to your buisness model is going to come from the open source community; the one place I highly doubt you currently anticipate or actually consider to be a real threat.
And the one company who takes it the most serious right now is Microsoft. They have publicly mused about throwing lawsuits around again the open source community. They consider it to be a major threat. It for them would be pointless, they would be unlikely to recoup any significant sums of money. It would really be to late as any code they claim rights to is already out of the bag. And what I believe to be the two main reasons, they know it would be a publicity nightmare for a company that is already referred to as the “Evil Empire” (think of Googles motto on this one) and it could force them to open up their code to the entire open source community to pick through it..I would be seriously surprised if that didn’t open them up to some serious lawsuits which could be quite damaging and not just financially.
January 1st, 2008 at 12:43 pm
Well, no use in going over what the problem is with your suggestion to ban all P2P networks and software creators. The posters above have that well in hand. However, I do think you touched upon the real problem and subsequent solution in your message.
The collective RIAA/MPAA need to refocus their strategy. It’s as simple as that. A redirected effort towards establishing a legitimate presence in the legal downloading arena would greatly staunch the financial hemorrhaging that has occurred since digital media files were first invented. Create a site with all of the combined music from the RIAA, create a site where you can download movies legitimately for a half decent price. Advertise it. Get it out there in the minds of your customers.
Do not however, further alienate those same customers. Honestly, the strategy so far has damaged the reputation of the RIAA/MPAA so much it may be hard to recover from. I think some people may even choose “illegal” downloading out of spite. I think somewhere along the way the RIAA/MPAA forgot that the United States of America is not run by corporations, it is run by the people. The people will do whatever they collectively want to. Adapt or die.
January 1st, 2008 at 12:45 pm
Hmmmm … seems to me an even better idea would be to outlaw mp3 players. Demand would evaporate, like, “BAM!”
January 1st, 2008 at 1:26 pm
How does one go after Anynomous P2P developers?
January 1st, 2008 at 1:33 pm
the people to go after are the people that make and sell the illegitimate cd’s and dvd’s in bulk, those are the ones making profit off others work
January 1st, 2008 at 1:38 pm
Let’s be clear what we are talking about here. I can record music off the radio, off television, off many sources – it has been done since the invention of tape in the 1940s. All we are talking about here is a minor quality improvement available through digital transmission and direct digital transfer.
The time to weep about this would have been in the 1950s when people began to record their Bing Crosby records. Too late – a precedent has long been established.
The golden goose has already died – and the industry should quit whining and figure out how to keep their customers. Threatening them is sure not going to do it.
January 1st, 2008 at 5:38 pm
Virtue cannot exist in the absence of choice. Perhaps that is why as society becomes more regulated, it also declines – we long for the chances to be virtuous.
Trying to control society is like trying to push a rope, it will not work the way you hope it will…Trying to inspire society is much more effective
January 1st, 2008 at 8:55 pm
This letter started out making some valid points, but quickly devolved into something perhaps even more absurd than the original issue. At least by attacking the pirates and networks you are attacking someone for committing a crime(however you feel about the harshness or integrity of the law). By attacking P2P program authors, you’re making direct user to user file transfer illegal. Do people use torrents and torrent clients to pirate? Absolutely. But they also use them to obtain perfectly legal data.
It’s becoming increasingly common for software developers to send torrents of demos, trailers, free add-ons, and so on. It’s always been common for individuals to post torrents of their own created content, as game mods, or artwork, or programs they’ve created.
To outlaw this kind of data communication would be criminal in itself, it is effectively denying everyone the right to share data. Here is some news for you; the big media conglomerates do not have a monopoly on data.
If simply providing people with a means to share data that -might- be illegal, suddenly becomes a crime, then I guess you’ll have to start targeting AIM, ICQ, Skype, and so on and so forth, all of which provide people with a means to exchange data. The only real difference is that in these cases, the programs don’t allow for users to find specific data anywhere on the network.
The P2P software you’re referring to simply allows people to distribute their data to anyone who wants it. And making that illegal prevents anyone from distributing anything for free, even if they have the legal right to do so. Which, hey, the media corporations would just love, wouldn’t they? They’d love to cripple the average user from distributing their own content. That would mean more people would have to buy their content from them.
Great idea.
Keep the internet free.
January 1st, 2008 at 10:54 pm
Is this guy on RIAA payroll? Why does buying an album of digital songs from MSN costs same as buying a CD? After all there is no manufacturing process involved. What about 25c a song instead of a 90c? Lets be more reasonable. No more ppl with their MBA can put supply and demand curve on the graph at RIAA? A lot of people who steal when a song is 1$ will buy if a song is 25c, simple ECO101.
January 2nd, 2008 at 2:05 pm
If we make the creation and distribution of P2P programs illegal then we’ll have to make Tivo illegal too right?
Blank DVD’s? DVD Burners? Computers? All of these items can facilitate the copying and “theft” of intellectual property. The minute you press record on your Tivo Federal Agents will bust down your door because you MIGHT copy it to your computer and give it to a friend…
This is the beginning of what they call a “slippery slope”. I liked the earlier comment regarding a hammer. Just because you can kill someone with it doesn’t mean your going to. Same thing with P2P. Just because you could share something illegal, doesn’t mean your going to.
Besides, Tivo makes way too much money to ever be made illegal, so why should we worry about P2P programs?
January 3rd, 2008 at 8:20 pm
At least the author’s analogy is on-target. He says: “Itâs kind of like drug paraphernalia, while in many states it is legal to buy it and as long as it isnât being used for consuming drugs it still isnât illegal, however when such items are used to consume drugs it then becomes criminal to posses. Whats the difference between drug paraphernalia that is used to illegally consume illegal drugs and software that allows consumers to illegally consume (steal) your intellectual property? There is no difference, which in its self should help you to lobby for the criminalization P2P client software.”
He totally ignores the syringes used by diabetics to take their life-saving insulin or all the drug paraphernalia that is purchased annually by doctors and hospitals for the purpose of dispensing life-saving drugs – not to mention the needles & other resources used by the Red Cross and others for blood drives and paramedic medical training or the pre-filled syringes distributed to US soldiers that contain nerve toxin anti-dotes or pain drugs (in syringes again) distributed to terminally ill out-patients to relieve their suffering. (Need I point out that the use a syringe to inject drugs into either ones self or another constitutes ‘consuming drugs’ at which point he claims possession becomes criminal ?)
By his logic, there is no purpose for which possession and use of drug paraphernalia is legal, so there is never any justification to avoid suing the manufacturers into the ground because *SOME* of the uses of *SOME* of their products *MIGHT* be used for a purpose that he disapproves of in *SOME* instances.
I guess his analogy is closer than it might appear on the surface – by his analogy, the same ridiculous points he makes against P2P can also be made against drug needles and rubber straps and small bottles containing drugs in suspension.
He really is doubly clueless for suggesting that all manufacturers of P2P clients should be chased down and destroyed, which by his analogy would also outlaw all drug paraphernalia and all manufacturers of same, thus destroying the entire pharmaceutical industry in the US immediately.
no doctors, no hospitals, no nurses -> no healthcare -> no people (customers) that can afford to buy music since they are too busy moving to Canada & Mexico ! >
August 14th, 2008 at 10:41 pm
this guy is just sick. that’s all.