Facebook joins the P2P networks
p2pnet news view Freedom | P2P:- “In a bid to conquer the web bit-by-bit, The Pirate Bay has launched a new feature to allow it to penetrate the social networking site Facebook,” says TorrentFreak.
With a click, “Facebook users can add their favorite torrents to their profile to share them with friends,” says enigmax.
The IFPI isn’t happy about this new development, and FaceBook isn’ t saying anything about it, for the moment, he says, quoting The Pirate Bay’s Peter Sunde as stating TPB hasn’t yet seen any complaints and, “As far as I know, no rights-holders have complained to us yet,” while, “noting that any complaints they do receive get deleted immediately”.
According to Sunde, TPB “didn’t feel the need to ask” if the new feature was okay with Facebook. They monitor their protal every day and, “should have noticed it long ago,” he says in the story.
Says Ray Beckerman on Recording Industry vs The People »»»
Once posted to a profile, the Facebook member’s friends can click the link on Facebook to begin the download right away, provided he or she already has a torrenting client installed. I just hope people do not use this feature to download copyrighted materials which are not authorized to be downloaded, or at least not materials copyrighted to litigation-happy RIAA Big 4 record labels. No doubt, if their song files were downloaded through this method, the record companies would sit back for awhile, derive profit from the promotional excitement generated for their dying industry, and then — armed with Facebook’s data — sue the pants off all the hapless Facebook users who fell for it.
Maybe.
Maybe not.
Big Music’s ongoing public relations Blitzkrieg
The RIAA’s efforts have so far had absolutely no effect on file sharing overall and in terms of the general population, they’ve meant nothing.
This isn’t to make light of the genuine suffering caused by the Big 4 to people unlucky enough to have been singled out for use in Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music and Sony Music’s ongoing public relations Blitzkrieg.
In the scheme of things, however, the chances of any one person becoming a victim of he RIAA sue ‘em all campaign are so remote as to be virtually nonexistent.
Thanks to one-sided reporting on part of the mainstream media, the entirely false impression has been created that thousands of people have already been sued, and that anyone, anywhere could become a victim.
But that’s hard-core Big 4 bullshit.
More than one billion songs a day are shared online as mp3s, says The Expanding Digital Universe an IDC white paper.
And that’s a conservative estimate, it says.
The statistic was arrived at by assessing the total number of new songs created, “which we assumed were created in a large file-format CD for distribution,” says the document, quoted in a 2007 p2pnet post.
Songs in mp3 format were considered replication and, “We estimated the number of legal song sales (CD and Web distribution) and added a conservative estimate of songs illegally distributed,” says the paper. “It is quite possible that we were too conservative in our estimate of illegally shared songs over peer-to-peer networks.”
That’s a heck of a lot of sharing. And so far, in the US, the Big 4 have only managed to get one person into court?
Having completely failed to make any impression on the P2P communities, the labels are now going blind trying to force governments around the world to use ISPs as corporate hit squads. But so far, a lot of bluff and bluster in the corporate press notwithstanding, it’s quite evident they’re not having much luck.
‘Odds of me being ‘fined’ … zero’
Around 40,000 innocent men, women and children have been on the wrong end of RIAA subpoenas. But subpoenas aren’t court cases, although the RIAA has done its best to imply they are.
However, the number most often quoted is 30,000. So let’s use that. And as p2pnet contributor surfer pointed out recently, say 9,000,000 Americans share [a massive underestimate], 30,000 lawsuits vs 9 million file sharers is about .03%, and of that, .03%, only 1 went before a judge, so thats around .009% of all file sharing.
“Odds of me being ‘fined’ … zero.”
IMO, if and when Facebook becomes a serious component of the P2P filesharing networks and the RIAA is stupid enough to go after Facebook users, the subsequent outrage would be mind-boggling, bringing with it all kinds of publicity Vivendi Universal, EMI, Warner Music and Sony Music and their RIAA certainly don’t need, particularly right now.
A single mother and her children with no means of defending herself against the multi-billion-dollar record labels is one thing.
Millions of Facebook users (and, by implication, ultimately, all the people signed on to all the other so-called social networking sites waiting in the wings) are another thing entirely.
As things stand, the RIAA has only to contend with helpless families with no money and no legal resources.
The picture would be completely different if it was trying to deal with the masses and the TPB move could – again, IMO – be one of two things »»»
- The straw that broke the camel’s back; or,
- A cataclysmic event which could save the corporate music industry.
All the Big 4 have to do is »»»
- Admit they made a mistake — IMO, it’s not too late, even now
- Fully open their catalogues and reduce their wholesale prices
- Admit competition is here whether they like it or not, and it isn’ t going to go away
- Admit the same thing about P2P and file sharing
- Start treating the people they depend on as customers who can be relied on, instead of “criminals” and “thieves” who have to be continually threatened and bullied.
It could also be something Facebook, et al, need to make their operations truly profitable.
Win-win all around.
Stay tuned.
Jon Newton - p2pnet
TorrentFreak – Pirate Bay Torrents Spread Via Facebook, March 29, 2009
Mashable - Torrent Sharing Comes to Facebook: Will the RIAA Step In?, March 29, 2009
Recording Industry vs The People – Pirate Bay on Facebook? Be careful, folks, don’t rise to the bait, March 29, 2009
public relations Blitzkrieg – You and I against the RIAA, March 28, 2009
p2pnet – 1 billion songs a DAY shared online, March 8, 2007
not having much luck – Europe parliament rejects French 3 strikes law, March 27, 2009
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.
March 30th, 2009 at 9:51 am
brilliantly written, Jon
March 30th, 2009 at 11:15 am
As long as file sharing continues to have that “criminal” label applied to it, and its users tracked, anyone directly clicking on a torrent link in Facebook would have to be clueless.
1) When you use a site like TPB, the click creates an obfuscated pathway, beginning with the encrypted tracker. Clicking a link in Facebook would add a traceable starting point to your activity, and verification of that on a Facebook server, thereby making you a more likely candidate for actual exposure.
2) The MAFIAA would immediately add Facebook to its growing list of sites it marks as “piracy promoting”, and start pressuring for FB’s cooperation and user information. Anyone who would trust Facebook at this point to choose the privacy of its users over threats of lawsuits would need his head examined.
3) As we already know, Facebook already keeps too many details for way too long, and can’t be trusted to delete anything. Zuckerbaby has always had this dream that, one day, everyone will stop looking too closely, allowing him to monetize all of it. You can be sure, if he doesn’t put up some form of objection to the TPB plan, it would be because he sees some potential to exploit P2P in some way.
Personally, I think TPB has been a revolution in itself. They’re innovative, and determined to correct the world’s thinking on file sharing, regardless of the “implications” their activities may bring upon themselves. But, I believe, in wanting to have torrent links promoted through FB, they may have not considered what trouble may result for Facebook and its users. Being used to having more legal shelter in their part of the world, they may not fully realize how those elsewhere may become victims of a sick campaign that hasn’t yet been properly defeated.
March 30th, 2009 at 12:07 pm
Can’t wait till the RIAA sues facebook for user data :p
March 30th, 2009 at 5:10 pm
Me thinks you about right on that one. Mr DA….Well said..
March 30th, 2009 at 9:07 pm
DA:
1. I don’t think people would have to be “clueless” to click on the Facebook link at all. So it creates a “traceable starting point?” The RIAA can’t even manage to get THAT much right. The points you raise are valid to some extent, but they fail to take into account the fundamental question: including torrent links on facebook or anywhere else will probably increase the amount of torrent use (which is already so astronomically huge that the chances of being sued over it are vanishingly small as it is.)
2. Much as the RIAA and their crony-goons would like us to believe, the legal system is grindingly slow, insanely cumbersome, and tragically overburdened (ever new moral panic they manage to ignite just adds to that fact.) The U.S. has the largest proportion of it’s population incarcerated as is, and there’s no evidence that the RIAA or their fumble-puppets (such as Mediadefender, Clusseau, or whatever else) have the resources to meaningfully combat the p2p thing (mindless jabbering about “the cell next to Daniel Dove” notwithstanding.)
3. I’m pretty sure that the guys at TPB would have it so that the link which gets embedded is equivalent to the ones you find via search results. Don’t take this the wrong way, but you are seriously underestimating TPB if you think that they haven’t already figured out the potential problems you’ve just highlighted (and I’m not just a fanboy for saying that.)
Having said that, thanks for raising the objections. I just think you’re overstating the risks, and overestimating the opposition (The RIAA have spent so much time being technophobic assholes — as demonstrated by how their sockpuppets performed during the TPB trial etc.)
The most likely outcome of the facebook thing would be a vast upsurge in torrent usage, resulting in the RIAA vermin having even more on their plate. You think .003 percent constitutes “success”, just wait until Facebook allows the less-techie types to start torrenting. Then you’ll see the numbers go from 9 million to 20 million while a vanishingly-small dribble of lawsuits grinds through the courts, and even more publicity against the lawsuits that DO manage to happen.
Also, “Zuckerbaby” as you call him — like all corporate weasels — needs to tread the fine line between being a money-grubbing scumbag, and pissing off the users. Mediadefender was destroyed by, what, one guy leaking emails? You really think a “social networking” site could survive (much less continue milking people) if it’s shown to be an RIAA beartrap?
To sum up:
1. The TPB guys are smart and tech-savvy enough that they most likely wouldn’t deploy something like this unless it was secured.
2. The Alphabet-soup Cartels are all technically-illiterate, ham-fisted corporate scumbags motivated solely by greed. They are ALSO already seriously overburdened as it is, and desperately trying to retain even a shred of positive publicity.
3. Facebook can’t AFFORD to sell it’s user-base out in the way you’re concerned about — not if it wants to survive.
Fellating the RIAA is not a good decision, because it brands you as an enemy collaborator, and ironically, that’s “bad for business”.
March 31st, 2009 at 1:41 am
@Henry…
Those are all excellent counter-points!
I agree completely with 99% of it.
One point of concern that remains is that the RIAA et al would not have to “get it right” when a click eminates from Facebook.
Here’s why:
1) They would only need to put legal pressure on Facebook for the server records.
2) Facebook WILL have them, as they keep too much – it’s Zuckiebaby’s religion.
3) Thanks to the out-of-control 3rd-party tracking of FB users, there’s going to be MULTIPLE records of the same action on FB’s servers, in addition to records kept by those 3rd parties the g00ns may just try to subpoena. There’s just too much data that could become available, and all with real names attached – and no flaky IP analysis to get into.
4) Facebook hasn’t exactly got a good track record of protecting the users.
5) The links may be the same, but the traffic will need to relay from FB to TPB. Tracking those relays is possible, and someone like BayTSP (or whoever the MAFIAA is getting to do it) could open up a FB account or become a “3rd party” themselves (FB is not particular about who does that), which would give them the ability to log it almost in realtime.
Whether I’m completely mistaken or not, there is one reason I believe this whole proposal may not go through anyway.
ZuckFace will not be able to guarantee himself involvement in this without the looming possibility of legal woes. The only way to avoid that and go through with it would be to pass the liability off to the users. And, he already knows why he can’t do that.
As you said, that is a fine line.
March 31st, 2009 at 3:43 am
@ DA,
so what? Facebook (”FB”) has records that someone had embedded and/or clicked a link.
Contrary to what the report -that NYCL also cites- says, you don’t download “right away” with those facebook links.
On the The Pirate Bay (”TPB”) you have different types of “pages” that you can reach with a link.
There is of course the famous section where the TPBowners mock those american companies that think that their DMCA is the new world order that works everywhere. The overview page of that section can be reached via a link to thepiratebay.org/legal
The stuff interesting for the issue at hand happends in the “userspace” though.
What the FB link does, is using the overview page of the .torrent file.
Clicking such a link does NOT initiate the download. (and I guess the TPB guys are smart enough to NOT do it directly, since then they would have no exposure of the FB crowd to the IMO obnoxious adverts on the html overview pages.
Let me use as example a guy that sells (as it seems from first glance) home grown software for MAC:
This guy with the username DJMac317 has not only a homepage (whimsplucky.com/videovangelist) but is using the power of p2p to ease his server load.
You can see all his overview pages neatly arranged by using a link like thepiratebay.org/user/DJMac317/
If he or satisfied customers of him that want to help promote him would use the FB link offered on TPB it would use as value for the link the overview page of the specific torrent.
hxxp://xxx.facebook.com/share.php?u=hxxp://thepiratebay.org/torrent/4808768/VideoVangelist_1.4_Faster_and_improved_DVD_conversion
To have it “instantly download” as the Mashable article claimed, the link would have been the one that can be seen when hovering with your mouse over the “download this torrent” text e.g.
hxxp://torrents.thepiratebay.org/4808768/VideoVangelist_1.4_Faster_and_improved_DVD_conversion.4808768.TPB.torrent
And even then there is no “instant” download.
The user’s browser would have to be setup to handle .torrent files appropriately by invoking an installed Bittorrent client and giving that file to it.
And the Bittorrent client must be setup to automaticly start and save every torrent file that is send to him via browser download into a specific directory.
That’s many more steps before you have something “instant” IMO.
(But even if we assume for the sake of argument that FB users are so tech savvy to have done all that with their browser and with an installed Bittorrent client… As pointed out, the FB link does not invoke this “instant” thingy at all.
And looking at html pages with textual descriptions .. not even the RIAA can serious claim that such a thing is a copyrightinfringement, can they?
[Disclaimer: while I'm a MOD at TPB, this comment is NOT an official statement by TPB but solely my personal opinion and should be treated as such. Further note for prosecutors: I'm NOT one of the "~10 guys with the SSL keys" to the servers. See trial transcript for context of that statement
]