Morle’s ‘Defining Rant’ on Kazaa
p2pnet.net News Feature:- “I believe we are going to win our legal battles. I believe this now more than ever. On day one we saw the potential for p2p to solve content distribution problems in the digital age and now we can see even further reaching opportunities for this logical evolution of technology. Phone calls, email, blogging, work groups, streaming …”
That’s the way Sharman cto Phil Morley starts a circa 2004 internal document he calls A Defining Rant, revealed during the Kazaz vs Music Cartel court battle in Australia. And having said that, he goes on to explain how and why p2p (read Kazaa) is the ONE.
He also makes a number of extremely interesting observations, such as:
It is reasonable that we show ads in order to create our free software, but I do not believe it is reasonable to place a user in a position where this free software will also make their machine sluggish.
And:
Consider how many people at Sharman Networks and its partners that hate installing Kazaa on their machines.
Australia’s APC Magazine has been running Kazaagate which has included takes from Morle’s rant.
We’ve got the entire .pdf document here [warning – unfortunately, it’s photocopy image: no text], or head over to Australia for APC’s .pdf download of same.
For now, read on for more excerpts >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
So we have millions of users who cost us practically nothing per peer, writes Morle.
Unlike most businesses our variable costs go up very slowly as the user base grows. So we don’t need much money for each new user.
But as each new user joins we gain the opportunities for more interactions – more value.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Every user we gain adds value greater than one to the network. Every user we lose removes that value.
We give too little and take too much to fertilize this dynamic. When too many users feel this way and leave then we will be faced with a self-fulfilling prophecy that will collapse the value of Kazaa.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Our competitors (notably eDonkey and Morpheus) are taking risks legally, but delivering compelling consumer solutions. We need confidence in what we do and must take similar leaps of faith. EDonkey is not yet being sued and is in a strong position to out-innovate us.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This year we risk a very damaging arms race between the major p2p companies. Open source development efforts from GIFT and MLDonkey have made it possible for developers to connect to Fasttrack (and eDonkey) without the permission of the licensors. These solutions are poorly implemented and as people connect en-masse, the performance of the applications will diminish. Morpheus 4, eDonkey and Shareaza all allow connecting to multiple networks. I am quite certain that Shareaza is creating a windows connection to Fastttrack as we speak. If we don’t nip this in the bud then we may have to create our own connections to G2 and eDonkey, creating additional legal risk, wasting development time, and ultimately damaging those networks most likely. All vendors wil be doing the same. In addition to that there is the consumer threat – if consumers can connect to FT (as well as Gnutella2, eDonkey and Bittorrent) and it has no ads or adware then it would seem a good choice. We need to deal with the [sic] carefully through a delicate mix of diplomacy with other vendors, technology and legal action, As much as possible I suggest we look at ways of working with them and exploiting it rather than fighting them – consider the mistakes the labels are making today in fighting decentralized networks.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
If user levels continue to fall the rate will only increase as the value of the network will decrease at an accelerated level. Less users creates less users. We risk hitting a tipping point for this in Q2 this year.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
We need to be careful with user resources. Most obvious is in the adware we add to their machine upon installation. This software slows down users’ machines and can effect [sic] other activity such as browsing the internet (as we have seen with PerfectNav). It is reasonable that we show ads in order to create our free software, but I do not believe it is reasonable to place a user in a position where this free software wil also make their machine sluggish.
["PerfectNav is one of the MANY pieces of garbage that is installed on your computer when you install Kazaa,” says a January 25 anoyances.org post slugged PerfectNav is killing me. By installing Kazaa, you no longer have control of your computer.”]
We need to revisit the acceptance testing procedure in light of PerfectNav and introduce significantly longer lead up times before doing deals and shipping.
We are also adding increasing p2p networks to the users’ machines. These are good value to users but they use more resources and create confusion for users as to what resources they are sharing and where this can be controlled.
Both of these issues could be reason that we lose users by overstepping the mark. Consider how many people at Sharman Networks and its partners that hate installing Kazaa on their machines.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Users already change Kazaa whenever they want to – so this is currently a threat. But I think we can turn it around so it is an opportunity. They like Kazaa because they control the world it connects them to. They hack it and make helper applications because they love the software and we need to define where it is important to stop them (and make them our enemies) and where we should encourage them because they will ultimately add value to the software at no cost to us. Users can never dabble with the p2p functionality. But they can translate it,. Radically change the look and feel, add functionality, etc.
Something you think we should know? tips[at]p2pnet.net
===================
See:-
digital lifestyle – Kazaagate Day 15: part 3, APC, February 3, 2005
February 5th, 2005 at 1:17 am
It was obvious to everyone from the streets to the courts that the software was ad supported. This “proof” is nothing new.
As far as aussie trade practices and rules are concerned.. from what i’ve seen of trade regulations it still would not result in a shutdown order.
February 5th, 2005 at 2:09 am
is it reasonable to assume that kazaa’s intention is to advance their application to benefit the user while earning revenue to fight the lawsuits….
February 5th, 2005 at 4:18 am
“benefit the user” – you got to be kidding
“earning revenue to fight the lawsuits” – sounds right
February 5th, 2005 at 4:35 pm
“If user levels continue to fall the rate will only increase as the value of the network will decrease at an accelerated level. Less users creates less users. We risk hitting a tipping point for this in Q2 this year.”
Several months ago, I wrote a story and mentioned that Kazaa’s userbase was shrinking. Marty Lafferty replied that I was making an incorrect assessment of the network. I wonder if his opinion has now changed.
Drake
February 5th, 2005 at 5:11 pm
Lafferty runs the Sharman-inspired DCIA (Distributed Computing Industry Association) which purports to represents the p2p community and which is mentioned in Morle’s rant.
Here’s my rant on the subject. http://p2pnet.net/story/1720
Cheers!
February 11th, 2005 at 7:49 am
If you can’t then you’re not blind freddy because even he could see it.
These guys must be dead in the water now they’ve been exposed.
I don’t think it will need a court order for millions of people to abandon these revolutionaries who turned out to be just as bad as the industry they said they were revolutionizing…..
February 11th, 2005 at 7:51 am
no it is not. a more likely assumption is that they are just money grabbing consumer robbing business people like the others