Comments on: MUTE: new p2p file-swapping app

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Tue, 08 Nov 2005 20:20:23 +0000

It’s not true
DirectTV suing people who take money for installing this system on others people boxes. Also you can’t modify rented boxes, because you are not owner. If you have your personal box you can do anything with it.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Tue, 17 May 2005 06:54:07 +0000

I guess in todays world, you could be sued for running it. Look at what DirectTV has done. They are suing people for simply owning card programmers that could POSSIBLY be used illegally. When congress sold us out with it’s digital rights act, they gave scumbags like the RIAA the right to sue you for what you might have done, or might do, and even if you did nothing, the law says you still have to pay for thier sleazy lawyers. It is cheaper to settle than to fight them, so no one ever does. DirectTV has made untold millions from this legal extortion from people who bought this stuff for a perfectly legal use, but could not afford the fight.
But once in a while it backfires on these mega-corporations. Look what happened with Bill Gates and Ernie Ball, for instance. That caused Microsoft to reconsider it’s strategy.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 18 Jun 2004 05:44:47 +0000

There is a new windows only release of the MUTE P2P app that you may want to point out on your web site.

It is available at:

http://mute-net.sourceforge.net/

the program is posted here near the bottom where it says OTHER RELEASES:

and gives instructions on how to use it.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 19 Mar 2004 16:10:29 +0000

Here in Europe, you can’t buy a gun if you don’t have a weapons’ license, which is rather hard to get. Laws can be molded to fit the needs of the political elite.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sat, 21 Feb 2004 22:52:41 +0000

Yeah Right. And then CISCO would be sued too, and every other router manufacturer, for routing thousands of illegal packets.
You can buy a gun for target practice, which is legal. But if you kill someone, you go to jail.
Get the point?
Sorry, but file sharing applications are not illegal. It’s the content that matters.
So this will be dismissed on any court of law.
Happy anonymous sharing everyone

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Sun, 25 Jan 2004 02:09:09 +0000

ya but freenet doesn’t work
i can’t get more than the frontpage and 1 image every once in a while to load.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 23 Jan 2004 08:51:51 +0000

The same problem was posed with Freenet, which uses a similar model where everyone uploads and you can’t tell who downloads. Freenet has quite a bit of child porn on it. (It is likely MUTE eventually will as well.)

Nobody’s been arrested yet.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Fri, 23 Jan 2004 08:42:55 +0000

Freenet tries to be like the World Wide Web, whereas MUTE tries to be like a regular filesharing application. That’s basically the only difference.

But it’s a good enough difference to switch– I don’t think people want to run a gigantic HTTP server hosting 1GB of other people’s content just so they can download music!

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Thu, 22 Jan 2004 17:54:34 +0000

What is the difference between this and Freenet?

Freenet protects your anonymity, and its routing scheme is also said to be inspired by ant behavior. Freenet has also been around for much longer.

By: Reader's Write

Reader's Write — Thu, 22 Jan 2004 02:59:03 +0000

I see the scenario of people being sued just for running it. The ones the RIAA does connect to it will not differentiate between dirrect uploaders and passer-oners. I don’t think MUTE has a way to verify that you were not the one uploading. sure this would be a desperate unscrupulous organization that does this type of sueing but what would stop them? Ii can see the judges face now “you ran a subversive program that would allow illegal trade knowingly! BAM Guilty!” pay your fine to to jail , join the military etc.