New LimeWire filter
p2p news / p2pnet: LimeWire is experimenting with a new filter system that allows copyright owners to register which files might infringe copyright on gnutella.
“So far the implementation in the Beta version (LW 4.11.0) respects user choice,” says a p2pnet reader. “We can use the filter if we want and it’s off by default, which is good.”
Here’s what LimeWire says:
About Filtering
Lime Wire is launching an experimental Beta Filtering System. Filtering enhances our network as a safe place to share content and information while respecting the concerns of copyright owners.
What is Filtering?
Filtering helps to ensure that you do not share files against the wishes of copyright owners. If you’ve enabled Filtering, LimeWire checks the status of the files you attempt to download. If a file’s copyright owner has requested that the content not be shared, LimeWire prevents you from downloading it.
Enabling Filtering helps you use LimeWire more safely and responsibly.
How to Set Filtering Options
You can change your Filtering settings at any time. To change Filters, go to ‘Filters’ in the menu and select ‘Configure Content Filters’. This will open the ‘Content’ section of ‘Filters’ in the Options dialog, and allow you to check or uncheck the ‘Enable Content Filters’ checkbox.
Copyright Owners
If you are an artist or copyright owner and would like to learn more about filtering, please see About LimeWire’s Beta Filtering System.
“How are we to know what files are preferred not to be shared without the possibility of connecting to a site that may log our address?” asks LOTR on the gnutella forums, going on:
“(Well obviously it will log our address as is the way with the web … point being this address is usually ignored. I doubt they will ignore it.)
“Is there a list somewhere we can visit rather than have LW secretly connect somewhere we don’t know to find out.
“I doubt my shared files are on such a list but … I’d like to find out.”
“Hi LOTR,” responds stief. “I’m not sure how the filtering works, but I sure don’t like the idea of a distributed network becoming dependent on central server(s).
“Still, I WANT to know if a copyright holder objects to one of my shared files, and would like to see a flag for disputed files in the search results.
“If this information can be openly shared on gnutella without killing the network, I’m in favour.
“Right now, it’s wait-and-see for me
“I registered a file (my favourite sailing pic), and am trying to see how the system will work. PM me for the magnet to see how it shows at your end, if you want.”
We’ve emailed Greg Bildson over at LimeWire for comments.
LimeWire hasn’t been exactly forthcoming, of late. We’ll see what happens this time.
Stay tuned.
March 25th, 2006 at 10:57 pm
so this looks like a keyword filter – are they ready for the 900,000 or more RIAA titles – its going to be a long list. Good that its optional hope it stays that way.
March 25th, 2006 at 11:41 pm
Note that this is filtering at the client level, not the network/protocol. This is why people use other gnutella clients such as frostwire and mutella.
March 26th, 2006 at 7:10 pm
To the author: You should probably have quoted more of that thread. After all, Stief & I tested out this new beta implementation & found just as it was quoted by one of the LimeWire programmers, simply to get rid of URL spam that has recently shown up on the network. And this does filter it out! More details on findings in that thread. http://www.gnutellaforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=54129
And this is an optional filtering.
March 26th, 2006 at 7:11 pm
Initially there was some over-reaction by Stief & Lotr to the concept. But it was a misundertanding. The filtering is a positive one for users.
March 27th, 2006 at 11:50 am
Filtering cannot unless some rules are put in place first. These is a partial list of my suggestions:
1. There are simply too many works that have copyrights. Probably trillions and the output is increasing exponentially. So the amount of creative works produced must be strictly limited to works of high social value so as not to choke the filter system. A possible way to do this is reduce writing education to about 1 percent of the population. Only one in a million should be allowd to write songs. This would result in about 300 songwriters in the USA. Even that may be too many songwriters.
2. It would require a central organization to set the rules. A “filter authority”. For exmple, the United Nations Copyright Office, which does not exist yet would have to be created. Of course, care miust be exercised so as not to cause WW III.
3. There are too many false and fraudulent copyright claims out there at present. The world is inundated with these, as the fruds act with the blessing of the many copyright related offices and organizations who, up to now look sideways as to not see anything that is going on. For example, many music publishers claim to own the Star Spangled Banner. Even Happy Birthday is claimed. A rule would be required so that anyone making a false claim to the filter authority will go to jail for at least 50 years.
4. Anyone cought with a altered file (so as not to be detected by the filter) needs to be summarily shot without a trial. A draconian action? Yes, but since it would be so easy to alter files, a strong detrrence is required.
5. The use of alternate methods of sharing files must be also lead to execution. Else, people will simply move to other methods, away from the Internet, if filters were made to work.
6. All reserarch by technology companies to develop products that will facilitate sharing of files must be made illegal. A two chip miniature MP3 player-recorder-cell phone that uses the new Samsung 32GB chips must never reach the marketplace. After all what good will Internet filtering do do if kids can simply trade gigabyte chips with 50,000 mp3 songs or send music files over their cell phones?
7. Legay produces, such as blank cds and dvds and magnetic tapes must all be banned.
8. All travel to third world countries must be banned as these places are all piracy heavens where anyone can buy all sorts of goodies, very cheap. Imagine, a 50,000 mp3 song chip for 50 bucks! That is about 1,000 songs per dollar. That is a lot better than what the record companies typically charge, over $1 per song.
9. Possesion of pirated files must also become a crime. At present only the copying is a crime (says the COCA cartels – COCA stands for Copyright Owners Cartel Association), so if the copying is done by someone else, there is absolutely no problem in owning the files. This legal loophole must be closed. To enforce the new law, surprise visits must be made to homes to check for possible possesion of illegal files. Also all airport checkpoints must scan every person for the possible importation of illegal files.
10. Copyright duration should be made perpetual. That way the copyright status of any work is always know. At present, any list of copyright works is obsolete immediately as works pass into the public domain. The public domain only complicates things from any filtering system.
11. Power of arrest must be given to COCA members. Else the regular police will be inundated with so much work that it coud eat all government budgets.
RV
April 5th, 2006 at 4:02 pm
“so this looks like a keyword filter”? The moon also looks flat. Arbitrary guesses don’t make facts.
The source code is publically available, and it doesn’t look at all like a keyword filter to me.