Comments on: Uncovering The Dark Side of P4P

By: YouAreAllSoYesterday

YouAreAllSoYesterday — Fri, 29 Aug 2008 03:21:54 +0000

1st, eMule died bcs of Bittorent
Now, Bittorrent die(d/s) bcs of Wua.la (http://wua.la).

Maybe some of you should have a look at Wua.la. Its save, its fast, its encrypted and works different (UDP only) and can not be throttled like bittorrent is.

Give it a try and join the biggest groups on Wua.la or create your own groups. ;)

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 02:32:31 +0000

if it ain’t broke don’t fix it

By: As An Industry Slowly Dies.....

As An Industry Slowly Dies..... — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 06:21:14 +0000

All I had to hear was that Dan Glickman and the MPAA were involved (not to mention those scum at Viacom) to realize that this one is a no-brainer. These people can NEVER be trusted. EVER.

It’s all about control. They realize they no longer have it and they will do anything to get it back.

Not on my watch. :P

By: fort1

fort1 — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 03:00:20 +0000

Good point, @6 !

“Aug 24, 2008 at 21:50 by hdt

It will also allow for easier prosecution, since both the sender and receiver are far more likely to be in the same jurisdiction, provably so I would think.”

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 17:52:47 +0000

If ISPs what it, then I don’t.

By: Phishybongwaters

Phishybongwaters — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 13:34:55 +0000

a peer to peer networking model, invented and developed by the MPAA and RIAA.

Do you need to actually say anything else on this subject?

Here’s my impression:

slow, painfully slow downloads, and you’ll have mpaa snooping on your system, as you’ve installed a nifty logger/backdoor by using any p4p enabled client.

good luck folks

“Ummm, no your wrong – get a clue. BT natively picks arbitary clients (regardless of speed). AND if you think it makes no difference:”

Umm, you’re half right. The clients are picked arbitrarily BUT the connections are maintained by the quality of the connection.

Your client picks peerA and peerB. PeerA sends data back to you slowly, your client drops peerA and keeps the line open to peerB.

That’s how it works, ignoring the availability factor of course.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 13:30:08 +0000

So they now want the public to bear the cost of their infrastructure and then sell it back to us.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 11:22:42 +0000

“this already exists, its called IPfiltersâ€¦ which is already integrated in both Azureus and uTorrent. (its up to the end-user on how efficient their filters are)”

This has nothing to do with IP filters.

By: Drake

Drake — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 10:41:47 +0000

Good article. P4P is definitely not a step forward and, as you pointed out, considering the groups involved this will only benefit ISP’s and the entertainment industries.

By: Ryan

Ryan — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 08:43:11 +0000

P4P is being developed specifically for protected, non-copyright infringing content. It is being worked on by companies like Pando that are working to deliver ONLY ‘premium’ content via P2P, and are looking for ways to make it network-friendly so that they don’t piss the ISPs off. As far as I know, there will be no private, open-source clients that work with P4P because they can’t ensure that non-pirated content is not running over the networks.

As for slowing down traditional, non-P4P filesharing — that’s not a part of the plan. Non-P4P clients will still exist — they just won’t work as fast and won’t connect to P4P-engineered apps.