Sunday, December 9, 2012

P2P File Sharing

In the world of technology, multimedia content has always been susceptible to illegal duplication. For example, those of you who were aware of the dilemma heard about a company called Napster. Napster was the first in my opinion to get the word out there to the public about an idea called P2P file sharing. As you might now conclude, you hear very little about Napster - put two and two together- after this secret was out. Since this happened, this raises the question, what exactly is P2P File sharing?
Let me explain first what is file sharing to begin with. File sharing is simply, making digitally stored information (like books, software, music and movies) available for others to access over the Internet. For example, a Web Page is a form of file sharing because it's your digital information and makes its contents available across the Internet . Another example of file sharing, which is also one the most common ways today, by using peer-to-peer (P2P) networks. This raises the next question, what is peer-to-peer file sharing? Peer-to-peer file sharing is a system of sharing files directly between network users, a without the assistance or interference of a central server. What this means in English, is that you and I both have computers, you decided to share a movie (The avengers :)) with me, but your too far away transfer the file from your computer to my computer via USB. So we transfer the movie file by letting our computers talk to each via the Internet. What this means is that it makes your movie available to me through P2P application (bitlord, lime wire, kazaa) and I can download it directly to my computer. A few examples of P2P File sharing includes spotify, gnutella, Skype, VoIP, edonkey and many many more. Many might ask what's wrong with P2P file sharing if I am the owner of the digital file? Well, I can give you 1.5 million dollars worth of reasons, which is the same amount that is being held against Jamie Thomas-Rasset for downloading 24 songs from Kazaa. According to the case, "earlier this year a U.S. District Court judge found the $1.92 million penalty against Thomas-Rasset to be "monstrous and shocking" and "gross justice" before lowering it to $54,000, or $2,250 a song."(Kreps, 2010) - this is still too much in my opinion, given that most songs sold on itunes are for $1.29.
     The moral of the story is this ladies and gentleman, it's wrong and don't be the person in her situation . Pay things the good ole fashioned way, with money and stop trying to cut corners. Be creative and do the right thing.

References
Daniel Kreps (2010, November 4) Minnesota Mom Hit With $1.5 Million Fine for Downloading 24 Songs from http://www.sci.brooklyn.cuny.edu/~rhein/baruchnewmedia/baruchnewmedia.com/w/images/3/35/IllegalMusic.pdf

No comments:

Post a Comment