Should We Trust RapidShare?
Download Should We Trust RapidShare? at High Speed
Article Revised by Hackworth 2009
The source of the small amounts of content used in this article is common knowledge and can be easily obtained by simply doing a search with any web search engine like Google for example.
The purpose of this article is to only touch lightly on a subject that is very valid and it is about what to expect as an up loader to a service in this case named Rapid share in the event that something illegal were to happen simple.
Originally Established in May, of 2002 as Rapid Share de located in Germany which at the time had nearly 84 sites linking to it.
Then Rapid Share.com, revamped founded in 2006, from Switzerland and became one of the biggest and fastest one-click file hosts in the world. Within a short time, they had succeeded in rising to become the twelfth most trusted and visited homepage in the world, and the trend seems to be still moving upwards despite some legal drawbacks.
Thats there introduction unfortunately I dont entirely share this same opinion.
Why you might ask? Well let me explain as best I can in this brief little article I put together I also would like to make clear that some of the legal issues mentioned in this article are about the original German site as well as the newer site located in Switzerland .
My main reason for making this article was to express my distrust in the way rapid share throws the keys of illegal in justice onto the backs of there respective paying members then simply walk away unscathed from any wrong doing on there part.
Ok so here I am once more with some topics you might have heard off the web from not too long ago.
And yes Im still a bit put off with this new file time deletion rule of theres but what the hell life sucks right?
Now dont get me wrong I use rapid share and enjoy it most of the time as a downloader but as an up-loader to there site its a whole new ball game as you will soon find out.
The reason I am posting this article is to show you how much different rapid share has become these days, and to display my objections from there controlling grip on my files ahem really other peoples files but lets not get into that legal issue right now.
I also want to show you how they talk about the very people who keep them in business.
Lets take a stroll down memory lane shall we.
First of all as I mentioned in my last article which by the way I was very pleased at the amount of members who made some very good comments on the topic.
My thanks too all who took the time to speak there mind.
The new thorn that is about to become a pain in the side of your files is now going to be a bit more controlled As of October 2009.
Now I believe in the freedom of speech as long as it is in part truth and not too distasteful, and of course has some real validity to what is being said.
First let me start by re-capping on what this new rule is and how it will affect you
Any files that are not downloaded at least 1 time within a 90 day time line will automatically be deleted without any notice to you.....well when I first read this I thought alright I can see the logic in this but then I remember looking in there policy and terms and for some reason this is what it said.
Your files will be hosted as long as they are active. When your file is not downloaded for more than 30 days, it will be deleted without any notice.
Now I dont know if this is a type error or what? But the original policy says 30 days yet the new rules that dont come into effect until this October say 90 days.
Now Im not complaining but it looks to me like someone has made an error on explaining how many different days there policy for deleting members files are or so it would seem.
Anyways lets forget about all that nonsense and take a look at some of the dirt that has wiggled its way into the great almighty rapid share we all have come too love and trust shall we.
First of all when it comes to protecting there righteous mega bytes this is what they do to there paying members.
Rapid share Shares more then just your files it also shares the Up loaders Info to the Rights Holders when accused of any wrong doing which is almost every second of the day.
Thats right youre the criminal for using there site when things go wrong for them.
Remember the story that was all over the net back around April, 2009
Well let me refresh your memory just in case some of you missed it or where too busy on the ill fated Pirate Bay site that got hit by a large law suit and sank faster then the Titanic.
It went something like this.
In Germany, the file-hosting service Rapid share de has handed over the personal details of alleged copyright infringers to several major record labels. The information was used to pursue legal action against the Rapid share users and at least one alleged up loader saw his house raided.
Now wasnt that nice of rapid share to not only take this members monthly registration fees but all so to take his private information and use it against him in-order to protect there fat assets from what I think should of been a crime in its self but heythere the rich guys and they kind of condone this behavior by letting members use there Ahemlegal file storage site right?.
The article continues to say:
At first it was unclear how the identity of the up loader was revealed, but the German news media said it had found out that this was likely to be accomplished by creative use of paragraph 101 of the German copyright law. It turns out that several record labels are allowed too use this method to take legal action against those who share music on Rapid share.
Wowthis is only for music I dont want too think about the 500 years of consecutive life terms one would serve for up loading 30 new movie releases yikes.
Anyways the article continued as follows.
Previously the paragraph was only used by the rights holders to get the personal details of those who shared the copyrighted works on the file-sharing network.
Now this is where it gets you thinking a bit before deciding to upload anything read on.
It basically enables the copyright holders to get permission from a civil judge to ask ISPs to disclose the personal details of a user behind a certain IP.
So folks this also seems to be the case for file-hosting services such as the great Rapid share you all trust and love so much be it the German or Switzerland site.
So much for rapid love eh?
They love your money as a member but trade you in when its time to feed the witch hunters in Hollywood.
Dont forget too say hi to Robert De Nero when your being sued for up loading Taxi
Thats when rapid share hands you over to the police and you say are you talking too me?
Now heres a good story with a happy ending.at least they almost got the right criminal this time.
Remember back in June, 2009 when the German Court Slammed Rapid share with a $24 Million dollar Fine.
I would have thought for sure the membership fees would have gone up 50% after that one.
But hey these guys can afford it and they got good lawyers so what the big deal over a few million amongst lawyers right.
I remember another article back in Late April, Ars Technica reported that the company had begun handing over user information to record labels looking to pursue illegal file-sharers. Its also not the first time Rapid share finds itself in court because of persistent attacks: it had already lost a similar case back in January 2008.
The music industry in Germany really likes to punch legal holes in the hugely popular file-hosting service which after all is home base to there original site De and like the saying says theres no place like home right Toto?
Well in part its kind of true since there is a Rapidshare.com which is located in Switzerland and the other one De which I am making some reference too in this article which is located in Germany.
But make no mistake both sites will hand you over to the law if and when the time should come without a second thought, lets continue then shall we.
But as we all know now Rapid was not shut down and why you might ask?
Well lets just say they know a few people at home and home is where the heart is yes?
Now this is where big brother comes into the online cyber lines.its almost like living in downtown London if you know what I mean?
This was from an article I found off the net about how our privacy isnt all that private when it comes too being a rapid share member, like I didnt already know this..read on.
Lots of anti-piracy and industry bodies state that its possible for file-hosting services and even ISPs to monitor police and filter copyright works from their servers and networks.
Sounds a bit like Homeland security eh? And thats legalAnyways let me continue..
And in some cases as we all have heard this case is no different when it comes to rapid share protecting its assets once again, and even worse with the help and cooperation of the judicial court system that has demanded this type of action or on the other hand will accept a few million in what I would describe as no more then legal bribes to keep things quiet so all is forgiven goody goody I just love the law dont you?.
In closing once again, Rapid share has always insisted that it cannot be held responsible for the actions, of its members who of course are the real criminals that upload copyright works to their servers for subsequent downloading by other criminals and pay rapid share a small fee too continue doing so oh goody goody thank you once again oh great and honest no blame Rapid share.
So rapid share makes money off you then helps blow you over when there assets are on the line.
Dont you just want give these blameless rich SOBs a big love hug at the end of your prison term.
Thank you for reading and maybe this is just one of the many reasons why rapid has decided to start deleting your files which you pay to have on there legal ahem.servers at no risk to them.
I hope they keep the net free and start going after the real crooks.
You knowlike the ones who charged you $30 dollars for a movie you bought 20 years ago on VHS for the same price as todays DVDs then HD then Blue-Ray you get the idea right?
(HOLLYWOOD) CORP should stop suing poor people and start going after the rich movie stars that dont pay there taxes and live in million dollar homes or musical talents that make one hit then charge 20 bucks for a cheap CD that has maybe one good song on it at best then go shave there heads and go on a drug binge because there life sucks so much.
I wont mention names and I really dont feel sorry for B Spears.Ooops.
I guess all I wanted to say in this article is that as a long time paying member of Rapid Share please just leave my files alone and stop betraying the ones who feed you.
I hope you enjoyed my little article probably more so then the people over at Rapid will.
Thanks for reading Ill see you at lock down ha ha ha take care.
Hackworth is a registered premium paying member of Rapid share.com and still continues to be at the time this article was prepared.
The mention of some legal issues and names mentioned in this article are from easy to find various online news sites and I see know reason to name them all since this article uses less then 5% of there total content.
You only need too search enter it into any search engine such as Google etc to find the full detailed articles, but this article was not written to go into great detail about all these legal topics I am trying to make a valid point that as a paying member of this organization you are a very easy target if you become an up loader to its described services.
Thanks for reading
H.W
+3
Hackworth / 26.09.2009
Search & download audio, videos, images, and lots more in just one click with no dead links - guaranteed.
1137
Thanks for the info
Your welcome and too any member who reads this please feel free to let others know.
It is fact....and I beleive all uploaders should know about it.
thank you
HI...thank you very much for the info..i had posted this on another forum but they disapproved it and some even made some search on the net and finally said that it was not posted on rapidshare website.I even search on the net but could not find it...actually from where the source of this article was? as for me i believe about this change of policy!!
Thank you
Felix
I will try and find the exact sites to where I got the orginal infomation but really this is all based on true facts and I am surprised you could not find it anywhere on the web.
As for looking at the actual Rapidshare website you will not see this info on there site.
The only thing you will notice is the 30 day deletion rule in there policy area which now is being told as of OCT 2009 will be 90 days.
Try typing in Rapidshare law problems or past legal issues or Rapidshare giving out members info to the law.
try typing any of these in Google or MSN search and trust me you will find many articles and maybe some I didn't see.
Please let know if you do ok.
and yes no other forums or blog sites like this one will allow this kind of article to be posted because it effects there members and there websites main source of trraffic and income so keep this in mind.
Rapidshare will not post the truth not will some websites that rely on them for there links this is just bussinus tatics they don't want people to know the truth....because it would hurt there membership income big time....it all about money remember that.
But trust me all the things memntioned in this article are 100% True that much I can assure you.
thamk you from H.W
here are a few links I found but I have yet to find the exact website that contain much much more on this
topic...it was very hard to find...and now I know why....they didn't want people too see it.
anyways I will search my web history favs to see if I can find it but these sites touch on only 1 or 2 of
the problems I was mentioning in my article take a look.
http://torrentfreak.com/rapidshare-to-be-forced-to-shut-down-following-court-defeat-080129/
http://www.techshout.com/internet/2008/19/rapidsharecom-shut-down/
http://www.zeropaid.com/news/86132/report-rapidshare-gave-personal-information-to-rights-holders-to-assist-home-raid-of-uploader/
http://www.gulli.com/news/rapidshare-cease-desist-letter-2009-04-30/
http://www.zeropaid.com/news/86179/german-lawyer-speaks-about-risks-of-using-one-click-file-hosters/
http://www.zeropaid.com/news/86494/rapidshare-fined-33-million-for-violating-german-copyright-laws/
http://www.afterdawn.com/news/archive/8460.cfm
http://www.rlslog.net/rapidshare-hands-over-uploaders-details-house-raided/
http://www.dmwmedia.com/news/2008/10/03/german-court:-rapidshare-must-proactively-nix-infringements
http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/news/2008/01/no-safe-harbor-for-rapidshare-in-copyright-infringement-case.ars
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rapidshare
http://torrentfreak.com/rapidshare-shares-uploader-info-with-rights-holders-090425/
http://www.rapidmatik.com/rapidshare-legal-warning.php
READ THE LAST SENTENCE........NOW THAT REALLY MAKES SENSE THIS IS WHAT THERE SITE WAS CREATED FOR ITS THERE OWN POLICY
Regarding Rapidshare.com rules, it`s not allowed to share, resell or abuse your premium account, it`s also not allowed to upload any illegal or copyrighted materials on rapidshare servers. In such situations, Rapidshare may terminate the access of your premium account. We also want to inform you that, we (rapidmatik.com) can not be held responsible for any process which rapidshare may apply for your premium account.
RapidShare keeps the legal right to close an account that are used by several people. It is a violation of terms to share an account.
Premium Account members can download more data than users of the free service. Currently, a Premium Account allows the download of 5 Gigabyte per day.
The current status of your Account and an overview of your activities in the last 30 days are displayed in the Premium Zone. If you have exceeded your limit, you can log out and download more data using the free service.
The files saved at RapidShare shall be treated confidentially. RapidShare does not have a search function which could help search through the RapidShare infrastructure. RapidShare does not open or view its users files; the files are neither catalogued nor listed in directories.
You may not store any data with illegal contents on RapidShare and make copyrighted material contents publicly available, e.g. by disclosing the links in a forum or on any other website.
NOW THAT ONE LINE SAYS IT ALL DON'T YOU THINK?
THANK YOU FROM H.W
You may not store any data with illegal contents on RapidShare and make copyrighted material contents publicly available, e.g. by disclosing the links in a forum or on any other website.
HERE IT IS AGAIN JUST INCASE YOU DIDN'T SEE WHAT I WAS POINTING TOO.
THEY KNOW THERE MEMBERS USE THIS SYSTEM FOR THIS REASON SO WHY THE HELL WOULD THEY CONTINUE TOO ALLOW IT
I HAVE SEEN 1000s OF FILES THAT HAVE BEEN POSTED AND NEVER REMOVED BY RAPIDSHARE EVEN THOUGH IT IS IN DIRECT CONTRIDITION TO THERE RULES AS STATED ABOVE.
NOW THE QUESTION I HAVE TOO ASK IS WHY ARE THEY NOT LIABLE WHEN THE LAW STEPS IN.
THEY JUST SIMPLY REMOVE THE FILE AND PRESTO....THERE FOR GIVEN JUST LIKE THAT......EVEN AFTER THE FILE HAS BEEN ON THERE SERVERS WITH THERE FULL KNOWLEGDE AND DOWNLOADED AT LEAST 3000 TIMES THEY STILL DO NOT COMPLY WITH THERE OWN RULES WHY?
I WILL TELL YOU WHY....$$$$$$$$$ THATS IT SIMPLE.
THEY CAN AFFORD TO PAY OFF THE COURTS AND WHEN IT GETS TOO HOT THEY JUST HAND OVER THE MEMBERS IP AND VISA INFO TO THE CYBER POLICE AND SAY THERE IS THE REAL CRIMINAL GO GET EM.
YOU SEE RAPID SEEMS TO HAVE A DOUBLE STANDARD HERE AND THEY HAVE WORKED IT TO THERE ADVANTAGE AS FAR AS THE LAW GO's.
THEY GET TO WALK AWAY SCOTT FREE....EVEN THOUGH THEY KNOW THE FILES ARE ILEAGAL BUT THERE IN LYES THE PARADOX THE REAL HIDDEN CORRUPTION OF THERE LAW NOT CREATED TO PROTECT ITS MEMBERS BUT TO SVAE THERE HUGE ASSETS.
I AM NOT COMPLAINING I LIKE RAPIDSHARE BUT I DON'T APPROVE OF THEM PUTTING AND MANIPULTING THE LAW TO ITS MEMBERS DISAVANTAGE.
MEANING IN SHORT WE GO TO JAIL THEY SAY SORRY AND CONTINUE TO MAKE MORE ILEGAL MONEY FROM NEW MEMBERS.
THUS IT ALL STARTS OVER AGAIN.
WHAT THEY FAIL TOO PUT IN THERE POLICY AND RULES IS THAT AS AN UPLOADER TO THERE SITE YOU ARE NOW A CRIMNINAL WHO CAN BE CHARGED WITH DISTRIBUTION AND THEFT OVER.....NOW THATS A BIG PROBLEM FOR ME.
YOU CAN GO TO JAIL FOR LONG TIME FOR THAT ONE.
JUST THINK 1 MOVIE IS 250.000 FINE PLUS 1 TO 3 YEARS JAIL TIME...NOW TIMES THAT BY 30 MOVIE UPLOADS ADD THE DISTRIBUTION AND OTHER FINES....WELL LETS JUST SAY IF THEY PICK YOU AS A POTENTIAL TARGET TO MAKE A POINT TOO ALL OTHERS ABOUT FILE SHARING THEN YOUR NOT COMMING HOME FOR CHRISTMAS EVER AGAIN.
THANKS AND THIS IS WHAT PEOPLE SHOULD TAKE THE TIME TO REALLY SIT BACK AND UNDERSTAND BEFORE THEY JUST UPLOAD A FILE AND GET THAT SIMPLE LITTLE LINK.....BECAUSE AFTER A FEW HUNDRED LINKS YOUR LOOKING AT A POSSIBLE REAL LINK LIKE THE ONE WRAPPED AROUND YOUR HANDS AND LEGS WHEN YOU GET TO GO TOO RAPID JAIL IN THE REAL WORLD.
THINK ABOUT IT
THANK YOU FROM H.W SEE YOU AT LOCK DOWN.
Ok I will make one more simple statement that explains my argument with Rapid shares policy and rules as easy as I can ok.
First let me just start by saying I am no better then anyone else as far as being guilty of using there system nor can I judge nor condone the actions of those including myself that do this with the full knowledge of knowing its wrong ok.
But I have a problem with a service like Rapid share that makes tons of money and even gives there members incentives like rapid points too commit what they know is 100% illegal in the first place.
Now here is a simple way to look at it.
A person gives you a gun then offers you free bullets while knowing what your going to do with this weapon but then once the crime has been committed they simply just up and say yes we gave them the gun at a cheap price and even added in the free bullets for being a good customer, and yes we had some idea they may use it too do some illegal or bad act…..but hey that’s not are fault.
Well I think it is……….and Rapid share needs to too start taking equal responsibility for what they are offering or start protecting there members from any wrong doing or simply just shut the fuckin money grabbing service down simple.
I am pissed with big businesses getting away with criminal activity and putting on the backs of there paying members.
This is like all the Banks and Wall Street which fucked the economy in 2007 then got bonuses and the average person got to foot the tax burden and loose there jobs there security and there money.
This is the point of too big to fail
Well in this case too big to go to jail
Well by now your probably saying too yourself what the hell is this Hackworth bitching about?
Well to answer any thoughts you may have about me or my articles or comments its simple.
After almost 16 years of being on the web and doing this and that I won’t get into details.
I sit back and read the comments of many users not only on this site bit many others like it and you know the one thing that gets me?
Most people don’t realize how much trouble you can get into just by doing these kinds of things.
I know some people who have gone too prison for these same things my topic is based on, and many others have faced serious fines that have totally ruined there lives.
So when I read these stupid comments like oh that’s too big a file or Rapid share or no download etc.
I just cringe at the fact that some and I say some….don’t realize the huge gamble up loaders take when they make a post.
When I’m not on this site I am reading the new guide lines and laws that are being pushed forward too help combat this type of behavior.
Now I’m no saint…..and I am no white hat ither but I do know that the net is becoming more controlled and soon these entities that we all seem to trust and love so much are going to be hit hard very soon with an option.
Give up your members or we close you down or worse fine and imprision the owner of such sites like Rapid share.
What option do you think there going to take if and when this time comes?
Look at The Pirate Bay…….gone Rapid share will cut a deal to save there $$$$$ before they give up there site trust me.
Next time it might be you that gets the shut down call…..hope you have as much capital and good lawyers to defend yourself from going too the big cyber prision.
Before reading this comment make sure you understand I am not for stopping file sharing but rather finding solutions that will help keep them going at the same time adding more protection to the people who use them.
This is what I would like too see sites like Rapid share change in there protective policy guide lines.
First off they should amend a member clause that states all paying members of there service if and when such an event of legality were too happen that the member in question would be given a one time warning then if it were to happen again they simply ban the member from using there service.
This I feel protects not just the service but the members as well as opposed to handing over there personal information to the legal system for future and harder prosecution
.
Now in most cases I would have to agree that the biggest problem I have noticed that has sparked the latest and past big media law suits meaning the movie and music industries are mainly attributed to the sharing of new released content such as movies and music and at times the new software operating systems.
So not too sound like I’m on there side….but if Rapid were too add this new amended policy of protectionism to there members they could also add a special clause that would target only those which upload new content such as mentioned above and I’m talking about the higher quality content versions not the beta and low end types you know what I mean.
This new amended rule would apply to only new content and this would be filtered out automatically meaning if you as a member upload such a file you stand to loose your account automatically.
.
Not like the present filter system that says due to copyright or complaints this file has been removed this present system is just not enough to satisfy the greedy SOB’s at Hollywood and music empires that continue to pursue legal litigation against all file sharing sites.
I mean if someone uploads anything that is just released and uploaded to rapids server it should be denied without question.
Now I know you’re about too jump down my throat right about now but just wait and continue reading before you rip my face off ok.
The whole point too this argument is too try and find a middle ground that protects the website the members and gives a bit of assurance too the media which is trying too completely shut down the file sharing system.
Rapid share and other sites like it would be in a much better legal stand point if any legal problems were to emerge in a court of law.
I would also like too see rapid share add a bold printed rule right next to the download and up load button that says if you upload a file that contains any material that is of a new release your membership will be taken from you.
Now of course this would only apply if such a file were to become a part of legal investigation.
But at least if one did occur you as a member would not be punished by the legal directive but by rapid shares policy of restricted access…..meaning you loose your account final.
This too me would seem too be an all win situation for all parties involved.
It protects Rapid share or sites similar to it.
It protects the members
It targets the up loaders of only new releases which seems too be the biggest problem I see so far.
It helps too give a bit more time for new release files to make profits before being shared.
I see this as a good and fair way too continue file sharing.
Now I know you can’t control the entire web, but at least you can try and diminish the larger file sharing sites from further legal actions pushed upon them thus keeping them alive a lot longer then the way its going these days.
Remember the web is becoming much more controlled then it was back in the day of naspter …..Remember that one and what they went through.
Well it’s only going to get tougher in the coming years trust me.
In closing I would like too just say that even though I hate to sound like I’m trying to help the other side stop file sharing….I am only looking at it from a logical perspective based on the current trends that I am noticing more and more these days.
If things continue on the same path as they are today we may loose the whole file sharing system all together its just a matter of time but at least these few changes can slow that clock down a wee bit yes?.
Remember it was not so long ago people ever thought smoking outside a bar or within an outside perimeter of a building would become an illegal act but it happened so anything is possible.
So by giving in a bit too the legal system we can’t look at it as a win for the other side but rather a smart process that just may still give us some wiggle room left if and when the time comes for the file sharing networks not too end up like some others to which I see are becoming extinct, and one that the legal system seems to be winning more and more these days.
But like all good things there will come a time when file sharing will become a thing of the past…just like smoking in a bar with a nice cold beer ahhhh those were the good old days oh well I guess I’ll just have to put up with that carbon monoxide fuming out the tail pipe of someone’s car idled by my patio table…..but that’s legal.
Thank you for reading my comments they are really not about the end of file sharing but rather a way to keep them going in the new web of today and the laws that are being enforced too shut them down with little or no protection to the members that use there services.
I would really like too see a more open readable policy and protection mechanisms put in the legal wordings of these few last file sharing web sites.
This comment was made at the time the author of its content was and still is a paying member of the file sharing host website named Rapid Share.com
Revised and written by member Hackworth 2009
Man, reading this post has left me really breathless!!!
I agree with (almost) everything you say! Kudos :-)
And yes, you're getting my vote - even if this post has no links to download, it has plenty of info to read and think :-) THANKS!
Your welcome Alex.
I hope the net never continues too go this way but like all things they will find a way to control it...or at best make it very difficult for people too use in such a way.
thanks from H.W
The Future demise of File Sharing could be hardware dependent?
I found this article too be quite interesting sit back and finish downloading that new movie release and crab a cold beer before reading ok then.
Digital content owners continue to emphasise enforcement and protection of intellectual property. However, the impact that litigation and legislation have had with the purpose of limiting illegal file sharing remains questionable, thus setting the stage for new economic models and approaches that could serve as a remedy.
Recent aggressive attempts by a government to limit file sharing include France’s HADOPI law, which is heavily criticised for being unenforceable and could possibly violate constitutional protections. The Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA) and affiliates’ litigation campaign in the United States, which has gone on for five years and led to over 30,000 lawsuits, has hardly deterred illegal file sharing. Despite other initiatives around the world in addition to actions taken in France and in the United States, artists or music companies are paid for only about 5 percent of all music files that are downloaded worldwide, according to the International Federation of the Phonographic Industry (IFPI). Content owners of video, games, and other digitised media also share the same plight.
In many respects, the RIAA’s litigation campaign and other more aggressive copyright protection and enforcement measures may turn out to be just a blip in new media’s history. Instead, new distribution models are likely to emerge that appease both content owners and consumers while replacing established commercial channels, such as CDs and even more modernistic online music sales.
Indeed, while the IFPI and the RIAA, for example, still maintain rigorous enforcement policies on behalf of their affiliates, these associations also now back alternative business models for digital content distribution.
”There is this sort of idea, on one hand, that copyright enforcement and the development of new business models are in opposition to each other. But they have been replaced by an assumption that they go hand in hand,” said Adrian Strain, a spokesman for the IFPI London. “There is enforcing the law, and on the other hand, there is the development of very interesting and proper digital services to consumers.”
But what alternatives exist that can appease those with royalty interests as well as meet the demand of consumers, especially those who actively engage in sharing copyright-protected media files? We look at some future models file sharing could take during the coming years.
Free Music with Paid Ads
The idea of unfettered access to music and video files free of charge may seem to fly in the face of industry copyright-protection and enforcement philosophies. Yet, the IFPI/RIAA has begun to embrace music streaming sites such as Deezer and Spotify that use ad revenues to pay royalties when songs are accessed.
However, while ad-revenue generating platforms that offer free content are something to consider, the commercial viability of these streaming sites remains uncertain.
”The industry will have to take into account the proliferation of interactive platforms and the common goods that are emerging from them, which should rather lead to a share of ads revenues rather than a strict application of DMCA [the US Digital Millennium Copyright Act], which is sometimes far too strict,” said Philippe Gillieron, an attorney with Switzerland-based Bianchi, Carnice, Christin, and de Coulon. “The future of all these systems will obviously also depend upon the way service providers can monetise this interactivity, an issue that largely remains unsolved so far except for ads revenues, whose sustainable growth, however, remains dubious in the long run in my opinion.”
Just as newspapers struggle to compensate for losses from their print operations with online advertising sales, websites may also struggle to make money with advertising while paying royalty fees for music and other content accessed by users free of charge.
”If this kind of offer becomes more and more popular, conversely, the number of people buying music will diminish,” said Nicolas Maubert, an attorney in the IP, Telecommunications, Media, and Technology department for the Paris-based law firm Gide Loyrette Nouel, referring to Deezer. “This means that all the majors (who have signed deals with Deezer) will very likely want to renegotiate these deals and increase the price to be paid by Deezer, meaning that Deezer in turn will need to find additional sources of revenues.”
In Asia, and particularly in China where hundred of millions of users take advantage of unfettered file sharing and unlicensed streaming sites with little, if any, risk of legal consequences, major media companies have begun to accept free downloads by consumers in exchange for advertising revenues. EMI, the Warner Music Group and Universal Music, for example, formed an alliance earlier this year with Google for free music file downloads for users in China. The move was largely seen as example of record companies throwing up their hands in a region where copyright enforcement laws in China are largely inexistent compared to Western countries.
Still, the future of file sharing China as well as in Japan remains murky, although a new legal framework could still emerge in these regions, said Joichi Ito, CEO of Creative Commons, who said that his comments did not necessarily reflect those of his firm.
”I think the legal roadmap for both China and Japan are unpredictable and thus I’d hate to predict them,” Ito said. “However, they are evolving and I hope and almost predict that some sort of compulsory licenses scheme gets implemented at some point.”
The End of Open PC Systems
The personal computer (PC) serves as the box from which files are exchanged, while the internet serves as the pipes through which digitised copies of content are distributed. Both were designed to facilitate the free exchange of files between users. These open systems are also the main technology enablers allowing users to exchange millions of files that violate copyright protections on any given day. Content providers have sought to use digital rights management (DRM) software to block users from making digital copies in the past, yet easy-to-install DRM-cracking software and consumer backlash have largely served to end its adoption. But now, the wide-scale adoption of new original equipment manufacturers (OEM) devices, such as video consoles, video players, set-top boxes, and smart phones, make file sharing more difficult due to their closed architectures, unlike the more open PC platforms.
A video game cartridge for game consoles, for example, is difficult to copy and distribute over the internet compared to the file format of PC versions of the same game. In the case of emerging multimedia products for the PlayStation, the Wii, and the Xbox, such as “Rock Band” and “Guitar Hero,” the content remains largely locked while several royalty streams exist, including money paid for use of copyright-protected songs as well as to the game developers. Other new similar locked-down products should also emerge for digitised content. If consumer demand shifts away from open-system PCs to more closed systems, then illegal distribution of media content would thus likely be significantly hampered.
”On a standard PC, a workaround to DRM has traditionally been a mere double-click away,” said Jonathan Zittrain, a professor at Harvard Law School and co-founder of the Berkman Center for Internet and Society. “That’s harder with, say, an iPhone, since the vendor gets to control what will and won’t run on the phone, short of some much more labour-intensive hacking.”
Still, some legal experts and representatives from digital rights consumer groups still doubt that closed OEM systems will completely replace open systems in the future, even if locked-down devices replace the PC model as the main consumer computer.
”Closed systems proliferate because they offer experiences that cannot be found elsewhere (iPod mobility, Xbox Live, etc.), but consumers are not giving up open platforms. If anything, consumers are increasingly comfortable with owning multiple networked devices for multiple activities,” said Fred von Lohmann, a staff attorney for the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF). “File sharing capabilities are also increasingly being baked into inexpensive stand-alone devices, such as network-attached storage drives, so consumers no longer need to rely on PCs for file sharing.”
Some observers maintain that even if closed hardware systems were to successfully end the issue of lost royalty payments due to massive file sharing, the adoption of hardware equivalents of DRM software could prove harmful for consumers in the long run, while carrying inherent risks.
”[Locked-down hardware] is designed to treat their owners as attackers, and to carry out policy that is adverse to their owners, at the behest of remote parties, without the owner’s consent and sometimes without their knowledge. This is a bad way to design systems from a security perspective,” said Cory Doctorow, a successful science fiction writer, net activist, and editor of blog boingboing.net.
”It means that our world is slowly filling up with devices, which if hijacked - either by a media company with dumb ideas about its business model, or by a would-be monopolist seeking lock-in, or by criminals seeking to abuse and rob a user - are designed to give the hijacker the advantage over the user,” he said.
Global Licences
Some policy decision makers around the world have begun to advocate a system that would enable consumers to pay a fee, possibly to service providers that would pay for unlimited file downloading of content.
William Fisher of Harvard Law School and others in mostly academic circles a few years ago touted the idea. Patrick Bloche, the national media secretary for France’s Socialist Party and the mayor of Paris’ 11th arrondissement, is among the backers of a common licence. Such a model, under which consumers would pay a monthly fee for unfettered media-file sharing, would also pay the artists more handsome royalties compared to how they are now compensated, Bloche said.
”The new [HADOPI] law will not pay most artists a single euro more,” Bloche said. “A ‘creative fee’ paid could generated 400 million euros per year for artists and content developers.”
One potential drawback involved in paying a common licence fee is that it could be difficult to administer, attorney Gillieron said. “The problem for most people is that such a system turns what should be a remuneration (which should bear some relation with the actual consumption of the work) to a mere tax system,” Gillieron said.
But in the long run, whether content royalties are paid for with a monthly fee or through ad revenues, content owners will eventually “benefit from abundance rather than scarcity,” Harvard law professor Zittrain said.
”With better internet connectivity, more and more people will be persuaded to enjoy their entertainment ‘just in time,’ streamed at the moment they want it, as part of an environment - a social network or a virtual world - where there are more opportunities for control and gate keeping,” Zittrain said. “The idea of obsessing over who holds a ‘gold’ copy of a song (namely, everyone who possesses a CD of it or a file ripped in good quality from the CD) will seem antediluvian.”
It looks and sounds too me like there going to try and manipulate the file sharing system by way of future hardware devices.
I see a day when all home computers will be fitted with some kind of device that will be logged under the name of the person who bought it.
Therefore if any hanky panky happens on this device you will be held accountable no matter what.
But that’s just pure speculation on my part…..the big brother system won’t be that tight for another 10 years or so……so relax and start downloading another new movie ok cheers.
H.W
If you ask me I think these guys should be saying thanks to all the file sharing sites of today and yesterday they created the web tools we all use everyday now.
The tools designed to measure user behavior on file sharing networks has led directly to tools that now mine licensed networks like Facebook, imeem, MySpace and YouTube.
When it comes to "where and how people stream, download, watch, listen to, blog about or otherwise make use of or interact with music,"
"file sharing seems to be the blueprint."
I think these guys should be paying the file sharing sites for there role in creating what is now the main patent for legal peer2peer sites like FaceBook My Space YouTube any many others.
but hey there the good guys right....so stealing a great platform idea is no sin to them.
Just somtthing to TWEET about you know what I mean?
H.W
Filesharing... is there an end to this madness!? I hope not.
But at times I have to say I think these people who are against file sharing sites are a bit insane with there own creations of rules and products.
File sharing has taken a new spin over the past few years.
With the Internet growing and developing as rapidly as it has, it’s only made it that much easier for millions of individuals to exchange music and video files on all these various forums that have been developed
I think that Barlow (2000) explains the situation well by stating, “To put it mildly, the geriatrics of the entertainment industry didn’t see this coming.? (p.1) This fad, in my opinion, spun off so quickly and people reacted just as fast, that it was near impossible for the entertainment industry to try and put a stop to things.
DRM, in my opinion, is a strategic business move by Apple to implement this into their iPods. They are going to lock individuals into purchasing music from their iTunes Store, and potentially prevent millions of individuals from accessing unauthorized sharing and copying. Personally, I think there full of shit….and DRM is easy to crack so there go’s that bright idea eh?
DRM protected songs which are posted on the Internet, then sold by pay per song.
Well in my opinion if you buy something you should be able to use it without any restrictions this is why DRM is BS it’s like buying a toaster then being told you can only use whole wheat bread in it.
This is just plain stupid and of course more control being placed on the average consumer.
Why can’t people who legally purchase DVDs make one backup copy? In my opinion, people always find a way to use and abuse privileges they are given. If you allow one back up copy to be made, what’s going to stop these individuals from making a second, third, fourth, etc.
When you purchase a DVD, you are legally purchasing that one copy of the DVD, you aren’t purchasing and owning rights to copying this DVD for further distribution.
Well that’s all good on paper but why the hell is it that Sony which makes most of the hard coded DVD encryption also provides a software for removing it?
I see a double standard here.
Another thing I found interesting was about how the RIAA had forced Verizon to hand over the names of customers who were swapping copyright-protected content using there devices.
I guess my question is, why isn’t the Verizon company being targeted for creating and implementing devices that allow this swapping to take place in the first place?
Same as the Sony company that makes DVD archos encryption then offers software to remove it takes know blame for doing the same exact thing.
Maybe it’s just me…but just like Rapid share they give you the tools and charge you a fee too use them…..but then they take no blame for what they originally created.
Thanks for continuing to read this ongoing commentary of mine.
I will be adding more so come back from time to time and see what else I’m up too ok
Later from H.W
thanks Hackworth