Hello Joseph,
I just finished to read your paper.
First, it is a very good job. The analysis of Fisher, Netanel and Litman
proposals are pretty interesting and helps to have a global view of the current
ideas about ACS, and a good approach to the different dilemna.
I was more sceptic about the method you propose to measure the popularity of a
work. Querying the nodes (servers) is not a bad idea but I have several
objections :
1- It requires to determine which P2P networks have to be sounded.
a) how to determine it ?
b) who has this power ?
c) the audio files available on Kazaa are not the same as the ones
available on Soulseek. Kazaa is known to host more "popular" files. If Soulseek
is not sounded, "underground music" could be forgotten and the arstists won't
have any money whereas, currently, music fans buy "underground CDs".
2- It hinders technical progress
a) some P2P networks hide the shared files, mostly for privacy reasons.
b) it would oblige to determine a standard for "audio fingerprints"
whereas others could be technologically better.
3- there is a high risk of fake reports
a) fake nodes could be easily created to report false "popularity". I
don't think legislating against it would be enough since it can be done by a
worm (a virus) which creates a node on the infected computer, and then the
infringer totally ignores that he is sending fake reports.
b) the nodes would report what they *think* is true. Even if the
algorithm of the audio fingerprint is not easily reproducible, the result (the
hash) is perfecly known. A client could send a hash (which is just a series of
characters) to a server even if it does not actually shares the file. Then
again, a virus could be created to send bulk hashes to servers.
4- may be illegal
a) Altnet has a 1999 Patent over the technique of monitoring P2P
activity thanks to hash codes. They recently sued 9 companies, included Big
Champagne. more information : http://news.com.com/2100-1025_3-5106093.html
Best wishes,
--
Guillaume Champeau
University of Nantes, France / University of Ottawa, Canada
www.ratiatum.com
--------
Réponse au message de Joseph Gratz envoyé le 2003-12-20 à 15:53:00 :
Folks,
I'm interested in comments on a paper I wrote recently on alternative
compensation system proposals. I review the Fisher, Netanel, and Litman
proposals, then make a proposal of my own. I believe that my proposal,
though more limited in scope than the others, is technically feasible,
economically sound, and does not require modifications to international
agreements to which the United States is a party.
In short, I propose an "opt-in" system which is limited to noncommercial
use of music. Copyright holders will be encouraged to opt in by a large
compensation pool and a partial repeal of section 1201. Popularity will
be measured based on what files are shared by users. The money will be
distributed to copyright holders according to a formula given in the
paper, which bases popularity on the number of times peers offer a song
for download, correcting for the size of peers' music collections so
that people with more music don't get more votes.
The paper is available in PDF format at:
http://www.joegratz.net/files/JosephGratz-ReformInTheBraveKingdom-Dec19.pdf
I look forward to your comments.
Sincerely,
Joe Gratz
2L, University of Minnesota Law School
www.joegratz.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternative Compensation Systems list at www.pholist.org
For list help, e-mail: acs-owner@xxxxxxxxxxx