1. I know file sharing is free NOW, but what I am saying is that it should ALWAYS be free; that there should always be a free version in the future . If you want to charge for the plus version it should be ok as long as you still keep that free version available. Maybe I didn't make that clear enough.

2. Ok, maybe not every company is supported by ads, but they all make money somehow , right? They wouldn't be running if they were losing money! And I did say 'most' and not 'all'. So the idea would still be valid.

3. You got me there; I didn't state that right. Thank you for correcting me.

(I noticed that you didn't say anything about my idea , just my so-called facts. I don't know what to think about that.)

1. It important to understand the distinction between making a profit and operating. LeeWare Development does not make a profit from its current business. I doubt that most filesharing programs do. However, that doesn't mean that I can't cover my operational cost which I think most P2P development companies do because their biggest investment is in talent / time not capital.

2. The next time your on LimeWire or any gnutella based host do a search for VDL -

Download the Video commentary "Taxing the public to pay for P2P"

__________________
Lee Evans, President
LeeWare Development
http://www.leeware.com

Now... by "protect ourselves" you had in mind, hide your IP, get some untracable rauters etc. Right?...
You see, I agree with you, but only if you want to hide "in the meantime"... And thats not a bad Idea... It's running away from law, hide only prove that you're innocent.
But... people, please, you have to understand that one important thing... HIDING IS NOT A SOLUTION! It will just get you by for a few months. You wanna know what is the only solution possible?... It's everyone of you and you public opinion. It's your letters, emails, phone calls saying, that you're outraged what is happening and what Entartainment industry is doing, directed to your governor, or anybody that could have some kind of influence on the law and legislature in general... Sure... most of you will just think..." I'm against RIAA etc, but let others handle that"...
SUUUUre... kepp thinking like that, but do you just know what happens if the public won't speak up and stand up for what's right?... First, (that is what they are actually trying to pass) they will be allowed to just browse you PC if they suspect there might be some copyright infrigement going on... In other words... they will invade your privacy whenever they want and blame it on "we have suspected him". PC- PERSONAL Computer, won't be "personal" anymore. Yup... but it's probably just a beginning... today it's invadind your computer, tomorrow, you will have a video camera in every room in your house... and they will say-

"it's because we need to know if they aren't planing to violate copyright laws... Democracy?... Who said democracy?... Yes we know 90% of population is against such measures, but we're sorry, we're the ones with money... Sue us.... Oppps... you can't afford a fancy lawyer as we can... I guess you will lose then... ah well..."......
GET IT?

Of course, I have exagerated it a bit, but it really isn't that much from the facts...
Read, learn and educate others about what is going on...

(of course it was directed specificaly to you Nightbird, only to everyone in general...

take care...

Be a wireless ghost

Spoofing your IP is illegal and somewhat pointless.

deepblue

__________________


"THEY WHO WOULD GIVE UP AN ESSENTIAL LIBERTY FOR TEMPORARY SECURITY, DESERVE NEITHER LIBERTY OR SECURITY."
--Benjamin Franklin

It's not illegal (at least in countries/states where proxies with NAT are not illegal). However it isn't possible to do that with TCP connections (and that's what LimeWire is using for file transfers).

Lee, nobody wants to hear your self-promoting diatribes any longer. Christ. The reason this thread was started was to protect us from the greedy *******s in the RIAA. The origin of most LimeWire content can be traced back to a CD someone purchased. That person MADE THE CHOICE to put it on a file-sharing network. It's on a large scale, but it's still sharing whether they like it or not -- and they don't. If you know of ways to stop the RIAA from taking back what's ours, let us know. Otherwise, buzz off.

#1 You're a little late to this party.

#2 Don't share copyrighted material and your problems will magically disapear.

__________________
Lee Evans, President
LeeWare Development
http://www.leeware.com

A couple of questions for the group for which I would like your thoughts:

1. What legitimate reason have the powers that be lengthened copyright protection (twice) from the original 20 yrs. to now 75 yrs?(don't quote me on the years, it doesn't really matter if the numbers are accurate)

2. If I have music on cassette that I bought before CD's were available, do I have a legal right to download songs from that cassette?

3. If the answer to 2. is yes, then a viable reason for sharing copyrighted content is to allow folks to upgrade the quality of their existing library.

4. How am I to fully evaluate music for purchase if:
a) I can get a whopping 30 secs from any Amazon.com type site
b) If I open a CD I can't return it except for another copy of the same CD (at most music stores)
c) ClearChannel and other conglomerate corporations control all the broadcast media and limit my opportunity to hear new and different music
d) Listen.com and the like has an astronomically small fraction of actual music and most of it is not downloadable (try it, I did.)
e) Musicmatch et.al. doesn't let you identify a particular song to listen to (if it's not in their approved library)
f) Labelling of music doesn't provide much insight into its content or quality
g) Listening to entire records in music stores on well-used and often icky (technical term) headphones isn't a particularly viable or pleasant experience and is often limited to the cd's of the store's choosing

5. Isn't it interesting that given all of the above, I'm expected to worry about the copyright holders?

6. I would like punitive damages for all the crappy a** songs I now OWN a license to, having bought full cd's, only to find I despise most of the songs on it. The RIAA owes me some money or some quality music (I have the $10,000 worth of CD's to prove it.)

Food for thought. Comments welcome (including from Leeware whose knowledge is clearly very strong.)

Just a few candid answers to your questions (I don't think that anyone will like these but they are true.)

#1 Opportunity for continuous profit.

How many people buy DVDs of movies they've either saw at the movies, rented or have on VHS?
How many people have exactly the same music on both CDs and Tape?
How many people buy copy after copy of the latest and greatest software products but use less than 20%
of its functionality?
How many people buy the lastest and greatest computer technology when machines that are 5 years old are sufficient for
most peoples needs?

The answer to these questions is enough to encourage the creation of whole industries selling people things they don't need.


#2 Most people rationalize (find a good reason to do something) but fail to see that a rationalization is not the same as a legal right to do something.
Therefore no. I'll explain why please spread the word. One of the things that makes our rights important in this country at least is that
everyone has rights including the much hated RIAA and MPAA therfore a persons rights only go as far as not infringing on someone elses rights. This is the foundation of our system.

Therefore the MPAA and the RIAA are groups that represent multiple content producers. These content producers have the right to seek profit for the use and or distribution of their products. They the content producers dictate the terms of any agreements not the consumers (notice producers --> consumers) not the other way around. The consumers can and often determine the success or failure of various markets. This is very effective when done legally and not very effective if done illegally.

Consider that most of the arguments against the RIAA and MPAA come not from people such as myself (a person who has a ligitimate interest in P2P technology) or the P2P developers themselves but rather from users who {believe} that they own the rights to do as they please with media that has been licensed to them for personal use and not public distribution.

This is always the issue and in the end these users will loose out but ultimately we all loose out due to increased network monitoring and attacks on the technology and not the problem.

Hopes that this clarifies things a bit.

__________________
Lee Evans, President
LeeWare Development
http://www.leeware.com