Tech- David Winslow
Ethics- James Holcombe
Legal- Erin Conway
Friday, March 2, 2007
Check Point 2 (cont)
http://www.bittorrent.org/bittorrentecon.pdf
http://www.pam2004.org/papers/148.pdf
http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1015508
http://research.microsoft.com/%7Epadmanab/papers/msr-tr-2005-03.pdf
http://www.zhenxiao.com/papers/jsac2007_bt.pdf
Basically, the salient points are
* BitTorrent doesn't allow for sending individualized files to clients, because it copies data from client to client. This is a non-issue because iTunes applies DRM after downloading the file anyway.
* BitTorrent is fastest initially (when lots of people are uploading so that the protocol will allow them to download) and tapers off later as less people connect to the torrent. This will not be a problem with iTunes, because (a) uploading will be legal (assuming Apple does the appropriate licensing) so people will not 'turn off' their uploads, and (b) iTunes can force people to upload all media on their systems.
* BitTorrent is slower for unpopular files. Apple can deal with this by having its own, high-bandwidth seeds for all files. In the case where only a few clients with little to none of the data are connected to a torrent and there is one seed, the service becomes very much like a traditional download.
As far as experimentation, I plan on comparing the download time for a reasonably popular, but not recently released movie (namely, the first Pirates of the Caribbean movie) via both iTunes and the official BitTorrent client on the same system and comparing the total download time and system characteristics (ie, slowdown) while downloading. I expect the time to be somewhat slower for the BitTorrent because performance will be degraded by the fact that people avoid uploading due to the illegality and lawsuits brought by the recording industry.
http://www.pam2004.org/papers/148.pdf
http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1015508
http://research.microsoft.com/%7Epadmanab/papers/msr-tr-2005-03.pdf
http://www.zhenxiao.com/papers/jsac2007_bt.pdf
Basically, the salient points are
* BitTorrent doesn't allow for sending individualized files to clients, because it copies data from client to client. This is a non-issue because iTunes applies DRM after downloading the file anyway.
* BitTorrent is fastest initially (when lots of people are uploading so that the protocol will allow them to download) and tapers off later as less people connect to the torrent. This will not be a problem with iTunes, because (a) uploading will be legal (assuming Apple does the appropriate licensing) so people will not 'turn off' their uploads, and (b) iTunes can force people to upload all media on their systems.
* BitTorrent is slower for unpopular files. Apple can deal with this by having its own, high-bandwidth seeds for all files. In the case where only a few clients with little to none of the data are connected to a torrent and there is one seed, the service becomes very much like a traditional download.
As far as experimentation, I plan on comparing the download time for a reasonably popular, but not recently released movie (namely, the first Pirates of the Caribbean movie) via both iTunes and the official BitTorrent client on the same system and comparing the total download time and system characteristics (ie, slowdown) while downloading. I expect the time to be somewhat slower for the BitTorrent because performance will be degraded by the fact that people avoid uploading due to the illegality and lawsuits brought by the recording industry.
Thursday, March 1, 2007
check point 2
We believe that using a bittorrent in conjunction with an iTunes client to distribute movies is an ethically, technologically, and legal way for consumers to gain access to high definition movies.
Ethics: The ethics of downloading movies illegally have been long debated. Copyright holders claim gross infringements to their creative expression, while consumers have debated to what extent their rights as consumers guarantee them access to products. However, we will examine both the Kantian and Utilitarian arguments in this memo, in union with the knowledge that the service we will offer will not break any court precedents or infringe copyright holder’s rights.
Legal: While we do plan to recommend the use of BitTorrent to iTunes for use with HD movies, there are many legal issues which must be considered with the implementation of this new use.
Initially, the legal problems associated with the use of BitTorrent for iTunes HD movies seem to outweigh the benefits of usage. However, the many court cases which have been filed against BitTorrent are ones of illegal music distribution (such as those filed against Supernova.org, EliteTorrents.org, and LokiTorrent). As long as iTunes allows for regulations that prevent such abuses with the HD movies, these types of cases can be avoided (regulations should prevent the sharing of illegally downloaded movies, prevent the purchase and sharing of HD movies which are not otherwise available to be run on computer programs, prevent the purchase and sharing of HD movies available in the US to those outside of the US to whom they are not yet available, and generally ensure that all DRM standards are met).
Becoming a safe harbor under DMCA Title II would also ensure that Apple is not responsible in the case that these measures are circumvented. This clause provides protection for online service providers against copyright liability “if they adhere to and qualify for certain prescribed safe harbor guidelines and promptly block access to allegedly infringing material (or remove such material from their systems) if they receive a notification claiming infringement from a copyright holder or the copyright holder's agent.”
Finally, Apple must consider the antitrust implications which could accompany such a decision. Apple has already faced monopoly charges in the past (such as the lawsuit regarding the iTunes-iPod link, in which Apple’s motion to the court to dismiss the suit was denied just this December, and other very similar suits in Europe). Further litigation would not help their case.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DMCA
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9006985
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bittorrent
Stephanos Androutsellis-Theotokis and Diomidis Spinellis, "A survey of peer-to-peer content distribution technologies", ACM Computing Surveys, (36):4, 2005.
Bob Rietjens, "Give and Ye Shall Receive! The Copyright Implications of BitTorrent", SCRIPT-ed 327, 2:3, 2005.
Fred von Lohhman, IAAL*: What Peer-to-Peer Developers Need to Know about Copyright Law EFF, January, 2006
Ethics: The ethics of downloading movies illegally have been long debated. Copyright holders claim gross infringements to their creative expression, while consumers have debated to what extent their rights as consumers guarantee them access to products. However, we will examine both the Kantian and Utilitarian arguments in this memo, in union with the knowledge that the service we will offer will not break any court precedents or infringe copyright holder’s rights.
Legal: While we do plan to recommend the use of BitTorrent to iTunes for use with HD movies, there are many legal issues which must be considered with the implementation of this new use.
Initially, the legal problems associated with the use of BitTorrent for iTunes HD movies seem to outweigh the benefits of usage. However, the many court cases which have been filed against BitTorrent are ones of illegal music distribution (such as those filed against Supernova.org, EliteTorrents.org, and LokiTorrent). As long as iTunes allows for regulations that prevent such abuses with the HD movies, these types of cases can be avoided (regulations should prevent the sharing of illegally downloaded movies, prevent the purchase and sharing of HD movies which are not otherwise available to be run on computer programs, prevent the purchase and sharing of HD movies available in the US to those outside of the US to whom they are not yet available, and generally ensure that all DRM standards are met).
Becoming a safe harbor under DMCA Title II would also ensure that Apple is not responsible in the case that these measures are circumvented. This clause provides protection for online service providers against copyright liability “if they adhere to and qualify for certain prescribed safe harbor guidelines and promptly block access to allegedly infringing material (or remove such material from their systems) if they receive a notification claiming infringement from a copyright holder or the copyright holder's agent.”
Finally, Apple must consider the antitrust implications which could accompany such a decision. Apple has already faced monopoly charges in the past (such as the lawsuit regarding the iTunes-iPod link, in which Apple’s motion to the court to dismiss the suit was denied just this December, and other very similar suits in Europe). Further litigation would not help their case.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DMCA
http://www.computerworld.com/action/article.do?command=viewArticleBasic&articleId=9006985
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bittorrent
Stephanos Androutsellis-Theotokis and Diomidis Spinellis, "A survey of peer-to-peer content distribution technologies", ACM Computing Surveys, (36):4, 2005.
Bob Rietjens, "Give and Ye Shall Receive! The Copyright Implications of BitTorrent", SCRIPT-ed 327, 2:3, 2005.
Fred von Lohhman, IAAL*: What Peer-to-Peer Developers Need to Know about Copyright Law EFF, January, 2006
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)